You read the headline right. According to Hyder Jawad, unless Martin O'Neill has sorted things out after his second full and first proper transfer window there could be troubling times ahead for the manager.

When the previous incumbent was appointed manager and I jumped on his back quicker than I'd jump at free first class tickets, many people came out and threw the classic at me; Sir Alex Ferguson needed three or four seasons to sort it out at Old Trafford. Back then I called it blarney.

When I heard those excuses I simply brushed it off as a different time and very much a different game. In reality it was a different time and players were brought in far cheaper than they are today but I'm going to hold my hands up and say maybe I was misguided.

I was misguided because you didn't need to be a rocket scientist to know the previous incumbent would take us as far as he could in his first season until the players figured him out. I was wrong but right.

The thing that has surprised me today in the article in the Birmingham Post is that Hyder Jawad is suggesting that Mr O'Neill has six months to turn it around. I'm quoting it below for you;

O'Neill still walks on water and it will be six months or so before he needs to even think about swimming - Hyder Jawad 22nd March 2007

In six months we could be four or five games into the new season and I for one won't be judging the manager on the results in those games.

I can't believe I'm going to use this as an excuse but the manager needs to be given time. He needs two more seasons, after this one, to mould a team and bring in new players. It won't happen over night and it certainly won't happen after four or five games straight after his first proper transfer window.

Now, I know what Hyder Jawad is implying in his article but I think this time, with Martin O'Neill, we've just got to wait for it to happen, because it will.

I might also forget about reading the Birmingham Post as I often find myself feeling quite 'blue' after I have, I wonder what that means?

Comments (15)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

stig said:

hyder jawad has proven before he is an idiot. i wouldnt read into this at all.

March 22, 2007

M4Baby said:

You sum it up with your last point - don't bother reading it. It's tosh

March 22, 2007

hughie said:

birmingham papers dont seem to have a good word to say about villa since the Dispatch disappered years ago

March 22, 2007

Michel Sibble said:

I often thought as a Laahndahnner theat the Post was a decent paper- until Hyder Jawad starts writing in it...

March 22, 2007

Thegreatdando said:

Perhaps Hyder Jawad should take more note of Martin O'Neill's comments. There is no way Randy will get rid of him that easily!

March 22, 2007

IanB said:

Maybe he was referring to the fans, rather than Mr. Lerner? www.claretandbluewedding.com

March 22, 2007

steve m said:

please dont even rise to what that prat at the post has to say. he gets it wrong on so many occasions and you always rise to it.... hang on, i've just done the same. anyhow, he writes articles to simply get noticed. if he was doing so well he wouldnt be writing for a second rate rag like the post but a national paper. ignore the plonker

March 22, 2007

Rench88 said:

I agree, Jawad writes sensationalist tripe. But this article is equally sensationalist as it completely misinterprets what Jawad is saying: 'O'Neill still walks on water and it will be six months or so before he needs to even think about swimming' Translated: Fans still love MON and things will only start to get sticky if the situation is the same in six months ('even think about swimming'). So for this article to say he is 'given six months to turn it around' is absurd and implies some sort of ultimatum has been issued by Randy. Hopefully this website will produce more realistic, sober headlines in future rather than gross exaggerations such as this one.

March 22, 2007

Johnny said:

O'Neill is a brilliant manager who's reputation is outstanding.At the start of the season everybody was shocked to see the change in the Villa team.Then certain injuries meant that things had to be changed round.Only for O'neill Gareth Barry,Our best and most consistent player addmitted he would have left.We'll Definately be in the top 6 next season. I think we should go back to playing 4.3.3 though

March 22, 2007

luke said:

It all went wrong when Moore got injured and we didn't have the squad depth to adapt to the changes that were forced upon us. The article is utter tosh and we'll see once we've got some good players what Hyder says. I'm sure it'll be either controversial or stupid- maybe both!

March 23, 2007

Nick123 said:

I don't think O'neil would leave so early, it would affect his reputation. the only way he'll leave so early is for the England Job or the Man u Job. anyway he's still a cool manager and i'm really looking forward to seeing who he signs in the summer. Up the Villa!!!

March 24, 2007

Jawad said:

Thanks for the comments, gents. I don't mind the insults ("idiot", "plonker" etc) but I would appreciate it if you at least got the facts right. At no point in my piece did I state that Martin O'Neill only had six months to get this right. All I merely said was that if things do not improve by next September or October, he will cease to walk on water. I think this is a fair point, given that Villa have only won two of their past 20 matches. Anyway, my email address is: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it I would appreciate it if somebody could email me some examples of the "sensationalist tripe" that I have written or some examples of how I get it "wrong on so many occasions". As we all want the same thing (accurate, interesting coverage on Aston Villa), I am sure you would not mind giving me a bit of help here. Best wishes, Hyder Jawad (chief sports writer, The Birmingham Post).

April 03, 2007

Damian said:

Actually Hyder, you didn't say 'if things do not improve by next September or October'. You actually said 'O'Neill still walks on water and it will be six months or so before he needs to even think about swimming'. What you've actually done is suggest that if he's not turned it around in six months there could be tough times. Most Villa fans will be giving him longer than six months and as I've said in the post a little longer than his first proper transfer window (I'm assuming you agree that last summer wasn't enough time and the January window isn't a great time to think about getting in players). But you wanted tripe; your open letter to the new CEO was stupid and what you wrote inaccurate.

April 03, 2007

Jawad said:

Hi, Damian. Thanks for your reply. When I wrote "six months or so", that was clearly not a specific timescale. It can easily refer to September or October. At no point did I state or imply that O'Neill only had six months to turn it around. I talk to him at least once a week, I rate him highly (and have written that a million times), so why the hell would I want to suggest, in print, that his days could be numbered? And nor did I say that there could be tough times ahead. I was merely implying that O'Neill's honeymoon period will end at the start of next season if Villa do not begin it well. That does not equate to suggesting that I think he could be out of a job. Regarding the open letter. If you thought that was "stupid", that is fine. I respect your opinion. But it was just that: an opinion. I thought it was a good idea, my sports editor did, my editor did. And when I spoke to Richard FitzGerald that January night he said that he was happy to engage in the debate. That is why he subsequently answered the questions (and other questions raised by Villa supporters). As for calling the letter "inaccurate", perhaps you could be more specific. I don't mind that you obviously dislike me (or what I write). I can even take the insults. Keep them coming! But I prefer constructive debate, where the response to an article is based on, and shows some understanding of, the article in question. I have written more than 1.5million words on Villa over the past five years and can say, without fear of contradiction, that the vast majority of it has been positive and fair. For sure, I have previously criticised Doug Ellis and David O'Leary; harshly, in some cases. If that bothers you, I cannot help that. Sorry. But I think time has proven me correct.

April 03, 2007

Damian said:

Hyder, 'Six months or so' is what you wrote. You've made your point now. Your open letter wasn't an opinion Hyder; you were forcing the hand of the new CEO and asking questions that most people already knew the answers to. Some might call it sensationalism. What did you expect him to say when he read that in the newspaper? It could have been done differently and smelt of amateur hour. As for inaccuracies in the letter. Search this site we've highlighted them in the past. And as for this 'obvious dislike'; I'm racking my brain for anyone that I actually do dislike and I'm afraid I can't think of anyone. I suspect your sword is more powerful. I just don't think the way you've gone about things is very professional for a local newspaper. As for what you've written about the previous incumbent or Mr Ellis, that's all in the past and the views of the people that contribute to this site are well documented on those two characters. If you're looking for a debate join a forum.

April 03, 2007

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

Add Comment