Spotted this whilst trawling the internet... https://www.clubcall.com/aston-villa/preston-snap-up-villa-ace-1794832.html Villa "ace" possibly a bit overboard however, when I read stuff like this and think about Cox, Robinson, Moore and the Leicester goalie all being sent packing without really much of a look in, I really seriously have to wonder who actually signed all of these players. The increasingly unhappy and thinly veiled comments from SC basically saying he hasn't got a clue what is happening makes it pretty evident that other than submitting his wish list, he has no input in the process WHATSOEVER. The comment about Cox in particular basically comparing him to Eric Pickles coupled with the recent comment from on high about our aiming too high in the summer goes to reinforce the growing suspicion amongst many City fans that in fact, SC submitted his list in the summer only to be told we can't afford them and was instead presented with Keith Burt's recruits and told to make do. Frankly, I am not sure that any manager would use players that they didn't ask for or want. I did a bit more trawling and found this article from May 2013 when Burt was appointed director of football when SOD was in charge. "I'll take on more responsibilities with the new role, sitting between the head coach and the board. It's a role I've fulfilled before," he said. It will allow Sean to get out on to the training ground more and focus on his time with the players and staff." SOD was quoted as being "very comfortable" with the arrangement however you don't need to be Einstein to work out that the exact opposite is the case with SC who obviously wants to chose his own players. So, it would appear that KB reports to SL and veto's most of the players that we want and SL accepts the alternatives recommended who the manager doesn't want. Our owner signs the cheques but I want to hear from him who it is who actually choses the players that we sign - KB or SC...
I think we'd all like to hear who makes the decisions because I remain convinced that IT ISN'T SC. And if that's true and he has little or no input into who we bring in, it makes us even more of a mockery of a football club than I thought we were.
I was under he impression it was to do with the one that got sacked beginning September. Reading Tetburys Massive comments on OTIB was very enlightening and went on about the dealings. The loan deals though to me was baffling and to be honest, I don't know how much that was stubbornness on behalf of SC and totally blame him for those. Cox not as prolific as some say but had to be better choice than some we had, listening to BBC Berkshire coming from the Reading game one or two callers glad to have him back! So even if they wasn't his choice, IMO he ****ed up by refusing to play them etc. And that's coming from me a pro Cotts supporter
Are any of the 4 players better than what we have got? Cox perhaps but he is not fit - of course if you don't play you can't get fit
But he was fit enough to sit on the bench, and is Agard fitter or Wilbraham after 70 minutes I seriously doubt that and actually believe that one was a spin. Robinson was snapped up straight away by Preston so I will leave that one for you to decide. Moore IMO done ok when playing just took the blame on certain things and looking at Williams and Ayling yes I think he could of been better if played in his natural position. IMO we had the players to go 4 at the back with him and Baker but one disaster against Derby and he's sacrificed. Hamer came when we was struggling and panicking in front of him but I do agree using him restricted other loanees even though only two was really used!
