Randy Lerner

[bertlambshank]

Don't agree club is on its arse.
After tonight it will look better.

Still like your idea about Dario Gradi, though!

More bothered about Saturday,lose that we are in deep trouble.

[hawkeye]

Don't agree club is on its arse.
After tonight it will look better.

Still like your idea about Dario Gradi, though!

More bothered about Saturday,lose that we are in deep trouble.

we will

[mr woo]

I do find some of this criticism odd.

For years, we had a chairman that many felt stuck his nose into team affairs a little too much. Now we have a chairman that is happy to step back and let his staff take care of their assigned positions, and people don't like that either.

It seems to me that if the team plays well, the chairmans great, and if they lose the chairman's shit. Are things really that simple?
Really?

Aren't there two arguments here? Those that think Lerner is a poor chairman because they know what constitutes a good chairman and those that think Lerner is a poor chairman simply because he's not as rich as Sheik Mansour.

No he is a useless Chairman because he makes useless appointments.

How many did you disagree with ON THE DAY they were appointed? 

We'll take McLeish as a given.

[Louzie0]

Don't agree club is on its arse.
After tonight it will look better.

Still like your idea about Dario Gradi, though!

More bothered about Saturday,lose that we are in deep trouble.

we will

No we won't.

[hawkeye]

I do find some of this criticism odd.

For years, we had a chairman that many felt stuck his nose into team affairs a little too much. Now we have a chairman that is happy to step back and let his staff take care of their assigned positions, and people don't like that either.

It seems to me that if the team plays well, the chairmans great, and if they lose the chairman's shit. Are things really that simple?
Really?

Aren't there two arguments here? Those that think Lerner is a poor chairman because they know what constitutes a good chairman and those that think Lerner is a poor chairman simply because he's not as rich as Sheik Mansour.

No he is a useless Chairman because he makes useless appointments.

How many did you disagree with ON THE DAY they were appointed? 

We'll take McLeish as a given.

add Houlier and Faulkner,

[bertlambshank]

I do find some of this criticism odd.

For years, we had a chairman that many felt stuck his nose into team affairs a little too much. Now we have a chairman that is happy to step back and let his staff take care of their assigned positions, and people don't like that either.

It seems to me that if the team plays well, the chairmans great, and if they lose the chairman's shit. Are things really that simple?
Really?

Aren't there two arguments here? Those that think Lerner is a poor chairman because they know what constitutes a good chairman and those that think Lerner is a poor chairman simply because he's not as rich as Sheik Mansour.

No he is a useless Chairman because he makes useless appointments.

How many did you disagree with ON THE DAY they were appointed? 

We'll take McLeish as a given.

Part of being a chairman/CEO is having a plan for when things go tit's up,RL/PF have no plan for when things go tit's up.

[Louzie0]

I do find some of this criticism odd.

For years, we had a chairman that many felt stuck his nose into team affairs a little too much. Now we have a chairman that is happy to step back and let his staff take care of their assigned positions, and people don't like that either.

It seems to me that if the team plays well, the chairmans great, and if they lose the chairman's shit. Are things really that simple?
Really?

Aren't there two arguments here? Those that think Lerner is a poor chairman because they know what constitutes a good chairman and those that think Lerner is a poor chairman simply because he's not as rich as Sheik Mansour.

No he is a useless Chairman because he makes useless appointments.

How many did you disagree with ON THE DAY they were appointed? 

We'll take McLeish as a given.

Part of being a chairman/CEO is having a plan for when things go tit's up,RL/PF have no plan for when things go tit's up.

How do you know, the transfer window's only just opened.

The roller coaster's up as well as down.  It just happens tonight we've had a down. The next game will be back up again and there are players to be brought in (transfer thread) who will make a difference.
honest.

[mr woo]

That's a hell of a statement.

But again I would say there are two arguments. Tits up off the pitch and he will be wanting answers from Faulkner. Tits up on the pitch and I doubt he'd have too much to say other than to remind Lambert of his responsibilities.

In fact, surely the austerity measures we are facing are part of putting things right in terms of the club being self supportive.


And Hawkeye, if you knew who Paul Faulkner was on the day he took his position and you knew on that day he was unfit for that role , fair play to you.

[bertlambshank]

I do find some of this criticism odd.

For years, we had a chairman that many felt stuck his nose into team affairs a little too much. Now we have a chairman that is happy to step back and let his staff take care of their assigned positions, and people don't like that either.

It seems to me that if the team plays well, the chairmans great, and if they lose the chairman's shit. Are things really that simple?
Really?

Aren't there two arguments here? Those that think Lerner is a poor chairman because they know what constitutes a good chairman and those that think Lerner is a poor chairman simply because he's not as rich as Sheik Mansour.

No he is a useless Chairman because he makes useless appointments.

How many did you disagree with ON THE DAY they were appointed? 

We'll take McLeish as a given.

Part of being a chairman/CEO is having a plan for when things go tit's up,RL/PF have no plan for when things go tit's up.

How do you know, the transfer window's only just opened.

The roller coaster's up as well as down.  It just happens tonight we've had a down. The next game will be back up again and there are players to be brought in (transfer thread) who will make a difference.
honest.

We have had 3 years of one balls up after another,I admire your faith in the clowns but they haven't got a clue.

[bertlambshank]

That's a hell of a statement.

But again I would say there are two arguments. Tits up off the pitch and he will be wanting answers from Faulkner. Tits up on the pitch and I doubt he'd have too much to say other than to remind Lambert of his responsibilities.

In fact, surely the austerity measures we are facing are part of putting things right in terms of the club being self supportive.


And Hawkeye, if you knew who Paul Faulkner was on the day he took his position and you knew on that day he was unfit for that role , fair play to you.

We are making no money off the pitch,and are going backwards on it.At which point does the penny drop.

[mr woo]

Assume for a second, you are the Chairman. What's your magic solution?

[saunders_heroes]

Assume for a second, you are the Chairman. What's your magic solution?

Cash. Cash for PL players, not lower league crap.

[bertlambshank]

Assume for a second, you are the Chairman. What's your magic solution?

Get somebody on the board who knows something about football.At the moment we have a bunch of bankers.
If PF is so good with money let him run that side of things,let a football man run the football side.
The board at the moment is a square peg in a round hole.

[mr woo]

Assume for a second, you are the Chairman. What's your magic solution?

Cash. Cash for PL players, not lower league crap.

I refer you to my earlier post re Sheik Mansour.

There isn't any more cash. Does that make Lerner a bad chairman?

[Stu]

Assume for a second, you are the Chairman. What's your magic solution?

Cash. Cash for PL players, not lower league crap.

I refer you to my earlier post re Sheik Mansour.

There isn't any more cash. Does that make Lerner a bad chairman?

If he can't find the money to finance the team, yes.