TrentVilla Posted November 27, 2011 Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2011 Think we're going to have to agree to disagree here. Randy certainly isn't blameless but given the amount of control he had, neither is MON either IMO. I guess we have to because nothing you can say will change my view that Randy is responsible and nothing I can say seem's to be able to put you right (joke) O'Neill is at fault for many many things including wasting money but I will always maintain the responsibility for financial control can never lie with the manager. Even if he is given total financial control which never happens if that goes wrong it is still ultimately the owners responsibility. If we went into administration it wouldn't be O'Neill that people were chasing for money. I think he could've gotten a better manager, yes. Problem here is we don't know what went on but I certainly don't think McLeish was his only option. No I'm sure he wasn't but it doesn't really matter now, the point I was making and I think even you must reluctantly agree with is that appointing McLeish is very far from being Randy's only significant mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxVilla Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Think we're going to have to agree to disagree here. Randy certainly isn't blameless but given the amount of control he had, neither is MON either IMO. Say I hire a stock broker to invest my money for me. If he ends up losing a good deal of my money investing in the market (in good faith obviously) then it is MY fault for hiring him and trusting him with my money. Would you not agree with this statement? I could after all quit my job and research the stock market myself, but he is a professional who is paid to do this for a living. It's easy to blame the manager for losing money but Randy Lerner is the owner of Aston Villa and if something happens on his watch that hurts the club financially then he is responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Are ppl still going on about MON??? What the hell does MON have to do with giving this McClown a job in PRemier league after being proven a failure in it and perhaps most negative manager ever to manage in Premier league this is a Randy Lerner thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 O'Neill is partly responsible, given the large amount of control Randy gave him. Should Randy have given him such control? No, probably not, but then again I doubt O'Neill would've worked under such conditions. How can you keep banging on about this and ignoring the points out forward? Our issue was not the money we spent. Our issue was the money we spent in relation to how much money we brought in. Please explain why mon would have known about all the ways we make money more than the owner. Please explain how MON should have known future forecasts than the owner? Did MON have anything to do with ticket pricing, corporate deals, merchandising, sponsorship, tv deals? Please explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makouns_grin Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Don't get the obsession with o'neill, he is a word removed and left when couldn't get what he want. He didnt sign the cheques though did he. Lerner was a fool for trusting him, he was probably worried that he would leave sooner and just said yes yes yes. Shit it when no money more said no, off he went. Nothing to do with o'neill lerners fault for giving him to much control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 How can you keep banging on about this and ignoring the points out forward? Our issue was not the money we spent. Our issue was the money we spent in relation to how much money we brought in. Please explain why mon would have known about all the ways we make money more than the owner. Please explain how MON should have known future forecasts than the owner? Did MON have anything to do with ticket pricing, corporate deals, merchandising, sponsorship, tv deals? Please explain. No, but in his infinite managerial wisdom he should have know that Habib Beye, Harewood, Heskey, Sidwell and so on weren't worth the hefty transfer fee and wages that he spent on them. Maybe if he'd have spent the money On players who offered more on the pitch then perhaps the revenue from sponsorship, TV etc would have kept pace with the millions of pounds he wasted on shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 O'Neill is partly responsible, given the large amount of control Randy gave him. Should Randy have given him such control? No, probably not, but then again I doubt O'Neill would've worked under such conditions. How can you keep banging on about this and ignoring the points out forward? Our issue was not the money we spent. Our issue was the money we spent in relation to how much money we brought in. Please explain why mon would have known about all the ways we make money more than the owner. Please explain how MON should have known future forecasts than the owner? Did MON have anything to do with ticket pricing, corporate deals, merchandising, sponsorship, tv deals? Please explain. What a successful business does is have the key personnel working and planning together. This clearly wasn't happening during O'Neill's time in charge. It looks like Lerner didn't realise the full extent of the costs being run up, and O'Neill didn't realise that Lerner couldn't afford to keep backing to him the same extent. Then when both realised the full extent of the other's actions, the relationship fell apart in dramatic fashion. In other words, an utter shambles. edit: and now in the latest example, we have Faulkner and McLeish clearly not on the same page. How hard can it be to actually talk to each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 O'Neill is partly responsible, given the large amount of control Randy gave him. Should Randy have given him such control? No, probably not, but then again I doubt O'Neill would've worked under such conditions. How can you keep banging on about this and ignoring the points out forward? Our issue was not the money we spent. Our issue was the money we spent in relation to how much money we brought in. Please explain why mon would have known about all the ways we make money more than the owner. Please explain how MON should have known future forecasts than the owner? Did MON have anything to do with ticket pricing, corporate deals, merchandising, sponsorship, tv deals? Please explain. What a successful business does is have the key personnel working and planning together. This clearly wasn't happening during O'Neill's time in charge. It looks like Lerner didn't realise the full extent of the costs being run up, and O'Neill didn't realise that Lerner couldn't afford to keep backing to him the same extent. Then when both realised the full extent of the other's actions, the relationship fell apart in dramatic fashion. In other words, an utter shambles. edit: and now in the latest example, we have Faulkner and McLeish clearly not on the same page. How hard can it be to actually talk to each other. I think that pretty much sums it up for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDrums Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 I see Sunderland have the balls to sack a manager playing crap, negative football but not Lerner. Happy enough to count the $$$$$. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazdavies79 Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 The two situations are very different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDrums Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 And how is it different? A manager universally despised by the majority of fans. Check. Crap, negative, boring football. Check. And only 5 points behind us and they are said to be in a relegation battle, with a better goal difference. Go on Bazdavies79, explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 30, 2011 Moderator Share Posted November 30, 2011 No I don't accept that. O'Neill was guilty of wasting money on certain players (we all know who) but he is absolutely not responsible for the financial position we found ourselves in. Randy and by his appointment Paul Faulkner are responsible for the financial control of the business and it is a business. They set the budgets, the are responsible for the commercial income (some income is I admit down to the manager) they control the spending. They are the one's who say yes to the player purchases or the player contracts. Now it is not their fault that O'Neill made some poor decisions but it is similarly not O'Neill's fault that they allowed spending and the wage bill to spiral to a level was unsustainable. Now this is either Randy's error (either directly or indirectly) or he has had a change of heart or circumstance that dictates he is no longer able or willing to sustain a level of spending he was previously comfortable with. The buck for our financial position stops with Randy, nobody else. I think the bit I've bolded is relevant and often overlooked. And on top of that not only have Randy's circumstances changed, the world's have changed. We have examples at smaller levels throughout the country of people cutting back personal spending, because the world has changed. People's individual circs change, too. It isn't necessarily their fault - they didn't cause the banks to crash, they didn't cause their income, or savings or pensions to diminish, but they have happened. People are stopping going on holiday, stopping buying cars and so on - isn't there a large degree of analogy with what Randy has done, there? He's cut spending on Villa, we've cut our holiday spending or whatever, basically. And it's not our fault that we're struggling or fearful for our jobs and income etc. So as much as you have a point, and Mantis does have a point, too, I think - When RL came in he had to give a deal of decision making control to MO'N because of his own situation (new to football ownership etc) MO'N then committed money which was available at the time, but no longer is on wages or low/zero resale values. Basically, external influences that neither MO'N or Randy or PF for that matter, have any control over, and therefore responsibility for, have played a part in this, too. SUrely that's undeniable, isn't it? And if you allow that it is a factor, then perhaps some of the comments made by some people about RL are wide of the mark? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazdavies79 Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 AM has only been in charge of 13 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis_B Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Admittedly Spudface has had more time but it's a question of whether AM deserves the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowDoINotLikeThat Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 I would genuinely prefer Steve Bruce as manager over McCrap. Bruce has much , much better Premiership record. Goes to show how crap McCrap is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 If our problem was our wages were too high compared to what's coming in then I don't see the financial problems around the world being the reason for us cutting back. Has the recession really effected our sponsorship deal or tv deal that much? Just seems another weak excuse to defend Lerner and try to push the blame on others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodytom Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Has the recession really effected our sponsorship deal or tv deal that much? What, there our only 2 sources of income?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 30, 2011 Moderator Share Posted November 30, 2011 No I don't accept that. O'Neill was guilty of wasting money on certain players (we all know who) but he is absolutely not responsible for the financial position we found ourselves in. Randy and by his appointment Paul Faulkner are responsible for the financial control of the business and it is a business. They set the budgets, the are responsible for the commercial income (some income is I admit down to the manager) they control the spending. They are the one's who say yes to the player purchases or the player contracts. Now it is not their fault that O'Neill made some poor decisions but it is similarly not O'Neill's fault that they allowed spending and the wage bill to spiral to a level was unsustainable. Now this is either Randy's error (either directly or indirectly) or he has had a change of heart or circumstance that dictates he is no longer able or willing to sustain a level of spending he was previously comfortable with. The buck for our financial position stops with Randy, nobody else. I think the bit I've bolded is relevant and often overlooked. And on top of that not only have Randy's circumstances changed, the world's have changed. We have examples at smaller levels throughout the country of people cutting back personal spending, because the world has changed. People's individual circs change, too. It isn't necessarily their fault - they didn't cause the banks to crash, they didn't cause their income, or savings or pensions to diminish, but they have happened. People are stopping going on holiday, stopping buying cars and so on - isn't there a large degree of analogy with what Randy has done, there? He's cut spending on Villa, we've cut our holiday spending or whatever, basically. And it's not our fault that we're struggling or fearful for our jobs and income etc. So as much as you have a point, and Mantis does have a point, too, I think - When RL came in he had to give a deal of decision making control to MO'N because of his own situation (new to football ownership etc) MO'N then committed money which was available at the time, but no longer is on wages or low/zero resale values. Basically, external influences that neither MO'N or Randy or PF for that matter, have any control over, and therefore responsibility for, have played a part in this, too. SUrely that's undeniable, isn't it? And if you allow that it is a factor, then perhaps some of the comments made by some people about RL are wide of the mark? I've never denied that external influences have had some impact upon our fortunes. My complaints about Randy have never or very rarely been about money either in part for that very reason but because I always knew the spending would come to an end sooner or later. My criticism of Randy has never been about his character or him as a person and its never really been about his spending. It is more about what I believe is his poor decisions he has made and continues to make as our owner or custodian as he likes to call himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 30, 2011 Author Share Posted November 30, 2011 I highly doubt Bruce would be any better than Eck as our manager Both very physical CBs who I'm today's game would get a red every week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Has the recession really effected our sponsorship deal or tv deal that much? What, there our only 2 sources of income?? I would say they are easily the two main sources of income. I also think our football and managerial appointments have effected ticket sales more than financial problems around the world. I have no idea about merchandise but I can't believe that's the reason we've got into financial trouble. Weak excuses IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts