Is our recent fall from grace all Paul Faulkners fault?

[kevangrealish]

It's not 100 per cent his fault at all. But as mentioned he's probably the most to blame IMO.

 

An american multi millionaire buys a club and hires him as the expert. He gets MON in and no doubt he was the one who was the middle man between Lerner and MON.

 

Meaning Lerner didn't have a massive idea of who or what to spend his money on and it came down to Faulkner as the expert in it all.

 

Letting MON buy all the junk he wanted then no doubt had a massive say within what managers to bring in next. And as we know that has also been a disaster.

[Big_John_10]

It's not 100 per cent his fault at all. But as mentioned he's probably the most to blame IMO.

 

An american multi millionaire buys a club and hires him as the expert. He gets MON in and no doubt he was the one who was the middle man between Lerner and MON.

 

Meaning Lerner didn't have a massive idea of who or what to spend his money on and it came down to Faulkner as the expert in it all.

 

Letting MON buy all the junk he wanted then no doubt had a massive say within what managers to bring in next. And as we know that has also been a disaster.

I don't think Faulkner was around for the whole of MON's management.

And once again how can the blame be put on Faulkner? If Lerner hires a man with no football experience to make key decisions about the club then the blame falls 100% of Lerner.

[brummybloke]

I believe Faulkner was a major part in our last 3 managers

 

I remember the photo of him smugly laughing with randy at the airport, 4 hours later MON is gone

 

I also think he recommended our next 2 managers, sniffing and scratching around and asking other managers who they think we should have, the 'letter' of recommendation from fergie springs to mind for the ginger one.

 

I think after messing up he has been given less power in regards to managers, hence we now have lambert.

 

I think if randy trusts someone he gives them total control over what ever project it is, this is clearly a mistake.

 

 

all just my thoughts, im not saying any of it is correct .

Edited March 22, 2013 by brummybloke

[TheSufferingVilla]

Learner bought a football club and put his personal assistant in charge while Lerner pissed off to manage other affairs. Faulkner had no knowledge of the football business or any relevant experience. Lerner might as well have given the job to Dorris the tea lady.

[Adbo9]

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.

 

Yes, but Steve Stride was part of the upper echelons of the club when our fans decided the last chairman was to blame for everything........ even though we were in the top few highest spenders in the league, and level for level, signed more exclusive players compared to what we have since RL stepped over the seas.......

[smetrov]

A good whack ...say 70% of it is his fault.

 

He is the key implementer of the ridiculous notion that Aston Villa Can't\Won't\Shouldn't pay the going rate for a premiership footballer.  Until that policy is shown up for what it is - we will continue to slide .....irrespective of whether or not we stay up this season.  

[CI]

Anyone see the pics of him & Lerner on the OS watching the players train pre QPR

Who is the guy on Faulkners right ?

[blandy]

Steve Stride was part of the upper echelons of the club when our fans decided the last chairman was to blame for everything...

My analysis is that this is kind of a key point. One of the reasons that the last chairman got a lot of flack (there were many, but let's stick to just one for the moment) was that he ran the club as a kind of personal fiefdom, interfering in everything, thinking he knew best about everything, failing to bring in expert advice, and having a board that was basically him and a few yes men, Stride included. He ran the club like he owned it even though he didn't - it was a plc. and he owned only a third of it.

What we have now is someone who is the owner, but who also has a board made up solely of a very few trusted associates. Again, there's no football expertise on the board.

Stride seemed very capable at the administration tasks that a football club secretary should be good at - registering players, complying with regulations and so on. He wasn't and isn't some kind of football genius. He was part of the three-man FA commission who decided by 2-1 that Wimbledon FC should be allowed to move to Milton Keynes, he voted in favour.

He, by his own admission did things the Ellis way.

So the similarity is that the two boards are both set up to do things exactly how the Chairman/Owner wants them done, and that there is a lack of breadth or depth of varied experience and knowledge to both set ups. It's a weakness common to both Randy and Ellis.

Of course the "leader" will not want people with with constantly dissenting views to be on his team, but that shouldn't mean a bunch of "yes" men who add little wider knowledge.

Paul Faulkner, like Stride is reportedly a lovely bloke and very capable at what he does, but ultimately they were both there to do exactly what they were told to do by the boss.

What we don't know with Faulkner is how much autonomy he has been given. We don't know whether he's just left to do what he thinks best to achieve whatever objectives he's set, or whether he's told exactly how to do things.

For (hypothetical) example is he told "make sure that wages make up no more than X% of income" or is he told "make sure that no new contract can be for more than 30K per week and no player may be bought for more than 6 million..."

Unless anyone knows the extent to which he is permitted to make decisions, it's not possible to accurately place responsibility.

What is the case, both with HDE and the current set up is that the board, plus manager, collectively are responsible for the overall state of the club.

My feeling is that the strategy as to how the club is run, and to an extent the football ethos was set by Randy, in consultation with Paul Faulkner and Paul Lambert - along the lines of a move towards self sustaining levels of income and expenditure, investment in players to be aimed at the potential to recoup that investment (in contrast to the earlier lack of care in that area). Also to have the team play attractive football that people want to watch (as opposed to the tedious drivel of the previous Manager). There was probably a feeling that the squad should make use of players who come through the system - spending all that money on facilities and so on, and then getting nothing for it was probably thought to be daft. The idea would have been to supplement the academy graduates with players from outside, well scouted, to fill the gaps, but that they would need to be of the right age and price bracket.

To me at least that seems like that's the situation, and if it is, then I'm not sure really that we're that far off it, so it would look like PF is fulfilling his core remit.

Of course all that doesn't focus on what fans look at - league placing and victories. And here there's obviously major cause for concern, as well as some reason for cautious optimism.

I've said this before, but it's been a major kind of experiment in making that change in approach to the way the club is run so drastically quickly. If it works and we stay up and are set well as a result, then they'll deserve some credit for doing it successfully. Equally it's high risk, and risks the club being relegated in the course of it.

If that happens then primarily I'd look at Randy and Paul Lambert as being more responsible for it than Faulkner.

[smetrov]

Good post - and I agree with a lot of it.

 

However with Doug he was at the club day in, day out - Lerner isn't. IMO therefore Faulkner runs the club on a day to day basis....I would say he has a sizeable input into fees paid, salaries spent ect

[dont_do_it_doug.]

I was chatting yesterday with the owner of a marketing research organisation that Villa used to use. In the sports world they act as a kind of go between for the potential sponsors and the clubs/organisations that are looking for benefactors.

Say Villa want a new motor industry brand partnership. They would inform this company of their needs, the company would go off and 'interview' potential partners and then sell this information to The Villa.

Villa, instead of taking the list, communicating with the research company and coming to an agreement, would go over their head and ring every single brand on the list themselves, regardless of whether they were interested in Aston Villa or not. Thus negating the need for the research in the first place and breaking all sorts of confidentiality agreements along the way.

It's not a cheap service either. So not only was it wholly unprofessional but they were pissing money up the wall needlessly too. This research company broke off the relationship with Villa because it was a damaging one for them regardless of the financial implications.

All legit stuff, take it for what it's worth.

Edited March 24, 2013 by dont_do_it_doug.

[GonzoAvfc]

Anyone see the pics of him & Lerner on the OS watching the players train pre QPR

Who is the guy on Faulkners right ?

 

That is Brian Doogan, Head of Media. He was the guy who was on the BBC WM football phone in a few weeks ago.

[CI]

Anyone see the pics of him & Lerner on the OS watching the players train pre QPR

Who is the guy on Faulkners right ?

 

That is Brian Doogan, Head of Media. He was the guy who was on the BBC WM football phone in a few weeks ago.

Ok cheers, he came across a bit deluded in that wm phone in.

[blandy]

I was chatting yesterday with the owner of a marketing research organisation that Villa used to use. 

Ho long ago did the club used to use that org? I know for a fact of similar instances when HDE was Chairman - was it under or him, or RL these people were talking about?

[Richard]

So we have gone from one owner who had a board of yes men and not much clue about football to , an owner with a board of yes men and not much clue about football.

Bright future indeed. Fwiw Faulkner is a decent bloke, although a little out of his depth IMHO.

[CI]

I'd love to see Jaguar Land Rover on the shirt again.

[Richard]

I'd love to see Jaguar Land Rover on the shirt again.

funny I'd like to see another star on the shirt personally

[CI]

I'd love to see Jaguar Land Rover on the shirt again.

funny I'd like to see another star on the shirt personally

Yeah me too but realistically we are a minimum of 5-7 years away from that .

[Kiwivillan]

Faulkner is responsible for driving MON into the arms of Sunderland who we can only wish we were where they are in the table right now

[BG_Villa_Fan]

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.

 

You mean like improving the wages to revenue %? Oh wait...

[smetrov]

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.

 

You mean like improving the wages to revenue %? Oh wait...

 

Any fool can cut wages. Its really not difficult. The trick is to cut wages, whilst remaining competetive on the field. We have certainly cut the wages......but the on pitch results have gone through the floor.