uncle_junior

It is him. If you look at his photos there's a photo of him holding a piece of paper with his Twitter username on it.

That's not going to happen until after a takeover, is it? A takeover that clearly is not imminent. People with the experience required to run a Premier League football club as CEO are not going to want to come to work for a man who has openly professed his desire to sell the club. Looking at the general reaction, this seems to be a point a lot of people are missing. This will not be "Faulkner goes, better CEO comes ", not while Lerner still runs the club. I can think of lots of things Faulkner screwed up and am not really going to shed any tears about him going, but it is hard to see how an even bigger chunk of uncertaintly chucked onto the vat of shit we are in at the moment is going to help. With Faulkner, people often - correctly - complained that we were run by someone who didn't know much about the game. Well now we're being run by someone who probably doesn't know what a football is, reporting to someone who doesn't care what a football is anymore.

The problem isn't that he got it totally wrong today, it is that he has been doing precisely that almost the whole season. I can't see us picking up another point this season. We may as well bin him now and put Sid in charge, then look for a replacement in the summer. Anyone still sure we are not going down must have balls of steel.

No, but to be honest, if I'd spotted the builder was making it out of wattle and daub, I'd be seriously thinking about it.

I don't think so. People already accepted that Liverpool fan's were not solely to blame for the accident. Your post is even more evidence of people not geting it. "Liverpool fans were not solely to blame for the accident"? Liverpool fans were not in any way to blame for the accident. I don't see how anyone can fail to understand that, other than not *wanting* to do so. I'm not getting into a debate here as anyone with differing opinion is lambasted. That's because your opinion is morally, factually and offensively wrong. I'm still not biting. How plucky of you. There's no need for you to bite, you've managed to align yourself with the cause of idiocy with your posts on this thread.

I don't think so. People already accepted that Liverpool fan's were not solely to blame for the accident. Your post is even more evidence of people not geting it. "Liverpool fans were not solely to blame for the accident"? Liverpool fans were not in any way to blame for the accident. I don't see how anyone can fail to understand that, other than not *wanting* to do so. I'm not getting into a debate here as anyone with differing opinion is lambasted. That's because your opinion is morally, factually and offensively wrong.

Another shining display of ignorance. The fans have just been as spectacularly and clearly exonerated of any blame is it is possible to be, but still some people just don't want to believe it. Liverpool fans come out of this exceptionally well, because it was they (and many others) who continued to keep this issue in the public mind for almost a quarter of a century.

I don't think so. People already accepted that Liverpool fan's were not solely to blame for the accident. Your post is even more evidence of people not geting it. "Liverpool fans were not solely to blame for the accident"? Liverpool fans were not in any way to blame for the accident. I don't see how anyone can fail to understand that, other than not *wanting* to do so.

He says, going out on a limb at 23.59

I'm trying to work out what we're actually attempting to do, and struggling.

General I think the thing that worries me most is that you think that it is the difference between you thinking we can finish 4th and 5th that is the issue. It isn't. Fifth is pretty much as out of the question as fourth is. I think yourself and Randy have been marvellous in the time you've been at the club, you have always been well intentioned, and this has shown through. I do worry, though, just how much you've learned about the game over that time if you think that this squad is going to be anywhere near 4th or 5th come the end of this season. Just to reiterate. Last season, we spent most of the season around the drop zone, before two good results and some other results going our way put us in ninth. However since then: Ashley Young - gone Stewart Downing - gone Nigel Reo-Coker gone Brad Friedel - gone Kyle Walker - gone A bunch of other releases including Salifou and Carew - gone. Coming in, we have had N'Zogbia and Given. Nobody thinks they're not very good players, they are. The problem is, there are only two of them. How on earth do you think that last season's squad, significantly weakened, is going to improve on last season, let alone challenge for anything significant? We all want it to, but wanting it to alone does not mean it is magically going to happen. Last season we were forced to play a number of the kids far more often that we'd have liked to. We had to do this because of injuries, and although they didnt let us down, unsurprisingly over time, the results went pear shaped. What is staggering is that this season, we are actually sleep walking into this again, except this time, it's a policy we've chosen to adopt. I understand your need to get the wage bill down, I understand the need to alter the finances on the transfer side, too. What scares me to death is that you're doing it far, far too fast. God help us.

General Two years ago, Gareth Barry. Last year, James Milner. This year Ashley Young AND Stewart Downing. Next year, Darren Bent. Throw in the extra beauty of a season of struggle followed by the appointment of a manager who we last saw getting relegated for the second time in three years, and it is really, really hard to feel positive about the club. In fact, it feels more or less exactly like it did when you arrived, except we're now in hock to the tune of a very large amount of money. When does the Bright Future bit kick in?

