Richard Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 yesterday Mark made a comment that last season was a poor season and we were in a relegation fight etc. Someone responded to him to say that "we finished 9th it doesn't matter how we got there but we got there and that is what the history books will say" well for me the who appointed oneill debate is the same. They will not say what was going on behind the scenes, who said what to who (conjecture), history books show ONeill was appointed and Ellis was the man that did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Can anyone honestly see O'Neill being prepared to work with Ellis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted February 16, 2012 Moderator Share Posted February 16, 2012 We're not history books. We're fans discussing what went on. In a discussion over who was responsible for hiring MON you have yet to actually engage me on what I'm saying. In essence you're not discussing it at all. The fact is that Randy was pulling the strings and doing the hiring and buying at that stage. Doug was given the ceremonial glory and he took the credit, but he wasn't making any of the decisions at that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 yesterday Mark made a comment that last season was a poor season and we were in a relegation fight etc. Someone responded to him to say that "we finished 9th it doesn't matter how we got there but we got there and that is what the history books will say" well for me the who appointed oneill debate is the same. They will not say what was going on behind the scenes, who said what to who (conjecture), history books show ONeill was appointed and Ellis was the man that did it. Youve also taken what I said out of context. We were comparing Dougs time with Randys and we werent critiquing Dougs time to the level that Mark did with that season. If we did its likely that some of Dougs finishes wouldnt reflect what actually happened in the season good or bad. So for comparing the two it is only fair to look at finishes at face value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Lerner gets no credit for O'Neill. The appointment was well underway before he got here. The unveiling of MON was just delayed until Lerners takeover went through. Lerner I strongly suspect had no idea at all who MON was so therefore would not have had any involvement in selecting him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 O'Neill was not Lerner's choice, but O'Neill wouldn't have come here without Lerner's takeover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 We're not history books. We're fans discussing what went on. In a discussion over who was responsible for hiring MON you have yet to actually engage me on what I'm saying. In essence you're not discussing it at all. The fact is that Randy was pulling the strings and doing the hiring and buying at that stage. Doug was given the ceremonial glory and he took the credit, but he wasn't making any of the decisions at that point.There is not much to enage with in all honesty Just answer this factually. Who appointed Martin Oneill as manager? You cannot accept that the answer is Doug Ellis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Can anyone honestly see O'Neill being prepared to work with Ellis? You might have asked the same question of Graham Taylor. The man who famously kept a resignation letter in his draw... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 yesterday Mark made a comment that last season was a poor season and we were in a relegation fight etc. Someone responded to him to say that "we finished 9th it doesn't matter how we got there but we got there and that is what the history books will say" well for me the who appointed oneill debate is the same. They will not say what was going on behind the scenes, who said what to who (conjecture), history books show ONeill was appointed and Ellis was the man that did it. Youve also taken what I said out of context. We were comparing Dougs time with Randys and we werent critiquing Dougs time to the level that Mark did with that season. If we did its likely that some of Dougs finishes wouldnt reflect what actually happened in the season good or bad. So for comparing the two it is only fair to look at finishes at face value. I'm not taking it out of context. I am saying what was said yesterday and for me how it is similar to the point today about who appointed Oneill etc. For me the end point is Oneill was appointed by Ellis, regardless of how we got there. Similar to the end point of the discussion you and mRak had that we finished 9th, regardless of how we got there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted February 16, 2012 Moderator Share Posted February 16, 2012 There is not much to enage with in all honestyWell if you won't engage in the discussion then neither will I. It seems only fair that I meet you half way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 16, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2012 O'Neill was not Lerner's choice, but O'Neill wouldn't have come here without Lerner's takeover. This. There was me thinking it was as simple as the above sentence. This thread suggests otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazdavies79 Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 O'Neill was not Lerner's choice, but O'Neill wouldn't have come here without Lerner's takeover.MON must have chatted to Lerner then, so he basically got our man for us. Top marks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chappy Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Lerner. He just needs to realise he has **** up majorly when appointing both Faulkner and Mcleish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Lerner. He just needs to realise he has **** up majorly when appointing both Faulkner and Mcleish.He doesn't. If he did neither would be at the club. They are here because they are doing as he wants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 deleted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Randolph every day of the week. He realised belatedly that he backed the wrong horse with O'Neill, and we're still trying to recover from that. Get this season out of the way, and I think we'll see a resurgent Villa, under both Lerner and Mcleish, next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Randolph every day of the week. He realised belatedly that he backed the wrong horse with O'Neill, and we're still trying to recover from that. Get this season out of the way, and I think we'll see a resurgent Villa, under both Lerner and Mcleish, next season. Sorry, but the hiring of mcleish doesn't provide much evidence to back the optimistic view that lerner will get us challenging again. The hiring of mcleish adds more weight to the argument that lerner is just happy to stay in the prem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 RRandolph every day of the week. He realised belatedly that he backed the wrong horse with O'Neill, and we're still trying to recover from that. Get this season out of the way, and I think we'll see a resurgent Villa, under both Lerner and Mcleish, next season.so lermer sacked Mon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 RRandolph every day of the week. He realised belatedly that he backed the wrong horse with O'Neill, and we're still trying to recover from that. Get this season out of the way, and I think we'll see a resurgent Villa, under both Lerner and Mcleish, next season.so lermer sacked Mon? Nope. I don't believe I've said that Tricky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Randolph every day of the week. He realised belatedly that he backed the wrong horse with O'Neill, and we're still trying to recover from that. Get this season out of the way, and I think we'll see a resurgent Villa, under both Lerner and Mcleish, next season. Sorry, but the hiring of mcleish doesn't provide much evidence to back the optimistic view that lerner will get us challenging again. Surely that depends how highly one rates Mcleish? I rate him relatively highly, although given the groundswell of opinion against him, I think he's got his work cut-out to turn both the team, and importantly the fans, around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts