Fans Worried Over Villa Future

[not3bad]

How do you know that would have helped? Would it have meant Lerner putting more money in?

[Brend'Watkins]

I'm a chilled out Mother. 

Supporting the Villa all these years I've come to the conclusion that whatever I expect from them they will do the exact opposite.  Top 10 and a cup beckons.

[pauliewalnuts]

Supporting the Villa all these years I've come to the conclusion that whatever I expect from them they will do the exact opposite.  Top 10 and a cup beckons.

There's definitely an element of that about this club.

[Lucky Eddie]

How do you know that would have helped? Would it have meant Lerner putting more money in?

I don't; but it may just have sent the message that we wouldn't stand for absolutely anything our owner fancied.

[pauliewalnuts]

How do you know that would have helped? Would it have meant Lerner putting more money in?

I don't; but it may just have sent the message that we wouldn't stand for absolutely anything our owner fancied.

But we have to stand for it, don't we? He's the owner, he doesn't have to answer to anyone, not even shareholders. We tried telling Doug we'd had enough and he said he'd leave when he wanted to. Which is exactly what he did.

We're having to stand for what Randy wants right now, too - Lambert still here, no spending, no ambition, and there's not a single thing we can do about it. 3,000 people not renewing their season tickets wouldn't even make any difference.

There's no way he'd have changed his mind. As it was, all those people running up and down Witton Lane when he got the job did was make it easy for them to deflect attention from the appointment.

Appointing McLeish was the most mind bogglingly stupid thing I've seen Aston Villa do in decades, it made zero sense on any level, but the fact he came from Blues - for me anyway - didn't make one iota of difference. It was the fact he was a poor manager with a proven record of shit results, relegations and awful football that bothered me, not that he used to manage Small Heath.

The protests just made it look entirely like it was because he used to manage them. To that end, they were actually counter-productive.

[Lucky Eddie]

How do you know that would have helped? Would it have meant Lerner putting more money in?

I don't; but it may just have sent the message that we wouldn't stand for absolutely anything our owner fancied.

But we have to stand for it, don't we? He's the owner, he doesn't have to answer to anyone, not even shareholders. We tried telling Doug we'd had enough and he said he'd leave when he wanted to. Which is exactly what he did.

We're having to stand for what Randy wants right now, too - Lambert still here, no spending, no ambition, and there's not a single thing we can do about it. 3,000 people not renewing their season tickets wouldn't even make any difference.

There's no way he'd have changed his mind. As it was, all those people running up and down Witton Lane when he got the job did was make it easy for them to deflect attention from the appointment.

Appointing McLeish was the most mind bogglingly stupid thing I've seen Aston Villa do in decades, it made zero sense on any level, but the fact he came from Blues - for me anyway - didn't make one iota of difference. It was the fact he was a poor manager with a proven record of shit results, relegations and awful football that bothered me, not that he used to manage Small Heath.

The protests just made it look entirely like it was because he used to manage them. To that end, they were actually counter-productive.

They came across as counter productive only because of the very small numbers that turned out.

We should never ever ever have stood for that appointment, Randy was being mardy and appointed the relegation king just to stick two fingers up to us.

I've no great criticism to level at Randy but I do find it hard to give him too much great for the Acorns deal, fabulous as it was, they only got the deal because he'd failed to secure a worthy enough sponsorship with a commercial party comparable with our rivals.

Our commercial deals throughout his ownership have been absolutely terrible and have left us years behind where we'd like ourselves to be.

At least that's my opinion.

[dave shelley]

It's your opinion Eddie and, I respect that but, I genuinely and sincerely hope you never, ever have to see any of your children (if you have them) in a hospice.

The Acorns/Commercial thing should never be part of the argument regarding Randy Lerner's tenure.  That is just my opinion.

[pauliewalnuts]

They came across as counter productive only because of the very small numbers that turned out.

I dunno about that, I thought they seemed counter productive because they looked so daft. Did they honestly think Lerner would un-appoint him?

[Lucky Eddie]

Behave yourself, my life's been devasted by cancer and I'm the biggest of fans of our Acorns relationship, I just think Randys avoided criticism for the dire business deals he's done for us.

I repeat; I'm proud of my club for supporting Acorns x

[Lucky Eddie]

They came across as counter productive only because of the very small numbers that turned out.

I dunno about that, I thought they seemed counter productive because they looked so daft. Did they honestly think Lerner would un-appoint him?

No I don't think 200 people thought he'd be unappointed, but if there had been twenty thousand there..............well who knows; maybe things would have been different.

[dave.woodhall]

Do these dire business deals include the biggest we've e ever had?

[Clampy]

How do you know that would have helped? Would it have meant Lerner putting more money in?

I don't; but it may just have sent the message that we wouldn't stand for absolutely anything our owner fancied.

The protests just made it look entirely like it was because he used to manage them. To that end, they were actually counter-productive.

That's probably because at a guess i'd say 95% of those who went along to the protests did so because of who he used to manage. That's why Randy didn't take them seriously enough to change his mind.

[Clampy]

How do you know that would have helped? Would it have meant Lerner putting more money in?

I don't; but it may just have sent the message that we wouldn't stand for absolutely anything our owner fancied.

But we have to stand for it, don't we? He's the owner, he doesn't have to answer to anyone, not even shareholders. We tried telling Doug we'd had enough and he said he'd leave when he wanted to. Which is exactly what he did.

We're having to stand for what Randy wants right now, too - Lambert still here, no spending, no ambition, and there's not a single thing we can do about it. 3,000 people not renewing their season tickets wouldn't even make any difference.

There's no way he'd have changed his mind. As it was, all those people running up and down Witton Lane when he got the job did was make it easy for them to deflect attention from the appointment.

Appointing McLeish was the most mind bogglingly stupid thing I've seen Aston Villa do in decades, it made zero sense on any level, but the fact he came from Blues - for me anyway - didn't make one iota of difference. It was the fact he was a poor manager with a proven record of shit results, relegations and awful football that bothered me, not that he used to manage Small Heath.

The protests just made it look entirely like it was because he used to manage them. To that end, they were actually counter-productive.

I've no great criticism to level at Randy but I do find it hard to give him too much great for the Acorns deal, fabulous as it was, they only got the deal because he'd failed to secure a worthy enough sponsorship with a commercial party comparable with our rivals.

So you're suggesting that rather than take the best deal we were offered, he decided to take nothing at all? Really?

[Lucky Eddie]

Do these dire business deals include the biggest we've e ever had?

Topping Doug in an era awash with money shouldn't make headline news.

[Lucky Eddie]

How do you know that would have helped? Would it have meant Lerner putting more money in?

I don't; but it may just have sent the message that we wouldn't stand for absolutely anything our owner fancied.

But we have to stand for it, don't we? He's the owner, he doesn't have to answer to anyone, not even shareholders. We tried telling Doug we'd had enough and he said he'd leave when he wanted to. Which is exactly what he did.

We're having to stand for what Randy wants right now, too - Lambert still here, no spending, no ambition, and there's not a single thing we can do about it. 3,000 people not renewing their season tickets wouldn't even make any difference.

There's no way he'd have changed his mind. As it was, all those people running up and down Witton Lane when he got the job did was make it easy for them to deflect attention from the appointment.

Appointing McLeish was the most mind bogglingly stupid thing I've seen Aston Villa do in decades, it made zero sense on any level, but the fact he came from Blues - for me anyway - didn't make one iota of difference. It was the fact he was a poor manager with a proven record of shit results, relegations and awful football that bothered me, not that he used to manage Small Heath.

The protests just made it look entirely like it was because he used to manage them. To that end, they were actually counter-productive.

I've no great criticism to level at Randy but I do find it hard to give him too much great for the Acorns deal, fabulous as it was, they only got the deal because he'd failed to secure a worthy enough sponsorship with a commercial party comparable with our rivals.

So you're suggesting that rather than take the best deal we were offered, he decided to take nothing at all? Really?

Yep