Jump to content

GENTLEMAN

Established Member
  • Posts

    5,582
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by GENTLEMAN

  1. 1 minute ago, Jas10 said:

    Hoping this isn’t the case (tweet below), I’d like us to sign both. Bailey out wide and Alvarez to be eased in as cover for the attacking positions, including for Ollie at CF. If he shines off the bench or in training, he gets into that first XI and displaces someone… Good attacking options and competition… 
     

    We may well sell El Ghazi (good time to, can’t see his value rising much. Not against keep him around though).

    So we’d have Jack, Buendia, Bailey, Traore and Alvarez….. that’s quite an array of attacking talent… major upgrade on having to play the likes of Trez & Anwar…

     

    Do you honestly think 29 follower Jorge del Pedro knows? I know you’ve posted to open up debate about the need to sign both, but I think Villa is pretty air tight. People do not know our intentions. Things seem to get leaked at the other end. To say that villa number 1 target, backup etc. It’s all guesswork.

    Leon Bailey would be a great addition. I agree that I think we need AM and Wide forward, ideally one of those who’s versatile to offer Ollie competition.

    • Like 1
  2. 3 minutes ago, ccfcman said:

    Can we just lock this until Monday? This thread is beginning to mirror Shakespeare's inspiration for Much Ado About Nothing

    It’ll just spill other into other threads. Got to give the people the avenue to vent. Even if it’s unhealthy. It’s just fretting. I’m guilty, said I’ve give it a rest today. Refreshing this thread all day at work. 

  3. 2 minutes ago, PieFacE said:

    I always hate it when a family member comes out and speaks like this in relation to transfers before anything is official. Stinks like it's going to be a messy one. 

    I think he's his agent/manager.

    • Thanks 1
  4. 3 minutes ago, philthevillan said:

    Exactly. And I’m sure the bosses at the Athletic will be appreciating the attention he gets. 
     

    As for getting transfers right, the only time I was certain about one was when I heard Brad Friedel say he was joining us. And still my employer at the time wouldn’t run the story until the club had confirmed it! 

    Sounds like a different era!

  5. 6 minutes ago, philthevillan said:

    Hi all, long time no speak. I want to offer my two penneth on today’s events and hope it provides some insight. I worked in football journalism for a trusted broadcaster and would like to think I have some knowledge to share. 
     

    1. The Man City reporter in question may well have sources he trusts but I can’t believe he would have a source high up enough to say anything other than City are ‘confident’. Most sports journos get their rumours from other journos, educated guesses and insiders who most likely work in the press office or at a mediocre level in the training ground. Also if you were the head of comms at the league champions, for example, I’m sure you’d think your club has a good chance of signing a player from a club in the bottom half of the table. I cannot see how this guy would have a direct line with the people working on such deals. Most likely that he’s heard the word ‘confident’ from a press officer. The best in the knows don’t tend to give a running commentary on how the deal’s progressing either. What they say tends to be confirmed soon after. 
     

    2. Villa may well have a price for Grealish which City are aware of but they haven’t done a deal yet so how can anyone, journo or not, claim they’d be happy with the price? If, say, Villa said he’s not going anywhere for under £100m then City would think ‘let’s offer an amount less than that’ and Villa might well rethink if they offered close to the asking price. It’s called negotiations. There’s no way anyone would know how they are going to go before they come to a resolution. And they certainly don’t appear to have happened so there’s no need to worry about that for now. 
     

    3. Grealish’s agent might be banding around what he’d want to be paid but again that means nothing. The player and club he plays for can just say ‘no deal thanks’. 
     

    4. I really don’t get Sam Lee’s reaction today. He knows full well that his claims will provoke aggressive responses from some, it’s the madness of social media. I think he probably has a much thicker skin than you realise and the key motive of today is ‘engagement’! 
     

    For the record I’m confident Jack is staying but that doesn’t mean I’m addicted to refreshing my Twitter feed until it’s confirmed. 
     

    UTV! 

    Thanks for the insight! Of course, he was trending after this 'meltdown'.

  6. 1 hour ago, turnbull said:

    My dad took me to my first Villa game in September 1969 v Hull  City, we won 3-2.

    I was 9 years old and attended Kingsland Road junior and infants in Kingstanding. We used to play football on Cooksey Lane playing fields just up the road. Back then Villa trained on there, so we were within ball kicking distance of our heroes. The teacher used to tell is off for paying more attention to the players than our game! 

    Any other ex Kingsland kids on VT? 

    Yes, actually lived on Kingsland Rd too. Before moving up north. Grandparents lived on Cooksey Lane. Fond memories of those playing fields in the 90's.

    • Like 1
  7. 7 minutes ago, Spoony said:

    Nonsense. He’s an absolute star and gave us another year when we were nearly relegated!!!! A lot has changed in a year and he has progressed a lot. He is now an international star.

    Everyone just stop with this hyperbole. We should be grateful he gave us another year when he didn’t have to. Of COURSE he wasn’t going to stay for another 5 years. The contract length is meaningless (I mean ffs if he stays he will be getting ANOTHER new contract).

    ”We are Aston Villa”. remember this means we are often relegation candidates and cannon fodder. Sure that seems to be progressively improving but a ‘middle-aged’ footballer can’t hang about waiting for us to become CL candidates again.  

    Blink 182 Reaction GIF

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  8. 10 minutes ago, Sulberto21 said:

    A lot of pre 2008 man city fans that I know are loving it. They're revelling in the fact that they can beat the mob in the same city as them. 

    As for their 'dictatorship' it's their lives - people choose to live there. It's there way of life. Maybe the west should stop buying their oil.? As with the Saud's. 

    Jack's a winner whether he does it here or does it elsewhere he'll be winning trophies within the next few seasons. The standards within our club has to go up a few levels.

    I should leave the politics for another thread.

    As I said. Searching for club identity. It’s empty. Ownership could have chosen any club in a major European city to carry out its sportswashing. The exact same process with the same results. An identity based on beating United. Cute, so pre2008. Also, in a twist of irony, what do you think attracted the ownership to City? Could it be the fact that United gave so much weight to Manchester as a city with footballing heritage. ADUG hollowed out the club, filled with best worldwide talent money could buy in every dept. Very little remained. Then cooked the books for the next decade. Disregarded the silly rules that others must follow and laughed.

    If Jack goes, he takes the easy route. Winner. Ha. 1 trophy in Aston in worth 100 in Manchester.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  9. 2 minutes ago, cheltenham_villa said:

    Very odd, I watched him quite a few times last season. Thought he was decent and a big reason behind Cheltenhams promotion. I thought he'd make a reasonable championship player.

    Could be exactly that. Develop for a couple of seasons. Sell for couple million profit to Championship club.

    • Like 4
  10. 4 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

    I'm familiar with Spitting Images but those look like obvious caricatures of their features and demeanour. I just don't see the caricature in Rashford's image. For one, you're supposed to be able to tell at a glance who is being caricatured, but without that image of him next to it, I'd have never been able to tell that was supposed to be him. 

    Like that scowl for example is basically the complete opposite of his character. Then on top of that they gave him stereotypical features that he doesn't even have to begin with. Looks like what a cartoonist would come up with in the 90's if you asked them to depict "black thug".

    It just seems like adding to the pile-on because the lad missed a penalty. Used to think they punched up at powerful people and politicians, not 24 year old footballers going through a particularly rough time.

    I do not agree with premise that there is a racial angle, it is a caricature after-all. I suppose it should be judged on the content. For instance use Rashford to shame those in power by his real life actions. However, I seem to remember them shitting on Ed Sheeran in S1 with a purely ginger angle. So will not hold my breath. I do agree that they should always punch up rather than down. Make fun at those with the power. Is that not the whole point? By all accounts it a pale imitation of the original. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...
Â