open letter from Steve Hollis

[olaftab]

I want hear what Darren Woolley has to say about this letter before making up my mind as I am heavily influenced by that man.

[SheffieldVillain]

In the second of those statements I was answering a point made by Toronto Villa and it followed on from his comment. As you know, it is only a part of my post.

Please don't try to score clever points by quoting me out of context.

OK. Here are both of your full quotes.

"I suspect it was (his decision), which makes him a puppet to Lerner and his intention not to spend more money."

"If he made the decision himself then he's not a puppet he's more of a twat. No patronising statement to fans can excuse this."

My question still stands - if he made the decision himself as you accept he did, is he (a) a puppet as you said in your first quote, or (b) not a puppet as you said in your second quote?

[trevor fisher]

I welcome the letter. It could have gone further and said that the problems did not start this season, but its welcome that it was said that the process of identifying the root causes started long ago, and we await the results of that. The finger would have to point ultimately at LErner, but he is not going anywhere, unless someone wants to buy the club

some time ago I suggested a fan's inquiry into the \Villa's decline, and Dave Woodall asks who would staff it. Its a fair point, and there is no simple answer. The desire has to be there, and then it is up to volunteers. No volunteers, no inquiry. If the club does get down to root causes, then there is no need for a fans' inquiry.

For the time being, it is sensible to let Hollis and the board pursue their policies. If there is progress, no need for the fans to do anything. But nothing less than root and branch reform is required, so keeping a watching brief is what we have to do.

Trevor Fisher

[in exile]

Oh Christ, here we go again

Shaffali Oza

[malckennedy]

In the second of those statements I was answering a point made by Toronto Villa and it followed on from his comment. As you know, it is only a part of my post.

Please don't try to score clever points by quoting me out of context.

OK. Here are both of your full quotes.

"I suspect it was (his decision), which makes him a puppet to Lerner and his intention not to spend more money."

"If he made the decision himself then he's not a puppet he's more of a twat. No patronising statement to fans can excuse this."

My question still stands - if he made the decision himself as you accept he did, is he (a) a puppet as you said in your first quote, or (b) not a puppet as you said in your second quote?

My response to you still stands. The second statement is in response to TV who made the point that Hollis, in his opinion, made the decision not to spend in January himself. My comment therefore followed on from that to say that if that was the case he was not a puppet but something worse.

Your quotes are still out of context because they don't include the full conversation.  Your points add nothing and are pedantic "clever dick" remarks.

[Ron Manager]

I welcome the letter. It could have gone further and said that the problems did not start this season, but its welcome that it was said that the process of identifying the root causes started long ago, and we await the results of that. The finger would have to point ultimately at LErner, but he is not going anywhere, unless someone wants to buy the club

some time ago I suggested a fan's inquiry into the \Villa's decline, and Dave Woodall asks who would staff it. Its a fair point, and there is no simple answer. The desire has to be there, and then it is up to volunteers. No volunteers, no inquiry. If the club does get down to root causes, then there is no need for a fans' inquiry.

For the time being, it is sensible to let Hollis and the board pursue their policies. If there is progress, no need for the fans to do anything. But nothing less than root and branch reform is required, so keeping a watching brief is what we have to do.

Trevor Fisher

I agree. We must wait and see what transpires.........because we have no choice.

Ronnie Manager

[Phil from the upper holte]

Good start. Don't tell me show me now! I like him

[SheffieldVillain]

In the second of those statements I was answering a point made by Toronto Villa and it followed on from his comment. As you know, it is only a part of my post.

Please don't try to score clever points by quoting me out of context.

OK. Here are both of your full quotes.

"I suspect it was (his decision), which makes him a puppet to Lerner and his intention not to spend more money."

"If he made the decision himself then he's not a puppet he's more of a twat. No patronising statement to fans can excuse this."

My question still stands - if he made the decision himself as you accept he did, is he (a) a puppet as you said in your first quote, or (b) not a puppet as you said in your second quote?

My response to you still stands. The second statement is in response to TV who made the point that Hollis, in his opinion, made the decision not to spend in January himself. My comment therefore followed on from that to say that if that was the case he was not a puppet but something worse.

Your quotes are still out of context because they don't include the full conversation.  Your points add nothing and are pedantic "clever dick" remarks.

I give up. They weren't pedantic 'clever dick' remarks - I was asking if you think he is a puppet or not.

Because if you think he is, I disagree. If you think he isn't, I agree. It's quite fundamental to the conversation we were having and I found your posts confusing so asked you to clarify.

Perplexed in Poland.

[sickbeggar]

I suppose he means well, but its rather like getting an apology and a promise to not do it again off the guy who drove over your dog and killed it. That's what they don't get in corporate land. Football is not like other businesses where you apologise to the customers when the product is faulty and hope they don't start buying off you rivals. No-one has ever been plunged into 6 months of depression because their Dyson was on the blink. Its a gesture i suppose but all a bit meh really

[brian green]

You are right sicko.  Football is like Art.  Whatever you say about it you could say the opposite and it would still be true.

Alphonse Leponse

[four fornicholl]

Perplexed in Poland.
I would be too ,living there

[peter w]

Does he mean it?  The identity of the next manager will tell us.

He'll mean it as much as Lerner will allow him to.

[paul_e]

I suspect not spending money in January will be a stick to beat Hollis with for a while but I also believe that it will turn out to have been the right thing to do.  Newcastle were in a much more salvageable situation and spent big to try to stay up but if anything they got worse and are coming down with us. The difference is they're doing it with an extra 150-200k p/w on the wage bill and £25m less in the bank.  Yes they'll sell some of the players they picked up this season but like us they're going to struggle to get their money back.

In truth we were so far back after the sunderland and norwich games at Christmas that I can understand the reluctance to spend, I honestly think that if we'd got 4-6 points from those 2 the window would've been very different.

[malckennedy]

In the second of those statements I was answering a point made by Toronto Villa and it followed on from his comment. As you know, it is only a part of my post.

Please don't try to score clever points by quoting me out of context.

OK. Here are both of your full quotes.

"I suspect it was (his decision), which makes him a puppet to Lerner and his intention not to spend more money."

"If he made the decision himself then he's not a puppet he's more of a twat. No patronising statement to fans can excuse this."

My question still stands - if he made the decision himself as you accept he did, is he (a) a puppet as you said in your first quote, or (b) not a puppet as you said in your second quote?

My response to you still stands. The second statement is in response to TV who made the point that Hollis, in his opinion, made the decision not to spend in January himself. My comment therefore followed on from that to say that if that was the case he was not a puppet but something worse.

Your quotes are still out of context because they don't include the full conversation.  Your points add nothing and are pedantic "clever dick" remarks.

I give up. They weren't pedantic 'clever dick' remarks - I was asking if you think he is a puppet or not.

Because if you think he is, I disagree. If you think he isn't, I agree. It's quite fundamental to the conversation we were having and I found your posts confusing so asked you to clarify.

Perplexed in Poland.

One more try, Perplexed.

I think he is a puppet, but if he made the decision not to spend in January himself as contended by some, then he's not a puppet but worse. This should be a simple concept to understand but does entail reading and understanding conversations in full.

If you still don't get this then I give up too.

[aj2k77]

I think we will have a decent idea of where the club is heading when we see who we appoint and the first few players we bring in to the club.