Jump to content

Can Someone please explain


PussEKatt
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am not a soccer analyst and some of the stuff going down at AVFC is very puzzling to me.Perhaps someone can explain it to me ?!

Ok,first off, I dont understand PLs tactics.I watched Man Shitty today and Mancini put Lescott on to defend their lead in the 75th minute.PL put Dawkins on when we were under real pressure to keep a point ? Lescott is a defender put on to help them defend their lead,Dawkins replaced a forward ( Zog ) 

2nd - Arsenal have been in the top 4 of the Premier League for 10 seasons streight,so Lambert must have known it would not be a walk in the park.So why were Marshall,Dawkins and Bowery even in the squad ? let alone on the field ?

3rd - I dont understand PL,s team selections.I always thought you would put out the best team avaiable ? Surely Dawkins and Bowery can,t be better than Bent,Ireland,Bannan,Allbrighton. ? And as for Marshall, surely if Guzan got injured in the warm-up or on the pitch Given would be better than Marshall ? 

While I am on the subject I might as well ask for explinations on the money situation that I dont understand either.

Ok, so MON got us to 6th for 3 seasons in a row, and apparently we overspent.I can understand that BUt we were in europe, we had long cup runs so we must have made more money than we are now ? I fail to see how losing games and fighting relegation can be worth more money ?

What about players ? we have to move the high erners on.Ok I can understand that as well BUT.

West Ham can afford Collins,Sunderland can afford Cuella, does that mean that we cant even keep up with West Ham for spending ? Fulham bought Berbatov and West Ham have Carrol on loan.....we have Dawkins.I am sure we cant even look at players like Berbatov and Carrol.

Finally, Since MON left we have gone from 6th to 18th, so since then we have been going downhill rapidly.We need to put the breaks on,now.Lambert has had a whole season and we have only got worse.

FFS, someone explain to me WTF is going on over there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lerner has put the breaks on the £££

He is looking for a return on his capital outlay (even though he's had way above bank % rates on his loans). Basically don't be fooled, Lerner has not put a single cent into this club. It's all about investment and return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lerner has put the breaks on the £££

He is looking for a return on his capital outlay (even though he's had way above bank % rates on his loans). Basically don't be fooled, Lerner has not put a single cent into this club. It's all about investment and return.

Well he is going to get **** all return the way we are playing and if/when we go down he will get a lot less than he is getting now.

I think a lot of these questions are rhetorical and/ or unanswerable.

And you probably know that, you varmint!

Its been about 5 years since I was last called a Varment. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the first question it was probably because he wanted to keep a threat up. If you take an attacking player off for a defender you give the opponents the advantage of being able to attack with more players as your own threat is lessened. I'd put on Sylla, so I felt like you did, But there's no wrong or right about it. Just a choice you make.

 

And on the players left out, well, I'm quite sure he has his reasons to not even include them on the bench. I trust Lambert on this one. Just because they've got experience doesn't mean they are the better options. In fact, none of them have been very good this season, and Ireland hasn't been very good at all. And some of them might've been injured.

 

For the economy part, well, do we really know that wham and sunderland can afford those players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter

1st - Do we have any defenders good enough to bring on in that situation off the bench? I imagine his thinking was add some fresh legs in Dawkins and maybe we'd keep the ball better further up the pitch and defend from the front.

 

2nd - We have no-one else to put on the bench. Given was injured, for example, which is why marshall was there

 

3rd - Again, injuries dictated it. I think the XI who started were th ebest available. Obviously opinion might dictate one or two places but it was abotu as strong as we could manage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is looking for a return on his capital outlay (even though he's had way above bank % rates on his loans). Basically don't be fooled, Lerner has not put a single cent into this club. It's all about investment and return.

 

 

Please don't talk rubbish.

 

Look at the accounts, Lerner has put a lot of money into Villa, with virtually zero chance of getting his money back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is looking for a return on his capital outlay (even though he's had way above bank % rates on his loans). Basically don't be fooled, Lerner has not put a single cent into this club. It's all about investment and return.

 

 

Please don't talk rubbish.

 

Look at the accounts, Lerner has put a lot of money into Villa, with virtually zero chance of getting his money back. 

He must have got heaps back from the sale of Milner,Young and Downing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter

That money either got spent, or invested into the club to cover the huge debts we're running up.

 

This baffling idea some people seem to have that Lerner sits there and goes "Ooooooh 20 million for James MIlner. That'll pay for my next Yacht" and pockets the cash is ludicrous.

 

Fine if you think he should be investing more. It's a legitimate argument and one I'd agree with about now. But to think he's actually taking money from the sales of players and filling his boots is nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not saying that he is taking money from the sale of players and keeping it.What I am saying is that it has not all been a loss, he has recieved a lot of money from the sale of those players ( more than we paid for them ) what he does with the money is up to him but the $$$ has not all been going out, a lot has been comming in as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't buy a mid-table football club in England with the idea of making lots of money. Period.

 

One does not have to have a Masters degree to understand that, but obviously a few on here thinks he is here to make money from his investment.

If you asked Randy himself about the total books, I think he would present a pretty red figure to everyone. Institutional investors could buy superclubs like Man Utd and sell them on like the Glazers might do, but that is a totally different league. Because of their guaranteed success, endorsements and brand value all over the world they generate money and can spend from own revenue, we cannot and Lerner knew that.

 

It has taken him millions from his own pocket just to cover losses and pay wages, so who cares about the interest payments from the club which is basically a smart move to avoid bank loans and restrictive covenants? He lends us money, we cover losses and pay wages as well as buying players, he gets some interest back which we can write off on our taxes - however- the club isn't making money and thus he is losing money on his "investment" every year. If you go back in time and check the books, how much have we paid in terms of interest, how much has he plowed into the club as fresh capital to cover the books? If you don't know these figures then you damn sure shouldn't criticise Lerner for trying to make money from this project. Every time we buy a player it comes right from Lerner's pocket because the club is skint without his willingness to help the cause, and if he wanted to make money from a 64M initial lay-out and several more millions during the years he could have invested in treasury bonds and the stock market and made a whole lot more money virtually risk-free compared to this football club. SURE, his success and reputation as a chairman has gone down and we are performing badly - but in terms of finances go the only thing we can bitch about is the fact that he is not rich enough! Not a human right after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That money either got spent, or invested into the club to cover the huge debts we're running up.

 

This baffling idea some people seem to have that Lerner sits there and goes "Ooooooh 20 million for James MIlner. That'll pay for my next Yacht" and pockets the cash is ludicrous.

 

Fine if you think he should be investing more. It's a legitimate argument and one I'd agree with about now. But to think he's actually taking money from the sales of players and filling his boots is nonsense.

Hes going to need a yacht because his current ship is sinking.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

 

...he's had way above bank % rates on his loans). Basically don't be fooled, Lerner has not put a single cent into this club. It's all about investment and return.

That's complete and utter bollocks. Totally wrong in every fact.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...
Â