We're not fickle..

[paul_e]

I view Houllier differently, to me, despite everything that went wrong, he had the right idea of what needed doing and, importantly, he was a good choice given the circumstances.  The season we really had to concentrate on looking at managers who weren't with a club and had the skills to come in and make a go of it without being able to add anything significant to the squad for 3-4months.  In that light I can understand his appointment and I'm slightly more forgiving towards him.  As I see it, at the time, we needed him more than he needed us, I can't think of another time where that has been the case.

[Concrete John]

Even with the negative football and lack of any idea I still dislike the pug nosed one more than I ever did Mcleish...

O'Leary, Houllier and McNeill never ever gave a shit about the Villa. They are to be treated for the rest of their days with the utter contempt they deserve. Shameful the way 2 of them talked Villa down, was involved in relegation scraps with mid table / top half squads and the latter who actually managed the feat. I'd find it tricky to piss on them if they were burning.

Turner and TSM were rubbish at the job, out of their depth and naeive in the exteme in the latter's case but they understood what Villa meant at least. That is why they were never going to turn down the job.

I never took to Houiller that much. I went on holiday a week or so after MON quit and by the time I came back Houiller was in charge and it felt strange. It was an odd appointment anyway but it seemed strange seeing him in the dug out. Did'nt he turn us down at first?

Must have been a long holiday as that took about 2 months, didn't it?

[rob_bridge]

Even with the negative football and lack of any idea I still dislike the pug nosed one more than I ever did Mcleish...

O'Leary, Houllier and McNeill never ever gave a shit about the Villa. They are to be treated for the rest of their days with the utter contempt they deserve. Shameful the way 2 of them talked Villa down, was involved in relegation scraps with mid table / top half squads and the latter who actually managed the feat. I'd find it tricky to piss on them if they were burning.

Turner and TSM were rubbish at the job, out of their depth and naeive in the exteme in the latter's case but they understood what Villa meant at least. That is why they were never going to turn down the job.

I never took to Houiller that much. I went on holiday a week or so after MON quit and by the time I came back Houiller was in charge and it felt strange. It was an odd appointment anyway but it seemed strange seeing him in the dug out. Did'nt he turn us down at first?

Must have been a long holiday as that took about 2 months, didn't it?

Whoever hired him had overlooked or failed to communicate the fact that he wasn't actually ready to start straight away. The phrase schoolboy error is used in the real world.

[Clampy]

Even with the negative football and lack of any idea I still dislike the pug nosed one more than I ever did Mcleish...

O'Leary, Houllier and McNeill never ever gave a shit about the Villa. They are to be treated for the rest of their days with the utter contempt they deserve. Shameful the way 2 of them talked Villa down, was involved in relegation scraps with mid table / top half squads and the latter who actually managed the feat. I'd find it tricky to piss on them if they were burning.

Turner and TSM were rubbish at the job, out of their depth and naeive in the exteme in the latter's case but they understood what Villa meant at least. That is why they were never going to turn down the job.

I never took to Houiller that much. I went on holiday a week or so after MON quit and by the time I came back Houiller was in charge and it felt strange. It was an odd appointment anyway but it seemed strange seeing him in the dug out. Did'nt he turn us down at first?

Must have been a long holiday as that took about 2 months, didn't it?

You've got me thinking now. We were gone for about 2 and a half weeks. I missed the Man City home game when Gabby got a hat-trick and Stoke away when we lost 3-2 (I think) then Liverpool at home. I think Houiller's first game was Stoke away but I might be wrong.

[rob_bridge]

Even with the negative football and lack of any idea I still dislike the pug nosed one more than I ever did Mcleish...

O'Leary, Houllier and McNeill never ever gave a shit about the Villa. They are to be treated for the rest of their days with the utter contempt they deserve. Shameful the way 2 of them talked Villa down, was involved in relegation scraps with mid table / top half squads and the latter who actually managed the feat. I'd find it tricky to piss on them if they were burning.

Turner and TSM were rubbish at the job, out of their depth and naeive in the exteme in the latter's case but they understood what Villa meant at least. That is why they were never going to turn down the job.

I never took to Houiller that much. I went on holiday a week or so after MON quit and by the time I came back Houiller was in charge and it felt strange. It was an odd appointment anyway but it seemed strange seeing him in the dug out. Did'nt he turn us down at first?

Must have been a long holiday as that took about 2 months, didn't it?

You've got me thinking now. We were gone for about 2 and a half weeks. I missed the Man City home game when Gabby got a hat-trick and Stoke away when we lost 3-2 (I think) then Liverpool at home. I think Houiller's first game was Stoke away but I might be wrong.

You are confusing 2008-09 with 2010-11.

[Clampy]

Even with the negative football and lack of any idea I still dislike the pug nosed one more than I ever did Mcleish...

