AntrimBlack Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I agree that Fox is probably running the show in terms of decisions. What I'm saying is that I imagine Fox would still need Randy's permission before signing the cheques, if that makes sense. No it doesn't. You are only trying to justify your original post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I agree that Fox is probably running the show in terms of decisions. What I'm saying is that I imagine Fox would still need Randy's permission before signing the cheques, if that makes sense. No it doesn't. You are only trying to justify your original post. Of course it makes sense, you'd be completely naive to think otherwise. And which original post am I trying to justify? And what do you mean by 'justify'? I don't think I've said anything wrong. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I agree that Fox is probably running the show in terms of decisions. What I'm saying is that I imagine Fox would still need Randy's permission before signing the cheques, if that makes sense. You do realise that the club isn't funded from Randy's current account don't you? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 So no one thinks that Fox would have consulted Lerner before appointing a new coach? It doesn't really matter who makes what decision in relation to my original post anyway. I'm still of the opinion that if we are about to be taken over, then the appointment of a new Assistant Manager will have been approved by them in some way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted June 25, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted June 25, 2015 So no one thinks that Fox would have consulted Lerner before appointing a new coach? It doesn't really matter who makes what decision in relation to my original post anyway. I'm still of the opinion that if we are about to be taken over, then the appointment of a new Assistant Manager will have been approved by them in some way. Nope. Tom Fox's job would be pretty annoying if he had to ask for Randy's permission every time he wanted to spend money. They will have a budget to worth with, i cant imagine Ray Wilkins is going to break the budget. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 So no one thinks that Fox would have consulted Lerner before appointing a new coach? It doesn't really matter who makes what decision in relation to my original post anyway. I'm still of the opinion that if we are about to be taken over, then the appointment of a new Assistant Manager will have been approved by them in some way. Lerner said he was leaving Fox in control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 So no one thinks that Fox would have consulted Lerner before appointing a new coach? It doesn't really matter who makes what decision in relation to my original post anyway. I'm still of the opinion that if we are about to be taken over, then the appointment of a new Assistant Manager will have been approved by them in some way. Nope. Tom Fox's job would be pretty annoying if he had to ask for Randy's permission every time he wanted to spend money. They will have a budget to worth with, i cant imagine Ray Wilkins is going to break the budget. Sorry but I think this is rubbish. I can't believe anyone would think that Wilkins (or any new Assistant Coach) will have been given a job without Lerner approving of it first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 So no one thinks that Fox would have consulted Lerner before appointing a new coach? It doesn't really matter who makes what decision in relation to my original post anyway. I'm still of the opinion that if we are about to be taken over in the coming weeks, then the appointment of a new Assistant Manager will have been approved by them in some way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I'm not sure I follow what useless is arguing, but I also don't think it's quite as ridiculous as is being made out. We're supposedly in a period of exclusivity, right? With people pouring over the books and stuff? It seems to me that the 'normal' procedure may be a little different at the moment. Wilkins might be on, what, the best part of a million quid a year? Maybe less. But that might still need a bit more permission in the clubs current situation than it normally would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cudoz Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Would the CEO of a plc be required to consult Shareholders when appointing a senior manager? Nope. Why would this be any different? Randy may be Chairman, but he has appointed someone to run the club in his stead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 So no one thinks that Fox would have consulted Lerner before appointing a new coach? It doesn't really matter who makes what decision in relation to my original post anyway. I'm still of the opinion that if we are about to be taken over, then the appointment of a new Assistant Manager will have been approved by them in some way. Nope. Tom Fox's job would be pretty annoying if he had to ask for Randy's permission every time he wanted to spend money. They will have a budget to worth with, i cant imagine Ray Wilkins is going to break the budget. Sorry but I think this is rubbish. I can't believe anyone would think that Wilkins (or any new Assistant Coach) will have been given a job without Lerner approving of it first. In what way? There will be a budget. As long as that budget is adhered to why would Lerner get involved? I'm sure Fox would have been informed of any budgetary changes at the time the exclusivity period kicked in, I would hope they are not running things ad hoc. In fact, they definitely won't be and to suggest otherwise is scaremongering. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted June 25, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted June 25, 2015 So no one thinks that Fox would have consulted Lerner before appointing a new coach? It doesn't really matter who makes what decision in relation to my original post anyway. I'm still of the opinion that if we are about to be taken over, then the appointment of a new Assistant Manager will have been approved by them in some way. Nope. Tom Fox's job would be pretty annoying if he had to ask for Randy's permission every time he wanted to spend money. They will have a budget to worth with, i cant imagine Ray Wilkins is going to break the budget. Sorry but I think this is rubbish. I can't believe anyone would think that Wilkins (or any new Assistant Coach) will have been given a job without Lerner approving of it first. Do you believe the club need to consult Lerner for every member of staff they hire? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Lerner isn't going to put the news on and hear about Wilkins being appointed is he? He will have be informed about it and if he didn't like the decision, for whatever reason he could put a stop to it, he's the owner of Aston Villa Football Club and it's Chairman, he's also Tom Fox's boss. Fox won't have free reign to do with finances as he pleases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted June 25, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted June 25, 2015 I'm not sure I follow what useless is arguing, but I also don't think it's quite as ridiculous as is being made out. We're supposedly in a period of exclusivity, right? With people pouring over the books and stuff? It seems to me that the 'normal' procedure may be a little different at the moment. Wilkins might be on, what, the best part of a million quid a year? Maybe less. But that might still need a bit more permission in the clubs current situation than it normally would. Why would our budgets change during a period of exclusivity. Providing we stay within the clubs budget and FFP laws I really don't know why the budgets would be changed, or why anyone looking at the books would be alarmed by it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Lerner isn't going to put the news on and hear about Wilkins being appointed is he? He will have be informed about it and if he didn't like the decision, for whatever reason he could put a stop to it, he's the owner of Aston Villa Football Club and it's Chairman, he's also Tom Fox's boss. Fox won't have free reign to do with finances as he pleases. There really isn't any point in anyone giving you a serious reply. You aren't prepared to listen to reasoned arguments and are blatantly trolling. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 So no one thinks that Fox would have consulted Lerner before appointing a new coach? It doesn't really matter who makes what decision in relation to my original post anyway. I'm still of the opinion that if we are about to be taken over, then the appointment of a new Assistant Manager will have been approved by them in some way. Nope. Tom Fox's job would be pretty annoying if he had to ask for Randy's permission every time he wanted to spend money. They will have a budget to worth with, i cant imagine Ray Wilkins is going to break the budget. Sorry but I think this is rubbish. I can't believe anyone would think that Wilkins (or any new Assistant Coach) will have been given a job without Lerner approving of it first. Do you believe the club need to consult Lerner for every member of staff they hire? No I don't, but Wilkins isn't just any member of staff, is he now? He will be on considerable wages and holds a high ranking position at the club. I'm not saying Lerner will have picked out Wilkins himself but I'm pretty sure that Fox will have asked his permission and gotten an idea of budget before allowing Sherwood to chose a new assistant. Besides all that, my original point is that if we are about to be taken over in the coming weeks, then Wilkins won't have agreed to join without some assurances. And if he hasn't had those from new owners then I'd presume that a takeover might be a while away yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Lerner isn't going to put the news on and hear about Wilkins being appointed is he? He will have be informed about it and if he didn't like the decision, for whatever reason he could put a stop to it, he's the owner of Aston Villa Football Club and it's Chairman, he's also Tom Fox's boss. Fox won't have free reign to do with finances as he pleases. There really isn't any point in anyone giving you a serious reply. You aren't prepared to listen to reasoned arguments and are blatantly trolling. Trolling? I haven't got a clue what your talking about. Because I think that Fox will have consulted Lerner before giving the Assistant Manager's job to Wilkins (or anyone) I'm trolling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Lerner isn't going to put the news on and hear about Wilkins being appointed is he? He will have be informed about it and if he didn't like the decision, for whatever reason he could put a stop to it, he's the owner of Aston Villa Football Club and it's Chairman, he's also Tom Fox's boss. Fox won't have free reign to do with finances as he pleases. There really isn't any point in anyone giving you a serious reply. You aren't prepared to listen to reasoned arguments and are blatantly trolling. I haven't read the whole discussion, but of course things like this will most likely be not only overseen but authorised by Lerner to a certain extent. Let's put it this way; I work under a GM in my place, and although he has a budget and is the boss, things such as management appointments are ones that he is directly accountable to his boss (e.g chairman) for. Fox could have most likely done this appointment by himself, but Randy is free to stop it at any point. He is Tom Fox's boss! Tim is probably free to appoint players, but only if Fox seems it necessary or helpful. In the same way, Fox is free to oppint his managers, but if Randy turns around he MUST have the final say! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post sne Posted June 25, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted June 25, 2015 While this is a fascinating argument, I fail to see what it has to do with Micah Richards age 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I'm not sure I follow what useless is arguing, but I also don't think it's quite as ridiculous as is being made out. We're supposedly in a period of exclusivity, right? With people pouring over the books and stuff? It seems to me that the 'normal' procedure may be a little different at the moment. Wilkins might be on, what, the best part of a million quid a year? Maybe less. But that might still need a bit more permission in the clubs current situation than it normally would. Why would our budgets change during a period of exclusivity. Providing we stay within the clubs budget and FFP laws I really don't know why the budgets would be changed, or why anyone looking at the books would be alarmed by it? Yeah, you're probably right. I'm just thinking of clubs sometimes having transfer embargoes when they undergo changes in ownership. Or maybe that doesn't actually happen in real life, and I'm just remembering Football Manager. I'm gonna shut up at this point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts