AstonMartin82

 

 

Why has a keeper error leading to a disallowed goal in a friendly left you with a bad taste for the WC?

That wasn't an error. It was very deliberate. As was the other own goal they scored that night.

 

 

Charlie Mulgrew scored a ridiculous backheel so I don't know what this other goal is

 

I'm talking about Scotland's second goal where the Nigerian kicked the ball into his own net. This coupled with the goalkeeper throwing, literally, the ball into the net (although disallowed laughably for a foul on the keeper) in a game which had already been flagged as suspicious due to irregular betting patterns has to be called into question.

Underwhelmed.

lol - I have no idea how my quote came through talking about Gabby and Bent. God knows when that is from. I used the Android app to quote and it looked good before posting...

it'd be a real kick in the ego for bent if he was dropped a couple of games after losing captaincy though... would it be worth it in the long run, or do you take him aside during the week and say "look, gabby's really after putting the pressure on you now - you're starting at the weekend, but you've got 60 minutes to impress or i have a decision to make"

It's about proof though... And there being enough of it to cause a big uproar that forces change.

There must be a very disgruntled employee at Fifa who is very high up to whistle blow all of this information to the Sunday Times. Good on him or her... Let's just hope it doesn't go to waste and change happens.

Why has a keeper error leading to a disallowed goal in a friendly left you with a bad taste for the WC?

That wasn't an error. It was very deliberate. As was the other own goal they scored that night.

I have no faith in Fifa to sort these match fixing issues out or lead an impartial investigation into world cup bribing.

The whole organisation is rotten to the core and needs fresh blood starting from the very top. Blatter should be banned from attempting to run for another term.

A very good article over at the Guardian regarding sponsors and alike regarding the world cup bribing:

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/jun/08/world-cup-sponsor-sony-investigation-qatar-bid

The last paragraph states there is concern regarding a Qatari legal challenge if they were dumped though I read somewhere else, maybe BBC, that any legal challenge is impossible due to contracts signed pre-bidding.

There are groups starting to emerge boycotting Sony, Budweiser, Visa and the other main sponsors - that's the most effective tool we have. I think there's a feeling starting to emerge that some of these global brands aren't particularly keen on being (publicly) associated with corruption, bribery and death.

Do you have any links?

I'd sign up to every which one going.

I do fully agree however it is hard to see enough people doing this to make a difference and even if that were to happen it would be many years in the future. It'd be nice to get reform done way before this time.

Also worth mentioning that Michael Garcia is not going to be using any of this new evidence in his report which is due next month.

Seems to me that the internal cover-up has started and we will therefore be reliant on external parties, such as Sony, to force through an independent and thorough investigation.

More revelations today in the Sunday Times and growing pressure from Sony, one of many Fifa sponsors...

Not voting for Qatar doesn't make you less of a word removed.

Well, the fact that this topic has only had a handful of posts in what is probably the biggest corruption news out of FIFA in a number of years shows that there isn't enough furore for the necessary change to be made. The only way that a self regulated organisation such as FIFA will change is if the people force it. This means every football fan boycotting FIFA sponsors and of course the World Cup itself.

Unfortunately the rest of the world only will see England kicking up a fuss as sour grapes to losing the vote.

It's also depressing to know that Blatter's next in-line (Platini) is just as bad if not worse than the rest of them. There are many dark decades ahead for football and it actually makes me sick.

Interestingly according to a Keith Harris article back in November 2008, Lerner was already planning to sell the club within this time period. Worryingly Harris has been involved in some dodgy deals.

Lerner, whose sensitive and shrewd stewardship of Aston Villa is the deal of which Harris is most proud, plans to own Villa for just that, seven to 10 years. (2008 Nov)

Click

I met Lerner after that magical Ajax Europa League evening. Everything was on the up and so rosy then and he told me he would keep hold of Villa for at least 10 years.

Considering how shit everything has got it is of no surprise he is selling a little sooner.

If Lerner stays and sacks Lambert it'll be the biggest act of cowardice I've ever seen from a chairman. I can understand the need for a clean slate if we're taken over, but in all honesty Lambert has done pretty well to keep the club up with that squad. Yes he's built it, but £40m on about 15 players on Championship wages is peanuts.

If he goes he's been a victim of circumstance more than anything else. If he stays I'll be right behind him again next season, though concerned that it probably means Lerner is still around.

Very well said.

Lambert hasn't been perfect but even if he was we wouldn't be finishing top half.

If he leaves then so be it, but people's expectations on the new manager had better be realistic else we're only going to have the same again every single season until the day Lerner leaves.

I don't see this investment thing. Why would a wealthy man only want to own part of a struggling premiership team? What's in it for them?

For the same reason he has pulled all of his investment in the club back over recent years... Risk.

TexasVillan may not be in the know but his theory is in line with my gut feeling. Which means absolutely nothing.

 

 

 

 

 

If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us.

 

Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here.

Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess.

Makes perfect sense to get the house in order.

 

Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders?

 

If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO.

Why would a new owner want to pay off a number of contracts and then spend more money on new ones? They're businessman. It would decrease the value of the sale.

Not sure why you don't see that, but horses for courses I guess.

Just because these guys are loaded doesn't mean they throw money away.

 

I see this perfectly well... I don't think you are understanding my point. A few people are getting excited by us being potentially bought out by a guy who has $11b in his bank. If this person was going to do something exceptional to us and turn us into title challengers he wouldn't be interested in getting value for money as he is going to be losing £100m's on the project anyway.

 

If he is interested in getting value for money then he isn't going to be the one to turn us into title challengers and as such isn't worth getting so excited about... unless of course P3te's excellently written post and point above comes into play.

Of course he wants value for money, just because he has money doesn't mean he is prepared to throw it away, it doesn't work like that. Man city had a financial plan in place, they didn't just throw money away for the sake of it. They spent heavily initially to get the ball rolling but the spending has tailed off. I'd be more concerned having some numpty come in and chuck money at because that is how we've ended up in this mess.

 

Man City lost £60m a year even after you take into consideration their £400m sponsorship deal which is being paid for by the same family that owns Man City and has been done simply as a tool to navigate around the FFP rules. If you took this out of the equation their losses would be colossal. They will never make this money back and seem happy to consistently pump money into Man City and are quite clearly not looking for value.

So, "of course he wants value for money" and "it doesn't work like that" isn't actually the case in all instances my friend.

My point is quite simple... I wouldn't get too excited if we got bought out by a multibillionaire. If they were going to be interested in making us into a world force they wouldn't have waited for all cost cutting to take place.

QPR are owned by one of the richest families on the planet, as are I believe Deportivo La Coruna. These teams aren't even in the top division in their countries and have no plans to do anything special. If we were bought out by a filthy rich man it seems clear to me it won't be as exciting as some people are hoping. This is the only simple point I am making.

 

 

 

If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us.

 

Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here.

Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess.

Makes perfect sense to get the house in order.

 

Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders?

 

If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO.

Why would a new owner want to pay off a number of contracts and then spend more money on new ones? They're businessman. It would decrease the value of the sale.

Not sure why you don't see that, but horses for courses I guess.

Just because these guys are loaded doesn't mean they throw money away.

 

I see this perfectly well... I don't think you are understanding my point. A few people are getting excited by us being potentially bought out by a guy who has $11b in his bank. If this person was going to do something exceptional to us and turn us into title challengers he wouldn't be interested in getting value for money as he is going to be losing £100m's on the project anyway.

If he is interested in getting value for money then he isn't going to be the one to turn us into title challengers and as such isn't worth getting so excited about... unless of course P3te's excellently written post and point above comes into play.

P3te's response is the only reason why you would be willing to lose millions AND still buy a well run club. Here's hoping... (not holding my breath though!)

 

 

 

If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us.

 

Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here.

Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess.

Makes perfect sense to get the house in order.

 

 

Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders?

 

If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO.

 

Let me put it this way then; would you rather buy a mess or a well run club?

 

I understand what you are saying, it isn't complicated, but if you were going to throw a load of money at it why would you care? Did the Sheiks care about the state of affairs at Man City when they got bought? Probably not.

If you are interested in buying a well run club then you aren't interested in losing millions to turn us into challengers.

 

If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us.

 

Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here.

 

 

Could be an FFP thing. The club is allowed to make X in losses per year under the English league FFP rules. For any losses over that, the club needs the owner to inject an equal amount to the amount of debt for the year above the  threshold.

Example: Villa owe run £50m in the black, but are only allowed to have losses of £10m. The options for the owner are to put in £40m of his own money to cover the loss, or to take the sanctions. That £40m is only used to service the debt, it can't be  used for transfers, or increased wages.

 

Lerner in doing his little £90m creation of shares has essentially done just that, one would assume to  bring everything in line with FFP and have us  avoiding sanctions. If we were £90m down for the last 2 seasons, for example, but breaking even this season (which we apparently are), then there's a £90m hole that needs to be filled for FFP or we face action after this season's books are out next year.

 

So, in stripping out the high earners from the club over the last few years, Randy has (potentially) reduced the amount that a new owner would need to put into the club just to bring it up to par, without spending anything on transfer fees, to nil. Had he not injected that £90m or tried to offload big earners, a new owner could've been faced with spending that £90m (or more if we hadn't gotten rid of some of the players we did) just to avoid being docked points. Now, that owner could come in and spend that £90m on whatever he wants.

 

I misunderstood the FFP rules in England the first few times around, but the way (I think) they work now is that  your owner CAN put whatever he wants into the club, but it's only to service debt. That essentially makes things no different than they used to be.

 

In the past it was:

 

Owner injects £100m in equity to club. Club spends £100m on players.

 

Now it's:

Club spends £100m on players. Club books show club £100m in debt. Owner pays off £100m debt with equity injection.

 

Same thing, different order. If you did it the old way, I believe it'd turn out as:

 

Owner injects £100m in equity to club. Money not counted towards FFP because it's non football related. Club spends £100m on players. Club books show club £100m in debt. Owner has to put in ANOTHER £100m for FFP compliance

 

This did cross my mind (not in as much detail though) and fair play... you could be spot on. But my gut feeling is telling me that is a long shot.

 

If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us.

 

Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here.

Isn't it obvious why? If you're selling a club then you get the books in order. Villa are a blank canvas at the moment. Perfect for a take over. The last thing a new owner would want is to come in and sort out a high earners mess regardless of their wealth. You don't get that rich by needlessly spunking money away. Having almost no big contracts to pay off is a lot more inviting than being left with a financial mess.

Makes perfect sense to get the house in order.

 

Then, isn't it obvious that if the "new" owner was waiting for the current owner to get his house in order then he isn't going to be the one spunking millions on us turning us into title contenders?

If the "new" owner was waiting in the wings for a clear out then that tells me that we are going to have another Lerner in charge. Nothing spectacular, and nothing worth getting too exicted over.

Don't get me wrong, I'd be glad Lerner is leaving but all this hype and excitment is very premature IMO.

I don't like the analogy but what the heck... why clean it up yourself when you can pay someone else to clean it up for you...

Also... why get Albrighton to sign a new 3 year deal if there are plans in place to do the next Man City?

No chance... sorry guys.

If PA was genuinely interested in buying Villa and also genuinely interested in investing hundreds of millions to turn us into competitors again, then why wait for Lerner to go through the pain of stripping out the high earners. Having a massive negative PL wouldn't affect his willingness to purchase us if he is the guy to pump millions into us.

Sorry, but I just don't see any dreams being built here.