Incorrect mate.
The medical reports (well, five of the six that were produced) all concluded that Ged could INFACT carry on in the job, Ged himself even said that he wants to carry on in the job. So the fact that both parties came to some sort of 'mutual agreement' to part ways would suggest that the board did infact want Houllier out, but werew looking for some sort of backing from doctors that would avoid sacking Houllier, hence not having to pay off the remainder of his contract.
So, like i said, whay is this taking so long when the board knew (or had a good idea) months ago that Houllier would eventually be replaced??? Whereas its took Fulham, what, 4/5 days to appoint a manager. Its just unprofessional.
Incorrect. The medical report they were waiting for recommended Houllier rest until August/September at the earliest and ideally longer. Villa then had to decide to keep him on as manager as usual, with plenty of risks or call it a day based on those results. They decided on the latter about a week ago now.
There were numerous medical reports, the majority of which stated that Houllier was fit to carry on. The board were witing for one to effectively say what it wanted to say i.e Houllier cant carry on, which would mean no compensation paid due to medical reasons
Actually all the reports suggested he could carry on as the condition isnt related to stress. But that he should rest for a long period.
The one they were waiting for at the end was the most detailed and accurate.
You're assuming that firstly, they didn't want him to carry on. Which I've seen no evidence for. And secondly that they've been looking for ages for a manager knowing that Houllier would be off which again, is not only a bit naughty and disrespectful but also out of character for Randy and Co. Planning for life without Houllier perhaps, but actively seeking his replacement? No. And again, no evidence for it.
So have a rant at dithering if you like but its based on nothing.