Chief Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Doug is with the team? That wouldn't stop a bid coming in though would it? As long as Randy/whoever wants to make it, they can do that without Ellis being there. The size of Ellis' ego and the buyer wanting him on side IMO means a bid will not be made unless he is at the club to call a press conference and tell everyone about it and how much it is for and how much the new owner has guaranteed to spend on players, as well as ELlis boasting about the fact they've kept him on as Club President because of al of his years of football knowledge! Agree in part, but I think he will want to do that when it goes through, if anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomIsADeftone Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 For all those who are worried let me tell you the thought that I hold onto. Martin O'Neill. 1. He must want the taleover as much as us 2. He wouldn't have joined unless it was haoppening/had happened (effectively) Good point richard, i'll do that everytime doubt creeps into my mind, MON is far to clever to have joined us with the prospect of Ellis staying on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runetune Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 I have been speaking in the last couple of days to a friend who is a coporate barrister. Initially I was worried about hearing nothing, but he has assured me it could be sometime before anything is heard, even if a formal bid is put on the table this week because he said there are so many initial processes to go through at the stage of contemplation. So personally, I am expecting transfer news ahead of any takeover news. If the one comes before it, then fantastic, but I have accepted it might be longer than we would have liked. I also take solice in the knowledge MON wouldn't be involved if there weren't some assurances over the future of the club. I didn't realise but the guy I was talking to was involved with some of the backroom dealings at Leeds when it all first went very pear shaped to help keep them afloat........ he is also a Leeds fan - and he hates DOL! It appears DOL is blamed as much for the demise at Leeds as the chairman was by those in the know. That's as much as he would tell me unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahamaad Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 For all those who are worried let me tell you the thought that I hold onto. Martin O'Neill. 1. He must want the taleover as much as us 2. He wouldn't have joined unless it was haoppening/had happened (effectively) Yep, that sums up my feelings on the matter aswell. And believe me, MON is not the sort of person to stick with it if Ellis decides he will stay and not sell. He will walk out without a second thought and leave Ellis with a large mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 It appears DOL is blamed as much for the demise at Leeds as the chairman was by those in the know Surely not. It must have been the injuries. The small squad perhaps. He was working for an arse.! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenjos Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Im beginning to loose hope of this happening in a reasonable amount of time. basically p*sspants messing around and business skill for stretching things out has led to us effectively (in my eyes) writing a season off. with this team we aint gonna do much! :evil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsby Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 It appears DOL is blamed as much for the demise at Leeds as the chairman was by those in the know. That's as much as he would tell me unfortunately. DOL could only spend the money given to him, on players that were sanctioned by the board. When he was sacked they were in the upper echelons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted August 11, 2006 Moderator Share Posted August 11, 2006 Don't think Ellis is pissing around tbh, I just think it takes this long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FernandoNelson Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 DOL could only spend the money given to him, on players that were sanctioned by the board. When he was sacked they were in the upper echelons. Agreed. Was at Elland Road when O'Leary went back with Villa & the reception he got from the home crowd was excellent. For all his faults at Villa (& there were many), it's to easy to forget that his 20 year career as a player & his first 3 years as a manager were faultless. Leeds were top of the league in his 4th season when Woodgate & Bowyer went out that sunday night. Leeds & O'Leary have never really recovered from the fallout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairbandinho Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 I noticed so far today as of about 15 minutes ago there have been no trades in the villa stock...is this normal given the news of yesterday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenjos Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Don't think Ellis is pissing around tbh, I just think it takes this long arguing with lerner is p*ssing about. :winkold: another 6 months of playing the kids beckons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runetune Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 It appears DOL is blamed as much for the demise at Leeds as the chairman was by those in the know. That's as much as he would tell me unfortunately. DOL could only spend the money given to him, on players that were sanctioned by the board. When he was sacked they were in the upper echelons. Apparently there is more to it than that. Unfortunately I wasn't able to get any more information out of the person I was talking to - but..... and I have to stress, this is reading between the lines - it appears DOL knew the club was way into the old financial mire and was the one who continued to press for more funds even knowing it was pushing the club further and further into debt and the chairman and board was too weak to resist his grandiose ideas. One thing I was told was "DOL isn't whiter than white in all of the backroom issues that went on at the time". I was surprised to find out about his disgust towards DOL because I hadn't ever really spoken to him about it before...... but whatever we know from the outside looking in, DOL is not liked by those who had to then sort the mess out and my friend isn't someone I know to generally hold a grugde about anyone...... So I know that whatever happened behind the scenes, it must have really got him mad to still be this angry all this time later. I have no doubt many of the fans still hold DOL in high regard. One of my cousins is married to a Leeds fan and I know he does and that isn't being questioned with my comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaztonVilla Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 it appears DOL knew the club was way into the old financial mire and was the one who continued to press for more funds even knowing it was pushing the club further and further into debt and the chairman and board was too weak to resist his grandiose ideas. Every manager in the history of football has wanted more money to spend on players. Except Brian Little at Tranmere who fell foul of his board for NOT spending the funds available to him. If Ridsdale couldn't tell DOL "no", then it makes Ridsdale even MORE of an arse in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runetune Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 If Ridsdale couldn't tell DOL "no", then it makes Ridsdale even MORE of an arse in my eyes. Oh believe me, when I was surprised to hear about his words on DOL - The venom about Ridsdale is 100 times worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfcinwales Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 It appears DOL is blamed as much for the demise at Leeds as the chairman was by those in the know. That's as much as he would tell me unfortunately. DOL could only spend the money given to him, on players that were sanctioned by the board. When he was sacked they were in the upper echelons. Ignore it its just another one of those attempts to rewrite history, we had plenty when JG left one very large one whch was eventually proved totally false. O'leary bought and sold some huge talent, I wish we had the likes of Ferdinand and a fit Woodcock in our squad now. O'Neills job would be easier as would the need for an owner with plenty of free pennies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Think I'll pass this one and leave it for someone else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfcinwales Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 it appears DOL knew the club was way into the old financial mire and was the one who continued to press for more funds even knowing it was pushing the club further and further into debt and the chairman and board was too weak to resist his grandiose ideas. Every manager in the history of football has wanted more money to spend on players. Except Brian Little at Tranmere who fell foul of his board for NOT spending the funds available to him. If Ridsdale couldn't tell DOL "no", then it makes Ridsdale even MORE of an arse in my eyes. there was much more to that than was published too, which is why when he went on record as wanting the Villa job I laughed my head off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldFart Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Woodgate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donaldfisher Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 A thought i have had over the last week and i just wanted to put it out there and see if anyone thinks it is plausible or not is what if an inprincipal deal between Ellis and Lerner has already been done but because the take over would take a couple of weeks to complete then it is being held up until the start of the season. I remember in January when West Ham were rumoured to be taken over by the British Iranian bloke that they had all transfers put on hold until the takeover was or was not complete ( i may not have this correct but i seem to remember this stopped them from buying a player or two) If this happened in our situation it would almost guarantee that MON would not have time to add to the squad during this transfer window. This way new players can be purchased using the overdraft which will then be covered by Lerner when he takesover the club. This maybe why Lerner and MON have had meeting to discuss possible transfer targets / transfer fees and wages. Any thoughts?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnCresswell Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Lets keep this on tha takeover lines, please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts