stanthemanisgod

Entirely agree would have been unfair to drop Lichaj after a win and a clean sheet. The city game we take 1 of 2 approaches we go a la houllier and admit defeat throwing in a weakened side of players that need pitch time or we take a punt on the fact they'll throw in a weakened side and try to win it with what is close to our strongest side.

Plus with QPR they'll just chuck a load more money at the situation in Jan. I still think we'll be ok though, still early days in Lambert's tenure, still plenty of scope for the current squad to improve and still a number of unknowns that may turn into quality players. Would expect Bennet to get his chance now, and with Ireland out the midfield will need a shuffle. Maybe i'm foolish but at present I'm more optimistic than pessimistic over the remainder of the season.

Exactly. Any club that is not getting CL footy regularly will struggle to keep hold of it's top players if the big clubs come sniffing, in fact I'd say the only reason we still have Bent is because none of those clubs want him. The only thing we can hope for is that the money raiseed from such sales is reinvested in players that are able to at partly fill the gap left behind.

He's certainly not above criticism and as THE, if not one of, the top earner at the club his return to wage ratio should be as heavily criticised as Ireland's is if you ask me. Whether it's all him, the players around him or a combination of both he's simply not doing enough at present to demand what must still be a significant portion of our wage budget. Tough one for the manager though, nobody in our squad has a record anywhere near as good as Bent's, and his value is only going to decrease on the bench, so I guess you keep picking him in the hope that the chances are created and taken. But if it was a choice between paying DB9 or Berbatov £80k a week I know which would seem better value for money.

So Ireland had a shot and is credited with an assist does that mean CI's opinion is changing as that was his main criticism leveled at the player last week?

Not trying to make excuses for him but unless you're very good, it's diffiuclt to make a telling run with the ball if there isn't movement around you making space and angles and generally creating a bit of confusion in the defence. As that develops we should start to see him make more of an impact. But as I said he needs to develop his consistency as well. He will not be suited to all games but he still has a role in the team if you ask me. Also as we are seeing attacking threats from other areas of the pitch and fingers crossed the new left back making overlapping runs it will mean the opposition will not have the luxury of doubling up on him all the time. Clearly if Lambo can identify a replacement and we get offers for him in Jan then chances are he'll be off, but I dont think we should write him off just yet.

With the team showing a bit more creativity all round there may yet be hope for Charlie boy. Obviously he needs to pull his finger out but with attacks coming from all areas of the pitch and (hopefully) a new attacking left back in the side the pressure will be off him a bit. I get the feeling that his decision making appears to be so poor becuase he is trying too hard to make something happen, he's looking for that first wonder goal to spark everything else off and it's just not happening for him. A bit like Ireland regardless of what he has and hasn't done thus far in a Villa shirt he has the potential to do something special and change a game and becuase of that he'll always be on the bench at the very least. We need to remember this team is still very new, with new signings yet to make debuts, it's going to take a little while longer for things to gel properly and that includes N'Zogbia's role in the side. Clearly an improvement is needed if he's going to make a starting place his but he has the talent to do so imo.

A bit over simplistic there... For example if you've got a few million in the bank you hardly make a habit of hanging around supermarkets near to closing time hoping to pick up half price bread. Would Lambert's approach been altogether that different had he been here when the money was flowing? We can't say, as people have hinted at we might be a little too reliant on young, unproven players as the season pans out. In a similar way we were a little too reliant on proven players under MoN. Also intersted to know where your evidence for their respective ability to negotiate wages and prices came from. We may have offered all of this years signings more than what they were prepared to join us for as far as we know it just happens they were cheaper players than the players MoN signed. Yes at this stage Lambert looks to be the more complete package but I dont rate your line by line critique, it's simply not that straight forward.

