itdoesntmatterwhatthissay

I agree with you there, but I do wonder how he'd fare if he had players close to him so he didn't have to be the ball winner, the move starter and the holding midfielder. His passing really dies after 70 minutes because he's saving all his energy for tackling and chasing the ball.

You can't say players aren't giving 100% and then play them again and again. That's bad management. Good management is trying a player and turning any failure into a positive, building trust. Fair enough the kids aren't good enough but up front they simply can't be any worse. Plenty of managers have shaken things up by playing a kid in attack to put pressure on their main players, the fact Garde hasn't shows real nativity especially at this stage in the season. I like him and I'd be happy if he stayed, but like Lambert if he's not going to learn from his mistakes he might as well go now.

Effort has been one thing, very few of our players give 100%, but it's the being brave aspect I can't stomach. If you see a pass, try it, going backwards will only lose us the ball anyway. We spend so much time dawdling and missing opportunities and it's why we're impotent up front and constantly on the back foot in defence. Watching Gil offer himself for a pass, or Ayew making a run seems pointless. If a pass if made (10% of the time) nobody supports to either make a run or play short, and when a pass isn't made (90% of the time) that player usually plays 'pass the responsibility'. It then ends up with Hutton who thinks, jesus christ you guys are awful, maybe I can do better. He can't but thanks for trying Hutts! Be it quality or attitude, I can't fathom why even our kids can play three neat passes in a few seconds, and our first team barely realises it's an option.

It's based on the fact he's strong, ludicrously fast on the ball, shows a passion for crossing or taking a man on and is potentially a game changer, as we've experienced ourselves. Is he going to make it as a top player? Who knows, plenty of talents haven't.

Win/win for him. By the time his contract ends he'll leave on a free and either earn the same wage taking into consideration bosman, or turn out amazing and earn more. Apart from wages many managers will take him on, he's raw, fast with the ball and knows to cross. He's a proper talent and with a good manager his early problems should be just that, he doesn't appear to have a balotelli attitude so that's a bonus.

I like Bentley as his shot stopping and positioning seem pretty decent, but I do have a few concerns. He doesn't seem to catch the ball all that often and he pushes the ball into less convincing places. On a free he'd be mad to not go for. The Clough link is interesting, he's highly rated if not a bit lightweight. Looks technically able in front of goal though. Bolton need the money. I'd be looking at Jermaine Anderson because I think in the Championship he'd be brilliant. I like Rasulo too, though I can't see him being a Prem player unless fitting in a system as he's not exactly blessed with pace. I'd much rather cut the wasters loose, buy in some hungry Championship level talents and then fit in our youth players. Worked for Southampton.

I didn't know I could have a block list. I just use the pause button. It's only recently that ads have started to annoy me a lot. I use Chrome for 90% of browsing and Firefox for sites I regularly visit. I visit VT on both but have no ad blocker on firefox. My motivation and conscience decides whether I pause the block. I have been known to donate to sites, not for a while, but if it's a forum for example I think quality interaction is as important as a financial contribution. I don't think I'd pay for sites, there's enough info out there to avoid that. Though who knows, the internet is an evolving beast. I don't pay for streaming movies, music or anything else. And only have Prime because I got a free trial for 6 months. FT - Financial Times, sorry, FT wasn't very helpful. In order to read the content they ask you a question. Some other websites won't let you see anything unless you stop blocking their ads. They're usually boring sites. A review system could work by individual websites being scanned for ads and if they pass a set criteria wouldn't be blocked by providers. It would need to be adopted industry wide. I don't know how the whole ad system works but I'm not sure enough has been done on the part of website owners to manage the concerns felt by their users, but then I'm a policy sort so perhaps I just look at things in a different manner.

Wooooo! He hit the target, haven;t seen that for a while. Still poor though and delays or misses far too many passes inside, not as brave as he was 6 months ago...though perhaps that's a little understandable.

Another example of how our team just isn't as good as it used to be. Though I do like Veretout, just not everything around him.

If it's a site I like I'll generally pause my ad-blocker when reminded, but usually leave it on to stop the many number of ads on other tabs. When content blocked I leave the site unless it's interesting, so a lot of the emphasis is put on the website itself. If a site you visit doesn't meet your expectations both in terms of function or content you might be inclined to leave the blocker on or not visit properly. As an example I always answer FT questions, and will unpause ad-blocking on streaming sites. I'd imagine there are a fair few ways to make things easier for advertising on sites, such as an agreement on the type of ad solutions which wouldn't be blocked, a limit on the amount or a website review system. All of this would cost money to set up but that's where organisations such as the ISPA could be involved. I don't run a website with ads so it doesn't cause me too much bother, but if I did I might be more inclined to think of solutions which could and perhaps should come from my end. Ad-blockers exist because websites became too add heavy, with obtrusive ads making them even more useful and fake sites multiplying the annoyance. If you're not a site which abuses the ad process perhaps you (not you specifically) should be using that to your advantage.

