ozvillafan

See Butterfingers - there are more than two types of people. There are actually 10 types: Those who understand binary and those who don't. Sorry, don't get this. You'd be in the latter group, then 10 is the representation for the number 2 in binary. It's an old geek joke..... .. and I couldn't resist. Sorry.

Why there have to be a focus on anything else? There are to main bits to football. Results, and style of play. One of them has improved this season, the other hasn't. If they were both decent, there'd be no complaints. Been a while since you went to the Lerner thread then, eh?

See Butterfingers - there are more than two types of people. There are actually 10 types: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

That was their first outing together, no? And against a red-hot Spurs at the time. There is enough improvement in Tonev, Kozak and arguably Albrighton to suggest you have more to cluch than just straws ;-)

The same way we win against any team that tries to attack us (Arsenal, Man City, Southampton) - we get them on the counter.

The only thing missing from that gif is the "thunk" as it rattles the net.

Di Canio got the sack this year. His replacement didn't come for 2 weeks. If you think we could sign a manager by then, you are living in denial. MON left 5 days till kickoff. We lost to Newcastle in our second game. My points are entirely relevant. Why? Because you say so? If results had of been better, I doubt we would have spent anything. No it certainly wouldn't. There are plenty of ambitious managers. McLeish is ambitious. Holloway is ambitious, too. The good ones? They are smart enough to smell a club in decline and, knowing the difficult job ahead, thumbed their noses at us. Martinez, anyone?

Indeed, we had plenty of options. But the job wasn't quite as rosy as you painted. Consider: - being 6 games into the season - having a squad that just got smacked 6-0 by Newcastle - a closed transfer window - no guarantee of funds ("smashing the transfer record" came some months later and was not certain by any means) - facing high expectations from fans/board - requiring compensation for poaching a manager and you might find that common sense would tell you that a majority of the supposed "options" would be: - uninterested (e.g. Martinez) - risky (e.g. lower league managers) - poor (e.g. Hughes) - just downright dumb (e.g. Di Canio).

That's 2 clubs that come out and attack us, expecting the win. We do alright on the counter, so no real surprises there. Getting goals against teams that sit back - that's our issue. We need more creativity in the middle of the park before that will change.

Yep. His 2 goals from open play offer us nothing.

Bonuses? If we agreed a bonus on performance for some (most) of our Lambert purchases, would that be included as a transfer fee? Or only once the bonus is realised?

His shooting is getting better and, lets face it, we know he can hit them so it will come as he settles into the league. I've seen some decent crosses and passes too in his more recent performances. Like the team, the trend is towards continual improvement. Only his touch concerns me - it's overly heavy and he turned over a lot of ball in that first half vs WBA.

Does he need to provide a reason? In his opinion, Shay is better off away from the first team.

Lambert saw something in him so I wouldn't write him off. I've seen steady improvement in the games he's played - mind you, he started pretty low with his full debut. He's not pulling up trees, that's for sure. Needs more time.

I remember when Benteke was 3 games in. Most people thought he was useless. I'm willing to give Kozak more time and stand by my earlier statement that he was unlucky to be hooked instead of Benteke.

Out of curiousity - how many games has Kozak played for us as a lone striker?

This really hit home for me during the game. While there are slight differences here and there, essentially KEA, Delph, Sylla and Westwood are very similar in the way they play their football. I don't think this is a good thing. We could really use a more attacking forward - perhaps for Tonev to find his feet a little quicker or Gardener to be fit. Something different. Anything!

Perhaps, but how long can you go on past laurels and not current form? It's true about Benteke winning the headers. But, then, he was the target for most of the forward balls. Kozak doesn't strike me as a forward that plays off the shoulder of a target man - but that is what he was asked to do. If he was the target man for the last 30 mins instead of Benteke, I doubt he would have performed any less.

Thought he was unlucky to be hooked. Looked more likely to score than Benteke, imo.