What's the point in having a natural goal scorer on similar wages if he doesn't actually score any goals? The point is sometimes players are picked because of what you know they can or might do, if PL was to pick a strikeforce on actual goals scored then Weiman and Benteke would start and Bent would be on the bench, but who would you want the ball to fall to in the 6 yard box? Sometimes you need to stick with a player to play them into form, I would argue SI is not out of form but perhaps lacking a bit of confidence, plus the starting line is still new it will take time for the creative side of the game to click into place. So my question is are you on the Bent page abusing him so much for doing naff all for his huge wages? Bent has recently come back from an injury (also missed some of pre season) and is regaining his sharpness. Ireland played regularly for the majority of the second half of the season. Bent has also got a proven track record of producing the goods. Besides one terrific season at city, Ireland has never on a consistent level shown himself to be a really creative player. And whilst I accept that mitigation, I would argue that whilst at Villa Ireland has never really been played in a team equipped to get the best out of a creative player. But my point is people see things in a very black and white way on these boards eg Ireland hasn't scored or been credited with any assists and therefore is not worth his wages. Well in the same way you could argue Bent hasn't scored and therefore isn't worth his. In reality both are performing well enough to earn a place in the team and we'd like to see more from both. But Ireland is getting slated and nobody has commented on the Bent page since August. Seems a little unfair if you ask me, seeing as the majotrity of the abuse is based on his wages, whic are in the same ball park as Bent's.

What's the point in having a natural goal scorer on similar wages if he doesn't actually score any goals? The point is sometimes players are picked because of what you know they can or might do, if PL was to pick a strikeforce on actual goals scored then Weiman and Benteke would start and Bent would be on the bench, but who would you want the ball to fall to in the 6 yard box? Sometimes you need to stick with a player to play them into form, I would argue SI is not out of form but perhaps lacking a bit of confidence, plus the starting line is still new it will take time for the creative side of the game to click into place. So my question is are you on the Bent page abusing him so much for doing naff all for his huge wages?

Put him straight into my dream team in place of DB9. Might not set the world on fire in terms of scoring, although He'll obviously chip in, but I think he'll be accredited with a fair few assists to both DB9 and the midfield, KEA must be licking his lips at the opportunities he's going to get from the edge of the box.

I'm assuming that as my post earlier on in this thread was ignored that everybody believes UEFA aren't going to do anything with the Fiancial Fair Play Regs? Because if they are enforced then a club like Villa doesn't even have the option of pulling a City, the current European elite will remain that way with the rest of us feeding off their scraps and hoping they don't take the domestic cup competitions seriously and only put out their 3rd 11!

Is it even still possible to do a Man City? Guess we'll see if QPR are able to take their current spending to the next level like City did and start buying properly good players and then get away with it! But it seems clear that current elite are going to continue crying off to UEFA whenever a new club looks like muscling in on their party, so I guess it'll depend on whether UEFA have the balls to enforce the Financial Fair Play Regs.

All of the players in our squad are capable fo changing a game, even the likes of Weiman we've seen come on as a sub and nick a goal through sheer determination. We're just not used to seeing it. Are Gabby, Bent and Benteke all going to be starting every week? There's at least 1 decent option on the bench. Marc Albrighton although lacking in consistency can certainly beat a man and stick in a decent ball. N'Zog and Ireland might spend more time on the bench now, if not Bannan and Holman are capable of doing something. Yes we're not City but there is plenty of quality in this squad provided the manager can get everybody pulling in the same direction.

To a lesser extent (I stress), this is exactly what happened with Cahill. I really don't remember it like that at all. Many people at the time saw that the only reason Cahill wasn't getting his game was because MON had spunked over 3 mil on Zat Knight because at the time we didn't know whether Laursen would come back. Laursen did come back which meant Knight wasn't needed, but in order to justify paying the money, MON used him over Cahill who many thought was the better defender. Even though we got good money for him as a reserve from Bolton we knew we'd sold a good one. Don't recall it ever being that black and white, even with Laursen out injured Davies and Melberg were playing well (That was pre my villa talk days but a few fans on 606 making favourable comparisons between davies and a young rio). Zat Knight was signed as back up, which probably did push Cahill a little further back in the pecking order, but we were a club who at the time had serious designs on a top 4 finish. It would have been foolish to rely on Cahill alone as cover at that time. And as it was Bolton he went to for 1st team football it would seem to indicate that he was not quite ready to play regularly for a top 6 team (as we were then). Like I say hindsight is a marvellous thing but it's hard to apportion blame in the Cahill instance, it's just one of those things in football. See Barca and Fabregas as another example.

