Butterfingers

1 minute ago, The_Rev said:

 

I don't want to be 'that guy' but the back and forth with Sweden ("You're shit, but your birds are fit" countered with "go home to your ugly wives") has been a thing which happens any time they play an English speaking country.  It certainly happened when England played Sweden in the 2006 World Cup and I dare say that wasn't the first time.  

No but when the English sing it, its an act of aggression.

Outnumbered 6 to 1 in a bar yet they were going to kick off? Based on what exactly?

See how its easy to shoot down the English?

Meanwhile:

150 Russian hard core, well trained troublemakers blames for the violence yet not one of them was arrested-All hail the saving grace though, a 16 year old English fan was arrested for throwing a bottle.

50 year old man in a critical condition with severe brain injuries after being attacked with iron bars.

7 minutes ago, BOF said:

No.  It isn't.  And that, right there, is the difference you were looking for.  You said it.  Not me.

But they are not being disrespectful-That is what I said. English fans sing songs and its disrespectful, Irish fans sing songs and it one big party. How come an Irishman can get drunk, loud and boisterous but an Englishman can't?

Besides, some of those Irish songs are anything but respectful to British people.

So what is the difference between the Irish packing out bars, drinking in the streets, singing out aloud and English fans doing the same?

These people are happy to take the money all day long whilst people continue chucking pint after pint down them. If you want a bunch of sight seers who visit museums, close the bars down. Don't keep them open 24/7 and then complain that there are people who are being disrespectful-That's what 12+ hours drinking sessions does to people.

Football fans in England go to pubs every week, they have a few beers, get boisterous and sing songs. Do we want to take this away from our game as well now?

Its all crap that is coming out now-The French are saying the English were being disrespectful-How were they? By ploughing more money behind the bar than any other nation is going to? I didn't see too many bars refusing to serve people who were being "disrespectful" It's boll#cks.

The bottom line is the French have messed up big time. The policing was appalling, security non-existent. How hard was it to predict that the port area was a potential flashpoint? That Russian thugs were going to cause trouble? The police stood by in many of those videos and allowed English people to take proper beatings. Innocent people who were there purely for the football.

Ok-Perhaps this is a tad controversial but here is my take on it. I am lucky, I do not have the same feeling for England that I do for the Villa. I hadn't watched a game since Brazil and didn't feel anywhere near the disappointment from the last minute equaliser as I did from the many times that its happened to Villa.

However, I feel the English are getting a raw deal here. I have not seen one bit of footage that shows the English as instigators. You have a few hundred local hooligans there, who were there for one purpose and that was to fight and cause trouble. The Russians also seemed prepared for trouble, with reports of many of them wearing gum shields, balaclavas, hoods etc.

The English were all drinking in bars and were happy to have stayed there. There could have been 2000 Dutch, German or anyone else in and around the area and it wouldn't have been a problem. The problems arose when gangs of Russians came from nowhere and attacked English people randomly. many fans were wearing England shirts-When was the last time an English hooligan wore a football shirt?

Throwing bottles at police is unacceptable and cannot be defended but its almost as if people can't wait for this type of thing to happen. When was the last time that the English kicked off in a tournament? The past few tournaments have passed off peacefully if I recall? It is really only Eastern European countries who are still doing this stuff nowadays.

I have found much of what I have watched over the past 2 days to be sickening. Its bullying and cowardice at its highest. There is a Stan Collymore video out there where a channel 4 news reporter tells him that the Russians all flew into Switzerland and then hired cars to take them to France in order to avoid detection. The English flew straight there and set up camp in the port with flags-Which of the two sets were planning trouble?

The songs and chanting are annoying but would it be any different if Villa or any other English club was playing in Marseille in such a big game?

It was England fans this time. Next time it could be Villa fans-We need to keep this into perspective. At what point do you not retaliate or defend yourself?

I've always thought the English got a raw deal abroad-My feeling is that sometimes the fans need defending and this is one of those occasions.

1 minute ago, AndyBM said:

last week it was reported that rdm would have £50m this window, earlier in the week it was £40m, by friday it was £35m, hopefully the takeover is completed by tomorrow so it doesnt drop below £30m, we need 11 new players as least

I wouldn't worry too much about what is reported-They are nothing more than guesses.

Until we know who is staying, I doubt even RDM knows how much is going to be spent.

Me personally, I would like to keep the 4 French signings plus Adama. Of the rest, I'd have Grealish. Out of that lot, I think we'll keep 3 maximum.

That means in an ideal world there will be 8 new starters come kick off in August.

In this league, with games coming thick and fast, we then need at least another 2 squad players., ideally 4.

We somehow need to get rid of the Sherwood signings plus Gabby, Guzan & Bacuna. I can live with Hutton, Clark and Westwood as squad players under the circumstances.

