Tony's Tweets

[olaftab]

Now you are introducing caveats to your original statement

[Villa75]

I reserve that right, at all times. 😉

[The Edge]

It's time they bulldozed the North Stand. To put things into perspective Wolves knocked down the old North bank terrace and built a new stand. Now they've knocked down that stand and built a replacement! In all that time our North stand has stood as a testament to apathy in my view.

Wolves also went into receivership and were minutes away from liquidation, partly as a result of the folly that they called the John Ireland stand

That's not the point. Nor is it the John Ireland stand. The old North bank has been rebuilt twice while we still have the original North stand from 1977. The facilities have always been sub standard.

[Chico Hamilton III]

It's time they bulldozed the North Stand. To put things into perspective Wolves knocked down the old North bank terrace and built a new stand. Now they've knocked down that stand and built a replacement! In all that time our North stand has stood as a testament to apathy in my view.

Wolves also went into receivership and were minutes away from liquidation, partly as a result of the folly that they called the John Ireland stand

That's not the point. Nor is it the John Ireland stand. The old North bank has been rebuilt twice while we still have the original North stand from 1977. The facilities have always been sub standard.

And what good has that done for Wolves? Spunking money on a stand that was never going to be filled with fans was the connection I was trying to make. And I'm not sure Wolves have learned their lesson. They average 21,000 at Moline...Molynea.....Moulinex.....the Wolves' ground. That's 10,000 brand new empty seats

[Ads]

 

It's time they bulldozed the North Stand. To put things into perspective Wolves knocked down the old North bank terrace and built a new stand. Now they've knocked down that stand and built a replacement! In all that time our North stand has stood as a testament to apathy in my view.

Wolves also went into receivership and were minutes away from liquidation, partly as a result of the folly that they called the John Ireland stand

That's not the point. Nor is it the John Ireland stand. The old North bank has been rebuilt twice while we still have the original North stand from 1977. The facilities have always been sub standard.

And what good has that done for Wolves? Spunking money on a stand that was never going to be filled with fans was the connection I was trying to make. And I'm not sure Wolves have learned their lesson. They average 21,000 at Moline...Molynea.....Moulinex.....the Wolves' ground. That's 10,000 brand new empty seats

I'm not sure I understand your point and how it has any wider application beyond how shabby the Wolves bin. What about the demolition of the Rainbow Stand and the building of a bigger East Stand at the Hawthorns? They don't fill it very often, but its coincided with an upturn in fortunes for them.

[The Edge]

It's time they bulldozed the North Stand. To put things into perspective Wolves knocked down the old North bank terrace and built a new stand. Now they've knocked down that stand and built a replacement! In all that time our North stand has stood as a testament to apathy in my view.

Wolves also went into receivership and were minutes away from liquidation, partly as a result of the folly that they called the John Ireland stand

That's not the point. Nor is it the John Ireland stand. The old North bank has been rebuilt twice while we still have the original North stand from 1977. The facilities have always been sub standard.

And what good has that done for Wolves? Spunking money on a stand that was never going to be filled with fans was the connection I was trying to make. And I'm not sure Wolves have learned their lesson. They average 21,000 at Moline...Molynea.....Moulinex.....the Wolves' ground. That's 10,000 brand new empty seats

Well there is probably never a great time to be ploughing money into the stadium when there's a constant need for improvement on the pitch. Point being ambitious clubs spend money on their stadium. Make all the arguments you want but the North stand is a relic and rebuilding it would send out all the right messages. At least the club seems to have grabbed that concept at long last.

[AV82EC]

It's time they bulldozed the North Stand. To put things into perspective Wolves knocked down the old North bank terrace and built a new stand. Now they've knocked down that stand and built a replacement! In all that time our North stand has stood as a testament to apathy in my view.

Wolves also went into receivership and were minutes away from liquidation, partly as a result of the folly that they called the John Ireland stand

That's not the point. Nor is it the John Ireland stand. The old North bank has been rebuilt twice while we still have the original North stand from 1977. The facilities have always been sub standard.

And what good has that done for Wolves? Spunking money on a stand that was never going to be filled with fans was the connection I was trying to make. And I'm not sure Wolves have learned their lesson. They average 21,000 at Moline...Molynea.....Moulinex.....the Wolves' ground. That's 10,000 brand new empty seats

Well there is probably never a great time to be ploughing money into the stadium when there's a constant need for improvement on the pitch. Point being ambitious clubs spend money on their stadium. Make all the arguments you want but the North stand is a relic and rebuilding it would send out all the right messages. At least the club seems to have grabbed that concept at long last.

I think Lerner did grasp it he just couldn't be bothered to do anything about it.

[The Edge]

It's time they bulldozed the North Stand. To put things into perspective Wolves knocked down the old North bank terrace and built a new stand. Now they've knocked down that stand and built a replacement! In all that time our North stand has stood as a testament to apathy in my view.

Wolves also went into receivership and were minutes away from liquidation, partly as a result of the folly that they called the John Ireland stand

That's not the point. Nor is it the John Ireland stand. The old North bank has been rebuilt twice while we still have the original North stand from 1977. The facilities have always been sub standard.

And what good has that done for Wolves? Spunking money on a stand that was never going to be filled with fans was the connection I was trying to make. And I'm not sure Wolves have learned their lesson. They average 21,000 at Moline...Molynea.....Moulinex.....the Wolves' ground. That's 10,000 brand new empty seats

Well there is probably never a great time to be ploughing money into the stadium when there's a constant need for improvement on the pitch. Point being ambitious clubs spend money on their stadium. Make all the arguments you want but the North stand is a relic and rebuilding it would send out all the right messages. At least the club seems to have grabbed that concept at long last.

I think Lerner did grasp it he just couldn't be bothered to do anything about it.

Yeah he had big plans and some great ideas to improve the ground and infrastructure but as with everything else under Randy it just didn't quite go to plan. As has been pointed out on here many times he sunk a lot of his families money into the villa so he can't be accused of not trying. Pity he had such a set of useless advisors.

[Damo70]

It's time they bulldozed the North Stand. To put things into perspective Wolves knocked down the old North bank terrace and built a new stand. Now they've knocked down that stand and built a replacement! In all that time our North stand has stood as a testament to apathy in my view.

Wolves also went into receivership and were minutes away from liquidation, partly as a result of the folly that they called the John Ireland stand

I always wondered if the John Ireland stand was actually in the same postcode area as the rest of Molineux.

[stuart445]

We were in debt. Very considerable for the time, before big money could quickly be made.

The rest of it is a very one sided opinion based on the views of people who are only interested in that one particular side.

Ellis was a man who made mistakes, whilst still making us competitive, with very little money.

Lerner had shite loads of money, won nothing, and broke about every negative record in our near 150 year history.

I'm well aware of your views on Ellis, Dave, and I agree on some of them.

What I'm less sure of are your views on Lerner, despite years of reading this forum. Now those views I would be really interested in, as they would be new to me.

Perhaps I'll see you in the Lerner thread, if I can find it.😉

Here's a question for you who made money out of villa Ellis or Lerner?

[stuart445]

Weren't we already tumbling down the table and in massive debt by the time Ellis returned?

I thought we finished mid table the year after winning the league?

Also, to be a bit pedantic, Ellis was back with us when we won the Supercup.

One thing I know for sure. In my 40 years of supporting Villa we have never been thought of of more irrelevant and worthy of nationwide ridicule than we have in the last few years.

I'll hold my hand up and say I wanted Doug to move over years before he did. I thought, like most on here, that the next person would come along and prove how easy it is to get our club back to the very top, especially with having money.

I'm man enough to admit I was wrong. It's not easy, and it never was. But, good god, Lerner really made a complete fuck up of it.

In hindsight I enjoyed the Ellis years a damn site more than I did the Lerner years. I'm not going to pretend I didn't, just because it offends those who continue to hate Ellis with a passion.

We finished tenth the season after winning the league but we did have a minor consolation trophy at the end of it. We were in no more debt than any other club, despite what Doug likes to say, and were sixth in the season he took over. We were relegated four years after that.

I'm not offended, I don't particularly hate Ellis, but I don't see why he should now be beyond criticism just because his successor left us in as bad a shape as Ellis took us to.

That's fine. As long as the same goes for Lerner.

Having been an avid reader of this forum for the last few years, I'm not sure it does. From some people at least.

Exactly.
And let's not forget that Ellis didn't relegate us with one of the worst teams ever seen in the top division of English football either, and didn't leave us with a skeleton of of a club like Lerner did. He has put this club back years and turned us into a genuine laughing stock. There's no comparison between the two in my opinion.

Hang on do you not remember the last season with Ellis where we were well on the route to where we are now.

[ChicagoLion]

We were in debt. Very considerable for the time, before big money could quickly be made.

The rest of it is a very one sided opinion based on the views of people who are only interested in that one particular side.

Ellis was a man who made mistakes, whilst still making us competitive, with very little money.

Lerner had shite loads of money, won nothing, and broke about every negative record in our near 150 year history.

I'm well aware of your views on Ellis, Dave, and I agree on some of them.

What I'm less sure of are your views on Lerner, despite years of reading this forum. Now those views I would be really interested in, as they would be new to me.

Perhaps I'll see you in the Lerner thread, if I can find it.😉

Here's a question for you who made money out of villa Ellis or Lerner?

When a man with experience meets a man with money,Ellis got the money and Randy got an experience.

[Drummond]

It's time they bulldozed the North Stand. To put things into perspective Wolves knocked down the old North bank terrace and built a new stand. Now they've knocked down that stand and built a replacement! In all that time our North stand has stood as a testament to apathy in my view.

Wolves also went into receivership and were minutes away from liquidation, partly as a result of the folly that they called the John Ireland stand

That's not the point. Nor is it the John Ireland stand. The old North bank has been rebuilt twice while we still have the original North stand from 1977. The facilities have always been sub standard.

And what good has that done for Wolves? Spunking money on a stand that was never going to be filled with fans was the connection I was trying to make. And I'm not sure Wolves have learned their lesson. They average 21,000 at Moline...Molynea.....Moulinex.....the Wolves' ground. That's 10,000 brand new empty seats

Well there is probably never a great time to be ploughing money into the stadium when there's a constant need for improvement on the pitch. Point being ambitious clubs spend money on their stadium. Make all the arguments you want but the North stand is a relic and rebuilding it would send out all the right messages. At least the club seems to have grabbed that concept at long last.

I think Lerner did grasp it he just couldn't be bothered to do anything about it.

I think that's unfair. He spent a lot of dosh on a lot of things and in the grand scheme of things, there wasn't much point spending money on the ground when we weren't filling what we had.

It's the age old thing, the teams investing in their grounds, Arsenal, Tottenham, Liverpool, Man City, Chelsea, Man Utd.... they need growth in their grounds because they get big crowds. They get big crowds because they do well. When we do well, we'll get bigger crowds. Which will be the time to potentially increase capacity. There's no point putting in 60,000 seats if we only get 35,000 fans in a 42,000 capacity ground.

[Villa75]

We were in debt. Very considerable for the time, before big money could quickly be made.

The rest of it is a very one sided opinion based on the views of people who are only interested in that one particular side.

Ellis was a man who made mistakes, whilst still making us competitive, with very little money.

Lerner had shite loads of money, won nothing, and broke about every negative record in our near 150 year history.

I'm well aware of your views on Ellis, Dave, and I agree on some of them.

What I'm less sure of are your views on Lerner, despite years of reading this forum. Now those views I would be really interested in, as they would be new to me.

Perhaps I'll see you in the Lerner thread, if I can find it.😉

Here's a question for you who made money out of villa Ellis or Lerner?

The good business man.

[Chinchilla Bathhouse]

We were in debt. Very considerable for the time, before big money could quickly be made.

The rest of it is a very one sided opinion based on the views of people who are only interested in that one particular side.

Ellis was a man who made mistakes, whilst still making us competitive, with very little money.

Lerner had shite loads of money, won nothing, and broke about every negative record in our near 150 year history.

I'm well aware of your views on Ellis, Dave, and I agree on some of them.

What I'm less sure of are your views on Lerner, despite years of reading this forum. Now those views I would be really interested in, as they would be new to me.

Perhaps I'll see you in the Lerner thread, if I can find it.😉

Here's a question for you who made money out of villa Ellis or Lerner?

The good business man.

On what planet is a man who sold all his club's best players unnecessarily, replaced them with poorer ones and hence got relegated, a "good businessman"?