blandy Posted April 26, 2012 Moderator Share Posted April 26, 2012 How can anyone think appointing a manager like Mcleish is ambitious or shows he wants the club to do well Appointing Mcleish is at best admitting to being a lower half club it shows not one sign of wanting the club to do well. Sorry but "intent" has jack to do with it. Actions do That's one way of looking at it. Personally I think appointing McLeish was a mistake, and I said so before they did it. If you judge someone only on one aspect of their conduct, then you are drawn to one conclusion, if you judge them on more than just who they choose as manager then you might reach a different view. It's just different opinions. I think, for example his financial backing showed ambition, and still does. I think he is having to work based around the circumstances at any given point. Some of those circs result from his own actions and choices, others don't. Of course as fans we mostly look at the results and league table and shout "good" or "bad" or "tolerable, must do better". Which is fine. I just think that when the team is rubbish, everyone cops for stick, and some of them don't deserve all that they get, or in some cases any of it. Randy deserves some of what he's getting, because his daft appointment caused much of it. But other aspects and characteristics are IMO being unfairly traduced. Carry on with the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 26, 2012 Moderator Share Posted April 26, 2012 How does appointing a past it ill health manager and a useless relegation expert like Mcleish show that Lerner wants us to do well? Do they show he wants us to do badly or that the choices weren't good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 It still amazes me that people support Lerner on blind faith accepting he has good intentions. I'm sure Mcleish wants the club to do well. I'm sure Heskey wants to score goals. I'm sure dunne wants to defend well. Why don't those that defend Lerner defend others using good intentions as the reason? Maybe because those others haven't used PR shit. Maybe because those others didn't replace Doug Ellis. Either way it seems strange to me how Lerner is supported for having good intentions when his actions and decisions are causing serious long term damage to our club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 They show, IMO, he has not one clue on how to run a successful sprting franchise. That he lacks ambition and or the resource to fulfill that ambition (and that is resource in all its forms) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMcKenna Posted April 26, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted April 26, 2012 Intent counts for nothing in football. It is a results game driven by fan expectations I'm afraid I'm sure Ellis had the intent for us to win everything, he still does. He was judged on actions and so should Lerner Quite right that he should be judged on his actions as was ellis. However the challenge of selling AVFC 6 years on is very different. When Ellis sold to Lerner the club owed £12 million, how much do we owe now? - £100+ million? I doubt that Lerner will want to sell at a loss, so he either works out how he can turn the club round or watches his investment go further down the drain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 However the challenge of selling AVFC 6 years on is very different. When Ellis sold to Lerner the club owed £12 million, how much do we owe now? - £100+ million? to who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 It still amazes me that people support Lerner on blind faith accepting he has good intentions. I'm sure Mcleish wants the club to do well. I'm sure Heskey wants to score goals. I'm sure dunne wants to defend well. Why don't those that defend Lerner defend others using good intentions as the reason? Maybe because those others haven't used PR shit. Maybe because those others didn't replace Doug Ellis. Either way it seems strange to me how Lerner is supported for having good intentions when his actions and decisions are causing serious long term damage to our club.Amazes me too that he still gets the level of support he does. It is my firm opinion, and I will not be convinced otherwise, that he is not Ellis is a major reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMcKenna Posted April 26, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted April 26, 2012 However the challenge of selling AVFC 6 years on is very different. When Ellis sold to Lerner the club owed £12 million, how much do we owe now? - £100+ million? to who? Lerner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Absolutely we owe money to him. Poor owner So not only have we achieved less success than under Ellis, we are worse now on the field than before Lerner came and we are massively in debt for the privelege, great owner Lerner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 In the end he made a monumental error with O'Neill, and he has spent the time since overcompensating for that error, hence the mess we are now in. He would probably sell in a heartbeat but, as there are no buyers, we can only hope that he fires McLeish and starts getting thngs right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMcKenna Posted April 26, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted April 26, 2012 It still amazes me that people support Lerner on blind faith accepting he has good intentions. I'm sure Mcleish wants the club to do well. I'm sure Heskey wants to score goals. I'm sure dunne wants to defend well. Why don't those that defend Lerner defend others using good intentions as the reason? Maybe because those others haven't used PR shit. Maybe because those others didn't replace Doug Ellis. Either way it seems strange to me how Lerner is supported for having good intentions when his actions and decisions are causing serious long term damage to our club. Don't shoot the messenger John, there is a difference between reporting what he said 6 years ago and accepting that his intentions (then) were good. If your post was pointed at me, you are wrong to assume that I support him. I was simply highlighting his comments - back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 It still amazes me that people support Lerner on blind faith accepting he has good intentions. I'm sure Mcleish wants the club to do well. I'm sure Heskey wants to score goals. I'm sure dunne wants to defend well. Why don't those that defend Lerner defend others using good intentions as the reason? Maybe because those others haven't used PR shit. Maybe because those others didn't replace Doug Ellis. Either way it seems strange to me how Lerner is supported for having good intentions when his actions and decisions are causing serious long term damage to our club. Don't shoot the messenger John, there is a difference between reporting what he said 6 years ago and accepting that his intentions (then) were good. If your post was pointed at me, you are wrong to assume that I support him. I was simply highlighting his comments - back then. No not aimed at you. There are people who clearly support him and use he fact he has good intentions as the reason. Like I said in my first post, I find it very strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMcKenna Posted April 26, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted April 26, 2012 Absolutely we owe money to him. Poor owner So not only have we achieved less success than under Ellis, we are worse now on the field than before Lerner came and we are massively in debt for the privelege, great owner Lerner What then? I agree that he should sell if possible BUT I cannot see him taking a massive hit. I agree that he has led us very badly BUT if he will not sell at a loss - what then? Under Ellis we knew that he would either "leave in a box" or eventually cash but now I cannot see a satisfactory conclusion to this mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Personally I want him out, I care not if he sells at a loss or not. If he does he can use the loss anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troglodyte Posted April 26, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted April 26, 2012 the magic man visiting town and selling us the alexia for youth. The what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Juande ramos and jacques santini spring to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 It still amazes me that people support Lerner on blind faith accepting he has good intentions. I'm sure Mcleish wants the club to do well. I'm sure Heskey wants to score goals. I'm sure dunne wants to defend well. Why don't those that defend Lerner defend others using good intentions as the reason? Maybe because those others haven't used PR shit. Maybe because those others didn't replace Doug Ellis. Either way it seems strange to me how Lerner is supported for having good intentions when his actions and decisions are causing serious long term damage to our club. Don't shoot the messenger John, there is a difference between reporting what he said 6 years ago and accepting that his intentions (then) were good. If your post was pointed at me, you are wrong to assume that I support him. I was simply highlighting his comments - back then. No not aimed at you. There are people who clearly support him and use he fact he has good intentions as the reason. Like I said in my first post, I find it very strange. If anyone corrects an incorrect statement about the owner, you find it strange. If anyone doesn't agree that the owner is bad on every point, you find it strange. There aren't too many on here who have a balanced view on things, I grant you, but those who have will leave you to continue finding things strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 "Martin knows there will be money available for transfers" .... what randy hadn't bargained for was that most of them were duds Ps thank you Randy for allowing me to play football manager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I think Lerner wants to do well here. He has to get his managerial appointments right though; because, as I'm sure every chairman in football knows, he's ony as good as the manager he appoints. c o r r e c t ps and the manager by and large will only be as good as his transfers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Randy lerner has been shit on from a great height from a manager I wouldn't send to by a paper. Mcleish & Houllier have been rubbish but one year a piece v 4 years....I'm talking transfer market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts