sne Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 yeah agree. rumour is he mightnt be fit for Ireland vs Sweden in March Really hope both Dunne and Given playes against Sweden... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Really hope both Dunne and Given playes against Sweden... well Given is retired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 well Given is retired Damn! Any chance he'll come out of retirement to get the odd game since he ain't playing for us anymore? As the Swedish goalkeeper (Isaksson) is just awful i was hoping Given might even out the odds a bit. To get back on topic: Since lower league signings seems to be the way we are going and as i don't follow the Championship can someone who does give a verdict on which players who are good enough to improve us atm and what their strenghts are? Cresswell? Will Hughes? Chester? Sako? M Phillips? Zaha? Ince? Butland? Redmond? And who ever else might be possible... I've seen enough of M Olsson (Blackburn) and Lee (Bolton) to wan't them here althou Lee prob isn't back to his best yet r Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Not picking on you, CI, but I've always wondered about this - just how much is the board to blame in this? The expectation of the board (judging by some posts on this site) seems to be: - The board should back the manager - The board should not allow long/expensive contracts for players that aren't being used - The board should not stop the manager from signing who he wants - The board should not allow our best players to leave to better teams I'm wondering exactly how the board can ever get things right given those set of parameters which are either contradictory or completely outside their control. How about this : - The manager names the players he wants - The board gets them players if available and if on a contract that the board find financially acceptable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 How about this : - The manager names the players he wants - The board gets them players if available and if on a contract that the board find financially acceptable The problem with this is that the board have no football know how to be able to judge what should be financially acceptable for a particular player. So for example how would they have known not to give Habib Beye such a long lucrative contract, but have known to get say Ashley Young tied down to a longer contract. And when the manger proposes N'Zogbia as a replacement for Ashley Young - the board's first instinct will be get him tied down to as long a contract as possible - because the guy in charge of the football side of things reckons they should. But if the board has an advisor say, for talk's sake Houllier - how can they be sure what their advisor says is going to tally up with what Lambert is recommending. Would Houllier have 'sanctioned' the Lowton deal for example? The board is in a tough position either way. Arsenal and Wenger seem to be in a good position as Wenger has clearly bought into maintaining the club's financial position at all times, even as they're losing their best players. In return they trust him to buy whoever he wants, and negotiate contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8pints Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Getting linked to James Henry from Millwall, seems a versatile player. Vaguely remember his name coming up before. http://www1.skysports.com/transfer-centre/clockwatch Millwall midfielder James Henry is attracting interest from a number of Premier League clubs, including Aston Villa. Henry has established himself as one of the best midfielders outside the Premier League and has an eye for spectacular goals. Henry also has one of the best assist records in the Championship and the former Reading man has been instrumental in Millwall's fine form this season. Villa boss Paul Lambert is keen to bolster his squad in January and he has shown he is not afraid to give young players their chance to play in the Premier League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Really hope both Dunne and Given playes against Sweden... It's qualifiers like this when Given and Dunne are at their best usually (were in Given's case). From an Irish point of view I'll be delighted to have Dunne back in time. Will help us get that heroic 0-0 victory Trap will be so desperate for ;-) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Splash a couple of million on Forren before Everton completes the signing. I don't know what we're waiting for, Fulham and Everton will probably battle it out for him come jan but right now we'd get him for 2-3 million before these two clubs offload to afford him. Seeing Hangeland yesterday I think this type of player is exactly what we need, and Hangeland has been quoted saying that Forren is twice the player he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 The problem with this is that the board have no football know how to be able to judge what should be financially acceptable for a particular player. So for example how would they have known not to give Habib Beye such a long lucrative contract, but have known to get say Ashley Young tied down to a longer contract. And when the manger proposes N'Zogbia as a replacement for Ashley Young - the board's first instinct will be get him tied down to as long a contract as possible - because the guy in charge of the football side of things reckons they should. But if the board has an advisor say, for talk's sake Houllier - how can they be sure what their advisor says is going to tally up with what Lambert is recommending. Would Houllier have 'sanctioned' the Lowton deal for example? The board is in a tough position either way. Arsenal and Wenger seem to be in a good position as Wenger has clearly bought into maintaining the club's financial position at all times, even as they're losing their best players. In return they trust him to buy whoever he wants, and negotiate contracts. Well, according to your logic a football club cannot be run in a financially responsible manner unless the guy who provides the money also has the footballing knowhow to do all the deals himself. I don't find this to be the case in most teams and wherever this happens, cough Chelsea cough, the results are rarely positive. In business, management delegates responsibilities to people, who work within a predefined set of rules to the best interest of the club or owner. Whether the responsible people are a number of advisors, or a director of football or the manager himself is up to the higher management - and so is the overall responsibilty for the business results. In Villa's case - if Lerner hasn't been able to hire people with the good footballing knowhow to do good deadls, then that's his problem and his responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Well, according to your logic a football club cannot be run in a financially responsible manner unless the guy who provides the money also has the footballing knowhow to do all the deals himself. I don't find this to be the case in most teams and wherever this happens, cough Chelsea cough, the results are rarely positive. In business, management delegates responsibilities to people, who work within a predefined set of rules to the best interest of the club or owner. Whether the responsible people are a number of advisors, or a director of football or the manager himself is up to the higher management - and so is the overall responsibilty for the business results. In Villa's case - if Lerner hasn't been able to hire people with the good footballing knowhow to do good deadls, then that's his problem and his responsibility. That's not actually my logic - I'm just looking at it from two different perspectives - Most good managers won't allow the board to police their transfer policy and decide who's worth the money - O'Neill certainly didn't. So the club have to hand over much of that responsibility to the manager within an overall budget. The ideal situation is when the manager knows and understands the financial implications of everything he does on the club - and will himself take the responsibility for the effect it will have on the club long term. This is something that Wenger clearly does, and strangely something that Redknapp seems to be doing at QPR by saying he's not going to risk bringing in big signings if he feels the club will go down. The Chelsea situation is an extreme - but can you really say the results are rarely positive? They're the current European Champions. I think their plan to be self sustaining within a certain period is also ahead of schedule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 That's not actually my logic - I'm just looking at it from two different perspectives - Most good managers won't allow the board to police their transfer policy and decide who's worth the money - O'Neill certainly didn't. So the club have to hand over much of that responsibility to the manager within an overall budget. The ideal situation is when the manager knows and understands the financial implications of everything he does on the club - and will himself take the responsibility for the effect it will have on the club long term. This is something that Wenger clearly does, and strangely something that Redknapp seems to be doing at QPR by saying he's not going to risk bringing in big signings if he feels the club will go down. The Chelsea situation is an extreme - but can you really say the results are rarely positive? They're the current European Champions. I think their plan to be self sustaining within a certain period is also ahead of schedule? Well, it obviously is a balance between what the manager wants and what the board can afford to get. The key is to negotiate and find this balance. It's very easy to blame someone, say the board gives O'Neill a budget of 200k per week for the transfer window and he buys Beye on wages that are high but within the set budget - then who's fault is it? I say both are wrong. Every football club has a team that should be both financially aware and with enough footballing knowledge, so that they would make the decisions in the best interest of the club. Now, obviously they'll make mistakes, but overall they should be steering the club forward. This hasn't been happening at Villa for a while now and with quite a few different managers. Also, as much as I agree that managers don't want to be controlled by the board, it is very naive to think that the manager himself does all of the transfer business, from the fee negotiating to the contract detials. As for Chelsea, they have been successful because Abramovich has more money than common sense, but I'd argue they would have been even more successful if he had let Mourinho do his thing and hadn't fired him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 That's not actually my logic - I'm just looking at it from two different perspectives - Most good managers won't allow the board to police their transfer policy and decide who's worth the money - O'Neill certainly didn't. So the club have to hand over much of that responsibility to the manager within an overall budget. The ideal situation is when the manager knows and understands the financial implications of everything he does on the club - and will himself take the responsibility for the effect it will have on the club long term. This is something that Wenger clearly does, and strangely something that Redknapp seems to be doing at QPR by saying he's not going to risk bringing in big signings if he feels the club will go down. The Chelsea situation is an extreme - but can you really say the results are rarely positive? They're the current European Champions. I think their plan to be self sustaining within a certain period is also ahead of schedule? The board should know much the club is spending, how much the club is making and what the future looks like regarding both those things. They failed to keep this under control under MoN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 11, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted December 11, 2012 They gambled under MON that we'd get CL and the increased revenue that comes along with it to balance the books. The mistake they made was putting so much faith in MON and allowing him to spend the money as he did. The board should know much the club is spending, how much the club is making and what the future looks like regarding both those things. They failed to keep this under control under MoN. But aren't you now saying we should be spending more? It seems to contradict your point above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 11, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 11, 2012 That wage bill would never have been sustainable even with achieving CL football though, we would have had to retain CL year in year out to sustain it. That is something that squad and that manager were never ever going to achieve. Even if they had significant wage increases would have been needed for the players. It was never sustainable, it was never under control and it was never managed. Martin O'Neill was like Augustus Gloop left with the keys to the sweet shop while our very own Willy Wonka was off faffing with his glass lift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBM Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 hangeland is a good shout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 11, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 11, 2012 But aren't you now saying we should be spending more? It seems to contradict your point above. With respect mate I don't think it does. The club has been run at two extremes, one where we pissed money up a wall for 4 years and now not enough is being spent in order to pay for the sins of the previous years. It is feast and famine stuff and the lack of financial control of the past seemingly has been reversed with too drastic cuts. Poor management on both fronts in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBM Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 the amount of money spent of sh it players is ridiculous, what a waste, over clubs certainly saw us coming and were laughing on the way to the bank... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 They gambled under MON that we'd get CL and the increased revenue that comes along with it to balance the books. The mistake they made was putting so much faith in MON and allowing him to spend the money as he did. But aren't you now saying we should be spending more? It seems to contradict your point above. Is this the maximum level of spending the club can manage? I don't expect out of control wage bills and hundreds of millions on fees but I think a club like ours should be able to spend more than what we did. Is that so unrealistic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Sky Sports understands a number of Premier League clubs are tracking Osasuna midfielder Raoul Loe. The all-action midfielder has impressed at Osasuna and his performances have alerted several Premier League sides. The 6ft 4in defensive midfielder, who has been likened to Patrick Vieira, has all the attributes to make him ideally suited for the physical nature of the Premier League. Newcastle, Aston Villa, West Brom, Norwich and Reading are all thought to have sent scouts to watch Loe in action this season. As a result of Osasuna's financial problems they may be forced to cash-in on Loe if any of his suitors firm up their interest in the player in January. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11677/8324771/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 That wage bill would never have been sustainable even with achieving CL football though, we would have had to retain CL year in year out to sustain it. That is something that squad and that manager were never ever going to achieve. Even if they had significant wage increases would have been needed for the players. It was never sustainable, it was never under control and it was never managed. Martin O'Neill was like Augustus Gloop left with the keys to the sweet shop while our very own Willy Wonka was off faffing with his glass lift. Agreed. Spurs were unable to cement a top 4 place. We had no chance. The club was run so badly that champions league football would not have fixed all our problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts