MO'N on Goals on Sunday

[eamonn]

Hmm, always successful signing players maybe but its not difficult when you're the only one silly enough to spend five or six million on Luke Young a year after you could have got him for a quarter of that on wages so generous that the player later turns down a move to Liverpool.

Apart from Ashley Young, I'm not sure which other signings were coups and it was a gamble (which to be fairto him, paid off) to spend £10m on him in the first place ( I.e. as paying a lot for potential rather than proven often is). I remember there were stories that we were trying to get Van Der Vaart but not really in with much of a chance.

[passport1]

Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.

No.

We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.

Same as when you are the victim of an accident and the insurance company make you an offer to settle out of court.Its the cheaper option . It doesnt mean you lostt your case because you accepted their offer.

I do wish people would stop using the settlement as proof that  he did not win his case.

[Dave]

Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.

No.

We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.

Same as when you are the victim of an accident and the insurance company make you an offer to settle out of court.Its the cheaper option . It doesnt mean you lostt your case because you accepted their offer.

It also doesn't mean that you won your case either.

[passport1]

I'm not minded to excuse the c**t, as previous posters have pointed out his departure renders any sympathy null.

But there are, I think some mitigating factors. The mandate was for Champions League football, we got close, and I think the key is we got there quickly.
The squad he took over was poor, and needed a complete overhaul. Realistically, we needed to be spending more than probably any other team to make up that kind of ground.
With hindsight, given that support from the chairman was going have its limits, it would have been wise to plan that investment over a longer more sustainable period, but it is hard to blame a manager for asking for players and getting them, it is his job.

Blimy some common sense.

[passport1]

Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.

No.

We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.

Same as when you are the victim of an accident and the insurance company make you an offer to settle out of court.Its the cheaper option . It doesnt mean you lostt your case because you accepted their offer.

It also doesn't mean that you won your case either.

Sigh

[Dave]

Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.

No.

We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.

Same as when you are the victim of an accident and the insurance company make you an offer to settle out of court.Its the cheaper option . It doesnt mean you lostt your case because you accepted their offer.

It also doesn't mean that you won your case either.

Sigh

I know, facts can be such tiresome things.

[passport1]

Yes indeed it would appear so.

[Percy McCarthy]

It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue.  It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.

That's it exactly.  With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress.  That was the key to success.  Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man.  Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years.  Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did.  He failed to do that. 

I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys.  And for what?  Sixth place finishes?  Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding.  And that was our chance, folks.  That was our future and O'Neill blew it.  Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is.  His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.   
     

Strange post. The first paragraph correctly describes what should have happened. The second paragraph then blames somebody who was not to blame that it didn't.

Blaming O'Neill for Randy's largesse is like blaming Sidwell and Shorey for O'Neill's.

[passport1]

I wonder what sort of hissy fits we would have seen on here had the internet existed when Saunders walked. I daresay some would have been blaming Sir Ron for all sorts.

[dave.woodhall]

I wonder what sort of hissy fits we would have seen on here had the internet existed when Saunders walked. I daresay some would have been blaming Sir Ron for all sorts.

Great manager he may have been, but he still did what he did.

[passport1]

Dear god

[dave.woodhall]

Dear god

What was that about facts?

[passport1]

Whose version?

[dave.woodhall]

Whose version?

If you mean the Saunders episode, the fact is that regardless of why he left, the circumstances surrounding what hapened next were very dubious.

[Chris Harte]

I wonder what sort of hissy fits we would have seen on here had the internet existed when Saunders walked. I daresay some would have been blaming Sir Ron for all sorts.

Wasn't he being dicked about by the board, prompting him to walk out?

Still, he had a glorious career after leaving. He managed to relegate both of our neighbours.