The Randy Lerner thread

[MMFy]

Well the articles says -

'Paul Gilroy has a particular interest in sports-related litigation. He recently successfully acted for Martin O’Neill in his wrongful dismissal claim against Aston Villa before the FA Premier League Tribunal'

So I don't need to be careful with my use of words do I?

Very interesting and will no doubt be ignored.

Also backs up what MON said when he joined Sunderland about never breaking a contract.

And yet people still believe he walked out 5 days before the season started to try and **** the club over.

I think two men fell out about how they wanted to do things, maybe they didn't even fall out, maybe they just saw things differently - one didn't want to sack the other, he wanted him to walk, one didn't want to walk, he wanted to be pushed - both of those positions were about money, maybe also for Lerner there was the thing about not being seen as having been the man who sacked a manager who'd done well and was seen as a figurehead.

I think Lerner then started to back Martin into a corner, cut off his cash supply, remove some of his supports and wait for him to go - in this sort of situation O'Neill will always leave - he's a very good manager of a football team, a decent manager of a football club, but he's an exceptional manager of brand O'Neill and he wouldn't have stuck around to dirty his reputation on a club in our position.

O'Neill won. He got to leave, by the sounds of things he got to be pushed, or at least pushed hard enough that he got to keep his reputation and he got his money.

Whether or not he also got to **** Lerner over for his troubles by walking out five days before the season started is a subject of conjecture - I think it's fair to say it wouldn't have caused him any discomfort.

Ultimately, the two men both did the thing they've been good at for the last few years - Martin O'Neill looked after Martin O'Neill and left another club with mixed feelings. Randy Lerner made a poor decision and spent a lot of money that might have been more use elsewhere.

Strangely, it would have worked out a lot better if he'd just sacked him.

Some good points there, and well made.

One things still wrangles me though. MON was only on one-year rolling contracts, as he stated himself. He would have known the financial situation prior to agreeing to retain his position as Aston Villa manager in the summer of 2010, but still agreed to retain the position.

That, I believe, leaves only a couple of possibilities:

• 1. Randy promised MON a pot of money for transfers to get him to sign on for another year, then withdrew his financial support. Randy = bad.
  
  2. MON pushed Randy too far with unreasonable or financially questionable request/s to sign player/s. MON = bad.
  
  3. MON failed to understand the financial constraints under which he was asked to operate. MON = **** stupid

[MMFy]

Other than MON walked out a few months before also but Lerner persuaded him back

How did he do that? What did he promise MON and did he then not follow through ?

Why did he walk out?

[Denis_B]

It's not a matter of retaining his position. With a rolling contract all it means is every day he gets up he has a 12 month contract, it doesn't get renewed each year. However, the point about knowing the financial situation is correct that is why I believe he fecked us over walking when he did

[DeepDish]

Well the articles says -

'Paul Gilroy has a particular interest in sports-related litigation. He recently successfully acted for Martin O’Neill in his wrongful dismissal claim against Aston Villa before the FA Premier League Tribunal'

So I don't need to be careful with my use of words do I?

Very interesting and will no doubt be ignored.

Also backs up what MON said when he joined Sunderland about never breaking a contract.

And yet people still believe he walked out 5 days before the season started to try and **** the club over.

I think two men fell out about how they wanted to do things, maybe they didn't even fall out, maybe they just saw things differently - one didn't want to sack the other, he wanted him to walk, one didn't want to walk, he wanted to be pushed - both of those positions were about money, maybe also for Lerner there was the thing about not being seen as having been the man who sacked a manager who'd done well and was seen as a figurehead.

I think Lerner then started to back Martin into a corner, cut off his cash supply, remove some of his supports and wait for him to go - in this sort of situation O'Neill will always leave - he's a very good manager of a football team, a decent manager of a football club, but he's an exceptional manager of brand O'Neill and he wouldn't have stuck around to dirty his reputation on a club in our position.

O'Neill won. He got to leave, by the sounds of things he got to be pushed, or at least pushed hard enough that he got to keep his reputation and he got his money.

Whether or not he also got to **** Lerner over for his troubles by walking out five days before the season started is a subject of conjecture - I think it's fair to say it wouldn't have caused him any discomfort.

Ultimately, the two men both did the thing they've been good at for the last few years - Martin O'Neill looked after Martin O'Neill and left another club with mixed feelings. Randy Lerner made a poor decision and spent a lot of money that might have been more use elsewhere.

Strangely, it would have worked out a lot better if he'd just sacked him.

Some good points there, and well made.

One things still wrangles me though. MON was only on one-year rolling contracts, as he stated himself. He would have known the financial situation prior to agreeing to retain his position as Aston Villa manager in the summer of 2010, but still agreed to retain the position.

That, I believe, leaves only a couple of possibilities:

• 1. Randy promised MON a pot of money for transfers to get him to sign on for another year, then withdrew his financial support. Randy = bad.
  
  2. MON pushed Randy too far with unreasonable or financially questionable request/s to sign player/s. MON = bad.
  
  3. MON failed to understand the financial constraints under which he was asked to operate. MON = **** stupid

I see a fourth possibility: MON tried to get rid of players in the summer to live under the financial constraints, but failed to get Young, Sidwell and others off the books. Then he engineered a fallout.

[Big_John_10]

Mon said he has never broke a contract.

He took the club to court for wrongful dismissal

The club agreed to pay him.

Doesn't look good on our part

[CI]

Other than MON walked out a few months before also but Lerner persuaded him back

How did he do that? What did he promise MON and did he then not follow through ?

Why did he walk out?

Not sure, some rumours at the time were he was making himself available to Liverpool others that he'd lost a lot of the dressing room others about not being given funds for more dross

[terrytini]

Thank you to those who kindly pointed out that MON had won "NOTHING" (why the capitals ?), but I was aware of that, just as I was aware that we won 2 League Cups under Little and Atkinson.

And, whilst handing out the 'most patronising person of the day' awards, thanks to the guy who said people need to 'understand' the various types of dismissal...knew that too.

None of which alters the fact that quite a number of people had hissy fits at MON leaving when it was, is, and always will be clear that it was Lerner who was responsible for him leaving, and for where we are now.

[TrentVilla]

I don't think there are many people who dispute the view that Lerner is ultimately responsible for the position we are in now. That said it doesn't mean that O'Neill doesn't have some responsibility for some of our problems or that people have to forgive him for walking out when he did.

This thread is about Lerner not O'Neill.

[flamingsombrero]

Thank you to those who kindly pointed out that MON had won "NOTHING" (why the capitals ?), but I was aware of that, just as I was aware that we won 2 League Cups under Little and Atkinson.

And, whilst handing out the 'most patronising person of the day' awards, thanks to the guy who said people need to 'understand' the various types of dismissal...knew that too.

None of which alters the fact that quite a number of people had hissy fits at MON leaving when it was, is, and always will be clear that it was Lerner who was responsible for him leaving, and for where we are now.

I think you may have just pipped him to it.

[smetrov]

I had a thought today - is Randy pursuing a scorched earth policy at villa ? - it sounds daft - but it would sure answer a lot of things

[KHV]

A helluva lot of people with egg on their never-satisfied faces as it grows more and more clear that MON did not walk out.

It was pretty clear to a lot of us a the time, and the abuse our most sucessful Manager - bar Saunders (and Barton ?) - since the war has been a disgrace.

our most succesful manger since the war :shock: :shock: :shock:

Taylor won promotion and finished 2nd

Big Ron finished 2nd and won the league cup

Little finished 4th, won the league cup and reached FA cup semi

Gregory finished top 6 twice, reached an FA cup final and reached UEFA cup 1/4 final

Eric Houghton won the FA cup in 1957

Jo Mercer won promotion and the league cup

Vic Crowe won promotion in the 70's

I would say they were more succesful than MON since the war.

[P3te]

"I think it's a very natural reaction considering I've been gone two years and they've never known my reasons for leaving. I was expecting it and I got it"

mon in his post match interview

note the bit in bold

[P3te]

re mon saying he's never broken a contract... it's probable that he believes lerner broke the contract, leading to constructive dismissal. however if that's the case, mon wouldve been the one who walked

its just that in HIS OPINION he didnt break a contract that was already broken

[TrentVilla]

"I think it's a very natural reaction considering I've been gone two years and they've never known my reasons for leaving. I was expecting it and I got it"

mon in his post match interview

note the bit in bold

Interesting that from the man himself the idea he was fired seems to have been dismissed.....perhaps the unguarded utterances of a venerable octogenarian are were as ridiculous as some thought.

[Harry]

He did win the case in effect because the club paid him and they wouldn't have done that if they weren't in the wrong.

I don't know why people are still arguing the contrary so hard in the face of all the facts.

The fact is he didn't win the case.

The fact is that he quit and claimed constructive dismissal.

The fact is that Randy must have made changes that O'Neill believed made his job impossible to continue in.

The fact is O'Neill walked out 5 days before the season.

The fact is the case like many others was settled before its conclusion, many of which are done because its the cheapest option.

I agree that O'Neill more than likely had a good case, I agree that he would likely have won but he didn't win. He wasn't sacked and he did quit.

Those are the facts there really isn't much else to be said.

Thank you for some common sense. I'm sick of reading some of the hysterical comments on this thread and the Pat Murphy esque love in with all things MON.

[ender4]

At least its now been confirmed as 100% fact by MON himself, that he did walk out on Villa.

I think it's a very natural reaction considering I've been gone two years and they've never known my reasons for leaving.

[TRO]

...yeah its all Randy's fault.

He gives him c 100 million to spend he buys in the best part junk and when he gets told we need to recover some of the money on the junk.... throws his teddy.

poor ole Martin

ps I'll bet some of our previous managers would have loved the funds Martin Got.

[Delphinho123]

At least its now been confirmed as 100% fact by MON himself, that he did walk out on Villa.

I think it's a very natural reaction considering I've been gone two years and they've never known my reasons for leaving.

:!:

That does nothing to confirm anything.

[TRO]

At least its now been confirmed as 100% fact by MON himself, that he did walk out on Villa.

I think it's a very natural reaction considering I've been gone two years and they've never known my reasons for leaving.

...Never doubted he walked.

He can't be told, but he expects his subordinates to pay heed to HIS commands.

it seems quite obvious to me the poor purchases i.e ( too high a fee and too high a wage for below average players, in the majority of cases) could not continue.

[Risso]

A helluva lot of people with egg on their never-satisfied faces as it grows more and more clear that MON did not walk out.

It was pretty clear to a lot of us a the time, and the abuse our most sucessful Manager - bar Saunders (and Barton ?) - since the war has been a disgrace.

our most succesful manger since the war :shock: :shock: :shock:

Taylor won promotion and finished 2nd

Big Ron finished 2nd and won the league cup

Little finished 4th, won the league cup and reached FA cup semi

Gregory finished top 6 twice, reached an FA cup final and reached UEFA cup 1/4 final

Eric Houghton won the FA cup in 1957

Jo Mercer won promotion and the league cup

Vic Crowe won promotion in the 70's

I would say they were more succesful than MON since the war.

Maybe he meant the second Iraq war?