O'Leary, Houllier and McNeill never ever gave a shit about the Villa. They are to be treated for the rest of their days with the utter contempt they deserve. Shameful the way 2 of them talked Villa down, was involved in relegation scraps with mid table / top half squads and the latter who actually managed the feat. I'd find it tricky to piss on them if they were burning.

Turner and TSM were rubbish at the job, out of their depth and naeive in the exteme in the latter's case but they understood what Villa meant at least. That is why they were never going to turn down the job.

I never took to Houiller that much. I went on holiday a week or so after MON quit and by the time I came back Houiller was in charge and it felt strange. It was an odd appointment anyway but it seemed strange seeing him in the dug out. Did'nt he turn us down at first?

Must have been a long holiday as that took about 2 months, didn't it?

You've got me thinking now. We were gone for about 2 and a half weeks. I missed the Man City home game when Gabby got a hat-trick and Stoke away when we lost 3-2 (I think) then Liverpool at home. I think Houiller's first game was Stoke away but I might be wrong.

You are confusing 2008-09 with 2010-11.

You're right you know. My apologies.

[glasses]

Wow, that's some confusion. West Ham home 3-0, Newcastle away 0-6?, Stoke away 1-2 was it in 2010-11?

[Ads]

It was yeah, but you missed out us beating Everton 1-0.

[Clampy]

Wow, that's some confusion. West Ham home 3-0, Newcastle away 0-6?, Stoke away 1-2 was it in 2010-11?

I went to America in 2008 and 2010 and we played Stoke away both times while I was gone. I think that's where the confusion set in and i'm not sure why because I was at the Newcastle game where they beat us 6-0. My bad (as the kids would say).

[Concrete John]

I view Houllier differently, to me, despite everything that went wrong, he had the right idea of what needed doing and, importantly, he was a good choice given the circumstances.  The season we really had to concentrate on looking at managers who weren't with a club and had the skills to come in and make a go of it without being able to add anything significant to the squad for 3-4months.  In that light I can understand his appointment and I'm slightly more forgiving towards him.  As I see it, at the time, we needed him more than he needed us, I can't think of another time where that has been the case.

I never quite got that argument.  We had just finished 6th, had a squad of internationals, some exciting young players and a chairman who had a reputation for backing his manager.  We needed to be more agressive in our recruitment and pursue the right man, regardless of whether he was in a job or not.

As for Houllier, I never really took to him and don't think he had any real feel for the club.  That having been said, he was getting it right and things were looking good going forward, until he had his health issues.  Which was one of the main concerns many of us raised when he got the job.

The about turn in then appointing TSM basically destroyed the groundwork he had laid, meaning Lambert had to start from scratch.  Lambert as the man after Houllier would have made a lot of sense.

[rob_bridge]

It was yeah, but you missed out us beating Everton 1-0.

Was Houllier or Kevin Mac in charge for that one?

[Concrete John]

It was yeah, but you missed out us beating Everton 1-0.

Was Houllier or Kevin Mac in charge for that one?

K-Mac.

[eastie]

Wasnt houlliers first official game at wolves when heskey scored a late winner?

[rob_bridge]

I view Houllier differently, to me, despite everything that went wrong, he had the right idea of what needed doing and, importantly, he was a good choice given the circumstances.  The season we really had to concentrate on looking at managers who weren't with a club and had the skills to come in and make a go of it without being able to add anything significant to the squad for 3-4months.  In that light I can understand his appointment and I'm slightly more forgiving towards him.  As I see it, at the time, we needed him more than he needed us, I can't think of another time where that has been the case.

I never quite got that argument.  We had just finished 6th, had a squad of internationals, some exciting young players and a chairman who had a reputation for backing his manager.  We needed to be more agressive in our recruitment and pursue the right man, regardless of whether he was in a job or not.

As for Houllier, I never really took to him and don't think he had any real feel for the club.  That having been said, he was getting it right and things were looking good going forward, until he had his health issues.  Which was one of the main concerns many of us raised when he got the job.

The about turn in then appointing TSM basically destroyed the groundwork he had laid, meaning Lambert had to start from scratch.  Lambert as the man after Houllier would have made a lot of sense.

The problem was one lurch to the other. Man Motivator (if you were part of the clique) exceptional to aloof Coaching Strategist (who had to all intent purpose excluded some of Man Motivator's men) with an Unconvincing Lackey  to a 'Limited' organiser. Waste waste and more waste. They were all 10 years past their best if you look at it objectively. Lerner and Faulkner have a lot to answer for. Lambert was a huge step criteria wise in the right direction and hopefully will turn out to work practically speaking.

I'd rather not RL and PF have the need to recruit anyone just yet as it would mean 3 sub optimal appointments. In fact I'll be happy if they don't need to at all.

[Ads]

Wasnt houlliers first official game at wolves when heskey scored a late winner?

It was indeed.