Our final third interplay is embarrassing, he doesn't fit with what we 'deliver' up front. He needs runners, quick interplay and the ball early, with the current starters we can't offer any of that.

You know how hype works, look at the players Liverplop and United have signed in recent years. The pace and single minded attacking desire is worth it alone for many clubs. He's raw, very raw, but he's also terrifying to play against, he just doesn't know how to use it. How much did United pay for Anderson?!! Many managers will have looked at him and thought, I can unlock that potential; that will also increase the likelihood of a bid. I'm not sure many managers feel that way about Brady, though we both know who would've been the better player for us this year...

Garde recently cited he didn't feel anybody was mentally strong enough for the first team, while I might argue you don't know until you try them, there are plenty of match players about, I am happy he's made that clear to the youngsters. I used to watch some youth and reserve team games but I've moved away so am limited to highlights, from the little I've actually seen of game presence there isn't anyone that stands out, though I do think Sellars has something about him when in the final third. Also I do think at this time it's a good opportunity to try them, if they fail with the team so be it, you can always put them back in the under 21's where they'll get that winning feeling back.

Another post I can't like even though it's true.

There are some brilliant young players dotted around the leagues, we should start again and entice them at Championship, not Premiership value. Villa in the Championship is very enticing, plus it's development not just a big move. Imo we should cut the crap, guys on disproportionate wages anyway, see if you can keep some of the new signings, chuck in the kids and make promotion a maximum of 3 year ambition. I hope not, but next year could prove a hangover year.

Because their kids train with Aguero, Kompany (sometimes), Hart etc. with many bought because they're potential world stars. A few true academy graduates but their youth team is very different than ours....similarly though they're getting ripped apart like our would..... We just need one or two getting minutes every game, it'll help instil a hunger to improve.

Really interesting letter from the employee who resigned, I can't believe how rotten all the stories are. Clearly there isn't actually any positive examples of Lerner's contribution.

I wouldn't play them all but I would give a few kids a chance in certain positions. Up front is one place, why not, win or lose you just tell them to use their time learning how difficult the game is. Not going to be any worse than the current crop. Midfield I'm not so sure, Lyden should get a shot but others, well I don't think central midfield is where the problem really lies. Despite the being hopeless against Liverplop. Jack can't even get a look in. At the back, well it's a big ask for a CB to come in but perhaps throwing a kid in for 20 mins or so would be helpful in settling them into high pressure scenarios. All about mentality on both sides, you need a manager to know their youth players and make sure he can mentor a poor performance into something to learn from. Takes a great manager and special player to do well from an early age.

I know the defence is pretty shoddy but our attack doesn't half heap pressure on them. The lack of pace really isn't a help when defending so deep, so little support for forward runners.

When did we end up with such a slow attack, jesus. Bad times...at least Vert and Gil are noticeably smarter than our fast players.

I think that's part of the problem. Looking back we had attacking quality and players who could beat a man like Gil does. Similarly to Gil most good players we had couldn't consistently beat the second and third man and if they could, they eventually left our club. 5-10 years ago we'd be look at Gil and say, he's a great young talent, now we look and say, he's one of our best players. Adjusting to our new level has been tough for many Villa fans and I don't think they understand what extra he has to do to be a consistent attacking threat. For me the fact he recognises that he MUST put himself in positions where he'll lose the ball shows he's understands how to improve us. Consistent execution comes with practice and space, yet with such little movement around him he doesn't really get a chance of either. At times against Norwich he was double marked, yet other players still found little to no space.

Still no runners to help out his one footedness but he does a great job finding us space to move forward. I'd love to see him more advanced with a chance to shoot, but for now he needs to link up play because nobody else in midfield has his ball carrying in the final third.

I thought so too, Gueye was instrumental everywhere and Okore was brave on and off the ball despite being out of position a couple of times. I felt Gabby had an influential game, capped with a goal but he didn't offer much in attack with many single runs rather than continually testing the back line and our midfields vision. But it's Gabby, for Gabby he had a good game.

Didn't bring on Richardson, played Richards right back, fired them up after half time. Plus we actually look okay at home, that hasn't been the case for years. I'm just happy when I turn on to watch I'm more concerned about our terrible attack than our terrible tactics. Really hope he stays, tbh it might be a fight to keep him.

Doesn't surprise me that his passing isn't brilliant in the last 25 minutes, the guy is amazing throughout and does so much work on and off the ball. He must be shattered. Watching him at the end running along Gabby was brilliant, he really gives it his all. I guess it'll be down to him whether he stays or goes.