Who is to blame?

[VillaAlways]

He becomes more like O'Leary every day.

He becomes more like Billy McNeill every day!

More like Glenn Roeder.

Wonder where he is now?

Still chief scout with us I believe

[dave.woodhall]

What a fucking idiot McLeish is. Does he actually hear the bollocks that comes out of his mouth?

As for who I blame. Paul Faulkner. He agreed the inflated contracts. He is the man who went after McLeish. He is the poison in the club, and unfortunately is one of Randys closest mates, so wont go until Randy goes. He is taking the club for a ride.

Paul Faulkner joined Villa at the same time as Randy but didn't become CEO until May 2010, long after the contracts you're talking about were signed.

[glasses]

What was his position up until that point, Dave?

[dave.woodhall]

If I remember correctly he had a couple, and was something like Operations Officer immediately before CEO.

[glasses]

What was his actual job then? What did that job entail?

I was told by someone who met him, that PF told him that he handled transfer negotiations/dealings with agents on O'Neills behalf, so he could focus on footballing matters. This was during the Uefa cup qualifying campaign at the start of the 2008/09 season. (The meeting with the person I refer to)

[dave.woodhall]

I have no idea what he did, but I find it hard to believe O'Neill didn't have a very influential say in transfers & contracts. 

[glasses]

Well as a manager, he should have an influential say in the players that he wants playing in his team. In the positions Paul Faulkner has held at the club during his time here, he should have accountability for where the money was spent, and have kept it in control.

[dave.woodhall]

Which is what appears to have happened from his appointment as CEO in May 2010.

[Stu]

Which is what appears to have happened from his appointment as CEO in May 2010.

And O'Neill won a tribunal for constructive dismissal against the club. That's not to say I think O'Neill was an innocent party, but I'd love to know what it was all about.

[pauliewalnuts]

Which is what appears to have happened from his appointment as CEO in May 2010.

And O'Neill won a tribunal for constructive dismissal against the club. That's not to say I think O'Neill was an innocent party, but I'd love to know what it was all about.

Now many times are we going to hear this?

He didn't win it.

[Stu]

Which is what appears to have happened from his appointment as CEO in May 2010.

And O'Neill won a tribunal for constructive dismissal against the club. That's not to say I think O'Neill was an innocent party, but I'd love to know what it was all about.

Now many times are we going to hear this?

He didn't win it.

He took a lot of money from us though, right?

[glasses]

Right. What about before then? Are his decisions in the positions he held prior to 2010 not important?

[pauliewalnuts]

Which is what appears to have happened from his appointment as CEO in May 2010.

And O'Neill won a tribunal for constructive dismissal against the club. That's not to say I think O'Neill was an innocent party, but I'd love to know what it was all about.

Now many times are we going to hear this?

He didn't win it.

He took a lot of money from us though, right?

We settled.

That's not the same as him winning.

[dave.woodhall]

On the subject of O'Neill, it's now generally reckoned that Randy's biggest error was letting him spend too much money. Given it's almost certain that having no more or severely restricted funds for new players was the root cause of him walking out, let's imagine this scenario:

January 2009, Villa are pushing hard for a top four place and O'Neill wants Heskey. If Randy had refused, what would have happened?

[Stu]

Which is what appears to have happened from his appointment as CEO in May 2010.

And O'Neill won a tribunal for constructive dismissal against the club. That's not to say I think O'Neill was an innocent party, but I'd love to know what it was all about.

Now many times are we going to hear this?

He didn't win it.

He took a lot of money from us though, right?

We settled.

That's not the same as him winning.

If Villa had to pay him any cash after he walked out, then the arbitration tribunal must have backed his version of events to a degree though, surely?

And we still don't know what the settlement was, other than a few ambiguous words about managerial costs in the recent release of the annual finances.