CannockVillan

. I suspect there is simply some misinterpretation of the comments. Regarding the wages, the contract is valid and so technically the player is entitled to receive them for the remiander of the term (unless something happens to determine the contract). The secret footballer didn't get all of his remianing contract paid up. What he did was negotiate his exit on terms that both he and the club were happy (or perhaps equally unhappy with. The club transferred a player who they had no interest in playing and managed (if i interpreted correctly) to get a transfer fee out of. In return for agreeing that the player had a £500,000 payoff from the club. how this was calculated i.e. salary, bonuses etc, well only the player and his agent will know.

If even only a slight possibility then this can only be good news as it will either start a bidding war, not that we'd expect significant sums for Collins, or it might atelast make either the Spammers or Mackems do something sooner rather than later if they fear the other is in the box seat. We can then concentrate on other reinforcements. Double deal for MON with Warnock and Collins for £4m would be great.

People refusing to condemn the club because of a lack of info can not be seen to have an 'everything is great' agenda. People who DO want to condemn the club despite a lack of information, can only be seen to have a negative agenda. Some have made their minds up and some are being more circumspect. I'm sorry if you can't see the distinction between the 2 approaches. ^^^^^^this, this and then....oh yes... this ^^^^^

This all seems very strange. Vlaar visits Villa Vlaar/Feyenoord confirm above Vlaar happy to join Feyenoord happy to sell No movement Feyenoord unhappy - deal must be done quick now No movement Vlarr - deal off (messed around). As twitter would probably put it: #feyenoorddesparatetosell #somethingnotquiteright Are we better off out of this? Was it all a smokescreen? Does PL prefer another (i.e. Ramis, a.n.other). If, as suggested, the club confirmed that there wouldn't be any signings whilst the team were away on tour then surely this is just Feyenord trying to flog one of their own to be able to move in the market themselves (I hear they are pretty hard up financially). Haven't heard about anyone else being in for Vlaar.

Why on earth is this topic still going? We're note going to get Carroll and even if we were interested in him, we have no way of affording his wages never mind the transfer fee. Liverpool won't pay part of his wages and even the reduced transfer fee being mooted by some papers seems rather prohibitive (£20m). The bin dippers want him gone on a permanent deal by all accounts and it seems he's on 80k a week. Bob Hope and no hope (and Bob's left town)!

While I'm very keen to believe that Randy Lerner has suddenly transformed his squad investment strategy from the unbalanced and staggering approach he has applied since he took over the club to something more focused and clever, I'm afraid I won't believe it until I see it. What I have seen is that Vlaar came over to VP (for a chat with Lambert apparently), went back to the Netherlands making very positive statements about Villa and said "it's up to the clubs". Suddenly Lambert is playing it all down and then we get a story in the press about how he hopes to sell Collins to "balance the books". It's a perfectly reasonable interpretation that the purchase of Vlaar is on hold until some cash can be raised from the sale of Collins So it's a question really of whether your formulation of "Get rid of those who we can and who are shit and replace with those who we can get and who are better" is just an obvious statement of the principle of building a better squad or if the manager is shackled by having to do one thing (get rid of the shit) before he can do the second (replace with better). Which would be "sell to buy" and also not very helpful in the case of Vlaar, whose availabilty is now broadcast to the market. I'm not saying you're wrong Briny but you've taken the best part of three different and unrelated sources (Vlaar, Lambert and i suspect a london rag) and put two and two together to make 5. That's the kind of reading between the lines that the Mirror does! If you take each on face value; 1. We want to sell Collins (and MON may or may not be interested); 2. Vlaar came over and was impressed and would like to sign; and 3. There's no imminent deal for Vlaar. The sell to buy point is purely press speculation - No quotes from anyone or the club on that as far as i can see. Nothing in there to suggest we wont buy Vlaar before getting rid. it might happen that way and indeed that might actually be required but it does annoy me when people regurgitate the press speculation only. It's fair to say that all 3 points above are true but its then a leap of pure faith to suggest that all means we are waiting to sell first. Like i said i'm not saying it's not in fact the case but i can't see that from the reports.

What happens if you chucked the card from last season on the floor, pissed on it, set fire to it, chopped it up into little pieces, and then fed it to maggots? I'm not entirely sure but I think if that was the case then you'd probably need a replacement (and anger management therapy).

Thomas "Pongo" Waring Mortimer, Morley, Cowans, Shaw, McGrath

I'm not sure that rule is entirely valid. I think it's one of those generalisations that has an awful lot of exceptions to it making it a bit of a nonsense: weigh neighbour species neither, either beige eight height There's probably a whole lot more too.

Don't disagree with the above but if Spurs want to get maximum value then they'll either sell him now or start playing him. They've got this summer and possibly the January window when everyone is scrambling around for half decent buys to shore up their season before he start to lose value. I think, given the resources Spurs have for his position, they'll sell this summer, Jan latest if they don't think a suitable offer has come in. It wouldn't surprise me if he comes on loan with a view to a permanent buy.

As he's rarely played for Spurs and doesn't appear to be in the current plans of the club i wonder if that's true. As you say if there is more than one club in for him then you may recoup what you paid however £4m would be a decent fee for someone who is not in your plans and won't want to stay and play second or even third fiddle. He won't want to be cover. With 2 years left on his contract, if he doesn't go now or in January (whilst he retains a decent value) you may find you have to accept much less in his final year or risk losing him for nothing. if Spurs rated him he'd be closer to the first XI. Now is the best time for you to sell him.

p.s yes i've notice "believe" and "grammatical" for the smarties out there (their) ?? :-)

VillaMad08 Please re-read your letter. I'm sure in today's world it was well structured and I certianly won't disagree with informative. The chap is harldy going to tell you to learn how to write a narrative or learn to spell. I can spell very well and my mistakes on this forum are generally as a result of my own laziness or lack of time when posting. However I would never write a formal letter to anyone without having checked it for grammar & spelling. I would not use the name of a coprorate sponsor without a capital letter. I would not use the word aloud instead of allowed and I would not use there instead of their. That's only following a skim read. I don't know which is worse aloud or there (i'm leaning to aloud). I don't mean to be uber critical but it really annoys me when people don't write properly. I beleive that you can be forgiven for complex grammatcial mistakes and i'm sure it's not that you can't it's that you don't take the care and attention needed. I'm sure that soon we'll be seeing letters written in text and facebook language. CU L8r p.s as an employer, if you send me a CV with really bad grammar and spelling errors then you won't get past the first hurdle. Please take this on board as i'm trying to be constructive and helpful. People wonder why they can't get jobs anymore

Because a one year rolling contract always has 12 months left to run, otherwise its not a rolling contract.

please god to the backroom staff at Bodymoor. please please please. in fact, dust off hs bloody shirt and get the iron out.

Let's wait and see shall we. If you believe that any breach of a contractual term (if indeed there was one) renders a contract void or terminated then I can see why you might think I have been "taken to the cleaners." I think you all need to take a look at the meaning of the term repudiatory breach. Not quite sure what all the arguments an infighting is over but from my experience of contracts (quite a lot by the way in my profession (although not sports related)) not all contractual clauses go to the root of the contract. Consider two clauses, one being that PL will have sole control over team selection and another being that PL will receive his claimed expenses on the third Wednesday of each month. Club pays his expenses on the Thurday after the due Wednesday - not rlikely to be a fundamental or repudiatory breach entitling him to terminate his contract! Chairman tells him what the team is for the next game - definitely a serious enough breach to be classed as repudiatory. You can of course also specify what you consider to be the material or fundamental terms of the contract which would entitle you to treat a breach as a fundamental breach but the Club concerned could and probably would have included provisions giving it the right to remedy the breach if it is possible to do so within a specified time. You really have to consider whether the breach was sufficiently serious to justify immeidate termination of the contract. The innocent party has to make that decision quickly so as not to be seen to have affirmed the contract after the breach. The innocent party could breach his contract if he terminates the contract without justification. Hope that helps.

We need to be going for that Birmingham Keeper, is it Butland? Heard from a number of people that he is regarded by the birmingham GK coaches as better than Hart was at the same age. if that's the case then he would be ideal as a short term no.2 to Gvien with a view to him taking over the No.1 role in a couple of years.

You can't have a performace based pay system which isn't designed for the team as a whole. you can't haver strikers awarded for goals and defenders awarded for clean sheets. Do Midfielders get both. What happens if at a corner (defending) one of our stirkers loses his man and a goal results. Does the striker lose a bonus or tje defenders or both. You stand and fall as a team and that is the only way perfomrance pay works. Team related i.e cup runs, league position, win bonuses. I'd be all for a salary cap, supplemented by performance related pay. But then i'm not a footballer! Villa have said that there is no salary cap but to me that's mnot quite true. There's an overall position we need to maintain and that therefore puts pressure on the salaries of any indiviudals. Yes you'll have high earners and low earners. What you won't get is 11 high earners. With a club like Villa you'll have 3 maybe even four. That's why we need to change our approach, change the way we play (from the kids up) and look for a style that will be successful in the prem. It doesn't have to be the tika taka of la liga but a combination of possession and power is what i think is needed. closest to that imho are the Germans.

Utter balls - accountants wouldn't draw up a contract - lawyers would. Take it from someone who is an accountant. i think its fair to assume the poster was talking about a lawyer not an accountant (someone in our legal department.. and .. friend from uni.. may therefore be a lawyer too. That said, i'm not rushing to Ladbrokes any time soon.

Betfair have traded £0 (Zero, nothing, **** all) on McCarthy being the next Villa manager. almost £2000 has been matched on McCarthy £8000 on Lambert and £5,000 on Martinez. its just gamblers having a punt and making some reddies, nothign more!

it's clear some wealthy individuals are having a laugh to make some money during a quiet period. Someone's ramped it up on McCarthy and will probably make a few quid and then bugger of when normal service is resumed. Talk sport are reacting to the odds changing but have amazingly forgotten to mention this possiblity. Place a bet on a long odds manager to shorten the odds. When his price comes in lay him big time and make a load of dosh from unsuspecting punters who think there's a bit of insider going on. i.e McCarthy stars the day at 20/1 so you bet £1,000 on him = potential win of £20,000 if hes appointed. this bet (and possibly others involved too) result in his odds shortening to say 5/1. At this point in time you lay McCarthy for £2,000 and 5/1 and if he's not appointed you get £2,000. Overall, if McCarthy is appointed you get a profit of £10,000 (£20,000 less £10k lost on the lay (£2k exposire at 5/1) (but that's the long shot). if he's not appointed you're still up by £1,000 (your £2,000 from the lay less your origingal stake on McCarthy when he was 20/1). The risk is whether the odds shorten but a little bit of runour and enough people betting and hey, there you go. McCarthy's odds will now no doubt start to slide out once all the pro gamblers have finished. End of Story!

all of the above will be true. Lerner has, in my mind, already decided to give McLeish the benefit of the doubt this season. Lerner is an honourable Chariman and not the type (i think) to say one thing to the manager and then do another. From waht McLeish has been saying he has the support of Lerner and Faulkner and this season was always going to be a near miss. i don't think Lerner or Faulkner would have given him that support if they didn't mean it. i thkn he has done what he had to do (keep us in the prem) even if only just. i don't think Lerner is the type of Chairman who chops and changes managers. don't laugh here lease, the point being that the recent managerial changes in the last few years have been enforced upon the club rather than instigated by it. We had to buy to sell - O'Neill goes. Houllier appointed - Houllier falls ill Big Eck apppointed - shit season but was always going to be really tough. We've come through it and i think we'll see McLeish here until atleast January but if performances don't improve by then, then i reckon he may be in trouble at that point.

I agree with KHV. half of me has hated the negative play, dour tactics and the other half (the reasonable half) is wondering if there was any other option. Losing most of your senior players to injury and having a bunch of kids whyo aren't up to the job. Would you have goen into the games gung ho. Maybe but I reckon if we had then we would deifnitely have been relegated this season. i think McLeish realised we had this problem and played an organised if not exciting team strategy intended to keep us in the league this season and be in a position to rebuild next. I think we'll see a number of more experienced players coming in on free trasnfers and small fees here and there (reasonable wages). Possibly pinching some from the relegated teams (i.e Pederson, Doyle, possibly even a Joey Barton or similar type - no protests here please these are just examples) giving the younger inexperienced players some breathign space and the chance to introduce them slowly (and not all at the same time). I think big Eck will be given another season (or atleast until January) with a view to playing a more expansive (albeit still defensively built) type of game. He's the type of manager that builds from the back, not the front.

is it that much of a surprise?...Really? We made a push for the big time when o'Neill came in and had to up the wages when we started buying better quality players. Coupled with the fact that we are not a London team and the added benefits that the comsopolitan life there has to offer. Due to this we have to pay a premium to attract the better players, more so than any london team would because we can't sell the club to players on the basis that we're only an hour or so from London. If Modric was on 25K a week at Spurs we would probavbly have had to tempt him with a much higher offer to come and live in the Midlands. That's a fact. We're not a top pull by any means (not even when we were fighting for fourth with O'Neill). O'neill and the board were certainly free (to say the least) with the cash and that's left us where we are but you can't compare apples with oranges. we're not in Norht London, or any other compass point of London. it shouldn't have been as high as it was (and that's the board and O'Neill's fault) but it was always gonna be higher to attract the names. We're in Brum and as much as we pride ourselves in that, let's face it everyone else thinks its a dive. We now need to start again from a solid foundation and build, but build sensibly and so everyone realises that we're not going to be a soft touch.

I get Stan's tweets and he recently (last day or so) tweeted that people who phone talk sport don't pay for the calls. Don't know if its true but there you go. I generally find him a decent pundit. if he was that bad he wouldn't be on TV. As for McLeish, some of the vitriol has been pathetic and sometimes i feel ashamed to be a villan becasue of automatically being assoicated with it. i don't like McLeish's tactics this season and if we are relegated then he has to go (on that alone) but if we're not i'm prepared to see how he can do when he has a stronger team playing and a chance to do something other than fight one fire after another. We've not been settled since O'Neill left and how long ago was that. i'm not particularly happy with the style of play (although there are times when we've played well but simply not taken our chances (i.e. Bolton, West Brom) but at the same time i also think that a lot of what has happened since Christmas has been forced on us rather than being down to McLeish. I always thought this would be a hard season of mid table at best, but when you factor in the injuries to the senior players is it really that surprising! Let's not forget that last season we were in a relegation fight until game 37. We managed to pull off two victories, away to Arsenal and home to Liverpool and ended up 9th which did nothing more than paper over the gapiing cracks. We have a bunch of promising kids but the're kids after all. Gabby is not playing at his best, Bent has been out for an age and Heskey is .. well just Heskey, so where do our goals come from? Albrighton has been injured and inconsistent. Bent is still our top scorer for christs sake! Hansen once said you don't win anything with Kids. He has been laughed at since then, but quite frankly at that time those kids were very very special (as we now know) and ours will be good (given time) but are nowhere near the same class. Please please please can we forget the protests and chants until after the game and then only if we play poorly. i watched the Blackburn game yesterday and they didn't have one shot on goal v's Spurs and they are a bunch of seasoned pro's. Tottenham have to play 3 games in 7 days. Let's hope Spurs have plently in the tank to beat Bolton and then let's really pick up the pace on Saturday and see if we can't take advantage of some tiredness there. UTV.