Hopefully, the cups will be used as games to play a reserve side. I'd be happy to get knocked out in the first round of both.

26 minutes ago, Gary Thomas said:

When you think the season kicks off in 9 weeks - it is going to be a very interesting transfer window!

Yes mate. I have to say that I'm not inspired when I see people mentioning Steven Fletcher etc. While my brain has accepted our championship status, my heart still cannot accept the type of player we're being linked to. I'm hoping that RDM will pull a rabbit or two out of the hat. If we get £30mil ploughed in, its not unrealistic to see another £20mil on top from sales. Lets hope that whatever is spent is spent more wisely than it has been in previous seasons.

38 minutes ago, dudevillaisnice said:

If we spend it wisely enough I think £35m + income from sales is enough to get out of the championship.

Main concern is wage bill though, sure some have left but think to attract real quality we have to pay the wages required which I think we might this time.

Seems we are already looking for a keeper and a striker so it's a good start not to mention the defender we are supposedly close to signing.

We should be able to compete with the teams from the lower end of the PL for players in my opinion.

Income from sales will quite possibly be way over the £20million mark.

Pool any three of last summers foreign signings at £7mil each gives you £21mil straight away. I think we all accept that at least 3 will move on. Coupled with the possibility of loosing other squad players for fees (Grealish for example would command big money) and its not unrealistic to see £30mil plus come in during the summer.

2 hours ago, dn1982 said:

Riley has got the blame for Sherwood spitting his dummy out and not actually creating a balanced squad. As a few have mentioned I don't think the foreign imports were that bad but they do tend to take time to settle and having half a teams worth was stupid but that doesn't stop the fact Sherwood never replaced the GK and RB he deemed not good enough the year before. It was also his decision to replace Benteke with Gestede!! I don't think Riley should stay but not on his signings more that we need a complete fresh start. 

I'm not Sherwoods biggest critic but now the dust has settled, his signings were far worse than the foreign batch.

I think collectively, a certain amount of blame should lie at everyones door for failing to recognise the need for leadership and experience to carry the new foreign imports through. Sherwood to his credit may have partly addressed this in defence but I think a bigger issue was the failure to replace Delphs drive and leadership further up the field.

4 hours ago, Spoony said:

Steve Hollis has been a bit of a champion since he's been here. He seems to just get shit done.

Compared to his predecessors, he's been like a breath of fresh air. I'm disappointed in a way that he won't be around in some capacity moving forward. I really feel that he bgs something to the party.

If Gueye signs for Spurs I'll eat my hat.

10 hours ago, hippo said:

No I heard little on the radio say it. 

What exactly did he say Hippo? I wonder if this may have been an issue in the King & Bernstein resignations?

My feeling is that a new owner is perfectly entitled to have the final say on who is/was appointed. I'm not sure that this will mean BL can't work under the new regime. His job is to advise-The final decision must always rest with the owner. I see BL's role more to be involved with helping the managerial and coaching staff in any case.

I think that BL has plenty to bring to the table still and his experience is invaluable. I thought it interesting to read Stan Collymores comments that Brian has a ruthless streak in him. he comes across as such an all round nice guy. I sincerely hope BL has a role to play moving forward.

I am personally not overwhelmed by Bond, although that said, I don't know an awful lot about him.

What I am pleased about is that the team were selected and in place before the manager was announced. This not only differs from recent appointments where the backroom staff have almost been an afterthought but also suggests that things have been in place for some time and that the team are RDM's first choice, not 2nd or 3rd choices as they have been for Garde, Sherwood and Lambert. Even Houlier wanted Phil Thompson as first choice.

15 minutes ago, R.Bear said:

Not particularly excited about this appointment but what can we expect in the Championship? Worrying that Di Matteo has had one season in 4 years and failed miserably. No idea how this is going to turn out.

Would you have had any idea if it had been Pearson or Moyes? I know I wouldn't have.

Who knows how Pearson will have fared without his backroom staff.

Moyes has failed in his last two jobs and is a long time since he managed in the Championship

RDM seems young, hungry, determined and respected.

If anyone can say that any one of those three (or indeed anyone else) was the nailed on best bet, then I salute them.

Get some decent money for him and we'll be laughing. Its testament to how utterly dire we are that a player of Gils calibre is held with such esteem.

Not one of the biggest culprits last season and he'll leave with my best wishes but he has flattered to deceive. As others have highlighted, he has his limitations and I'm sure we can do better than starting with him-Even in the championship. What does that tell you?

1 hour ago, maqroll said:

Sale not confirmed, manager not confirmed. Lerner still owner.

 

I bet you're a barrel of laughs on a night out?

1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said:

Whereas O'Neill would have run a mile sooner than work for Ellis.

 

I don't blame him.

Still doesn't escape from the fact that at the time he joined, it wasn't 100% certain.

The difference this time around is that we are not looking at managers in the MON category. Pearson, RDM et all would not run a mile if offered the Villa job

5 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

The Lerner deal was virtually done when MON was signed up, in fact the whole unveiling of MON, with Doug at the press conference, was pretty much an ego thing, with Lerner allowing Doug to pretty much act as though this was all him. Clearly MON had the green light from Lerner, and the press conference was just a nice gesture to an elderly, ego-maniacal outgoing chairman. 

But I think you're misunderstanding my point. I'm not necessarily saying that the club shouldn't appoint a manager now. What I'm saying is that from a prospective managers point of view things are risky right now, and until the takeover has been completed it's unlikely we'd even have anyone want to join us until the future of the club is clear.

It's most likely the case that RDM is for all intents and purposes rapped up, but the entire deal is conditional on Dr X getting approval. No immanent approval, no RDM, it's as simple as that.

"virtually done" is not 100%

This current deal is actually done. It simply awaits rubber stamping.

Do you think that if we hadn't been bought out and Hollis offered RDM the job, he would turn it down?

The vast majority of these managers we're being linked to would crawl on their hands and knees to BMH to get the chance to manage Villa-Its still a massive job

5 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

Absolutely - but you'd said the opposite when you'd said MON was a manager who had come in without 100% certainty on a change of ownership.

Provided the takeover is where we hope it is and where it should be, I don't see any benefit in delaying an appointment. 

 

There is very little difference in percentage between where we were with the Lerner takeover and where we are currently with this one.

Lerner wasn't 100% & neither is this one. So MON did indeed join without 100% certainty in ownership.

15 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

MON joined with 100% certainty - he was approached by Lerner, met with Lerner and Lerner's people, signed a contract drafted up by Lerner on behalf of a football club which Lerner was absolutely committed to already owning and came to work at Villa Park for Lerner. The fact that Ellis was still on the leather chair when he arrived was entirely inconsequential.

 

So not different from this current situation then?

RDM will have been approached by the new owners and can quire easily have his contract drafted up by the new owners and come here to work for the new owner.

The fact that Hollis is in the chair is inconsequential.

Lets not pretend this is some pipe dream, grasping onto a wing and  prayer. It is the culmination of weeks of intense negotiations and has been announced as happening by the club.

2 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

..because what manager would join us when the takeover is still, for all intents are purposes, uncertain? As a manager you'd surely want to know, with 100% certainty, that the takeover will go through, otherwise why take the risk?

MON for a start

Also, where do you draw the line? What if there is a problem with one of the leagues? What if it takes 2 months to resolve? Do we start pre-season with Eric Black in charge?

A line needs to be drawn. If a certain manager (RDM for example) doesn't want to join us in case the takeover fails, then there isn't much that can be done. However, firstly it would unlikely be the case and secondly, we don't know until he is offered.

If Its true that Pearson was Hollis number 1 target then there is no reason why an appointment cannot now be made. 

Can't see Sid being privy to the thoughts of the new regime-How could he possibly know?

Bruce opens up yet another can of worms.

I've always thought that he's bought extremely well, others think the opposite. He assembled a good side at Blues for 3 seasons when they first came up-Ironically, the best on paper was the one that went down.

He got Bent for £10mil for Sunderland and has signed some good players for Hull.

I have no stand out choice for manager-I'd probably have gone for Moyes given that most wanted him and it would galvanise things a little. Moyes has his negatives as well though.

RDM, Bruce or Pearson? I wouldn't like to say which one is the best bet-It's so close.

I think any incoming manager would prefer the opportunity of rebuilding a squad in one window, rather than work with players that his predecessor had bought in.

Every manager has rebuilt a squad by the end of the third or 4th window in charge.

Key for us this summer is as much about who we keep as it is who comes in. Keeping hold of the few quality players we have, allows focus to be applied to positions that are vacant.

I don't think we'll keep them all but if we had Grealish, Aywe, Amavi and Adama here next season, we would only be looking at 6 or 7 first choice signings (yes I am aware of the significance of the word "only")

In reality. we'll probably only have one or two of those 4 available come August. Realistically, we are going to have to look at the second tier in the squad-Players who ideally, most of us would like to see the back of: Hutton, Clark, Westwood, Sinclair, Gestede,  possibly Baker, possibly Okore.

I'm not phased by the 46 fixtures as I'd be happy to see us just field reserve sides for the cup games. I think a squad depth maybe important though with 2 games a week.

A big decision for RDM would be whether to go with Gestede (which imo is a gamble) or spend a big portion of his war chest on a replacement-So much depends on who stays. Does it have to be a big target man up front in that division? I have no idea.

I think we have to accept that the starting line up next season is not going to be quite as strong as we'd hoped-There will be a few familiar faces in it. I'd say 6, maybe 7 new faces starting the first game and 4 or 5 from last season.