smetrov Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 (edited) The good thing about being a pessimist is you are either constantly proved right or pleasantly surprised. I guess its that the plane went to Luton first - and Lamberts comments about nothing being on the horizon that put a dampner on it [bob Rich] for me..... Why? When Mr Lerner arrived to meet O'Neill just before he was unveiled as the manager he flew into Luton as well. Pretty much every US owned long haul exec jet pitches up at Luton at some point-it is their main gateway to London Ah ok - I was thinking they work like buses - everyone got off at Luton - but the plane just parks at BHX ! Im never hopeful with villa - we have to 2-0 up with 75 gone before I start considering a point might be on the cards..... Edited May 19, 2014 by smetrov 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 I would imagine lerner does just want a sale. This idea that he loves us is just a hopeful dream for a man many have put a lot of faith in. The last few years show he really doesn't care much at all. What a bizarre conclusion. Just because things haven't worked out doesn't mean he doesn't care. Alex mcleish shows he didn't care. The last two January windows, when we've been desperate, he provided funds for sylla and allowed Dawkins, Bertrand and Holt to join on loan. Nothing about not working out, those actions speak volumes. No, the appointment of Alex McLeish shows that he didn't always make good decisions. Same goes for the January transfer windows. It's as if you think it's impossible to both care but make bad decisions at the same time. I would imagine lerner does just want a sale. This idea that he loves us is just a hopeful dream for a man many have put a lot of faith in. The last few years show he really doesn't care much at all. What a bizarre conclusion. Just because things haven't worked out doesn't mean he doesn't care. Alex mcleish shows he didn't care. The last two January windows, when we've been desperate, he provided funds for sylla and allowed Dawkins, Bertrand and Holt to join on loan. Nothing about not working out, those actions speak volumes. I don't always agree with BJ10 - but you have to say he has a point here. Its inexplicable to me why he has gambled with our premier league status - and more bafflingly his own investment - He left it to chance that we would bag a £72m TV deal - Surley £5-10m should have been given so this wasn't left to luck (Yes I know he got away with it - but you get the point) I don't agree with that at all - his whole point is based on the flawed logic that success (or lack of it) of decisions determines how much he "cares". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 No, the appointment of Alex McLeish shows that he didn't always make good decisions. Same goes for the January transfer windows. It's as if you think it's impossible to both care but make bad decisions at the same time. If you think releasing those funds in January was him caring but just making a bad decision then I'll leave the discussion there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 I don't agree with that at all - his whole point is based on the flawed logic that success (or lack of it) of decisions determines how much he "cares". What? You've made your own assumption there. That's nothing like what my point is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 (edited) No, the appointment of Alex McLeish shows that he didn't always make good decisions. Same goes for the January transfer windows. It's as if you think it's impossible to both care but make bad decisions at the same time. If you think releasing those funds in January was him caring but just making a bad decision then I'll leave the discussion there. I don't think it's a specific example of him caring but at the same time it can hardly be taken as evidence that he "doesn't care" either. I don't agree with that at all - his whole point is based on the flawed logic that success (or lack of it) of decisions determines how much he "cares". What? You've made your own assumption there. That's nothing like what my point is It pretty much is though. Your whole argument is basically that Lerner doesn't care because he's made bad decisions. Edited May 19, 2014 by Mantis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Pat Murphy tweeted that he thinks Lerner just wants a sale and doesn't care who to. Not that I believe Murphy knows how Lerner's feeling. Maybe he's bitter about O'neill still. I've put the Murphy's tweet in a spoiler for those that want to see his exact wording. Pat Murphy @patmurphybbc 10h Randy Lerner & Villa sale: forget any lofty idealism from him about preferring a 'custodian' in his perceived image.He now just wants a sale Pat Murphy tweeted that he thinks Lerner just wants a sale and doesn't care who to. Not that I believe Murphy knows how Lerner's feeling. Maybe he's bitter about O'neill still. I've put the Murphy's tweet in a spoiler for those that want to see his exact wording. Pat Murphy @patmurphybbc 10h Randy Lerner & Villa sale: forget any lofty idealism from him about preferring a 'custodian' in his perceived image.He now just wants a sale Sounds bitter to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted May 19, 2014 Moderator Share Posted May 19, 2014 Pat Murphy tweeted that he thinks Lerner just wants a sale and doesn't care who to. Not that I believe Murphy knows how Lerner's feeling. Maybe he's bitter about O'neill still. I've put the Murphy's tweet in a spoiler for those that want to see his exact wording. Pat Murphy @patmurphybbc 10h Randy Lerner & Villa sale: forget any lofty idealism from him about preferring a 'custodian' in his perceived image.He now just wants a sale Sounds bitter to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 It pretty much is though. Your whole argument is basically that Lerner doesn't care because he's made bad decisions. No he doesn't really care because he didn't really care. The examples I gave weren't just bad decisions they showed that the best interests of Aston villa weren't his main motive in making them. You think they were then great. End discussion there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 (edited) It pretty much is though. Your whole argument is basically that Lerner doesn't care because he's made bad decisions. No he doesn't really care because he didn't really care. The examples I gave weren't just bad decisions they showed that the best interests of Aston villa weren't his main motive in making them. You think they were then great. End discussion there. Not at all. It's entirely possible that he was acting in what he thought were the best interests of Villa at the time. The fact that they proved to be wrong (at least with regards to McLeish) doesn't mean he didn't care. Nice black and white thinking there. Where did I say I thought they were great? It's laughable that you can say that especially since I never once wanted McLeish here and was pretty quick to want him gone actually. Just because I agree with you on one thing (Lerner caring) doesn't mean I don't agree with you that hiring McLeish was a terrible move and not investing the past two Januaries were risky. As I keep on stressing to you, the world is not black and white. This duality you're trying to construct with regards to Lerner and Lambert is getting incredibly tedious. It simply isn't the case that anybody that disagrees with you on those two points thinks everything they've done is great. I've noticed quite a few people have been "defending" Lerner in this thread to an extent (myself included) but I'm fairly certain that most of us at the same time still want a change of ownership. Edited May 19, 2014 by Mantis 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeVillan Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Being a pessimist here, wasn't Lerner always against having a gambling sponsor? But then we signed up with dafabet. Does this lead to the idea that Lerner is just getting the best financial gains now rather than caring about ideals? Was it ever confirmed that Lerner didn't like betting companies or was that just the assumption/rumour? I honestly don't know, I just remember reading something along those lines previously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 What's going on now? I haven't followed the tread today it it descended into new levels of bollocks. This just seems to have turned into the randy Lerner thread and we have another one of those for that point 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 In 1964 Bob RIch just missed out on getting into the US Ice Hockey team that competed at the Olympics. Thirty two years later he was inducted into the frozen food hall of fame joining his Father. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mart-L7 Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Basically the way it's stands right now is pretty much worst case Paul Lambert is staying put Lerner ain't sold us or near to selling us apparently. In a nut she'll we are **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Basically the way it's stands right now is pretty much worst case Paul Lambert is staying put Lerner ain't sold us or near to selling us apparently. In a nut she'll we are **** Not really - worst case would be Lambert walking out and us being left to look for a new manager with uncertainty over ownership. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted May 19, 2014 Moderator Share Posted May 19, 2014 In 1964 Bob RIch just missed out on getting into the US Ice Hockey team that competed at the Olympics. Thirty two years later he was inducted into the frozen food hall of fame joining his Father. The American Dave Whelan! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post NurembergVillan Posted May 19, 2014 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted May 19, 2014 Continued the discussion in the Randy Lerner thread. Or "The Broken Record Thread", as it's fondly known. 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 In 1964 Bob RIch just missed out on getting into the US Ice Hockey team that competed at the Olympics. Thirty two years later he was inducted into the frozen food hall of fame joining his Father. The American Dave Whelan! So Bob Rich has 'flat packed' frozen food companies as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Ooh-Ah Posted May 20, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) Once again, amidst the 444 pages of speculation, bickering, puns and lies, thetrees comes through with something real. It's funny how he and Kwan don't have any tangible link to the club, yet they're the only people who have provided us with any concrete information regarding the takeover. I think that goes to show how little anyone at the club knows and how privately Randy Lerner conducts his business. It's tough not knowing what's going on and I'm as frustrated and impatient as anyone here but I think we should be grateful that our outgoing owner isn't a (pair of) very creepy, smut-peddling attention-seeker(s), or a geriatric, media-hungry mainstay of Sky Sports News, or a fat, jersey-wearing "fan" who changed the name of our stadium to an e-mail address, or a moustachioed Bond villain who changed our colours and crucified our ex-manager in the press, or someone who tried to blackmail the club's fans into allowing him to change our name to the Aston Villa Lions. Or a criminal. There are lots of bad owners out there and although ours has made some bad decisions, I still have faith that his heart is in the right place and that he'll do his utmost to leave us in good hands. Edited May 20, 2014 by Ooh-Ah 18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlincourt Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 Dare I say... Fully fit our squad isn't as bad as the records show...! But on the other hand you have to expect the injuries and fulfil the void left by others... I think you'll be surprised if lambert left, they'd be another 10 managers lined up around the same calibre... *Prepare for the bombardments* 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 Dare I say... Fully fit our squad isn't as bad as the records show...! But on the other hand you have to expect the injuries and fulfil the void left by others... I think you'll be surprised if lambert left, they'd be another 10 managers lined up around the same calibre... *Prepare for the bombardments*I think the problem is, if Lambert left, would a new manager want to come, when he would know that the new owners might not like him and he could be sacked within a few months of being here, if a takeover happens? To me, you're not going to get many committed managers in those circumstances, just a journeyman looking for a last payout, playing the 'committed manager to this big club' act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts