Bernstein/King resign?

[Woodytom]

30 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Yet you're slamming Bernstein and King as childish and unprofessional 

Yeah because we know more about them in this particular incident.

They are the ones who were criticising him over email. They are the ones who have resigned. 

If they'd had just approached him with their issues (which I'm sure they did) and then left it and resigned instead of bitching then ok..but they didn't.

[Woodytom]

And Stefan - childish and unprofessional is very different to **** clearing in the woods and the rest of the abuse Lerner gets. 

[philthevillan]

8 hours ago, briny_ear said:

Here's what "Pelty" said - he is supposedly Krulak's son, so that explains the content of para 2.

" If you knew the entire story, and the actions of Bernstein and King, you might understand why thing went down the way they did. The offensive emails are the tip of the iceberg. I have long stated that I think RL has made some huge mistakes along the way and think he has more than his share of the blame in this horror story. How can he not? But there are two sides to every story and that is certainly the case in this latest episode; in this particular instance, I think Randy showed a great amount of restraint, believe it or not, prior to the firings resignations, and an equal share in the last day or so after these two showed their class by airing it all to the press. How some here on the boards can not read the tea leaves and see just what sort of men these two are for behaving in this disgraceful manner is beyond me. I suppose there is so much hatred of RL that they cannot see clearly, and I get that even if I think it is only partially fair, but if airing dirty laundry in the press does not say something to you about the egos of these two "men," I am not sure what to say.

This narrative that my father up and left when the going got tough is unfair as well - no surprise I would say that - the timing looked bad, but the reality is that he became the president of a college that was about to be shuttered and was close to $100 million in the hole. His remit was to stop the dam from bursting in a year and then get the college on firmer footing over the next two all while an accreditation group was standing at the executioner's block. He tirelessly traveled and spoke to all who would listen so as to raise money and get the college solvent. To say this took all of his time is not an understatement and this is why he left, plain and simple. It was certainly not because he was cowardly or felt shame in some way, which is a pathetic suggestion. Also, he has never been and will never be involved in football operations, so for those who think his presence on the board is somehow negatively affecting football decisions, this is not a role he fills, and rightly so.

I am not really going to say more about this, but I thought some of the comments towards him were unnecessary and I would simply say that the boardroom issues are more thorny than some have suggested, though others have been fairly close to the truth, but not nearly cynical enough about the actions of the two former board members"

You'll see why I said I didn't see much actual "evidence" here.

This is just a load of BS designed to make Randy look like a victim. Do we really believe the former governor of the Bank of England and former chairman of the FA would say anything that would leave Lerner so upset? Come on he's a grown man.  

My conclusion: They told him the truth and he couldn't handle it. This is a man who for the past 10 years has been a coward. He won't front up and leaves everyone else to do it for him. When we needed to hear from him he'd release some wishy washy statement and expect us to appreciate it. That Shummanite one really took the biscuit. The man's deluded, these two realised that and they decided the best thing to do was force his hand and push through a sale. I have nothing but total respect for King and Bernstein. They are people that were on the inside, albeit briefly, that quickly realised what was going on and truly have the best interests of the club at heart. If they did stab him in the back then I'm certain it was only what he deserved. He's very nearly destroyed this club with years of atrocious decision making. The warning signs have been flashing ever since he ignored everyone and appointed McLeish. Total idiot. 

[philthevillan]

30 minutes ago, Woodytom said:

Yeah because we know more about them in this particular incident.

They are the ones who were criticising him over email. They are the ones who have resigned. 

If they'd had just approached him with their issues (which I'm sure they did) and then left it and resigned instead of bitching then ok..but they didn't.

I wonder if the takeover would be as likely had they kept quiet? I bet not. They've done the right thing and they know they've put their own reputations on the line to save our club. You should be thanking them, not criticising them. 

[Woodytom]

9 minutes ago, philthevillan said:

I wonder if the takeover would be as likely had they kept quiet? I bet not. They've done the right thing and they know they've put their own reputations on the line to save our club. You should be thanking them, not criticising them. 

Eh? I've no idea where you've come up with that drivel.

[DCJonah]

2 hours ago, Woodytom said:

I'm not necessarily defending the owner. I'm bringing a bit of balance to the debate - that's the bit your struggling with.

It's ok saying I'm basing it on nothin.g, those sagging Lerner off (for this particular incident) are basing it on nothing. 

You're right we don't have a clue. None of us do. So it seems daft to take either side.

Yet I have very little time for anyone who takes their bat own and does one at the sign of a challenge.

You're reasoning for it not being unprofessional is absolutely laughable. Absolutely and utterly laughable.

We all do it so it's ok. Nah.

Are you trying to bring balance because so many people disagree and you get the reaction you want?

Because I rarely see you try to bring balance to any threads criticising players or managers

[nick76]

King whose a Villa fan and former Governor of the Bank of England and Bernstein, ex head of the FA I currently would take their side on this matter.  Woodytom while I can see you are trying to balance the books, you are doing it not taking into consideration any history which seems naive doesnt it.  You are basing your balancing the books based on an isolated incident which is fair enough but taking into context the history of Lerner, Kind and Bernstein adds a whole new perspective to this and you can easily argue for the abuse that Lerner is getting over this.  

Without details on the emails which we are never going to get we are never going to know.  From the outside we know what Lerner is like and we know the reputation of Kind and Bernstein who I am assuming before this have never done business together before Villa so for both of them to take this decision as a joint decision speaks volumes.

You earn a reputation, which is based on your past performance, which taints current/future activities which I know is unfair but Leopards very rarely change their spots.  If it was so off why hasnt Lerner in some way refuted, commented or done something.

Edited April 21, 2016 by nick76

[Ingram85]

So some muppets believe an extremely unsuccessful man who is a complete imbecile and overseer of our relegation and a mystery poster who claims to be Idiot Imbecile Jr and they believe them over the former Governer of the BoE and a former chairman of the FA and Man City Exec because of 'hurt feelings'. Poor Randy, boohoo lol Jesus **** Christ.

Only on **** VT. If this doesn't convince anyone that they are a transparent troll then I don't know what will.

[mykeyb]

The one thing you can be sure of is that Mervyn King is not involved in a takeover in anyway shape or form because he will know that it would be illegal for him to do that so we can rule that out, and I am sure the same could be said of Bernstein.

[mwj]

23 minutes ago, mykeyb said:

The one thing you can be sure of is that Mervyn King is not involved in a takeover in anyway shape or form because he will know that it would be illegal for him to do that so we can rule that out, and I am sure the same could be said of Bernstein.

Why?

Unless any of the parties are publicly traded (unlikely given it'll be either some billionaire or a "consortium") then there is no law they would be breaking.

[philthevillan]

16 hours ago, Woodytom said:

Eh? I've no idea where you've come up with that drivel.

Drivel? Says the person trying to bring balance by criticising the only two people that seem to have the balls to take a stand against Randy's regime.

If they kept quiet and let the rot continue, they'd be criticised. Instead you're criticising them for taking a stand. Don't be so naive to think that they've done this to feed their own egos. They are risking their credibility in future roles by doing this. 

[philthevillan]

16 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Are you trying to bring balance because so many people disagree and you get the reaction you want?

Because I rarely see you try to bring balance to any threads criticising players or managers

Woodytom, "the sign of a challenge" seems most likely to be told that you can't do what you are there to do. If that was me and I could afford to risk my reputation, I'd do the right thing and speak out. If we were talking about a national leader committing war crimes would you keep quiet in order to remain professional? It's an extreme example of the same principle. 

[dounavilla]

Look at it another way , why the hell would King and Bernstein take up the positions know the first place if it was there intention just to piss Randy off ? 

Ludicrous.

They have obviosly assessed things and said what they have needed to and in doing so cheesed off Master of the universe Randy big bollocks. 

[Gary Thomas]

7 minutes ago, dounavilla said:

Look at it another way , why the hell would King and Bernstein take up the positions know the first place if it was there intention just to piss Randy off ? 

Ludicrous.

They have obviosly assessed things and said what they have needed to and in doing so cheesed off Master of the universe Randy big bollocks. 

Or they have read one of his "messages" and thought no hope, get out quick!

[mykeyb]

2 hours ago, mwj said:

Why?

Unless any of the parties are publicly traded (unlikely given it'll be either some billionaire or a "consortium") then there is no law they would be breaking.

So he is working on the board while being part of one of 8 consortiums trying to buy the club.

If you were one of the other 7 would you not think he has a conflict of interest and should not be in a position to have knowledge of competitors bids or in particular your bid?

I dont think that King would allow himself to be put into a position like that, Villa fan or not.

[mwj]

21 minutes ago, mykeyb said:

So he is working on the board while being part of one of 8 consortiums trying to buy the club.

If you were one of the other 7 would you not think he has a conflict of interest and should not be in a position to have knowledge of competitors bids or in particular your bid?

I dont think that King would allow himself to be put into a position like that, Villa fan or not.

I didn't say it was ethical or not, just that it wasn't illegal. You said that we can be assured 100% that he's not involved in the takeovers. I was simply saying that's not the case, especially now that they have resigned.

[briny_ear]

I sort of hope they are working with a bid group.

[Woodytom]

22 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Are you trying to bring balance because so many people disagree and you get the reaction you want?

Because I rarely see you try to bring balance to any threads criticising players or managers

The 2nd sentence kind of answers your question. 

I'm 31 years old mate, I've got better things to do than fish for reactions on here.

[Barney_avfc]

http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/04/24/report-david-bernstein-had-ambitious-target-to-replace-garde-roy/

Randy Lerner reportedly blocked David Bernstein's attempts to lure Roy Hodgson toAston Villa.

 

According to The Sun, David Bernstein wanted to bring England boss Roy Hodgson to Aston Villa, before leaving the club last week.

Villa's relegation to the Championship was confirmed with a 1-0 defeat to Manchester United last weekend, and after Saturday's 4-2 defeat to Southampton, the season can't end soon enough for Villa fans.

It promises to be a big summer for Villa, as whilst players will naturally come and go, there is also the matter of appointing a new manager. Remi Garde left the club in March after less than five months in the job, and finding somebody who can turn the club around will be a tough ask.

Now, The Sun report that David Bernstein - who joined the Villa board in March before resigning last week - had an ambitious target for the club's new manager; Roy Hodgson.

Hodgson has led England to Euro 2016 with ten wins from ten games in qualifying, but many anticipate him leaving the role following the tournament, having managed the Three Lions for four years now.

It's claimed that Bernstein and Adrian Bevington, who worked with Hodgson during their days with The FA, were keen to lure the 68-year-old to Villa Park, but owner Randy Lerner is keen to cut costs, and bringing in a big-name manager like Hodgson wasn't possible under that plan.

 

[calcifer]

According to The Sun