Jump to content

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, CosmicVillan said:

Just watched it, sounds like an absolute shambles. 

Xia clearly just as much a charlatan as we all suspected.  So glad that lot have gone, imagine if we'd have beat Fulham that day....sliding doors moment

Ironically if we'd gone up then there wouldn't have been as many signings as what we had to do in 2019. Sam Johnstone and Snoddy would've been coverted into permanents. James Chester wasn't completely broken as a CB at that point and we could've still got likes of Axel and Tammy on season long loans. Likes of Fellani and Javier Hernandez were also rumoured if we'd been promoted IIRC.

Would've still been a desperate struggle against relegation playing turgid football though and we'd have been miles off the trajectory we're on now though.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Jude did a good interview. Obviously Wyness is going to paint himself in a positive light but I would probably put his word above Xia's.  Xia is/full of sh*te. You do wonder though if Wyness  had doubts about Dr Tony during the takeover or did he just take the money and hope for the best?  He must have realised a lot of the statements were pipe dreams like being the top 3 best teams in the world  and having a 60,000 stadium.

I think he did a reasonable job as a ceo, not Purslow's level but ok. A bit old school. Not sure I agreed with him sub contracting out the club shop though.

McCormack sounds like a complete car crash and its deeply concerning that Grealish still appears to be mates with him.

 

Edited by The Fun Factory
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/01/2021 at 13:34, useless said:

Haven't watched it myself, but just seen this new interview with Wyness posted on twitter:

 

Sheer laziness of my part mate but would you mind summarising what he said about McCormack? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SuperTed said:

Sheer laziness of my part mate but would you mind summarising what he said about McCormack? 

He didnt say anthing for legal reasons

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Contrary to what has been said; Wyness actually is a throughly likeable bloke and I know a lot of staff at the Villa (background staff, etc.) remember him very fondly in what was a worrying time for many people employed by us 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, useless said:

Wyness states that nobody knows who Xia was or where his money came from, to put Xia in a bad light, but then why did agree to work for him in the first place if he was that much of questionable character, also surely he would have known of Samuelson and Banfill's past, surrounding dubious takeovers, seems to me he's just trying to lay the blame for what happened on everyone else and not taking any responsibility himself.

Surprised by the amount of people that have watched it and decided that he wasn't such a bad CEO after all.

 

 

Xia had a lot of people fooled I think mate. I’m not saying he was without fault in the whole debacle because he certainly was but remember Xia was still technically his employer when it became apparent things weren’t as great as they initially seemed and due to legal red tape, we’ll probably never hear from him about what really happened with that whole mess (his account, anyway)

Like I said though, as a person he actually isn’t a bad bloke at all. Xia and Lerner are the real villains I think. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Xia might have had a lot of people fooled to an extent, but that should hardly be an excuse for Wyness, he was involved with Samuelson and Banfill in the takeover, and worked for and with Xia, so knew a lot more than anybody else. Not even sure why he's trying to frame the whole thing as a him vs Xia type situation, they were both in it together. And he might be a decent person on a one to one basis, but that doesn't mean to say he wasn't a bad CEO, or that he didn't make a lot of bad decisions that contributed to us nearly ceasing to exist.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
17 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Having a feud on Twitter with Micah Richards.

Pretty much admitting he could have sold him to West Ham too but wouldnt without a fee.  

Another reason to hate him. How much could that have saved us? Arsehole. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I’m in the minority, but I don’t mind what Wyness has said. Micah did an interview that got shares loads, where he said he wanted to leave but they wanted him to effectively stay as a non-playing cheerleader. Wyness has clarified that Micah completely left out the bit about Villa wanting a small fee.

I’m actually amazed that most people are seemingly criticising Wyness over Micah with these two snippets. I think people just want to like Micah because of his pundit persona. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

I think I’m in the minority, but I don’t mind what Wyness has said. Micah did an interview that got shares loads, where he said he wanted to leave but they wanted him to effectively stay as a non-playing cheerleader. Wyness has clarified that Micah completely left out the bit about Villa wanting a small fee.

I’m actually amazed that most people are seemingly criticising Wyness over Micah with these two snippets. I think people just want to like Micah because of his pundit persona. 

For me it's nothing about liking Richards and everything about the fact that ANYTHING that would have got him off the wageroll should have been taken. 

The club nearly ceased to exist. Richards was the highest paid player sitting on his arse doing nothing.  If the opportunity to ship him out was available and not taken that's pretty much criminal negligence which would have heavily contributed to the Liquidation of the club if NSWE hadn't have saved our bacon. 

  • Like 1
  • Shocked 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Having a feud on Twitter with Micah Richards.

Pretty much admitting he could have sold him to West Ham too but wouldnt without a fee.  

Considering the money Micah was on, letting him go would've been tantamount to accepting a "small fee" for him. To not let him go, all things considered, was terrible for everyone involved.

I don't dislike Keith by any means, but he should really just drop this.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter
14 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

I think I’m in the minority, but I don’t mind what Wyness has said. Micah did an interview that got shares loads, where he said he wanted to leave but they wanted him to effectively stay as a non-playing cheerleader. Wyness has clarified that Micah completely left out the bit about Villa wanting a small fee.

I’m actually amazed that most people are seemingly criticising Wyness over Micah with these two snippets. I think people just want to like Micah because of his pundit persona. 

I guess it’s because of the financial mess the club had gotten itself into. Richards’ wages would have gone into the millions over the three years in the championship. A hell of a lot for someone who the club doesn’t have any real intention of playing. 

How much were the club expecting from West Ham? I doubt it would have been more than what they’d have saved on his salary. I could understand it if West Ham were direct rivals or if Villa had bought Richards for £5m the previous season and were keen on recouping what they paid, but he was a free transfer.

The club seemed to be happy to pay a million or two for Lescott then let him leave for nothing.

For the record, I like Richards as a bloke. I don’t like him as a player for us. I wish we hadn’t bought him, but I’ve always had a bit of an issue with the idea that he’s a bad egg.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Feels like neither side are telling the whole story and it'll be a pissing contest between 2 clowns who took the piss out of us whilst they were here so **** them now they've both left

If we "sell" him to west ham for £0 then we owe him a fee or bonus or some such thing, so we say to west ham give us £500k for him to cover the fee, they say no, we say no

Who knows, who cares... 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rob182 said:

I think I’m in the minority, but I don’t mind what Wyness has said. Micah did an interview that got shares loads, where he said he wanted to leave but they wanted him to effectively stay as a non-playing cheerleader. Wyness has clarified that Micah completely left out the bit about Villa wanting a small fee.

I’m actually amazed that most people are seemingly criticising Wyness over Micah with these two snippets. I think people just want to like Micah because of his pundit persona. 

Yes it was much better to continue to pay 60k a week to a player with no knees in the championship and who we knew would never play than to get rid of him for free.

Staggering. No wonder we nearly want to the wall with this fat **** managing us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â