Confirmed: Paul Lambert new Villa boss

[jacketspuds]

Haha if you need cheering up just look at the pinkun message boards latest post

Lmao they really do hate us they are even starting to refer to us as *vilers* like the blose do i like the *big mouthed* American owner part ive yet to hear Randy speak more than a couple of sentences

Norwich have become very bitter & small time,a shame really as they were a club I quite liked,they will get over it in time.

With respect its a bit rich you calling us small time when massive Aston Villa are the ones trying to get out of paying compensation for taking our manager. Despite what many of you appear to have convinced yourselves Lambert can;t just rip up his contract and there will be compensation due. If you would just get on and agree it then i am sure Culverhouse and Karsa will be with you the next day as (again despite what many of you seem to think) we are under no illusions that they will eventually follow Lambert and that their current retention is anything other than linked to the compensation issue.

You will need Culverhouse as he is apparently a great coach and he is the one who does all the day to day coaching. He is also apparently key in identifying transfer targets. Nobody knows what Karsa does. Have heard he is lambert's brother in law and he seems to find him a job wherever he goes but never seen any evidence of him actually doing anything.

Anyway hopefully sense will soon prevail and it will all be sorted soon. We are actually all pretty happy at Hughton coming in and the start of a new chapter and I can tell from here that you are all delighted with lambert. You should be as he is an excellent manager.

Personally I don't think Villa have done anything wrong with their pursuit of Lambert. If rumours are to be believed McNally breached Lambert's contract so he walked, and we have rightly acquired a manager who we believe was out of contract.

I don't think you can class it as small time just because we are refusing to pay compensation. I think as a club we have been pushed around quite a lot over the last few seasons, which is very small time, and now Lerner/Faulkner are trying to enforce some form of power over other clubs. No idea whether we will end up paying compensation but clubs shouldn't just pay out for the sake of it if they feel they have a justified reason not to.

[GarethRDR]

Isn't Lambert's basis for tearing up/walking away from the contract that the club were initially in breach for refusing him permission to speak to A.N. other club?

[SikhInTrinity]

If Villa broke any laws PL wouldn't be our manager right now and Norwich would have stopped the appointment, however McNally is getting his knickers in a twist because Rodgers cost Liverpool £5Million and his club received nothing due to him breaching PL's contract of not allowing him to talk to a fellow PL club, if he had allowed permission, Villa would have then agreed a package.

[Smithy07]

Isn't Lambert's basis for tearing up/walking away from the contract that the club were initially in breach for refusing him permission to speak to A.N. other club?

That is allegedly what he/Aston Villa are claiming but:

1. Anyone who thinks he hadn't already spoken/lined things up with Villa before he quit is very naive.

2. I would be amazed if there was a clause which allowed him to speak with any other premier league club. Even if there was a clause along those lines then I have read that there is a dispute over the effect of the clause; and

3. Again even if there was such a clause breach of such a clause would almost certainly not just allow him to terminate his contract. If he has been properly advised he will know that as will Villa. You or he will have to pay one way or another. Faulkener and Lerner just end up looking like grubby cheapskates using these tactics.

I have no problem with lambert leaving us to move to you - moves happen in football and it won't be the last time he moves clubs. I do, however, think it is unecessary and shows a lack of class for Villa/Lambert to seek to deny us compensation in these circumstances.

[irreverentad]

Isn't Lambert's basis for tearing up/walking away from the contract that the club were initially in breach for refusing him permission to speak to A.N. other club?

That is allegedly what he/Aston Villa are claiming but:

1. Anyone who thinks he hadn't already spoken/lined things up with Villa before he quit is very naive.

2. I would be amazed if there was a clause which allowed him to speak with any other premier league club. Even if there was a clause along those lines then I have read that there is a dispute over the effect of the clause; and

3. Again even if there was such a clause breach of such a clause would almost certainly not just allow him to terminate his contract. If he has been properly advised he will know that as will Villa. You or he will have to pay one way or another. Faulkener and Lerner just end up looking like grubby cheapskates using these tactics.

I have no problem with lambert leaving us to move to you - moves happen in football and it won't be the last time he moves clubs. I do, however, think it is unecessary and shows a lack of class for Villa/Lambert to seek to deny us compensation in these circumstances.

Of course it would. It was the breaking of that term by McNally that allowed him to walk as he could claim his contract was void.

[Smithy07]

Isn't Lambert's basis for tearing up/walking away from the contract that the club were initially in breach for refusing him permission to speak to A.N. other club?

That is allegedly what he/Aston Villa are claiming but:

1. Anyone who thinks he hadn't already spoken/lined things up with Villa before he quit is very naive.

2. I would be amazed if there was a clause which allowed him to speak with any other premier league club. Even if there was a clause along those lines then I have read that there is a dispute over the effect of the clause; and

3. Again even if there was such a clause breach of such a clause would almost certainly not just allow him to terminate his contract. If he has been properly advised he will know that as will Villa. You or he will have to pay one way or another. Faulkener and Lerner just end up looking like grubby cheapskates using these tactics.

I have no problem with lambert leaving us to move to you - moves happen in football and it won't be the last time he moves clubs. I do, however, think it is unecessary and shows a lack of class for Villa/Lambert to seek to deny us compensation in these circumstances.

Of course it would. It was the breaking of that term by McNally that allowed him to walk as he could claim his contract was void.

Erm, no I think you will find it doesn't work like that.

[Dante_Lockhart]

Isn't Lambert's basis for tearing up/walking away from the contract that the club were initially in breach for refusing him permission to speak to A.N. other club?

That is allegedly what he/Aston Villa are claiming but:

1. Anyone who thinks he hadn't already spoken/lined things up with Villa before he quit is very naive.

2. I would be amazed if there was a clause which allowed him to speak with any other premier league club. Even if there was a clause along those lines then I have read that there is a dispute over the effect of the clause; and

3. Again even if there was such a clause breach of such a clause would almost certainly not just allow him to terminate his contract. If he has been properly advised he will know that as will Villa. You or he will have to pay one way or another. Faulkener and Lerner just end up looking like grubby cheapskates using these tactics.

I have no problem with lambert leaving us to move to you - moves happen in football and it won't be the last time he moves clubs. I do, however, think it is unecessary and shows a lack of class for Villa/Lambert to seek to deny us compensation in these circumstances.

Of course it would. It was the breaking of that term by McNally that allowed him to walk as he could claim his contract was void.

Erm, no I think you will find it doesn't work like that.

I think you will find that it does. It doesn't work one way. If a clause in the contract is breached then the contract is void.

[BOF]

1. Anyone who thinks he hadn't already spoken/lined things up with Villa before he quit is very naive.

Similarly, anyone suggesting that he had already spoken/lined things up with Villa before he quit would have to be able to prove their allegations seeing as they're accusing him and Villa of breaking the law.

2. I would be amazed if there was a clause which allowed him to speak with any other premier league club. Even if there was a clause along those lines then I have read that there is a dispute over the effect of the clause; and

I don't see why it would be amazing. The initial contract and terms would have been drawn up in League One where a clause like that would be only fair. Terms would improve as they went through the leagues but I can imagine; knowing Norwich are relatively small-fry by Premier League standards; that Lambert would be eager to retain that original condition. Refusal to allow him to speak would therefore be a breach of contract and would allow him to walk.

3. Again even if there was such a clause breach of such a clause would almost certainly not just allow him to terminate his contract. If he has been properly advised he will know that as will Villa. You or he will have to pay one way or another. Faulkener and Lerner just end up looking like grubby cheapskates using these tactics.

"You or he will have to pay one way or another" - I don't see how you can claim there would be any legal basis to that. Just because you're pissed off at losing him for free does not mean we or he did anything wrong. Norwich **** up plain and simple. That's precisely what contracts are there for. Norwich can't just ride roughshod over someone and then put their hand out for anything other than a slap on the wrist. Villa WILL have to pay Norwich compensation but it will be for Culverhouse and that other bloke. Not for Lambert.

As for the accusation that they'll be seen as cheapskates. That's a bit silly. They've done nothing wrong here. At the end of the day, Lerner has kept his hand in his pocket because Norwich's self-inflicted problems have meant they aren't entitled to a penny. If anything, McNally has shown himself to be the naïve one. If he's going to try and square up to people, he'd better be a little more sure he has a leg to stand on before he goes off on one.

Welcome to the Premier League, McNally.

And that's coming from someone who likes Norwich City. I always have, going back to the days of Jeremy Goss. I'm afraid your chief executive has just made your club look a bit small time and it's him I'd be directing my anger at if I was you.

[GarethRDR]

1. Anyone who thinks he hadn't already spoken/lined things up with Villa before he quit is very naive.

Probably, but that's football. We knew Downing was tapped up by Liverpool but it didn't stop the deal, and in the eyes of a tribunal the 'What Villa probably did' line will amount to sweet **** all without some concrete proof. Happens to every club, hell Norwich did it to get Lambert in the first place, y'all just got caught doing it and forced to compensate. Doesn't automatically follow that we will too. That Lambert reportedly has the backing of the LMA would seem indicate the strength of his/our position.

2. I would be amazed if there was a clause which allowed him to speak with any other premier league club. Even if there was a clause along those lines then I have read that there is a dispute over the effect of the clause; and

Lambert seems to think there was, and you'd wager that he'd be more likely than most to know what was in his own contract. Again, all conjecture on our part, no doubt it'll all come out in the wash, but I tell you this; if you or I wanted to walk out of a job, we'd be making damn sure our arses were covered before we did it.

3. Again even if there was such a clause breach of such a clause would almost certainly not just allow him to terminate his contract. If he has been properly advised he will know that as will Villa. You or he will have to pay one way or another. Faulkener and Lerner just end up looking like grubby cheapskates using these tactics.

I have no problem with lambert leaving us to move to you - moves happen in football and it won't be the last time he moves clubs. I do, however, think it is unecessary and shows a lack of class for Villa/Lambert to seek to deny us compensation in these circumstances.

It would, because the contract would be null and void upon the employer's initial breach. On this 'imagined reprehensibility' of our actions, I would simply refer you to the manner in which Norwich recruited Lambert and proffer the words "pot", "kettle" and "black".

[SikhInTrinity]

Smithy has just been taken to the cleaners by BOF and Gareth!

[Smithy07]

Smithy has just been taken to the cleaners by BOF and Gareth!

Let's wait and see shall we. If you believe that any breach of a contractual term (if indeed there was one) renders a contract void or terminated then I can see why you might think I have been "taken to the cleaners."

I think you all need to take a look at the meaning of the term repudiatory breach.

[GaztonVilla]

I think you all need to take a look at the meaning of the term repudiatory breach.

I just did...

A fundamental breach (or repudiatory breach) is a breach so fundamental that it permits the aggrieved party to terminate performance of the contract. In addition that party is entitled to sue for damages.

What's your point?

Edited to add:

If the decision of the innocent party is to terminate, the key element here is not to delay in making that decision known to the other party in the form of a clear and unequivocal communication (preferably written). Case law has shown that there is definitely a danger that if sufficient time passes without the innocent party making an election, they will be deemed to have affirmed the contract. As one would expect there are no hard and fast rules about the length of time that the innocent party can take in making its decision but what is clear is that they should do so as soon as possible.

[TrentVilla]

What makes me laugh about all the complaints from Norwich fans over the departure of Lambert and our stance over compensation is the collective selective memory which is seemingly shared by McNally himself. They all seem to have forgotten about Lambert's departure from Colchester which enabled him to take the Norwich job and the way in which McNally himself recruited him.

The following extracts are interesting reading, a few Norwich fans and McNally himself could do with being reminded of them.

A Norwich statement read: "City can confirm they have been informed Colchester United have made a formal complaint to the Football League against the Canaries and three members of our management team, Paul Lambert, Ian Culverhouse and Gary Karsa.

"The matter is now in the hands of our legal representatives and the two clubs will be called to a hearing of the Football Disciplinary Commission to resolve the matter."

United chairman Robbie Cowling said: "We regret that it has not been possible to settle compensation claims with Norwich City relating to Paul Lambert, and therefore we have had to report all four parties to the Football League for breach of Football League Regulations and misconduct.

"The Football League will set up a Football Disciplinary Commission (FDC) to hear Colchester's complaint. The FDC has the power to award Colchester compensation and deduct points from Norwich, a remedy which we are advised might be particularly relevant in this case."

Cowling said the two clubs had enjoyed an "excellent relationship" and that he had "genuinely tried to preserve those good relations."

"However, no one should doubt the resolve of the Colchester United"

Here

or this from a Norwich City blog

With Norwich managerless, rumours began spreading like wildfire, but McNally retained a laser focus on one man; Paul Lambert. And eventually, controversially, and illegally, he was ours. This was a sea change for Norwich, a radically new way of running the club – ballsy, single minded and without remorse. The sacking of Gunn after two games was brutal but necessary, the bullying antics in coaxing Lambert from Colchester were those of a club tired of being ‘little’. Little Norwich, the friendly club who didn’t make waves; this was the feeling among fans. It was devoid of ambition; but no more.

Here

[jimbob80]

Silence is deafening

[Ads]

You should read some of the shite on the Norwich boards. Endless thread after thread about the Villa.

Norwich have joined Coventry in the one way hate the Villa stakes.

[jimbob80]

Small club with small club mentality , remind me of small Heath

[Moorski]

The Mustard Makers need to make their minds up,one minute Lambert is not so great it is all down to Culverhouse & the next thing is we are an evil club for taking their King!

One thing is for sure they need to get over it, he has left them & they are now also starting a new era it happens in football,Where have they been for the last 100+ years!!

[Rob182]

What a ridiculous discussion.

Good input.

[Smithy07]

Silence is deafening

Sorry was watching the England game. Yes we took Lambert in not dissimilar circumstances but the dispute with Col U was over the amount of compensation due not whether it was ever payable. We were also a broke league 1 team at the time not a premiership giant like yourselves!

Re the repudiatory breach point even if a clause exists and is in the terms Lambert/villa claim it would clearly not be a clause which is fundamental to or goes to the heart of the contract as between Norwich City and Lambert.

[KitKat]

To save anyone else having to offend themselves reading through the awful Norwich "Pink'un" forums, here are some quotes from the FIFTEEN threads that directly mention Villa or PL on the first page alone:

I look at their squad and there's maybe 2 or 3 players who might get in our first 11

Their fans have seriously deluded expectations.

Next thread:

can hughton take us to europe?

Every signing and every Villa result - friendly and competitive for at least the next season will be given a thread of its own.

Thought that Villa were suppost to be a "big" team??

didn't think that big teams avoid paying out a few millions to get the right man for the job...

But I fear that Culverhouse and Karsa will be off to Villa (hopefully with some compensation coming the other way). I don't think that Lambert will be as strong without them.

(Holt)

He won't be sold to Villa until they pay up for Lambert's compo. McNally's no fool.

Interesting targets because we already have Holt and Ayala, and I don't think Snodgrass or Phillips would be out of our reach either. I expected more ambition from the step-up that is the massive 1982 European Cup winners Aston Villa.

I think if we could get someone like Curtis Davies in with that money who has more experience and would bring better leadership qualities to the defence that would be some decent business for me.

lol

So if this is true he has £20 million to spend, Which is probably less than we have. And he wants to spend half of it on 2 players he already had! Makes you think he would have been better of here, Kept Holt and Ayala and had the extra £20 odd million to improve our squad. If tis is true then I think he has shot himself in the foot.

(Culverhouse & Karsa)

If we keep our nerve Villa will eventually have to buckle and pay up. For a so called giant of the game they really have been two bob and tinpot over this situation.

(Culverhouse & Karsa)

They also seem to be clinging desperately on to the idea that they will pay us no compensation and are waiting on us to decide the fate of the guys they want as his back room staff. IMO it makes them look small-time, why don't they just 'buy' them? - meanwhile we hit the ground running, have gone out, sought the guys we want quietly and professionally and negotiated for them. I know for sure which club comes out of the whole thing best in the wider football community, and it is not Vanilla.

BTW the 'official' Birmingham City pseudonym for Aston Villa is Viler! Big Smile []

That's all I could stomach.