Jump to content

Christian Purslow


villan-scott

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, allani said:

The trouble with that argument is that if, as an owner, the way you behave is to just ignore the people you employ to do a job and do your own thing without including them - very soon all the good people that work for you leave, you gain a reputation for being difficult and no-one else will come near you.  Why do you think Spurs are having so much trouble hiring a manager?  I mean how bad must things be for a manager to turn down working for a Sly 6 team to stay in the Netherlands?  Levy has p1ssed off so many managers now that he's really going to struggle to convince anyone to join - they will almost certainly have to hire someone out of a job who is desperate to get back to work.  We really don't want to be associated with the next Levy.

Nas sacking and appointing managers on his own because he can is even more scary than the idea that Purslow was able to sign a manager on his own.

Levy is the Chairman I believe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, allani said:

The trouble with that argument is that if, as an owner, the way you behave is to just ignore the people you employ to do a job and do your own thing without including them - very soon all the good people that work for you leave, you gain a reputation for being difficult and no-one else will come near you.  Why do you think Spurs are having so much trouble hiring a manager?  I mean how bad must things be for a manager to turn down working for a Sly 6 team to stay in the Netherlands?  Levy has p1ssed off so many managers now that he's really going to struggle to convince anyone to join - they will almost certainly have to hire someone out of a job who is desperate to get back to work.  We really don't want to be associated with the next Levy.

Nas sacking and appointing managers on his own because he can is even more scary than the idea that Purslow was able to sign a manager on his own.

I think you are missing the point. 

It's not about Nassef behaving like some maverick owner, he is doing what is right for the club IMO, and on that occasion, he had to go above the CEO (not uncommon) to do what was best for the sake of the club ( that's not just me assuming)

Anyone worth their salt will know that he isn't that type of an owner that you're suggesting he could turn out to be nor does he strike me to be or turn I to that either (imo).

Our owners have a target/objective where they want this club to be. They chose to make the descision they did in firing the last guy and making the descision on this occasion to hire the replacement to coincide with their vision where they want to take this club. No harm in that. (Maybe Purslow was briefed at the last minute about what was going to happen?)

Levy is a different breed altogether and cannot even be compared with Nassef. Levy has his own reputation through his own doing - how he sells/project the club to potential new managers will be the one of the reasons he cannot attract anyone, again imo. Any potential new head coach going into that will have taken one look at what has happened with Poch and Conte and possibly thinking... no thanks? (Just my observation on that)

Nassef has attracted one of the most successful European coaches going - through selling the project to him and he has gladly bought into it too.

Levy on the other hand, has made his own club a laughing stock through no fault of his own.

Trying to compare our two owners and Levy is just worlds apart imo. I don't think it's going to turn out with our owners as your post concerns it to be.

Nas stepped in to sack the last manager (again, it's out there if you care to search) because the guy he employs to make those descisions sat on his hands for too long so NasWes eventually made the descision.

I'm not sure why you and others are failing to accept this though.

 

Edited by AvfcRigo82
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, allani said:

The trouble with that argument is that if, as an owner, the way you behave is to just ignore the people you employ to do a job and do your own thing without including them - very soon all the good people that work for you leave, you gain a reputation for being difficult and no-one else will come near you.  Why do you think Spurs are having so much trouble hiring a manager?  I mean how bad must things be for a manager to turn down working for a Sly 6 team to stay in the Netherlands?  Levy has p1ssed off so many managers now that he's really going to struggle to convince anyone to join - they will almost certainly have to hire someone out of a job who is desperate to get back to work.  We really don't want to be associated with the next Levy.

Nas sacking and appointing managers on his own because he can is even more scary than the idea that Purslow was able to sign a manager on his own.

The argument was that he couldn’t without consulting his CEO, which isn’t true. I’m sure he and Wes consult the CEO and many others on a vast array of subjects. Not listening to advice from anyone at the club would indeed be stupid but nobody is suggesting any such thing. 

I’m not sure how scary it  would be if Nas hired and fired all our managers given our last two appointments. Certainly less scary than the CEO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KMitch said:

many on here who are spinning the narrative of "Nas is Purslow's boss!  He can do whatever he wants and make Purslow do whatever he tells him to!" have no idea how large companies operate. 

That’s not something anyone has “spun” as a narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, AvfcRigo82 said:

I'm not sure why you and others are failing to accept this though.

Possibly because it's not true? I mean, most people have been saying that *the board* decided together to sack Gerrard, after *the board* had arranged the employment of his successor and allowed Emery's club to line up the appointment of his successor. CP is part of *the board* and would have agreed to all of this.

It's entirely likely that Nas *may* have been the strongest voice on *the board* for the dismissal of Gerrard and the most enthusiastic exponent of getting Emery.

So what? CP may have been the strongest voice in getting Smith, we'll never know. It's probable he wanted Gerrard it's probable he was the last to come round to *the boards* decision to sack him.

I really don't think Nas will have or could have done anything on his own. He's not even in a position to do a Levy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, romavillan said:

I mean, most people have been saying that *the board* decided together to sack Gerrard, after *the board* had arranged the employment of his successor and allowed Emery's club to line up the appointment of his successor. CP is part of *the board* and would have agreed to all of this.

*Me and a few other pals* are going to the pub.

I (CP) didn't want to go to "chosen pub" but since everyone else was up for that said pub *I went along*.

 

.... Hey mate, how did your weekend go?

It was alright, *me and my mates* went to 'xx pub' because *me and my mates* really rate it.

- remember, I didn't really want to go to that pub - but I decided to go along with it because that's what everyone else decided anyway, but I'll word it as "We decided" if anyone asks. It's a more professional approach.

 

Edited by AvfcRigo82
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, AvfcRigo82 said:

Nas stepped in to sack the last manager (again, it's out there if you care to search) because the guy he employs to make those descisions sat on his hands for too long so NasWes eventually made the descision.

it's not. i've looked. there was a tweet about nas storming out of the fulham game but in the same sentance says purslow then did the same. nowhere does it say that nas single handedly sacked gerrard and unless you were stood next to them you cannot possibly know the truth (and nor do i)

there is however numerous evidence to the contrary. purslow just recently gave an interview indicating it was a joint decision...so picture the scene:

1) purslow "sat on his hands for too long" so owners did his job for him

2) nas single handedly appoints emery - purslow introduces him in the press conference as new AVFC manager, indicating he had a hand in that appointment

3) purslow gives interview indicating it was a joint decision sacking gerrard...i'd argue that it actually comes across as HIS decision. i'll even give you the quote: "Yes, it was [a difficult decision]. It was very tough. He's a very good person I've known for a long time. When I was at Liverpool, he was the captain of the club. But, my priority is Aston Villa, and doing the right thing for our club, and it hadn’t worked out. " - so if nas sacked him, purslow is seeming taking credit there?

and after all this , purslow is still employed...why do you think this is might i ask? you must have serious reservations about nas/wes if you feel that they continue to employ this guy right? i mean, if you employed someone so bad that you had to do their job for him that's bad enough...but he then goes off and takes the credit? he'd be out the door too...if what you think happened actually did happen. when all evidence points to the contrary

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

it's not. i've looked. there was a tweet about nas storming out of the fulham game but in the same sentance says purslow then did the same. nowhere does it say that nas single handedly sacked gerrard and unless you were stood next to them you cannot possibly know the truth (and nor do i)

there is however numerous evidence to the contrary. purslow just recently gave an interview indicating it was a joint decision...so picture the scene:

1) purslow "sat on his hands for too long" so owners did his job for him

2) nas single handedly appoints emery - purslow introduces him in the press conference as new AVFC manager, indicating he had a hand in that appointment

3) purslow gives interview indicating it was a joint decision sacking gerrard...i'd argue that it actually comes across as HIS decision. i'll even give you the quote: "Yes, it was [a difficult decision]. It was very tough. He's a very good person I've known for a long time. When I was at Liverpool, he was the captain of the club. But, my priority is Aston Villa, and doing the right thing for our club, and it hadn’t worked out. " - so if nas sacked him, purslow is seeming taking credit there?

and after all this , purslow is still employed...why do you think this is might i ask? you must have serious reservations about nas/wes if you feel that they continue to employ this guy right? i mean, if you employed someone so bad that you had to do their job for him that's bad enough...but he then goes off and takes the credit? he'd be out the door too...if what you think happened actually did happen. when all evidence points to the contrary

Listen, with all due respect let's park the bus shall we? As this debate has gone on for long enough and could go on for pages and pages. It's becoming taxing.  🤝

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, blandy said:

He’s not the owner, I think that’s ENIC and a bloke called Lewis, who is a hands off owner, so yeah the situation is not comparable to ours with CP and NSWE. I’m struggling to understand why this whole discussion is so polarised and extreme. The two people who own 99% of Villa clearly have the biggest control. They employed CP to be CEO. He has a nominal shareholding and as CEO a place on the board. He’s worked hard and generally got a lot right and been part of the impressive growth of the club. He hasn’t got everything right and nor could he, or anyone, be expected to. People voicing their thoughts on what’s gone well or badly needn’t be a call to extremes. Someone asks “tell me what you think he’s got wrong”. Some others reply with their opinions. That’s all we’re doing. It’s not anything other than different people with different opinions and different attributions as to who has a role in what. None of us are on the inside, none of us has a monopoly on informed analysis. Chill out.

I’m glad I’m not the only one struggling to understand why this discussion has become so heated and polarised. Opinions are pretty much all there is but people are unnecessarily, in my opinion, getting a bit wound up by it all.  I agree we should all chill out. 

Edited by DaveAV1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DaveAV1 said:

I’m glad I’m not the only one struggling to understand why this discussion has become so heated and polarised. Opinions are pretty much all there is but people are unnecessarily, in my opinion, getting into a bit wound up by it all.  I agree we should all chill out. 

i'm fine with people giving opinions. it's the point of a message board. what i don't like is that we're in the best shape we've been in years and the guy in charge for some reason is having unfounded claims (other than "it's out there, go look for it") being posted as if they're fact. it's just wrong. but best just leave it i guess...i managed to avoid the mings thread for a good while, i guess i just avoid this one for a bit too!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AvfcRigo82 said:

Listen, with all due respect let's park the bus shall we? As this debate has gone on for long enough and could go on for pages and pages. It's becoming taxing.  🤝

 

You could always just cite the source that you claim is out there.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blandy said:

He’s not the owner, I think that’s ENIC and a bloke called Lewis, who is a hands off owner, so yeah the situation is not comparable to ours with CP and NSWE. I’m struggling to understand why this whole discussion is so polarised and extreme. The two people who own 99% of Villa clearly have the biggest control. They employed CP to be CEO. He has a nominal shareholding and as CEO a place on the board. He’s worked hard and generally got a lot right and been part of the impressive growth of the club. He hasn’t got everything right and nor could he, or anyone, be expected to. People voicing their thoughts on what’s gone well or badly needn’t be a call to extremes. Someone asks “tell me what you think he’s got wrong”. Some others reply with their opinions. That’s all we’re doing. It’s not anything other than different people with different opinions and different attributions as to who has a role in what. None of us are on the inside, none of us has a monopoly on informed analysis. Chill out.

Levy owns in the region of 30% of ENIC, so he does hold a significant chunk of Tottenham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PerryBarrPet said:

Was Purslow at Villa Park yesterday? No sign of him during end of season celebrations - is he still with us?

 

1 hour ago, Brumstopdogs said:

He was apparently at the match but, yes, was no sign of him during the celebrations.

Sacked for being a shit head. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PerryBarrPet said:

Was Purslow at Villa Park yesterday? No sign of him during end of season celebrations - is he still with us?

Seen him before kick off by the tunnel presenting something to someone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PerryBarrPet said:

Was Purslow at Villa Park yesterday? No sign of him during end of season celebrations - is he still with us?

Good on him staying out the way and off the pitch. He'll win more respect by butting out a bit, he's got zero football nous. Maybe he's finally realising.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â