Things that stood out: - Sylla was a passenger in this one. - Tonev is getting better. All of his shots (3 or 4 in total) were on goal. He tried to play the free role, but his touch let him down often. He'll improve. - Kozak was unlucky to get hooked, imo. He looked more likely than Benteke - KEA showed why he gets the nod. Not because he's brilliant - he's not - but of our midfield he is the most composed in front of goal. Imagine if that was Delph, Westwood or Sylla...... - Brave from Lambert, considering all 3 subs were not up for a full 90 minutes yet and not allowing for any injuries for the last 30 minutes. Risky, but ballsy too.

I always thought Alpay was a better defender than Mellberg..... ... well, up until he went to the WC and his head all asploded.

With Lowton and Luna, I like 3-5-2. It can be a quite attacking system as well, if you want. There is no such thing as 3-5-2. In that formation, the "3" all sit centrally. That means there is acres of space out wide - especially at Villa Park (one of the biggest pitches in the PL). Inevitably, the wide men in the "5" end up dropping to cover the space, meaning you really start playing a 5-3-2 instead. Having so few bodies ahead of the ball, then, means you end up camped in your own half with your midfielders desperately trying to shut the ball down. When they do, they have 4 other people in front or around them, and 6 behind (including the keeper). The ball tends to go backwards and we continue to play in our own half until, under decent press, we hoof it up to the forwards for the cycle to begin again. This is what we saw in that abomination against West Ham. I hate the formation. 4 at the back gives us better shape and a variety of options in front. (4-4-2, 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1, etc).

I'd agree, though I'd add that Lambert's contribution has been more positive than negative.

That's an interesting phrase: "out of control". It suggests there was no way to bring it back in line - which we now know to be false. A less sensational assessment would be that wages were too high. I don't have a definitive answer for you on why - there were none in the article itself - although there are plenty of theories which I am certain you are aware of. What really matters is that wages are no longer high. As for settling out of court - I'm not sure I get your point. You seem to suggest the reason Lerner settled was because he was in the wrong. It has been mooted that they had a rolling 1 year contract with MON. While I know as much as you, it just may be that MON demanded his pay by court order. Why would he do that? Well, why would he walk out of the job 4 days before the season started? Perhaps because he is a bitter, bitter man. Regardless - Villa paid whatever was due without having to go to court. End of story. Or it could just be that it has little to do with where we are heading. You can't complain about "letting the wage structure get out of control" and then, in the next breath, complain that "wages have very much restricted what the manager can do". Which one do you want? I've ignored nothing. Let me say it again: Lerner backs his manager with a budget. What point is there saying "you can have half now and half in January"? And what is the point of a budget if you break it every January? They backed their manager's judgement to keep us in the top flight within their given budget. And they have been proved correct in their judgement so far. This applies to McLeish as much as Lambert. Why is that? Surely our budget is tied to revenue, not to loans. We will have more players on high wages off the bill by the end of the year. Hopefully we finish higher in the table and have bigger home crowds. Who knows? Maybe even an FA cup run? The possibility for higher revenue is there - we should expect a bigger budget also.

That's the excuse for failing to control the finances at the club? The issue was wages to ratio so the owner ignored all the information given to him because the manager was charming? Nope. That is just praisedmambo's opinion. According to the article: MON exit 4 days before the start of the season was a major blow to plans. and Paul (Faulkner) referred to the unpredictability of football – MON exit, which suggests it was MON throwing the toys out of the pram rather than Randy or the club being unreasonable. Indeed it doesn't. Though I'm not sure what they could say about that - perhaps "sorry"? Not sure how that helps us right now, though. Interestingly, they did say this: The club are looking to build success from continuity like ManU/Arsenal model. They are looking to try and build in continuity that can be maintained even if the manager changes, an ethos that runs through. which suggests they have learned from their past mistakes. As you said, it does paint a nicer picture for the future According to the article: Lambert has had £43 million to spend over the last 2 seasons and it is up to him how he spends it. Now questioning the lack of spend in January is very subjective. If you are a "glass half-empty" type of person you could see it as "not backing the manager" or "lacking concern for the club's status". But what sort of club would give their manager a budget and tell them "you can only use 50% now and the rest in January"? Or what sort of budget do you have if it gets thrown out every January for more purchases? I prefer the opposite approach. That is, having been set a budget and the freedom to spend it, the club backed their manager's decisions in the expectation we would not be relegated. If that was the case, then they have been proven correct.