Does anyone out there have any kind of confidence in Ashley at all?

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Oh, shush KaKa, he had principles and his honour to defend.

needed defending after lying to us all that he had the final say after milner went.

 

I put this somewhere else, but....

 

Wise 'Kev we're selling Milner' = no final say.

 

Wise 'Kev, we can bring in Schweinsteiger (or another) but we think that may leave us overloaded with wingers. Villa have offered £12m for Milner, we reckon that its a good deal and the German is a cracking player'.

 

Kev 'Well Ok, I'm not best pleased with losing Milner but if I can get a better player in (Schweinsteiger) then lets do it.

 

= Kev gives the go ahead and has not lied in any one of his statements up to September 1st.

 

Shame the replacement never came in.

 

Scenario 2 is highly plausible, and would give weight to Keegan going Ape Shit when he was told that Owen or Barton could be sold but we had better replacements coming in.

[madras]

In terms of giving examples, that has to be the worse one ive ever seen in my life.

 

If you don't like that example, try another one. Would you have been happy in January if Wise had been appointed manager - a job for which he at least had a little experience? If not, why are you happy for him to have an even more important role at the club?

 

Do you think Dennis Wise has the required background and experience to be the most important figure on the footballing side of the club? The one who not only ultimately chooses which players to buy and sell, but which coaches to hire and fire?

 

 

probably not but looking at it that way you wouldn't have wanted keegan first time round.how much he had to do with finding gutierrez and bringing coloccini in .I don't know but if he was involved he shoiuld take some credit and if xisco and gonzalez have nearly the same impact you should admit he does have some talent for the job.

[madras]

Oh, shush KaKa, he had principles and his honour to defend.

needed defending after lying to us all that he had the final say after milner went.

 

I put this somewhere else, but....

 

Wise 'Kev we're selling Milner' = no final say.

 

Wise 'Kev, we can bring in Schweinsteiger (or another) but we think that may leave us overloaded with wingers. Villa have offered £12m for Milner, we reckon that its a good deal and the German is a cracking player'.

 

Kev 'Well Ok, I'm not best pleased with losing Milner but if I can get a better player in (Schweinsteiger) then lets do it.

 

= Kev gives the go ahead and has not lied in any one of his statements up to September 1st.

 

Shame the replacement never came in.

 

Scenario 2 is highly plausible, and would give weight to Keegan going Ape s*** when he was told that Owen or Barton could be sold but we had better replacements coming in.

but thats not what he said in the press conference. he said HE decided and HE has the final say on ALL comings and goings.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Oh, shush KaKa, he had principles and his honour to defend.

needed defending after lying to us all that he had the final say after milner went.

 

I put this somewhere else, but....

 

Wise 'Kev we're selling Milner' = no final say.

 

Wise 'Kev, we can bring in Schweinsteiger (or another) but we think that may leave us overloaded with wingers. Villa have offered £12m for Milner, we reckon that its a good deal and the German is a cracking player'.

 

Kev 'Well Ok, I'm not best pleased with losing Milner but if I can get a better player in (Schweinsteiger) then lets do it.

 

= Kev gives the go ahead and has not lied in any one of his statements up to September 1st.

 

Shame the replacement never came in.

 

Scenario 2 is highly plausible, and would give weight to Keegan going Ape s*** when he was told that Owen or Barton could be sold but we had better replacements coming in.

but thats not what he said in the press conference. he said HE decided and HE has the final say on ALL comings and goings.

 

But if he agreed to selling Milner in order to bring in Schweinsteiger then he would have had the final say on both the sale and purchase.

[madras]

Oh, shush KaKa, he had principles and his honour to defend.

needed defending after lying to us all that he had the final say after milner went.

 

I put this somewhere else, but....

 

Wise 'Kev we're selling Milner' = no final say.

 

Wise 'Kev, we can bring in Schweinsteiger (or another) but we think that may leave us overloaded with wingers. Villa have offered £12m for Milner, we reckon that its a good deal and the German is a cracking player'.

 

Kev 'Well Ok, I'm not best pleased with losing Milner but if I can get a better player in (Schweinsteiger) then lets do it.

 

= Kev gives the go ahead and has not lied in any one of his statements up to September 1st.

 

Shame the replacement never came in.

 

Scenario 2 is highly plausible, and would give weight to Keegan going Ape s*** when he was told that Owen or Barton could be sold but we had better replacements coming in.

but thats not what he said in the press conference. he said HE decided and HE has the final say on ALL comings and goings.

 

But if he agreed to selling Milner in order to bring in Schweinsteiger then he would have had the final say on both the sale and purchase.

i repeat,he said all comings and goings and how is it the final say ? ie why did he walk out if he had the final say ?

[Guest optimistic nit]

Tbh I think Ashley has done a good job since he took us over. He cleared the debt, installed a progressive system that has succeeded in bringing in good players and shipping out bad ones whilst not spending lavish amounts of money and balancing the books in a way that will lead us to be able to spend better in the future, and just be in a more strong financial position as a club as opposed to one that could have gone under with the previous regime's policies.

 

1) When he bought the club, he bought the debt as well. Paying it was the most economical choice.

2) He's only brought in two players we know can lift the first team, one of them at a club record price for a defender.

3) Ameobi, Smith and Duff are still here; Carr and Ramage were out of contract. The "deadwood" would then be Rozenhal, Emre, Faye and Milner, two of them first team players -- one of which hasn't been replaced. That's pretty fucking progressive.

4) "Will lead us to be able to spend better in the future". And I'm sure they'll promise to do so, yet again. I'm willing to bet that they won't.

 

 

 

 

 

1) its about time someone put this shit argument to bed. whether it was the most economical choice or not, the club was in a fuck load of debt which is now gone (unless he's just moved the debt around, but i've seen no evidence for this, but would love someone to show me why these rumours are here). that is a good thing he has done for the club, and if he didn't know about the debt (a mistake, but undestandible one, considering hall apparently only gave him a limited time to look at the books) then it will have affected his spending plans.

 

whether it was the most economical choice or not is irrevilent, it still saved the club and it still would have effected his spending plans.

 

2) wow, just wow. are you using the fact we've spent the club record for a defender as an argument AGAINST ashley? and you never KNOW how a transfer will turn out, but the 2 argies seem to be very astute signings so far. add to that what we've seen SO FAR of bassong and guthrie, they will both definately imrpove the squad if not the first team. so our recruitment team gets a vote of confidence from me.

 

3) Smith is only here because Keegan wanted him, Shola is only here because he failed a medical and Duff, i'm not sure, maybe we didn't want to sell, maybe we couldn't find any buyers, but with our squad it may be a good thing he's still here.

 

4) i dont know whether they plan to spend in the future or not, but i'm willing to bet they will spend if they can find the players to spend it on.

[Elliottman]

In terms of giving examples, that has to be the worse one ive ever seen in my life.

 

If you don't like that example, try another one. Would you have been happy in January if Wise had been appointed manager - a job for which he at least had a little experience? If not, why are you happy for him to have an even more important role at the club?

 

Do you think Dennis Wise has the required background and experience to be the most important figure on the footballing side of the club? The one who not only ultimately chooses which players to buy and sell, but which coaches to hire and fire?

 

 

 

Who has wise hired or fired that we know of for a fact??

 

A dof role is completly different to being on the training field with them. Wise has shown with our signings so far, he has a knack of spotting a good player. And to be fair, all arguments about back stabbing and who is to blame etc he has done a good job.

 

This doesnt mean i would acdept Jonathan Douglas as our manager.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Oh, shush KaKa, he had principles and his honour to defend.

needed defending after lying to us all that he had the final say after milner went.

 

I put this somewhere else, but....

 

Wise 'Kev we're selling Milner' = no final say.

 

Wise 'Kev, we can bring in Schweinsteiger (or another) but we think that may leave us overloaded with wingers. Villa have offered £12m for Milner, we reckon that its a good deal and the German is a cracking player'.

 

Kev 'Well Ok, I'm not best pleased with losing Milner but if I can get a better player in (Schweinsteiger) then lets do it.

 

= Kev gives the go ahead and has not lied in any one of his statements up to September 1st.

 

Shame the replacement never came in.

 

Scenario 2 is highly plausible, and would give weight to Keegan going Ape s*** when he was told that Owen or Barton could be sold but we had better replacements coming in.

but thats not what he said in the press conference. he said HE decided and HE has the final say on ALL comings and goings.

 

But if he agreed to selling Milner in order to bring in Schweinsteiger then he would have had the final say on both the sale and purchase.

i repeat,he said all comings and goings and how is it the final say ? ie why did he walk out if he had the final say ?

 

Lets put it another way.

 

IF we had signed Schweinstieger after the Milner deal had been completed would you agree that selling Milner has allowed the club to move forward - which is what Keegan had claimed.

 

And IF Wise had put the proposition to Keegan that it was a good deal all round and Keegan agreed to the sale and purchase then he is having the final say on the two transfers?

 

It was a cock up that Milner was sold before a replacement was secured (assuming the Schweinsteiger story is true), but that doesn't mean that players were sold behind his back.

 

It is of course as likely (if not more) that Keegan agreed to the sale of Milner PROVIDED that Schweinsteiger was bought.

 

As he obviously wasn't the walkout could have been over this and then the last minute purchases of Xisco and Gonzales who Keegan didn't think would replace Milner.

[Guest Edd]

It's funny how so many of the things that the vast majority viewed as positives a few weeks ago have suddenly become negatives since Keegan walked.

[madras]

Tbh I think Ashley has done a good job since he took us over. He cleared the debt, installed a progressive system that has succeeded in bringing in good players and shipping out bad ones whilst not spending lavish amounts of money and balancing the books in a way that will lead us to be able to spend better in the future, and just be in a more strong financial position as a club as opposed to one that could have gone under with the previous regime's policies.

 

1) When he bought the club, he bought the debt as well. Paying it was the most economical choice.

2) He's only brought in two players we know can lift the first team, one of them at a club record price for a defender.

3) Ameobi, Smith and Duff are still here; Carr and Ramage were out of contract. The "deadwood" would then be Rozenhal, Emre, Faye and Milner, two of them first team players -- one of which hasn't been replaced. That's pretty f***ing progressive.

4) "Will lead us to be able to spend better in the future". And I'm sure they'll promise to do so, yet again. I'm willing to bet that they won't.

 

 

 

 

 

1) its about time someone put this s*** argument to bed. whether it was the most economical choice or not, the club was in a f*** load of debt which is now gone (unless he's just moved the debt around, but i've seen no evidence for this, but would love someone to show me why these rumours are here). that is a good thing he has done for the club, and if he didn't know about the debt (a mistake, but undestandible one, considering hall apparently only gave him a limited time to look at the books) then it will have affected his spending plans.

 

whether it was the most economical choice or not is irrevilent, it still saved the club and it still would have effected his spending plans.

 

2) wow, just wow. are you using the fact we've spent the club record for a defender as an argument AGAINST ashley? and you never KNOW how a transfer will turn out, but the 2 argies seem to be very astute signings so far. add to that what we've seen SO FAR of bassong and guthrie, they will both definately imrpove the squad if not the first team. so our recruitment team gets a vote of confidence from me.

 

3) Smith is only here because Keegan wanted him, Shola is only here because he failed a medical and Duff, i'm not sure, maybe we didn't want to sell, maybe we couldn't find any buyers, but with our squad it may be a good thing he's still here.

 

4) i dont know whether they plan to spend in the future or not, but i'm willing to bet they will spend if they can find the players to spend it on.

don't think he was using the coloccini as a stick to beat ashley with but he was stating good and bad of the clubs dealings as he sees it.

 

i wish more would do this actually rather than just cherrypick there info to suit their side of the argument.

[Elliottman]

It's funny how so many of the things that the vast majority viewed as positives a few weeks ago have suddenly become negatives since Keegan walked.

 

its uncanny isnt it.

[madras]

Oh, shush KaKa, he had principles and his honour to defend.

needed defending after lying to us all that he had the final say after milner went.

 

I put this somewhere else, but....

 

Wise 'Kev we're selling Milner' = no final say.

 

Wise 'Kev, we can bring in Schweinsteiger (or another) but we think that may leave us overloaded with wingers. Villa have offered £12m for Milner, we reckon that its a good deal and the German is a cracking player'.

 

Kev 'Well Ok, I'm not best pleased with losing Milner but if I can get a better player in (Schweinsteiger) then lets do it.

 

= Kev gives the go ahead and has not lied in any one of his statements up to September 1st.

 

Shame the replacement never came in.

 

Scenario 2 is highly plausible, and would give weight to Keegan going Ape s*** when he was told that Owen or Barton could be sold but we had better replacements coming in.

but thats not what he said in the press conference. he said HE decided and HE has the final say on ALL comings and goings.

 

But if he agreed to selling Milner in order to bring in Schweinsteiger then he would have had the final say on both the sale and purchase.

i repeat,he said all comings and goings and how is it the final say ? ie why did he walk out if he had the final say ?

 

Lets put it another way.

 

IF we had signed Schweinstieger after the Milner deal had been completed would you agree that selling Milner has allowed the club to move forward - which is what Keegan had claimed.

 

And IF Wise had put the proposition to Keegan that it was a good deal all round and Keegan agreed to the sale and purchase then he is having the final say on the two transfers?

 

It was a cock up that Milner was sold before a replacement was secured (assuming the Schweinsteiger story is true), but that doesn't mean that players were sold behind his back.

 

It is of course as likely (if not more) that Keegan agreed to the sale of Milner PROVIDED that Schweinsteiger was bought.

 

As he obviously wasn't the walkout could have been over this and then the last minute purchases of Xisco and Gonzales who Keegan didn't think would replace Milner.

do you think he would walk because the club tried but failed to get a replacemnet.

 

my reading of the situation was that keegan left because the deals were being done (in and out) without his authority.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

It's funny how so many of the things that the vast majority viewed as positives a few weeks ago have suddenly become negatives since Keegan walked.

 

Word up.

 

That's what I find so irritating, the way everyone is completely forgetting how we saw the club up to a week ago.

[Guest optimistic nit]

i assumed he was countering AS9's pronouncements that we are not spending lavish ammounts by saying that we've just spent our record ammount for our defender, but you may be right, although if that is true it would be the only positive thing in the entire post, so i'm not completely convinced.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Tbh I think Ashley has done a good job since he took us over. He cleared the debt, installed a progressive system that has succeeded in bringing in good players and shipping out bad ones whilst not spending lavish amounts of money and balancing the books in a way that will lead us to be able to spend better in the future, and just be in a more strong financial position as a club as opposed to one that could have gone under with the previous regime's policies.

 

1) When he bought the club, he bought the debt as well. Paying it was the most economical choice.

2) He's only brought in two players we know can lift the first team, one of them at a club record price for a defender.

3) Ameobi, Smith and Duff are still here; Carr and Ramage were out of contract. The "deadwood" would then be Rozenhal, Emre, Faye and Milner, two of them first team players -- one of which hasn't been replaced. That's pretty fucking progressive.

4) "Will lead us to be able to spend better in the future". And I'm sure they'll promise to do so, yet again. I'm willing to bet that they won't.

 

 

 

 

 

1) its about time someone put this shit argument to bed. whether it was the most economical choice or not, the club was in a fuck load of debt which is now gone (unless he's just moved the debt around, but i've seen no evidence for this, but would love someone to show me why these rumours are here). that is a good thing he has done for the club, and if he didn't know about the debt (a mistake, but undestandible one, considering hall apparently only gave him a limited time to look at the books) then it will have affected his spending plans.

 

whether it was the most economical choice or not is irrevilent, it still saved the club and it still would have effected his spending plans.

 

2) wow, just wow. are you using the fact we've spent the club record for a defender as an argument AGAINST ashley? and you never KNOW how a transfer will turn out, but the 2 argies seem to be very astute signings so far. add to that what we've seen SO FAR of bassong and guthrie, they will both definately imrpove the squad if not the first team. so our recruitment team gets a vote of confidence from me.

 

3) Smith is only here because Keegan wanted him, Shola is only here because he failed a medical and Duff, i'm not sure, maybe we didn't want to sell, maybe we couldn't find any buyers, but with our squad it may be a good thing he's still here.

 

4) i dont know whether they plan to spend in the future or not, but i'm willing to bet they will spend if they can find the players to spend it on.

 

I'll jump in here, debt is actually often the cheapest way to finance a business in the short term (I bet Man Utd pay out less in additional interest on their debt than they used to pay out in dividends), however as Ashley was presumably looking to maximise the available resources in the club it made sense to lose the interest.

 

Whether it is in the form of an equity injection or a loan between himself and the club is irrelevant as we are owned by one body so to him the value of the club is the same, it is only now more efficient.

 

I really can't see how anyone can say its a bad thing that the interest payments have been removed from the club

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Oh, shush KaKa, he had principles and his honour to defend.

needed defending after lying to us all that he had the final say after milner went.

 

I put this somewhere else, but....

 

Wise 'Kev we're selling Milner' = no final say.

 

Wise 'Kev, we can bring in Schweinsteiger (or another) but we think that may leave us overloaded with wingers. Villa have offered £12m for Milner, we reckon that its a good deal and the German is a cracking player'.

 

Kev 'Well Ok, I'm not best pleased with losing Milner but if I can get a better player in (Schweinsteiger) then lets do it.

 

= Kev gives the go ahead and has not lied in any one of his statements up to September 1st.

 

Shame the replacement never came in.

 

Scenario 2 is highly plausible, and would give weight to Keegan going Ape s*** when he was told that Owen or Barton could be sold but we had better replacements coming in.

but thats not what he said in the press conference. he said HE decided and HE has the final say on ALL comings and goings.

 

But if he agreed to selling Milner in order to bring in Schweinsteiger then he would have had the final say on both the sale and purchase.

i repeat,he said all comings and goings and how is it the final say ? ie why did he walk out if he had the final say ?

 

Lets put it another way.

 

IF we had signed Schweinstieger after the Milner deal had been completed would you agree that selling Milner has allowed the club to move forward - which is what Keegan had claimed.

 

And IF Wise had put the proposition to Keegan that it was a good deal all round and Keegan agreed to the sale and purchase then he is having the final say on the two transfers?

 

It was a cock up that Milner was sold before a replacement was secured (assuming the Schweinsteiger story is true), but that doesn't mean that players were sold behind his back.

 

It is of course as likely (if not more) that Keegan agreed to the sale of Milner PROVIDED that Schweinsteiger was bought.

 

As he obviously wasn't the walkout could have been over this and then the last minute purchases of Xisco and Gonzales who Keegan didn't think would replace Milner.

do you think he would walk because the club tried but failed to get a replacemnet.

 

my reading of the situation was that keegan left because the deals were being done (in and out) without his authority.

 

It may have been the final straw, yes. (if as I said he had agreed to sell Milner providing a replacement was secured)

 

The club are saying one thing, Keegan another. They both probably believe that what they are saying is correct as it is human nature to polarise views regarding your own situation.

 

The truth is in the middle somewhere, we'll probably never know exactly where but its almost certain that significant blame can be attributed to both parties, which is why his leaving was such a protracted drama

[madras]

Oh, shush KaKa, he had principles and his honour to defend.

needed defending after lying to us all that he had the final say after milner went.

 

I put this somewhere else, but....

 

Wise 'Kev we're selling Milner' = no final say.

 

Wise 'Kev, we can bring in Schweinsteiger (or another) but we think that may leave us overloaded with wingers. Villa have offered £12m for Milner, we reckon that its a good deal and the German is a cracking player'.

 

Kev 'Well Ok, I'm not best pleased with losing Milner but if I can get a better player in (Schweinsteiger) then lets do it.

 

= Kev gives the go ahead and has not lied in any one of his statements up to September 1st.

 

Shame the replacement never came in.

 

Scenario 2 is highly plausible, and would give weight to Keegan going Ape s*** when he was told that Owen or Barton could be sold but we had better replacements coming in.

but thats not what he said in the press conference. he said HE decided and HE has the final say on ALL comings and goings.

 

But if he agreed to selling Milner in order to bring in Schweinsteiger then he would have had the final say on both the sale and purchase.

i repeat,he said all comings and goings and how is it the final say ? ie why did he walk out if he had the final say ?

 

Lets put it another way.

 

IF we had signed Schweinstieger after the Milner deal had been completed would you agree that selling Milner has allowed the club to move forward - which is what Keegan had claimed.

 

And IF Wise had put the proposition to Keegan that it was a good deal all round and Keegan agreed to the sale and purchase then he is having the final say on the two transfers?

 

It was a cock up that Milner was sold before a replacement was secured (assuming the Schweinsteiger story is true), but that doesn't mean that players were sold behind his back.

 

It is of course as likely (if not more) that Keegan agreed to the sale of Milner PROVIDED that Schweinsteiger was bought.

 

As he obviously wasn't the walkout could have been over this and then the last minute purchases of Xisco and Gonzales who Keegan didn't think would replace Milner.

do you think he would walk because the club tried but failed to get a replacemnet.

 

my reading of the situation was that keegan left because the deals were being done (in and out) without his authority.

 

It may have been the final straw, yes. (if as I said he had agreed to sell Milner providing a replacement was secured)

 

The club are saying one thing, Keegan another. They both probably believe that what they are saying is correct as it is human nature to polarise views regarding your own situation.

 

The truth is in the middle somewhere, we'll probably never know exactly where but its almost certain that significant blame can be attributed to both parties, which is why his leaving was such a protracted drama

just about sums up my position on the whole affair. blame probably on both sides but unless it goes to court we'll probably never know.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

just about sums up my position on the whole affair. blame probably on both sides but unless it goes to court we'll probably never know.

 

Aye, mine too. Even if it goes to court we probably won't know that much more - hopefully it won't come to that anyway.

[madras]

just about sums up my position on the whole affair. blame probably on both sides but unless it goes to court we'll probably never know.

 

Aye, mine too. Even if it goes to court we probably won't know that much more - hopefully it won't come to that anyway.

in a way but it may be the only way to conclude it. many people will believe keegan regardless while a minority will believe that if keegan doesn't take it to court it is because he has no case.

 

either way it's going to leave a nasty taste. the court route may be better in the long run if ashley plans on staying.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

just about sums up my position on the whole affair. blame probably on both sides but unless it goes to court we'll probably never know.

 

Aye, mine too. Even if it goes to court we probably won't know that much more - hopefully it won't come to that anyway.

in a way but it may be the only way to conclude it. many people will believe keegan regardless while a minority will believe that if keegan doesn't take it to court it is because he has no case.

 

either way it's going to leave a nasty taste. the court route may be better in the long run if ashley plans on staying.

 

Not sure, to be honest I'd be surprised if any legal action was taken by either side.

 

Keegan hasn't denied that he resigned has he? So he wouldn't have much of a case against the club that I can think of. What would he sue them for, or what would they sue him for?

[madras]

just about sums up my position on the whole affair. blame probably on both sides but unless it goes to court we'll probably never know.

 

Aye, mine too. Even if it goes to court we probably won't know that much more - hopefully it won't come to that anyway.

in a way but it may be the only way to conclude it. many people will believe keegan regardless while a minority will believe that if keegan doesn't take it to court it is because he has no case.

 

either way it's going to leave a nasty taste. the court route may be better in the long run if ashley plans on staying.

 

Not sure, to be honest I'd be surprised if any legal action was taken by either side.

 

Keegan hasn't denied that he resigned has he? So he wouldn't have much of a case against the club that I can think of. What would he sue them for, or what would they sue him for?

constructive dismissal was muted and the club could sue for breach of contract i guess.

[Guest optimistic nit]

going to court will just make this drag on even more than it has already though, and i just want it to go away. also a Keegan vs the club (asley) court case is going to polarise people even more, and even if the court finds in favour of ashley the majority could very well just believe that ashley lied or bribed the judge or something ala ashley's "smear" campaign against keegan.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I don't think the club will pursue Keegan for breach of contract - there would be too much negative publicity in it.

[Guest optimistic nit]

I don't think the club will pursue Keegan for breach of contract - there would be too much negative publicity in it.

 

although that statement on september the 6th doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that they lack the petiness or the stupidity to do it.

[UV]

I really can't see how anyone can say its a bad thing that the interest payments have been removed from the club

 

It's not a bad thing at all, but it's only a good thing if those savings in interest payments are reinvested into the club.