OutByEaster?

Can you define them better? (the regressive campus left) I'm genuinely interested - I'm not sure I recognise the people you're describing (and I ought to, I'm out there) who are they? I should also say at this point that I'm not entirely sure how we define 'safe spaces' other than spaces where everyone is allowed to be right, no matter what their view - how would you define a safe space?

Broadly I agree with you on this, but I think in this paragraph there's a bit of hopeful thinking on the money that needs to be invested - not many of the things on this list are going to make a big return in a single fiscal year and money doesn't care much for things that aren't so immediate. We desperately need to invest in long term, renewable, integrated, sustainable erm...stuff - but the markets aren't going to do that and society such as it exists through government doesn't have access to that money.

Views that are perfectly legitimate can be defended surely? People will always be angry about opinions that are different to theirs - in days gone by that anger used to produce debate, occasionally even change - now we have generation wuss protesting their right to never be criticised. In my opinion, attempting to make every space safe is attempting to make every view acceptable, it's removing right and wrong, it's preventing any real debate or change.

There's nothing wrong with intolerance of views that are inherently bad. The modern malaise isn't intolerance, it's the idea that everybody must be okay all of the time.

Is this buzzword bingo? The alt-right I kinda get, it's those people that used to get labelled neoliberal racist hawks, they believe in a world without social provision or tax where the purpose of 'society' is to serve a corporate structure and that trickle down economics and global control will result in a lifting of standards of living for those that participate hard enough and that those that don't should not be included - where you get what you can afford. The regressive, campus left - i think I get - regressive as in moving to a political time prior to Reagan and Thatcher and prior to an economy lead society of neoliberal values - regressive in this case meaning in both in time and policy to socialism, campus I'm not sure on, I guess it's an allusion to leftist thinking coming from Universities and college campus's in the US and is meant as a dismissive gesture in terms of wishful thinking and dreamers that don't have an experience of the world. Safe spaces I guess in this case means places where their views aren't challenged - so social media largely, or in the case of the alt-right, most all the UK's formal press. Where I'm really struggling is in how you think these standpoints are similar - is that they're both talking about the world? The nearest I can come to a answer is that the alt-right feel that there is still a way things are today that has too much of a leaning toward socialism - there's still an NHS, there are still people that get to use roads for nothing, that get free water, that sort of thing and the regressive, campus left feel that there's a way things are today that has too much of a leaning toward corporate control, that has income inequality, no social provision for care of the weak in any format, no central structure in health, transport and so on. So it's possible they could be similar in that they don't like the way things are - in much the same way that Villa fans and those of small heath don't like being in the championship and that makes us similar I suppose. Or maybe it's in the way that the alt-right have adopted some of the anti-establishment rhetoric of the regressive, campus left in order to persuade enough Turkeys to join them in the yuletide festivities that's making things seems similar. I'm really not sure. Whichever, I'd like to know a bit more so I can understand what you're saying.

They'll do it again won't they?

On his day he's the best player in the Championship. When he's not on his day, he works hard and remains a threat to create something out of nothing. We'd be much poorer without him.

First bit I think is really interesting - especially since I think it's Round's job not just to decide if they all play the same way, but also to decide what that playing style is. The second bit makes perfect sense - we go to long lengths to find a manager that the Technical Director can work with, but I wonder how much influence Round has on the staff that then come in to work with him, or whether the manager just picks his own stage based on experience and relationships. It's odd, but personally speaking, I think the job of Technical Director is a little bit mysterious, to me at least, possibly to a lot of us.

This coming Monday, Villatalk has been invited to a supporters group meeting with Steve Round, Technical Director. If there are any questions you'd like asked to him about his role, the direction he wants to take Villa in, what he's done so far, his feelings on managers or just about anything you can think of that might be of interest, please let us know in this thread.

It's nice when a player comes off the bench and it's the one you thought might come off the bench and he's replacing the one that you thought he might replace - and you haven't got to try and figure out the formation or where players are going following the change - it's nice to look at the team and think, yeah, he plays there, in the position that he's playing in - it's just good, sensible stuff. I like it. It's been a while.

A good point and a better performance - we were the better side against a very good side. We've had a couple of good points with bad performances in this little run - i'll take this - onwards and upwards.

I hate this ref. What's his name?

Grealish looks a class above these - and they're genuine promotion hopefuls.

We're brilliant at the moment - we HAVE to find a winner!

We're well on top.

Adomah has a range of corners. Most of them are rubbish.

Grealish on for Gardner. Bruce thinks we can get at em.

They're getting absolutely everything - if anything the linesman on the near side is worse than the referee.

Doesn't have the engine for that imo.

Dickhead only gives those dopey decisions one way then I see.

What's almost more galling is that the referee is making a load of crappy decisions and the pratt in the studio watches replays and says "yep, he's got that right" as a bloke in blue stripes falls over for no reason whatsoever.

Quimpuffin.

This ref is a womble of the highest order.

That would have been a fantastic goal - great stuff from us early. We may have been wrong about them coming out fired up!

Jedinak looks so much better in a three. Kodjia hasn't scored yet, so I have us mentally 2-1 up. I think they'll come flying out of the traps second half and really come at us - it might just work for us on the break.