houllierout Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I wonder if a lot of the "dissaprove" fans are glory hunters who only become Villa fans when Randy arrived, are now are prepared to jump ship? Yeah, theres been a massive rise in the number of fans hasnt there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houllierout Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I don't think our board have any feeling at all for the Villa faithful and are dismissive. They are not, IMO, footballing people and do not understand the affinity that a fan feels with his/her football club and the emotional attachment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alec Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Because the question is specifically phrased regarding 'current approval' rating then I have to vote disapprove. I do not want to see Mr. Lerner sell up and leave and don't believe that he has any intention of doing so. He has done much that is good in his five years in charge and this will not soon be forgotten by any of us. However, it is the steadily increasing list of decisions that appear unfathomable that is the cause for concern. I can't quite put my finger on who is most to blame (though obviously the buck has to stop with the man in overall charge) but it's quite clear that there is little confidence in the judgement of either Mr. Lerner or Mr. Faulkner. The truth is we know very little about the rest of the board and their varying contributions. The General has proved to be a good outlet for the disclosure of certain information and insight, though this is evidently drying up. Mr. Faulkner is an obvious fall guy for disaffected supporters, and there has been little in either his actions or his often vaguely worded official statements published on the website that would suggest he is strong enough to hold such a position at a Premier League club. Having said that, I'm sure there is much that goes on behind the scenes that we never come to hear of and the fact that he is the most visible simply renders him the easiest target. But therein lies the problem - everything seems to happen in such shrouded secrecy and the level of communication and the dismal public image that the Club allows to represent them is so bad that it is very difficult to condemn anyone for jumping to negative conclusions (even if their extremity is usually inappropriate to read through The General's thread). The truth is that despite our many frustrations, we remain in a healthier state than most of the rest of the league. Even a club like Spurs have a sell-to-buy policy and despite progressing to the latter stages of the Champions League last term have only been able to make one signing of note this summer - our ex-goalkeeper on a free. With the exception of Liverpool, Utd and Sunderland, nobody is exactly doing a high volume of trading this summer and we have been no different. Of course, it is hard to take seeing star players leave for the third successive summer and at a substantial profit that has yet to be re-invested, and time will tell if Mr. Lerner's commitment to sanctioning large transfers will continue. I believe it probably will, but the terms under which new players arrive may have to pass through a much tighter level of scrutiny than previously, and if this leads to high-salaried players like Heskey, Beye, Sidwell etc. not sitting on the bench or wasting away in the reserves at our considerable expense then so be it. But one cannot escape the fact that the selection process for appointing the new manager was deeply flawed, and this is simply inexcusable for determining the most important position at the Club. I'm not speaking specifically about Mr. McLeish, his background or past allegiances, but the confused criteria that seemed to shift dramatically from one confirmed candidate (Roberto Martinez) to the eventual choice (Mr. McLeish), the apparent discarding of perfectly suitable - and eligible - candidates, and the lack of ability to secure or persuade, or it seems, even entertain the possibility of approaching more ambitious options. One cannot escape the sheer lack of preparation that was all too evident when the season finished and Mr. Houllier's illness was confirmed as being severe enough to prevent him returning, especially in light of the first-hand experience gained only nine months earlier when the Club found itself with little time and even fewer options when it came to replacing Mr. O'Neill. I think the nature of Mr. McLeish's eventual appointment points more to a conflation of circumstance that Mr. Lerner and Mr. Faulkner happily jumped upon with time ticking away which only reinforces this view. One cannot escape the nagging feeling that though bestowing the near omnipotence enjoyed by Mr. O'Neill during his time as manager is highly problematic and subsequently led to a multitude of problems when he left, his control shielded Mr. Lerner and Mr. Faulkner from many football-related issues that they have since had to grapple with. The naivete and apparent lack of understanding they have demonstrated in many of their key decision-making has created grave doubts in their footballing acumen. They seem determined to adhere to a rigid business model in their dealings that just doesn't seem in step with the way the rest of the football world operates. One cannot escape the fact that year after year there are continual problems with the basic kit, whether it be the superficial (in terms of design decisions that seem unnecessarily random and controversial, making a mockery of any plan to cement a wider brand identity) to the tangible (protracted release strategy that sees them in shops long after league rivals, manufacturing issues, delays in availability). Some may argue that there have been circumstances that been unavoidable (at least relating to the manufacturing problem last year) but I don't believe for one second that any other Premier League club would stand for it, especially the timescale that elapses before solutions are put in place. One cannot escape the fact Mr. Lerner's board lost the first shirt sponsorship deal they had agreed in less than twelve months of the contract being signed (32 Red were signed by Doug Ellis and Acorns was obviously a charitable concession). Regardless of the recession and whatever FX Pro's reasoning, it is another unmistakable sign of weakness - and one only worsened by the time taken to confirm a replacement. Like the departure of Mr. Houllier, I understand FX Pro's decision to pull out was confirmed before the end of the season and that it has taken a Club of our stature the time it did to establish agreement with another company once again puts serious question marks against Mr. Lerner's and Mr. Faulkner's ability to effectively penetrate a competitive marketplace. Naturally, I hope the deal with Genting will prove to be a beneficial, long-term partnership, and on the face of it, is no more obscure or less impressive than many that adorn the shirts of other Premier Lague teams, but the nature of reaching the agreement would appear to bear all of the hallmarks that seem to characterise the way we make any other appointment - chiefly, with little speed or foresight. One cannot escape the fact that nobody it seems - from supporters to players to the manager himself - has any idea what the overall aims of the Club currently are. Ostensibly, we appear to be drifting. There is little talk - whether just for effect or otherwise - of a desire to compete for honours in the short term or build a challenge for greater things in time to come. Ambitions seem to be to remain as competitive as possible, but it is very hard to define exactly what that is beyond Mr. McLeish's assertion that he would like to improve on last season's ninth placing. The truth is that we, as supporters, have little to invest in at present beyond the habit and routine of following the Club because that is simply what we do. The impression is increasingly of an ownership that is content to play upon this loyalty for as long as possible without committing to grander aims - and the mounting unrest and dissatisfaction among the fans stems from their gradual recognition of this. This is not a case of being 'fickle' - it's about a total lack of inspiration, exacerbated by the ever-widening disconnect between us, the lifeblood of the Club, and an owner who appears increasingly aloof by way of his continuing silence. The Club is currently engulfed by malaise and suspicion, some of it merited and some of it not, but it all unfortunately comes back to Mr. Lerner. Perhaps one of the greatest frustrations is that there is much that could be put right with relative ease and minimal expense - and that the Club doesn't is as bewildering as it is infuriating. We say we want action and not just words, but quite frankly, a few well-chosen words would make for a pleasant and much-appreciated change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theunderstudy Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Watching Dispatches this week made me a bit more thankful for Randy. Sure the board are incompetent sometimes. Sure they make PR gaffes etc. But I'd rather that than throwing a load of money unsustainably at something we can't afford anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Because the question is specifically phrased regarding 'current approval' rating then I have to vote disapprove. I do not want to see Mr. Lerner sell up and leave and don't believe that he has any intention of doing so. He has done much that is good in his five years in charge and this will not soon be forgotten by any of us. However, it is the steadily increasing list of decisions that appear unfathomable that is the cause for concern. I can't quite put my finger on who is most to blame (though obviously the buck has to stop with the man in overall charge) but it's quite clear that there is little confidence in the judgement of either Mr. Lerner or Mr. Faulkner. The truth is we know very little about the rest of the board and their varying contributions. The General has proved to be a good outlet for the disclosure of certain information and insight, though this is evidently drying up. Mr. Faulkner is an obvious fall guy for disaffected supporters, and there has been little in either his actions or his often vaguely worded official statements published on the website that would suggest he is strong enough to hold such a position at a Premier League club. Having said that, I'm sure there is much that goes on behind the scenes that we never come to hear of and the fact that he is the most visible simply renders him the easiest target. But therein lies the problem - everything seems to happen in such shrouded secrecy and the level of communication and the dismal public image that the Club allows to represent them is so bad that it is very difficult to condemn anyone for jumping to negative conclusions (even if their extremity is usually inappropriate to read through The General's thread). The truth is that despite our many frustrations, we remain in a healthier state than most of the rest of the league. Even a club like Spurs have a sell-to-buy policy and despite progressing to the latter stages of the Champions League last term have only been able to make one signing of note this summer - our ex-goalkeeper on a