El-Reacho Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 (edited) It's all about how the fans are seeing things. We don't know what his remit is to know whether he's doing a good job or not. We don't necessarily have any right to know what his remit is either. The club don't have to supply the fans with a figure to vent their anger at - much as we would like it. He might be exceptional at what he does as an administrator etc. I reckon any footballing decisions that have been made have been done at the recommendation of the coaching staff and signed off by him. Edited March 21, 2013 by El-Reacho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Finally and this is just a small data point but for me a telling one, there was a period of a couple of months last year when he was in full charge of the club. no interim manager just him and his judgement. At that time he specifically chose to let Guzan go. If true then surely you blame the man who decided to give someone like Paul Faulkner that much control. Lerner of course is at the top but he also is a busy man whose primary focus is not the club. You can blame lerner for everything bad in the club if you want but the op was asking a question about Faulkner who is in a very powerful position at the club. In this case I think Lerner's employee has let him down badly.Did Faulkner let Guzan go ? Or Eck ? Guzan was released after Eck left. Regardless Faulkner had a window there to do whatever he liked. In that one case he had no manager to hide behind and he made a bad call. I cant remember but I think Heskey was also released in that time (could be wrong) so we can give him credit for that if we like. Many rumours were that there always was an offer on the table for guzan but he wanted to see what his options were..guzan would've been mad to sign a contract with no manager in place.. Faulkner can hardly be blamed for that... No one(on here) knows what his job is and therefore whether he is doing well or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 In this case I think Lerner's employee has let him down badly. If you think he's let him down then ask the question why Lerner gave this job to a man with absolutely no experience in professional football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciggiesnbeer Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 In this case I think Lerner's employee has let him down badly. If you think he's let him down then ask the question why Lerner gave this job to a man with absolutely no experience in professional football. I can. But why are you so keen to defer the blame for him doing a crappy job to his boss? By the same logic you should blame Faulkner for our managers. Why dont we just embrace both truths, Faulkner is crap at his job and Lerner is crap as an owner for keeping him employed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsonp Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 He's the head honcho in the uk so yes, he takes some of the blame. Non football man, yes man, bag carrier. At least Steve stride knew his football. I guess hindsite is wonderful, I remember a lot of crap thrown Steve Stride's way at the time saying he was a yes man under Doug Ellis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsonp Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 He's the head honcho in the uk so yes, he takes some of the blame. Non football man, yes man, bag carrier. At least Steve stride knew his football. I guess hindsite is wonderful, I remember a lot of crap thrown Steve Stride's way at the time saying he was a yes man under Doug Ellis Sorry, meant hindsight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 I think Falkner is doing exactly what he has been hired to do. In that respect you would have to say he's doing an excellent job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted March 22, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted March 22, 2013 Is it all Faulkner's fault? Nope. Has Faulkner played a part? Definitely. The owner, the board, the manager, the players - all have played a part. So who is to blame? Ultimately, the buck stops with the owner. After all, he appointed them and pays their wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 If lambert had only signed one striker in Bowery during the summer and played him every game, and even when he's performing badly week in week out kept starting him. Who are you blaming Bowery or Lambert? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 Faulkner is just a mouthpiece of Lerner, all decisions are made by Lerner. Alex McLeish was appointed by LERNER, PF just follows his instructions. To be fair I ain't Faulkner's biggest fan but he has increased revenue off the field, with all the sponsorships etc. We may blame Faulkner now but what I would say in a few years we may look at it and think actually he saved our club, because the way it was being ran under MON/Lerner which was not sustainable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Folski Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 In fairness with Guzan, if you had a goal keeper on 50k a week and your primary objective is to lower wages, I can see why he would not have offered Guzan a new contract, if a new manager came in and said they didn't want him that would be more wages on the books, making the managers job even more difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelle Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 I thought the deal with Guzan was quite clear. We offered him a contract but he wanted to see if he could go somewhere else where he thought he'd get a better chance of a starting place. He didn't get a better option and the rest is history. Hardly anything to blame Faulkner for. If Faulkner is appointed as ceo or something like that he has to take part of the blame, even if Lerner's the one who hired him. If my shift at work does something bad, like yesterday, it's my responsibility as I'm their leader. There's always a chain, but I've got the direct responsibility for that shift and I'm the one to blame. And if I do bad over and over again I'll be fired. The thing is, we don't really know how bad things are behind the scenes, do we? Football wise it's very bad, no doubt, but if we ride this rough path out we might be in a lot better state than we think we are now. But then again, if we go down things can't look good. My point is that I won't blame anyone before I know the whole picture and the result from it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 Let's say hypothetically you could sentence people for crimes against villa I'd give Faulkner say 4 years MON 8 years Lerner probably 4 aswell Warnock 10 years Ireland gets life 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 Faulkner is nothing more than Lerner's mouthpiece Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 Faulkner is nothing more than Lerner's codpiece Lo, I hath repaired thine statement. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcTheObsession Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 I reckon this is exactly what Lerner wants, fans saying 'it's all Faulkner's fault', deflecting the attention from himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelle Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 I really don't think he wants that. That would make no logic. Buy a club to pull it up from the shite and then appoint a guy to drag the club down again and lose money on it just to be able to blame him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 Its down to our poor choice of managers and our poor choice in replacing key players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swerbs Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 Faulkner as CEO is doing a steady job on the road to stabilizing the club's finances. I don't know what input he has into footballing matters so I can't comment on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts