thefeet1980

Get in!

I think Papillon's post is pretty much spot on - ever the optimist though I think that Westwood could, given time, prove to be an important player for us. Unfortunately, during the course of this season, with the lack of quality/performances throughout the team, we've not been able to give him the benefit of time.

I think he's suffered as a result of not having decent defensive midfielders behind him. That said, it's impossible to know what's happening behind the scenes... Whilst its frustrating that Ireland is yet another recent player that has only shown glimpses of his full potential, i always thought that would be a risk when he signed.

Watched the video, I was hoping to see him make some solid tackles and generally putting himself about, but the 5 minute highlights were never going to be enough to judge...I'll give him the benefit of the doubt but its going to be a big step up...

At least we haven't conceded from a corner....

4:23am here in the Philippines and i'm up watching this shite...

See Liverpool have signed Coutinho - oh well.

All this ITK stuff is highly amusing. Can we increase the stakes by suggesting that ITK's make pledges to villatalk on the basis of their faith in their information? I really ought to coff up some money for the running of the site so I'm going to give £10 to villatalk if we don't sign anyone and £20 if we do. I actually think it's more likely we will sign someone now but I'll be so pleased if/when we do (particularly if its the DM we need) that I'll pay more... However, if it's Reo-Coker or Eric Bakke all bets are off.

Conceding early in the second half was the problem - it knocked confidence and caused us to play too deep. This is why we need a big personality in midfield to protect the back 4 and, more importantly, to stop heads going down.

Top man Brian Little.

Changed my vote.

Makes no difference for me whether he stays or goes...

We won't know that definitively until January 31st. It's possible that Lambert's comments are an attempt to drive down the price of transfer targets. It's also possible that the board will reasses if we lose today / are unable to offload any of the deadwood. I'm going to try and avoid getting concerned until the end of the month - fortunately I'm not detoxing during January, so that takes the edge off it.

I'm with Morpheus on this. Irrespective of the mistakes that the Board has clearly made, I still give them more credit than to operate a transfer policy in this way. There is no reason to believe that the memebrs of the Board consider themselves to have the requisite footballing knowledge to make decisions in the way you suggest. It's likely that Lambert did hand a list of players to the Board but to assume that as signings are made the Board "take it upon themselves" to decide the implications for the remaining targets seems pretty far-fetched. Anything other than a frequent dialogue between Lambert and Faulkner etc would be very odd indeed. I'm pretty sure that Lambert was consulted on all signings over the summer and anticipated that the players he signed would be good enough to see us through to January when he could then reassess. He couldn't have anticpated the injury problems or the performances of some of the more senior players (whether he could have done more about the poor performances is for another debate). Hairyhands suggested that Lambert wanted to sign (at least) two players this Januaray but the Board won't sanction their purchase. He suggested Lambert will not be able to sign players that cost £5m. It is plausable that after the summer the Board made it clear to Lambert that no more players could be signed unless more of the higher earners (Hutton, Warnock, Dunne, Bent, Ireland, Gabby, Makoun) are sold. In which case, he must have been hoping that the desperate league situation might encourage the club to reconsider this policy. If hairyhands is right, then it begs a number of questions: 1) Why isn't more being done to shift the higher earners? Where does the responsibility lie - with Lambert of the Board? It's understandable why it would be difficult to ship out Hutton and Warnock - Lambert's taken the decision not to put them in the shop window (presumably for team moral / because they're shit) - and also Dunne (injured). It's perhaps more questionable why he played (and cup-tied) Bent in the FA Cup, but perhaps being cup-tied for the FA Cup isn't a massive deal for potential buyers - alternatively there is also Julie's theory... Maybe he wants to hold on to Ireland and Gabby (and Makoun is on loan anyway). I just hope the Board are doing everything possible to get players off the books. 2) Just how much more does the wage budget need to be trimmed? I can't be bothered to go over the 'ins' and 'outs' from the club, but surely after Beye, Cueller, Collins, Heskey etc left the wage bill is looking a lot healthier? You would have thought we can afford to bring in a few more players - particularaly with the anticipation of Warnock's contract expiring and so on...but I'm not privy to the books or to what Lerner considers to be a balanced set of books. 3) Would the Board really be willing to risk our premiership survival by refusing to sanction players that are desperately needed? No, I don't think so. Having thought through this, I think that the most likely scenario is that Hairyhands' information is half correct. Lambert has quite possibly lined up a couple of £5m players (and maybe a couple more beyond this) but the club are waiting to see if they can shift some of the players that are surpluss to requirements (in particular Bent, Hutton, Warnock and Ireland) before they bring them in. Without shifting players the Board faces the risk that Lambert brings players in and we still get relegated - this would make the financial implications of relegation even greater. It's a much easier decision to maintain the status quo with a 'one in, one out' policy than have to take the decision to increase the wage bill with the threat of relegation still looming. They've probably gambled that they could get through the League Cup semi's and the Southampton game without making any signings - although the first-leg result is making this gamble look all the more risky - and one would hope they are doing whatever they can behind the scenes to shift players. If they're not able to shift players going in to the last week of January, they can then take the decision on whether they sanction more signings.

It's not a bad post. But it doesn't address the points that were being discussed in posts that immediately preceded it - except to confirm there is reason to trust Hairy hands' information. There was no debate as to Lambert's ability. For what it's worth, I've personally not stopped backing him. Nor am I blind to the precarious financial position that the club is currently in (I continue to primarily blame MON). The issue that was being discussed was whether Lerner was refusing to 'back' Lambert during this transfer window. Hairy hands has suggested that Lambert had identified two players that he felt were required, but neither have been sanctioned by the club. This raises a number of questions: why is Lambert not clear about the parameters under which he is working? How wildly over-expensive were the players he identified? Hairy hands suggested that Lambert will not be able to sign £5m players - if the two players would have cost the club £10m it doesn't seem a huge amount to pay to avoid the far greater financial implication of relegation - particularly given the increased TV revenues. I will continue to support Lambert irrespective of how this month pans out, but without the couple of players we are crying out there's a good chance we'll go down'

Fair enough. If you're right (or your source is) then it certainly is a risky strategy - so risky that, for the first time, I think it's more likely we'll go down than stay up.d

Apologies if I've missed it, but I've not seen you provide any explanation as to why you may have an insight into what's going on behind the scenes at the club. The tone of every post I've seen of yours suggests you want everyone to believe that you have acces to privileged information. Unless you can provide a reason for me to believe you, I'll continue to assume your posts are just a negative brand of wild speculation.

I think we'll see quite a different starting XI come September, and even more so after January. I said before that I wouldn't have been surprised with any result today. There were positives and there were negatives, but perhaps the most encouraging thing is that we have a manager that will analyse that performance and address the issues. Let's not forget that this was Paul Lambert's first competitive game in charge against real opposition. I'm sure the transfer window stays open beyond the start of the season as it allows the managers to cement their thoughts in pre season when buying players, after seeing the squad in play in the league. If Lambert wanted a few million quid to spend and hope for mid table year on year, he would've stayed at Naaaarwich. I'm sure we weren't his only suitor either, so he must have had a reason to come to Villa as I'm sure other clubs could've matched his new salary. It's clear what we need in the squad and I'm sure Lambert will be backed in order to get them. Roll on the next game and UTV! This The Twilight Zone.

I think "rock the casbah" would be wholly appropriate. I think that NormandyVillan was playing about although I think he underlined that there is no reason to change the original lyrics. "rock the crossbar" is laughable. Just my thoughts.

Well, Darren Bent thinks we're going to have a "really, really good season" so I'll say £15m net.

Ah, there's more. Are they going to unleash Jack on him?

Ah, click the picture of him. Then it loads.

Yep, me too. What a load of bollocks.

Last thing I want is for us to do a Man City.

^ Although it's just your opinion, and therefore there's every possibility you're wrong, I think you've captured the difference between the two 'types' of manager that we could hire. For me, Houillier fitted your 'Klinsman' bracket and McLeish your 'Bradley'. I agree that MON also fitted the 'Bradley' bracket, although he was a very very competent example of it. I think the reason so many fans got behind OGS was not just the excitement of the risk, but was because the youtube video (and his background) seemed to suggest he fitted into the Klinsman bracket. I'll be happy as long as we appoint someone who, I can at least believe, similarly fits this bracket. Excellent post by the way.