free. With the exception of Liverpool, Utd and Sunderland, nobody is exactly doing a high volume of trading this summer and we have been no different. Of course, it is hard to take seeing star players leave for the third successive summer and at a substantial profit that has yet to be re-invested, and time will tell if Mr. Lerner's commitment to sanctioning large transfers will continue. I believe it probably will, but the terms under which new players arrive may have to pass through a much tighter level of scrutiny than previously, and if this leads to high-salaried players like Heskey, Beye, Sidwell etc. not sitting on the bench or wasting away in the reserves at our considerable expense then so be it. But one cannot escape the fact that the selection process for appointing the new manager was deeply flawed, and this is simply inexcusable for determining the most important position at the Club. I'm not speaking specifically about Mr. McLeish, his background or past allegiances, but the confused criteria that seemed to shift dramatically from one confirmed candidate (Roberto Martinez) to the eventual choice (Mr. McLeish), the apparent discarding of perfectly suitable - and eligible - candidates, and the lack of ability to secure or persuade, or it seems, even entertain the possibility of approaching more ambitious options. One cannot escape the sheer lack of preparation that was all too evident when the season finished and Mr. Houllier's illness was confirmed as being severe enough to prevent him returning, especially in light of the first-hand experience gained only nine months earlier when the Club found itself with little time and even fewer options when it came to replacing Mr. O'Neill. I think the nature of Mr. McLeish's eventual appointment points more to a conflation of circumstance that Mr. Lerner and Mr. Faulkner happily jumped upon with time ticking away which only reinforces this view. One cannot escape the nagging feeling that though bestowing the near omnipotence enjoyed by Mr. O'Neill during his time as manager is highly problematic and subsequently led to a multitude of problems when he left, his control shielded Mr. Lerner and Mr. Faulkner from many football-related issues that they have since had to grapple with. The naivete and apparent lack of understanding they have demonstrated in many of their key decision-making has created grave doubts in their footballing acumen. They seem determined to adhere to a rigid business model in their dealings that just doesn't seem in step with the way the rest of the football world operates. One cannot escape the fact that year after year there are continual problems with the basic kit, whether it be the superficial (in terms of design decisions that seem unnecessarily random and controversial, making a mockery of any plan to cement a wider brand identity) to the tangible (protracted release strategy that sees them in shops long after league rivals, manufacturing issues, delays in availability). Some may argue that there have been circumstances that been unavoidable (at least relating to the manufacturing problem last year) but I don't believe for one second that any other Premier League club would stand for it, especially the timescale that elapses before solutions are put in place. One cannot escape the fact Mr. Lerner's board lost the first shirt sponsorship deal they had agreed in less than twelve months of the contract being signed (32 Red were signed by Doug Ellis and Acorns was obviously a charitable concession). Regardless of the recession and whatever FX Pro's reasoning, it is another unmistakable sign of weakness - and one only worsened by the time taken to confirm a replacement. Like the departure of Mr. Houllier, I understand FX Pro's decision to pull out was confirmed before the end of the season and that it has taken a Club of our stature the time it did to establish agreement with another company once again puts serious question marks against Mr. Lerner's and Mr. Faulkner's ability to effectively penetrate a competitive marketplace. Naturally, I hope the deal with Genting will prove to be a beneficial, long-term partnership, and on the face of it, is no more obscure or less impressive than many that adorn the shirts of other Premier Lague teams, but the nature of reaching the agreement would appear to bear all of the hallmarks that seem to characterise the way we make any other appointment - chiefly, with little speed or foresight. One cannot escape the fact that nobody it seems - from supporters to players to the manager himself - has any idea what the overall aims of the Club currently are. Ostensibly, we appear to be drifting. There is little talk - whether just for effect or otherwise - of a desire to compete for honours in the short term or build a challenge for greater things in time to come. Ambitions seem to be to remain as competitive as possible, but it is very hard to define exactly what that is beyond Mr. McLeish's assertion that he would like to improve on last season's ninth placing. The truth is that we, as supporters, have little to invest in at present beyond the habit and routine of following the Club because that is simply what we do. The impression is increasingly of an ownership that is content to play upon this loyalty for as long as possible without committing to grander aims - and the mounting unrest and dissatisfaction among the fans stems from their gradual recognition of this. This is not a case of being 'fickle' - it's about a total lack of inspiration, exacerbated by the ever-widening disconnect between us, the lifeblood of the Club, and an owner who appears increasingly aloof by way of his continuing silence. The Club is currently engulfed by malaise and suspicion, some of it merited and some of it not, but it all unfortunately comes back to Mr. Lerner. Perhaps one of the greatest frustrations is that there is much that could be put right with relative ease and minimal expense - and that the Club doesn't is as bewildering as it is infuriating. We say we want action and not just words, but quite frankly, a few well-chosen words would make for a pleasant and much-appreciated change. Well said, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 The way that's been shopped, it looks like those two ...er... ladies are strangling him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowDoINotLikeThat Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I am not currently happy with Lerner and the board. I dont understand why Hughes was not approached, apparently we were not happy with the way he resigned from Fulham. Then McLeish does exactly the same thing and gets the job??? McLaren was apparently not interviewed because of fan dissatisfaction. Then McLeish gets the job??? There is also the matter of Carew, NRC, Downing, Young , Friedal, and probably Heskey and Cuellar leaving to be replaced by Given who was handed a 5 year contract despite the fact he is a crock after serious shoulder injuries and we are told ther will be one more signing. Gambling on youngsters and the possibility that Baye, Warnock and Ireland will pull their fingers out their arses is extremley risky in my eyes especially the latter. McLeish has told players they must relocate to Birmingham, I cant see that going down to well with our bunch of stroppy argumentative players. Squad harmony anyone??? Appointed Peter Grant!!!!!! That needs no comment Im sure you are all aware of how popular he is amongst players he has coached especailly at Blues. Houllier would have been given the all clear to come back in September. McCallister could have been in charge with GH behind the scenes until then. I thought that worked well at the end of last season so why not let the pair carry on what they were building as I feel GH would have turned the corner and been able to build a squad. Then there is the crowning turd in the water pipe itself - Alex McLeish Done nothing, plays a negative brand of boring defensive hoofball and is about as popular as blind one legged midget with no teeth in a bikini would be at Spearmint Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flatty Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Okay so my biggest issue is the lack of communication from Randy/the board. I am certainly one of those fans that was deeply angered and upset by the appointment of AM, I would love to know the percentage of fans that felt similar or in the least werent happy. Regardless the board/Randy will have known that this decision was going to be met by a mixed reaction and so I assumed and hoped that the club would come out and explain why AM was the best manager available to us - what we got was a bullsh*t statement full of largely hot air on the official site. And that was that... We were told by the General (whom I respect a lot for posting on sites like this) that we would see action in the coming weeks, of course by large the only action was agreeing to pay the blues compensation and selling two key players. We have since bought in Given (good signing) and have been told to expect one more - hardly the stuff dreams are made of and certainly seems to contradict the statement by the general. I dont think its unreasonable to expect continual investment considering as far as we are aware our aim is to play champions league and compete with the top 4/5. In the very least id expect the money we have recieved for the players we have lost to be used to replace them. Considering we spent a lot of money to bring Bent in during the Jan window this seems such a contrast now. I dont expect for the club to issue a statement telling us that we will be spending x million and aim to bring in players in the following positions... BUT I think a statement letting the fans know that we are still aiming towards the same goal would be appreciated, if our goals still are the same then its clear our method of achieving them has changed so an explanation why. If for some reason the goalposts have changed then tell us, dont just hide behind "cleverly" worded statements that leave us none the wiser. What I want is a clear realistic vision for the club and if I had that my vote would be approve, if this nervous and concerned feeling I have continues much longer then Im afraid it will be the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowDoINotLikeThat Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I dont understand why Hughes was not approached, apparently we were not happy with the way he resigned from Fulham. Then McLeish does exactly the same thing and gets the job??? McLaren was apparently not interviewed because of fan dissatisfaction. Then McLeish gets the job??? I think its glaringly obvious now why Hughes and Benitez were overlooked. Both would have wanted money to spend and are not yes men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Qualified approval here. At times he's made Villa look like clowns, and quite embarassing. There seems to be a good deal of naivety at board level. Yet I think he's put a sound structure and ethos in place at the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holtelower Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I really really really would not complain too much about attracting players / paying wages , fees etc... if I was you. New rules satte you can only spend what you bring in. So, we cannot be bankroled. The only way to do it is earn it. How do you do that ? Sponsorship (or shirts / ground etc..) we are not Man U, we are not in London - may raise some, but not a lot. Commercial activities especially abroad - see above Bonuses - Champions league needed for that - for that you need the players , vicious circle - won't happen short term. or...... Do what all the other successful clubs have done Whomp up tickets to £70 - make the cheapest ST £1000 and sell half the ground to corporate sponsorship !. Personally, I'll take watching the Villa finishing 8th, rather than not being able to afford to support them finishing 4th thanks very much ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I really really really would not complain too much about attracting players / paying wages , fees etc... if I was you. New rules satte you can only spend what you bring in. So, we cannot be bankroled. The only way to do it is earn it. How do you do that ? Sponsorship (or shirts / ground etc..) we are not Man U, we are not in London - may raise some, but not a lot. Commercial activities especially abroad - see above Bonuses - Champions league needed for that - for that you need the players , vicious circle - won't happen short term. or...... Do what all the other successful clubs have done Whomp up tickets to £70 - make the cheapest ST £1000 and sell half the ground to corporate sponsorship !. Personally, I'll take watching the Villa finishing 8th, rather than not being able to afford to support them finishing 4th thanks very much ! I dont see why we dont get a stadium sponsor like Man City or Arsenal if I'm honest. I know we wont get a deal anywhere near as much but something has to better than nothing. Alot of German teams do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelle Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Approve. Sure, he's made some misstakes and ain't the perfect owner, but so far the good things far outweigh the bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condimentalist Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 New rules satte you can only spend what you bring in. That only affects teams in European competition. I understand the need to get a handle on the wages issue. However I'm mightily disappointed that we don't seem to be prepared to invest in replacing the significant number of first team players lost, particularly since we have received almost £40m on incoming transfer fees this summer. Overall, he still has my support - just about. But there can be no doubt that any poor performance in the league this season is directly attributable to his leadership; his absurd choice of manager and weakening of our squad. If we do OK, try to build again next season and show some signs of sustainable progress, I'll buy back in to his (undoubtedly revised) vision for the club. But that remains to be seen. It's equally as likely that we could end up scrapping at the bottom of the table once more. This is a big season for him, and if we do badly, he may well be forced out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houllierout Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I love the people hiding behind the uefa finance rulings.... Its for Europe. We wont be in it for a long time and if we do we'll probably throw it anyway. See this thing were in its called the premier league and if we dont reinforce its going to r*** us. Human Centipede 2 styly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holtelower Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I love the people hiding behind the uefa finance rulings.... Its for Europe. We wont be in it for a long time and if we do we'll probably throw it anyway. See this thing were in its called the premier league and if we dont reinforce its going to r*** us. Human Centipede 2 styly Ehhh ? So why the hell spend 100's of millions of pounds if you aren't gonna make it. The total shambles of a season got us 9th last year - so if we are only gonna get one place further in your eyes (as generally, not all the time, but usually, 7th gets you Europe) why on earth spend 100m and put us in financial dire ? And some of you wonder why GK gets bloody annoyed at you all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I dont see why we dont get a stadium sponsor like Man City or Arsenal if I'm honest. I know we wont get a deal anywhere near as much but something has to better than nothing. Alot of German teams do it Chelsea have been looking for a ground sponsor for over a year and nothing. Newcastle have been looking for a ground sponsor for 2 years now, and nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I think they are doing their best to make us financially more...prudent. However that won't matter a jot if it sacrifices quality on the pitch, and we slip down the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Qualified approval here. At times he's made Villa look like clowns, and quite embarassing. There seems to be a good deal of naivety at board level. Yet I think he's put a sound structure and ethos in place at the club. Definite approval from me, but I do firmly agree with the point you make about the board's naivety which can be gut wrenching at times. Randy really does need to employ a vastly experienced football man of stature (ie David Dein type) as Chief Executive, in order to properly focus his considerable financial commitment to Villa. Imo Paul Faulkner is an excellent and loyal personal assistant to Randy and that should be his job at the moment. He may have gained the experience and gravitas to step up to the plate in ten years time, but not now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts