Villarocker Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 (edited) I couldn't do a short link on my phone so I've copied and pasted this from a news article from a local paper that was posted online: In a statement, the club said: “Having discussed his re-engaging with the chairman’s broader business while remaining involved with Villa in a non-operational role, agreement could not be reached. “On the strength of many productive years together, and a long-standing friendship, Faulkner has parted on good terms". Seems like maybe Lerner wanted to replace him. But, is it with Robin Russell on a permanent basis or, does Lerner plan for someone else to take that role? Edited July 8, 2014 by villarocker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Cortese please 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post blandy Posted July 8, 2014 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted July 8, 2014 So Trent, you say don't listen to Pat Murphy. Are you implying that Faulkner left on his own terms rather than being pushed out the door like Murphy is suggesting? What's curious is the reason for Faulkner leaving. The statement says Having discussed his re-engaging with the Chairman's broader business while remaining involved with Villa in a non-operational role, agreement could not be reached. That seems like Randy wanted Faulkner to no longer be CEO, and he was offering "other work" to him - Why would Randy not want him to be CEO? It's not going to be about his past performance in the job, it'll be about some disagreement over the way to proceed whilst the prospect of a sale is on. It would seem reasonable to surmise that Faulkner wanted more investment/money etc. for players and more "care and attention" paid and feels that the club is no longer being run in the interests of the club itself. I'm worried about Randy Lerner's state of mind, frankly. Some pretty bizarre things have been happening of late. 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis_B Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Blandy I fear you may well be right, too many people WANT this to be a sign of a takeover but that is not as I see it. Why announce now if takeoer was imminent? Why talk about 're-engaging'? That does look like RL said yesterday he was going t ofocus on the club and PF not liking what was planned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 So Trent, you say don't listen to Pat Murphy. Are you implying that Faulkner left on his own terms rather than being pushed out the door like Murphy is suggesting? No implications intended, more a general comment on his coverage of the club post Ellis. Fair enough It's strange that we shouldn't listen to Pat Murphy on this one, when he's only reiterated what's already been said in the statement on the OS. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 I read that statement as saying that Faulkner was sacked, and was unable to agree alternative employment within the Club or Lerner's organisation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrinityRoadSteps Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 I read Paul Faulkner and Bryan Jones were going to choose the next academy head a few weeks back. Did this happen? What the hell is going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 IMO PF wasn't pushed he left because he was not happy with RL. RL as a friend of PF's offered him another role to convince him to stay but PF said thanks but no thanks. Whatever you think of PF he worked hard in getting the players PL wanted and probably had to handle some difficult negotiations. I didn't want him as CEO but he is better than no CEO given the current state of the club. I think RL has lost it and can't get the price he wants for the club. Don't be surprised if we end up geting sold to someone who is not 'fit and proper' to take us on to the next level. RL will take an offer from anywhere right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 That is a cracking episode ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 So Trent, you say don't listen to Pat Murphy. Are you implying that Faulkner left on his own terms rather than being pushed out the door like Murphy is suggesting? What's curious is the reason for Faulkner leaving. The statement says Having discussed his re-engaging with the Chairman's broader business while remaining involved with Villa in a non-operational role, agreement could not be reached. That seems like Randy wanted Faulkner to no longer be CEO, and he was offering "other work" to him - Why would Randy not want him to be CEO? It's not going to be about his past performance in the job, it'll be about some disagreement over the way to proceed whilst the prospect of a sale is on. It would seem reasonable to surmise that Faulkner wanted more investment/money etc. for players and more "care and attention" paid and feels that the club is no longer being run in the interests of the club itself. I'm worried about Randy Lerner's state of mind, frankly. Some pretty bizarre things have been happening of late. By "of late" do you mean the last 4 years? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 The club is for sale and Paul Faulkner left because he thinks any new owners will want there own people. It might not matter it the takeover is three or six months down the line, PF could just want to get himself sorted with a more secure role somewhere as soon as possible. I don't believe it has anything to do with Randy's statement from yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CannockVillan Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 It's a strange one and interestign timing of it all too. I'd have liked this to have come out before RL's statement but given there longstanding and seemingly good relationship i can understadn why Faulkner may have waited. This would have been well known yesterday by RL and delaying it has meant he didn't have to deal with it in his own statement of course. 1. Is a takeover closer than we all previously thought? 2. Does Paul have another opportunity which won't wait? I can't believe RL has sacked him. I wonder whether he has asked for clarification on his position going forward given that a sale is going to happen at some point and was offered alternative positions within the RL empire which he feels are either beneath him or not interesting enough for him. Rather than hang on till the end perhaps another position has come up which wouldn't wait for him to see out his Villa days. Who knows, but now i'd like RL to clarify this although his statement yesterday said there would be no further statements until a sale so there's little chance of that. Nice and neat for RL (just not for us). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 8, 2014 Moderator Share Posted July 8, 2014 By "of late" do you mean the last 4 years? no. Last 6 months 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juteface Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Randy is losing it, prepare for impact.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Nobody knows what Russell's exact job spec was and is; likewise they never knew what Paul Faulkner's job spec was. It's all guess work and hearsay to suggest that the CFO had no contact with agents and players. I'm making an equally wild guess that he was involved with negotiations, given that he's CFO, and that he sat in on board meetings. It's very common for a CFO to step up to CEO in companies. Robin has been at the club since 2006. I'm sure he knows the inner workings of the club inside and out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Just to reiterate. The club is a shambles right now, rudderless and not surprising to anyone I would imagine if there are people at the club, in some senior positions who quite frankly do not have a clue of what is currently going on. How in the world is anyone supposed to manage the playing side with all this cracking off as a major distraction 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Hopefully the off-the-field turmoil will bring everybody together. UTV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginko Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 (edited) Surely if/when new owners were to come in then they'd want to appoint their own CEO, right? I'll admit I'm clutching at straws trying to see something positive come out of all this, and I obviously respect Trent's views since he has a reliable source of information, but so far we have employed an assistant manager who has another job which could imply he is only here for the time being until a new owner comes in, and now we have a vacancy in the CEO role. It's only really the manager's position that may provide a headache for any potential new owner, but even that may have been sorted when Paul flew out to the States to discuss his position with Randy. It sounds very much like wishful thinking, but perhaps Lambert agreed to stay in charge until a new owner was found since he'd no doubt get paid for doing this and there are no vacant manager positions that are better than the Villa's right now? I just hope these seemingly interim appointments of Keane, Russell and perhaps even Lambert himself are signs that a takeover is close. It's probably not the case if I'm being completely honest with myself, but it's a shred of hope to cling to. Edited July 8, 2014 by Ginko 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts