MessiWillSignForVilla

Stop spouting bullshit. I don't give a shit about the rest of the arguments, but this is just not true. In our last 9 games we have beaten - 3 Playoff hopefuls (Derby, Norwich, Sheff Wed), 2 relegation battlers (Bristol and Wigan) and 2 teams with "nothing to play for" (Rotherham and QPR). We have drawn to another relegation battler in Burton, and lost by a flukey goal to a team that is pretty much guaranteed playoffs but no more in Huddersfield. And our last 5 games come against - 2 playoff challengers (Reading and Fulham), our biggest rivals, a relegation battler in Blackburn and one of the best teams in the league, Brighton. Hence why finishing strongly will be important. Stop saying we've been playing teams with nothing to play for, it is a lie. Edit - I suppose you could include Blues as a relegation battler too, adding extra spice to that game.

I don't think you understand how the burden of proof works, it's on the person making the claim. And their owner being terrible is nothing like Merson being an idiot. Their owner is literally throwing a hissy fit because he couldn't change Hull's name. He said Hull's own supporters could go die because they didn't want the name changed, he sold their two best players this season whilst they were battling relegation, he waited until October to bother appointing a permanent for Bruce and he basically said he couldn't be arsed to support the club if he couldn't get his name change. He is verifiably terrible, and he didn't move Bruce on, Bruce resigned, and Allam certainly doesn't have Hull's best interests at heart. Anyway, this is massively off topic and I can't be arsed to keep arguing with someone who keeps making things up about what I've said.

No. Because I know what I posted. I never said Bruce was perfect, that's something you claim I said, so it's on you to prove it. I change my view based on the evidence before me, not blindly stick to a position regardless of the current situation. And just FYI, the reason Hull didn't back him in the summer is because their owner is terrible and is refusing to fund the club as he is throwing a hissy fit because he couldn't get permission to change Hull's name. You'll notice that Phelan and SIlva weren't particularly backed either, Hull have about 15 first team players and a load of loans.

I'm sorry, where did I say any of that? I thought Bruce should've been sacked back in February, but the recent form has changed my mind because it's been bloody brilliant winning consistently, if we go back into the awful form we were in January/February there's no doubt my mind would change again, because I judge our team on how they are currently doing not how they were doing months ago. Bruce has his failings, and there are certainly improvements to our game and team I'd like to see, but that doesn't mean we should sack him, especially since our form is so good currently.

"which is what our current form would give us." Where do I say I think we're going to do that next season? But yeah, I'm delusional for thinking that if we keep our current form up to the end of the season, which is title winning form, then it would be insane not to give Bruce a pre-season and next season. And just because the current best teams in the league don't play direct doesn't mean it doesn't work. Loads of teams have gotten promoted playing direct, notable examples being Stoke and Hull twice (managed by Bruce).

I'd rather try and continue this form until the end of the season, maybe the odd appearance and Green featuring more again, but if we want to go up next year we need to keep that winning feeling and end the season strongly.

The important stats are we've conceded twice in 9 games and scored 13, who gives a **** if we don't dominate possession if we don't concede and consistently get goals? I couldn't give a shit if we're playing hoof ball if it means getting 100+ points which is what our current form would give us. Look at the stats for our January form, we kept the ball and dominated possession in most games and still get absolutely battered, one of our best performances came in a game where we had about 30% possession. But that's irrelevant really as those sorts of stats have no actual bearing on performance. And it's not as if playing direct football has never worked in this division, in fact, the perceived wisdom is that direct football is the best way to get promoted.

A streak that came when our most important player returned from international duty and our new January signings had settled into the team. Our current form is title winning form, not only that, it's record points title winning form. If we continue this form to the end of the season we are in ridiculously good shape for next season, sacking Bruce, especially without giving him a pre-season, would be absolutely mental, just because we had some bad form that he has emphatically turned around.

Ah well, it was a long shot anyway, hopefully we can keep building form for next season.

Burton have 54% possession

No, if Wednesday lose tonight, which is likely since they play Newcastle, we'll be 7 points behind instead of 9. Not that it'll be easy, but we are closing the gap slightly.

6-1 to Norwich... Have Reading fielded their U12s or something?

Maybe we'll be able to catch them

Hopefully it's just a precaution and not too serious

Leeds are beating Preston, so not quite all.

Johnstone; Hutton, Chester, Baker, Taylor; Jedinak, Lansbury, Bacuna, Adomah, Amavi; Kodjia. For those who can't be arsed to wait through that awful GIF.

**** Off Derby... Yes Derby!

He scored in our last game...

Two centre backs on the bench and Bruce brings on a right back?

December 2009, Beat Hull, Utd, Sunderland and Stoke.

We beat Rotherham 3-0 this season, so probably not... Actually, our last two wins were clean sheets.

Amavi coming on for Adomah apparently? Green on the right Amavi on the left? Seems a bit too defensive.

Baker made his debut under Houllier, so was slightly before Hutton.

Because loan deals often include a fee, whether that be for the loan or an optional signing fee, when that's the case often clubs will agree to eliminate the ability for recalling as to not jeopardise that fee, if a club insists on including a recall option, the loaning club will forgo paying a fee. It's only really with youth players who are loaned out to gain experience that can be recalled, as there less likely to include bigger fees, I imagine that St. Etienne gave us £1m or so to loan Veretout, hence we can't recall. Edit: In fact, here's a line from a Bham Mail piece about Bruce monitoring our loanees for next season, "Bruce was unable to recall either player in January as part of the arrangements made prior to his October arrival."

The same was said for Sherwood, but it was painfully obvious to those who actually watched the games that he was out of his depth, I wonder how many of these pundits have been subjected to our last 8 games? I'm willing to bet not many. I'm also willing to bet that if this was Di Matteo, or Garde was still here from last season, the pundits wouldn't still have confidence in them like they do for Bruce.