I can kind of see what you're saying but imo the 2 examples are quite different. Cahill had done a decent job when he covered as CB but at the time, despite his obvious potential, he was being kept out of the team by our then 1st choice pairing. He wanted 1st team football and wasn't prepared to wait so forced a move. The Fonz hasn't shown that quality and despite a few loans to lower opposition hasn't tried to force the club's hand by demanding a transfer to another PL club. Probably because there isn't the interest from other PL clubs. My initial response was trying to take into account the anger directed at that manager about Cahill (hindsight is a marvellous thing) in a way it could be argued Cahill wasn't given the chance he deserved, but then at the time he was deservedly being kept out of the team. Whereas with the fonz I think he has been given enough chances to prove his worth he just hasn't taken them.

The way I see it even if he does leave us and goes onto bigger and better things I don't think any of could sit here and accuse any of our managers of not giving him a chance, and that is an indication of his impact here. A frustrating player when I've seen him on the pitch he's looked to have that nautral ability to put the ball in the back of the net. But I remember a game at Pompey when MoN was in charge and although he did well, MoN was literally constantly shouting at him about where to be, who to mark, when to make a run etc. Seems for al his natural ability he isn't switched on enough to make it work. Compare him to Andy Weiman, who isn't as technically sound but will run through brick walls trying to get the ball, and you can see why us fans and the coaching staff are more inclined to give Weiman the time on the pitch. Ultimately if he goes I'll be disappointed but only becuase he hasn't fulfilled the obvious potential he displayed when he first broke into the first team.

What do the columns actually mean?

Why is that for sure? What do you know that we don't? Will Bent, Gabby and Given all be asked to accept a new contract on lower wages too or are you just singling out Ireland? Because imo Bent hasn't done an awful lot to deserve his wages too in the current calendar year.

Isn´t that the same? I'd have said so, no point having a 50 man squad if 38 of them are never going to get a sniff at playing in the team.

Think we might be a little off in our estimation of what players expect to earn in the PL, again off the point but I don't think we'd have to be anywhere near the top 6 for some of regular starters to be in a position to demand and get more than £15-20k a week. Yes we could just sell Ireland, but then who's nex in the high wages firing line, Gabby then Bent? Back on topic I think this will be a big season for Ireland, think the way Lambo wants us to play is perfect for him and provided the players around him continue to make the right runs he'll be a valuable asset to us.

Slightly off topic but wondering where it has been stated what KEA is on, and also assuming it is £15k how long do you think it will be before he starts asking for more? If he plays well enough in our team other clubs will come sniffing and it surely wont take long for him to realise what the Bents, Gabbys and Irelands of the squad are on. Would you be happy in a job knowing people are doing a similar role to you on 3 or 4 times as much money?

The thing is the wage bill is constrained by income. We have to assume that UEFA will enforce their Financial Fair Play Regs so is there any point hoping for a richer owner for exceeds the UEFA regs and bars us from competing in any European competition we may qualify for. Out of interest what would those that are critical of Lerner's tenure be saying if he or a new owner spent the money on wages for us to finish 4th for example, to then be prevented from competing in the CL by UEFA? Would that constitute good ownership or would hhe be criticised for not spending withing our means?

It was always going to take a bit of time, a bit o luck and a lot of renewed confidence for the team to start picking up points playing in a new style with a largely new line up. Not suprised by Guzan selection, he would have had a long chat with Lambo when he resigned, Given made a mistake and Guzan did well in the cup game, so would have been a tad upset if he didn't start, it should now be his place to lose. In fact with the numbers we now have in the squad I'd expect the same to apply to all of our players. I was obviously disappointed by the opening 2 results but in all my optimism levels havn't been dented from where they were when Lambo got the job, I'm looking forward to seeing what the new signings can do.

This site outstounds me, it really does, as a group we really will find the negative in just about anything. Nothing in the press about possible deals = The board are shit, we're getting relegated. Press leak a story about a bid for a decent player = It's a PR stunt the board are shit, we're getting relegated.