Who is to blame?

[andrew08]

Which will make for a good head to head in a few weeks as well, if they're both selected

[ktvillan]

I don't think Faulkner can be described as a total disaster.  The Genting and Macron deals probably have something to do with him, and they are probably the best deals of their kind we've had, or were ever likely to get.  That's not to absolve him completely - I don't know what his involvement was re MON's spend fest but there's no way we should still be paying Jenas' wages, and I'd guess he had a say in appointing McFeck. 

But ultimately he was selected by nice guy Randy, because Randy knows him, not because of any proven ability to run a football club.  Randy means well but has shown himself to be incompetent verging on idiotic.  It was Randy who allowed MON to inflate wages to 80% of turnover, he allowed MON to sign and overpay for some very average players, he faffed about over managerial replacements because he hadn't got a clue,  he allowed MON to force out some experienced CEOs who may have had a bit of football nous, and it was him who listened like an enthralled schoolboy as Alex Ferguson duped him into paying a fortune to appoint one of the worst managers in PL history.  I suspect he has another tattoo somewhere that simply says "mug".  As someone else said, he isn't a business man, his Dad made the money,  he's dabbling with inherited wealth, and making a proper hash of it on both sides of the Atlantic.  Either the apple fell a long way from the tree or he takes after his Mother.

[andrew08]

I don't think Faulkner can be described as a total disaster.  The Genting and Macron deals probably have something to do with him, and they are probably the best deals of their kind we've had, or were ever likely to get.  That's not to absolve him completely - I don't know what his involvement was re MON's spend fest but there's no way we should still be paying Jenas' wages, and I'd guess he had a say in appointing McFeck. 

But ultimately he was selected by nice guy Randy, because Randy knows him, not because of any proven ability to run a football club.  Randy means well but has shown himself to be incompetent verging on idiotic.  It was Randy who allowed MON to inflate wages to 80% of turnover, he allowed MON to sign and overpay for some very average players, he faffed about over managerial replacements because he hadn't got a clue,  he allowed MON to force out some experienced CEOs who may have had a bit of football nous, and it was him who listened like an enthralled schoolboy as Alex Ferguson duped him into paying a fortune to appoint one of the worst managers in PL history.  I suspect he has another tattoo somewhere that simply says "mug".  As someone else said, he isn't a business man, his Dad made the money,  he's dabbling with inherited wealth, and making a proper hash of it on both sides of the Atlantic.  Either the apple fell a long way from the tree or he takes after his Mother.

Quality insults, if it was MON he'd have your money for some of them ;-)

It's an interesting subject though wealthy kids. I would imagine that Randy had a vastly superior education to that of his old man. He's been to the top uni's both sides of the Atlantic and surely you don't just get to those by money alone ? He must have something about him.

Anyway one of my hopes (or straws I clutch at) is that he sells the Browns and chucks the money at Villa. What does a NFL franchise go for these days ?

[Dave Clark Five]

Which will make for a good head to head in a few weeks as well, if they're both selected

You haven't ruled out Gary coming good then? I must admit to being disappointed in Albrighton but haven't given up on him yet. I take your point about Gardner's miss at Newcastle but, if it had been other players, we would have said they were crap. We know Gardner will regret that miss and will get better and better. The fact is, he has to come good. There is nowhere else to turn.

[pauliewalnuts]

Writing off a young player on the basis of a handful of appearances is mental.

[Steve R]

Writing off a young player on the basis of a handful of appearances is mental.

Especially when he looks to have something about him.

[glasses]

Well, if you think he is doing a good job, fair enough.

I don't.

What has he done wrong, as the CEO (responsible for the business and brand but not footballing matters) he's increased revenue.  Surely that's his job and he's making a decent fist of it.  His knowledge and experience in football isn't good enough but that should be countered by the board containing a member with that football background.  That person not being there is the prime reason for the problems we're in.  Lerner and Faulkner are at fault for not identifying that but that is the only major error (I say only, but it's a fecking huge one and I point the finger much more firmly at Lerner than Faulkner for it) on their part.

To clarify, I chose a mixture of both, Lerner needs to stabilise the board and get the right team at level in place to set measurable performance goals to match with the financial goals.  McLeish needs to completely rethink his footballing philosophy and start making pass and move, 1 or 2 touch football integral to everything we do on the training field.  He also needs to pressure the players to improve their fitness and start playing a much higher tempo in defence where we hunt in packs (1 close the ball, 2-3 others cut out the easy passes to force the 50-50 balls) and press much higher up the field.

Either change will go a long way towards sorting things out but the 2nd is something that McLeish will never be able to do as far as I can see, which makes him yesterdays man and not suitable to manage a club with any intentions on being genuinely successful on the pitch.

A fair point regarding Lerner hiring him despite not having a football background. As I have pointed out, and others, I think he was hired more for the fact that Randy knows him. He is his mate. There should be someone on the board with football knowledge. As CEO though, he has to be responsible for what goes on, ultimately.

We have made losses in the last two financial years. Revenue in the first year would have increased because TV money has increased year on year for god knows how long, coupled with us actually taking a sponsor instead of forfeiting sponsorship for Acorns. Any sponsorship deal would have increased revenue in that respect. I'm aware these are not the only revenue streams, but certainly two of the biggest. Hardly ground breaking stuff.

What has he done wrong? Hiring a man with known medical problems? Hiring the most unpopular manager in our history?

[john e]

Glasses
i think the known medical problems of Houllier should not have stopped him being a football manager if he was given the all clear to do so, there are many many people who have suffered heart problems who will deserve another shot at whatever they do,
it didnt work out because the heart thing came back, thats just unfortunate,
 you coold say the same thing about Redknap and he's probably going to be the next England manager with all the stress related issues that entails

i would not blame Randy for taking a risk with Houllier, in fact i would even give him some credit, you are of course correct about Mcliesh though

[andrew08]

Which will make for a good head to head in a few weeks as well, if they're both selected

You haven't ruled out Gary coming good then? I must admit to being disappointed in Albrighton but haven't given up on him yet. I take your point about Gardner's miss at Newcastle but, if it had been other players, we would have said they were crap. We know Gardner will regret that miss and will get better and better. The fact is, he has to come good. There is nowhere else to turn.

I forgot about his Wolves miss as well and with the rest he was shite at Wigan when the whole team was set up for Bannon and him to run the game. I'm not saying he wont come good, or I'm writing him off (which would indeed be mental) I just don't think he will be a 'legend'

He would have had some momentum if he'd scored at Wolves and Newcastle.....both gettable chances as well. On such things do careers change. I'll be happy to be wrong though.

[pauliewalnuts]

Whose shot was it that Schwarzer parried to let Weimann score against Fulham?

[paul_e]

I'm not saying Faulkner is blameless, I just think he gets a lot of stick on here because of footballing issues when that isn't where his skillset is.  The major failing is the failure by the Board in general to identify that this isn't his skillset and take on an additional member to provide those skills.

I think, with a good football man on the board, Faulkner could prove to be a very valuable CEO.

The problem is, MoN has left them with the impression that the 'goodfootball man on the board' should be the manager, which is a really dangerous position to put ourselves in.

[Dave Clark Five]

Whose shot was it that Schwarzer parried to let Weimann score against Fulham?

He got a shot in at Arsenal as well. Always dangerous from 25 yards, like Paul Scholes is, although not that style of player necessarily.

[andrew08]

Whose shot was it that Schwarzer parried to let Weimann score against Fulham?

Yes fair comment, although perhaps with the reputation he came with from the reserves he should have put it in the top corner. That would be being churlish in the extreme by me and in the same spirit of generosity I'll agree with 'parried' rather than 'dropped' !

Weimann scoring actually proves my point a little. He came on and scored which is what 'hot' prospects do.

[Risso]

I'm not sure that Albrighton will ever be anything more than a mid-table to lower Premier league player in the manner of say Ridgewell or Luke Moore.  Gardner though, looks class.  He looks like he's being playing Premier League football for years.

[MarkM]

I think in terms of aportioning blame then its split into two areas.

The current way the team is performing and its style of play is down to the manager.

But, looking at the bigger picture

Who gave MoN the green light to spend, spend spend on average players and in the process to inflate the wage bill to about 80% of turnover?

Who was one of the two parties that led to MoN's walk out and subsequent huge pay off?

Who appointed GH with all the risks that that entailed?

Who was in control as some of our best players went off to play for 'bigger and better' clubs?

Who made one of the worse mangerial appointments in our history?

Who has pulled funding for the team leaving it weak and unbalanced?

Who appears to not be commited to turning the club around?

I'm not advocating that we sell up but I think that the owner really needs to get a grip.

After all if Ellis had made the above decisions we would want him to be hung from his testicals from a lamp post on Witton Lane