Where was Roberto Martinez's record of success, out of interest?

Bruce had Heskey, Palacios and N'Zogbia because he bought them. Little and Gregory didnt take over Villa after we'd just spent 200 odd million pounds in establishing ourselves as a top six club. Make this appointment and we are tacitly admitting we've given up.

They're not weeks old, they're from the last few days, but he quite clearly says he's taking a year off. The journalist even says, "You're not going to be managing anywhere next season, can we write that?" and he says "yes". It's time to let it go. He's not coming, he's made it as clear as he possibly can, in a direct interview a few days ago.

Why do people keep saying they're old? They are clearly not. The interviewer specifically mentions the jobs at Villa and Fulham, which only became available Wednesday last week. Maybe he might have guessed there would be a vacancy with us, but nobody knew anytning about a vacancy at Fulham until it happened.

As has been said, you don't need to worry about that. Randy is no fan of gambling companies. I suspect one of our other partners might step into the breach. Seat? Cisco Systems was a popular one a while back, do we still have ties with them? Randy is no fan of gambling companies? So why have we had two different "official betting partners" in the last two years? Watch this space, you might be surprised. ITK? I'm a director of an online gambling company. Last month one of my business partners was in Hong Kong at a conference dealing with, amongst other things, sports sponsorship. He was told by a couple of people who work in precisely that area that Villa's shirt sponsorship was being actively touted around online gambling companies - complete with price tag. To suggest Randy has some ethical objection to gambling companies just doesn't stack up. For a start, his fortune came from the credit card industry upon which the entire online gambling industry relies. He's not going to be a stranger to that field. Furthermore, as I said, we have had three official gambling partners since Randy has been here - 32 Red, Boylesports, and now 188 Bet. Boylesports had an AVFC branded portal to their sportsbook. If there were an ethical objection, I am sure Randy would not have done either of the Boyles or 188 deals.

As has been said, you don't need to worry about that. Randy is no fan of gambling companies. I suspect one of our other partners might step into the breach. Seat? Cisco Systems was a popular one a while back, do we still have ties with them? Randy is no fan of gambling companies? So why have we had two different "official betting partners" in the last two years? Watch this space, you might be surprised.

General Good to hear. Although the season does actually start on August 16th. That'd be even better.

I think your standpoint is a little naive, General (forgive me, I'm not being deliberately confrontational here). We're having this conversation about Gareth Barry now. Unless we invest MASSIVELY in our squad and improve MASSIVELY next season, this time next year we wil be having exactly the same issue with Ashley Young. The reason we're so sensitive to the issue is because it touches on every aspect of our support for the club - we exist to challenge, to push for trophies. If we don't progress quickly enough, or if we don't invest in the right players, we will always lose players to the Sky Four whenever they decide they like the look of them. The result will be that we'll stop progressing. We could finish 5th this season, or we could finish 8th. As this outcome rides on the result of one day's round of fixtures, you might think it doesn't really reflect majorly on the progress on the field. You'd be wrong though, it reflects massively. Finish 5th and we've moved up 6 places. Finish 8th and - in a league table sense - we've barely improved. We'd be only slightly higher up the table than Newcastle. That is how "tight" football is in the mini league we are playing in. For a lot of us, the Barry issue is not really about losing the player. Nobody is irreplaceable. It is about the message it sends out - to the other players, to the fans, to the rest of the league, to the Sky Four. That's why we're calling it an acid test.

General Will the club be putting a correction page re yesterday's attendance on the official site, and be changing it in the match report? We're very keen to break 40k average this year, and this is going to put a dent in it if people use this 32288 figure. The BBC are showing it in their average attendance screen, as are football365 A correction on avfc.co.uk and perhaps a couple of mails to the aforementioned two sites would be nice - we're bothered about this kind of thing now!

Are you sure about this? (Incidentally, obv you will be). My credit card bills have MBNA on them, as does my credit card which I received about 6 weeks ago.

I wish the General would just make it clear. Did we or did we not try to get lower ticket prices only for Man United not to agree?

Actually, we only have 2,800 away seats, we get dispensation to offer less than the usual amount due to segregation isues.

Maybe they already spend enough on the club? Maybe they don't think it is good enough for the price asked? Maybe they don't use Windows + IE in which case, they're ****? Does that make them not proper supporters or - OH MY GOD - 'fickle' or something?