John_Lerwill

Can't agree on the "target for just surviving bit". McLeish himself said that a finish of below 9th would be a failure, hence there can't have been such a target. I agree as to where the culpability for the manager's appointment lies, however.

So the home fans have to put with the s**t, is it?!!! :shock:

am sure under MON many teams came here and left with points as we struggled to break them down There's some truth in what you're saying, but this season is already as bad stats-wise as any of MON's seasons at home. Six have already been lost which equals MON's worst home record (2007-08...) for the whole season. In truth, it is probably some years since Villa Park was the fortress that people remember, but under McLeish the situation has got much worse.

I think we're getting a bit confused here, CI. :confused: I agree that happened under MON (and it goes back to the late 90s), but now we're in a situation where there's virtually no optimism before each match that comes around. I seem to recall that under MON there were some purple periods and there was never the despondency that now exists. As I said before, we now wonder whether Villa can get a win over teams like Swansea or QPR. Quite a different scenario (that 'orrible foreign word!) I think.

Nothing of the kind. To say that Villa was generally on an 'up' between 1969 and 1999 is a given. What happened particularly between 2000 and 2006 caused a big push to get Doug to sell. What was then expected was a substantial improvement that a fair owner and extra money would bring. I am quite prepared to accept an occasional blip, but the past 2 seasons have been hard to take - particularly this season which has hardly a good thing to be said for it in terms of playing performances. The future is very questionnable with the manager we have. For a club that is supposed to be a sleeping giant and has many past glories, this is not what is required.

CI, I was not trying to do anything of the kind ... All I was trying to do was to show the general direction that the club had taken between 1969 and 1999. The downturn period of 1984-87 (I would say not 1983-) period was only 3 years. Anyway, this track is getting off topic.

This has to be the saddest and most woeful development that has occurred. After all the huge re-development to get back to the top in the early '80s, then the resurgence from Graham Taylor onwards to the late 90s, what we have witnessed since (apart from MON's 3-year mirage-like charge) has been a a general decline in Villa's ability on their own pitch. No longer is it a question of how long has it been since we defeated Man U or Arsenal or Liverpool at Villa Park, but now whether we can keep off the likes of Swansea, QPR, Albion or Norwich!! I really wonder whether the management (top-down) really understand what they've allowed to happen - they were supposed to be an improvement over Doug.

Well, some are. Yes ... some. You always will get swinging voters.

Nah. Even if those two overhauled us, one of the other three still have to hit some serious form too, which seems pretty unlikely. Not out of the question, but I'd be very surprised now if we got relegated. Whilst relegation is almost certainly not on, there is the possibility of Villa finishing 16th or even 17th. Are we happy about that even?! For me and gievn the players Villa have, to finish anywhere near this point is a disaster. I thought that McLeish said that a finish below 9th would be a failure?

Coming to terms with???? What on earth are you on about. It isn't a case of coming to terms with it, despite what some claim the objections to McLeish aren't about where he came from which this comment again implies. ... Yes, no-one is changing their views, surely? If they've stated their views, there's little point in putting up the same thing over and over again. Whilst the chances of Villa being relegated are virtually nil, one matter that might stimulate more comment is that Blackburn (and Perhaps QPR) are creeping up a bit on Villa. So with some pretty stiff fixtures coming up for Villa, how do we feel about Villa finishing in 17th place?

Grinding points doesn’t seem to be the issue with McLeish; its winning games and playing attractive football. Even if McLeish wins a trophy (highly unlikely) I suspect he will never win over the fans; he’s not got a personality that people warm to, and the majority of football he aims to play is functional at the best. I think in a year from now, we will be pretty much in the same place, wondering the same questions. I've only just caught up with (I imagine) a lot of football supporters by reading the book "Kicking and Screaming" - sub-titled "An Oral History of Football in England". The snippet in the book that prompted me to write a response here was on the matter of the obligation in football to entertain. At least, I think there is such an obligation, and this snippet sums it up for me. The words were spoken by George Hardwick, talking about the England team of the late 1940s. I feel that Alex McLeish might draw some wisdom from this! Football probably can't be any longer as it was back then, but McLeish could at least try some of this.

That's exactly what I meant when I earlier said that some better things seem to be happening in spite of McLeish.

Yes, and as I write it's beginning to look as though number 8 has arrived. Eat those words. Eat them all Are you ordering me? :shock: Apart from which I have already expressed my wrongness ... clearly you don't read all the postings. But one swallow doesn't make a summer, they say ...

I am relieved I am wrong, Denis! As things stand I still can't see Villa doing well under McLeish, but I do hope this result causes him to re-assess. Maybe there are one or two players who will save his bacon yet. There are one or two players that can save Villa, as was shown today, however I fear that by default will save McEck. Now the pressure is off I hope to see Weiman, Gardner start against Notlob. Absolutely. It seems to me that whatever improvements have occurred has been in spite of McLeish, not because of him - Cuellar being another case in point. BTW, it was stated by Neil Moxley in the Daily Mail today that McLeish has got Lerner's backing and that he will be at VP next season. With money to spend in the summer, too, apparently. Where that will all lead is anyone's guess, though ...

I am relieved I am wrong, Denis! As things stand I still can't see Villa doing well under McLeish, but I do hope this result causes him to re-assess. Maybe there are one or two players who will save his bacon yet.

Yes, and as I write it's beginning to look as though number 8 has arrived. Well ... could this be a turning point? If it is, then I'll eat humble pie. :shock:

Yes, and as I write it's beginning to look as though number 8 has arrived.

While I agree with the overall tenor of your argument, Nick, we have not yet equalled the 1921 record! It will be equalled today if Villa fail to beat Fulham. Sorry to be a pedant but we can't accuse McLeish for something he's not (yet) guilty of!

cahill was a rough around the edges promising kid when he was sold, he wasn't one of our best players. had he stayed at the club he might never have matured into the player he is now due to lack of match time Well, of course he wasn't a star player at the time, but he had qualities that could be seen that would improve with time. I suggest that he was a better proposition than Knight, although Knight ended up by playing with Cahill at Bolton. MON actually said that he regretted selling Cahill.

The post I was commenting on was about 'Randy selling our best players'. Carew & NRC weren't sold, their contracts ended. I too would have kept NRC, but I would have let Carew & Davies go personally. I still think our 'best' players that we sold were just Downing, Young, Milner & Barry. Ummmm ... and Cahill?

I've read that AM himself said a finish below 9th is failure. If he did say that (memory tells me he did, though I could be wrong), then surely he should walk if we finish below his stated level.

Who was the manager for that winless run? Oh, that was back in 1920/21 when there was no team manager. It was also a difficult time - when Villa were re-adjusting after the horrors of WW1.

This is the Big Question. Failing to win against both these two will mean beating the current record of 8 matches at home without a win and will just vastly worsen the general atmosphere ... if it could get much worse. Perhaps it's a case of all fans combining to will the team to win against Fulham tomorrow ... I think I've actually come to the point of agreeing that for the supporters to get behind the team no matter what is the only solution for the next 2 matches.

Very true, although I suspect come the end of season our total points will be much closer to the 39 Blues got, than the 48 we got. Time, like Johnny Ball, shall reveal all. The quality of the football under AM last season (like this) was a tad below expectation as well ... it's not just a stats issue.

Well, we wondered just how Alex McLeish came to be appointed. Some say it was due to a written recommendation from the Fergie, but I've just found an article written by Bill Howell in 2010 that refers to a book published that year, entitled "The Management, Scotland’s Great Football Bosses", by Michael Grant and Rob Robertson, which apparently points to the everlasting legacy of George Ramsay, effectively the first paid “manager” in world football. Well, that's fair comment. All we Villans knew about that!! :-) But Howell states that in that book, : "McLeish makes it in the 'Great Rangers Managers' chapter. Not at all bad when the likes of Busby, Shankly, Stein, Ferguson, Docherty, Dalglish, Souness, Graham and Walter Smith and Moyes are in the running." So, did Randy read the article/book?! Bill Howell article link.