timharding

Andy Johnson 'earned' and scored what? 10 pens for palace? Hate to say it but he was certainly effective. Having a record FULL of pens does detract slightly but I donbt think it puts effectiveness in doubt.

Defoe, like Moore, deserves credit as any member of thestrilkers union will agree that is is tough to go on a scoring streak if you are not a regular starter, or if you're coming off the bench. Defoe got 18 in all comps, Keane got 22 and berbatov got 23. Given that Berbatov is the guarenteed starter, this is a very good return. Ilike Defoe, though not as much as I like Bent, and certainly not as much as the Sun does. However it is important to remember the criteria. 1)Will he improve us? 2)Is he good value? 1)Our squad has 3 out and out strikers and MON clearly wants a 4th. Therefore any new striker is Angel's replacement. I loved JPA but Defoe is an improvement. 2)Cant be answered yet. In a nutshell there are players I'd prefer, but Defoe in a Villa shirt would have more pro's than cons imo.

General, I recently read an interview, in which you were asked if you had been suprised by some of the negative attitudes, or at least a question along those lines. I for one have become increasingly anxious about some of the comments made along these lines recently and would hope that this has not tainted the majority of us with the idea that we are ungrateful for the great strides Mr Lerner and the team have made.

Apparently Big Sam wants to offload Obafemi Martins. I personally subscribe to the view that we are after a player that can deputise for Carew as well as play with him, like Bent (While I think Ashton could deputise for Carew, I doubt they could play together, and for the price Ashton would cost I'd expect him to do both). However for the right price Martins would be a crackin signing. Thoughts?

WARNING! This is not about spurs!!!!!!!!!!! Do people honestly think that UEFA cupfootball is enough of a lure to swing a players decision on who he joins? Champions league yes but UEFA? Its nice to play in but to be honest most players would take it or leave it. Also the players we are looking at are not going to be given a ONE year contract therefore any non participation this year means nothing, because they know that over the course of a 3 or 4 yr contract we're gonna get there and they'll be part of it. Yes they're are clubs that are very attractive, the london lights, european football, but please don't make out there is a massive gulf in appeal, because whilst we are slightly behind, the difference is that. Slight.

In any other topic your post would be fine, this topic however isn't for discussions, its for questions to the general only, if you've found something in here you want to discuss with other VT'ers please by all means start a thread about it in the Villa Talk forum - this has been mentioned SO MANY TIMES!!!! Please observe this rule as it makes it easier for the general to reply to specific points if he doesn't have to read subsequent discussion posts, the rule is there to aid the general, not for some perverse pleasure us mods are supposed to get by deleting posts - Bicks

Anyone hear fat freds comments on the radio today? Some liverpool fans asked if they could have owen back, he said for 9m he'd carry him there! then he realised he were being recorded and he backtracked.

We can get Bent but he might go to the team we shouldnt mention. If he does we'll take defoe. But he might want to stay there so we'll have Keane. But he might want to stay there so we'll have Bellamy, kepa blanco, gudjohnsen, pizzarro, ashton............or we might stick with the bright young talents we have. The point is people we're in the driving seat. A club may beat us to a target, but it doesnt mean anything. We beat a few to Young. No other club will **** up our revolution.

He'd be a fool to go to Pompey. They train at a school, town is shite. I should know i live there!

Agree on the Bent issue. I'd prefer to have him because he could play with any of Gabby/Luke/Carew. Would still fancy defoe though but only if Bent isnt available.

How 'bout eidur gudjohnson then??

Young is too attacking to play in a 3 man midfield, if you sacrifice a midfielder to play 3 up front them the three in midfield have to be more solid. I can see the reasoning though, to fit gabby and defoe in the same team, though I can see them being more rotated.

Exactly what I thought and when I look around the league and ask myself about Owen, other than the top four, I think of...... ......Villa! The funny part here is what i just read some Newcastle fans discuss. Apparantly he has a £ 9 Mill release clause in his contract. One of them even implied that that it had been confirmed. How the hell can you sign a player for £ 17 Mill and give him a £ 9 Mill release clause? It was the only way to get him there. The plan was that he'd score that many goals in his first season that they'd get into the Champs League. By that point they'd hope he'd have done so well, with the club in ahigh position and him loving the adulation that he'd wanna stay whoever came in for him. Because Fat freddie is thick

Can I just add a thought. We need cover at centre back cos laursen can do a full season right? So what if we bought a left back who could cover Bouma when Laursen was injured, with Bouma moving over to his favourite position at left sided centre back? A young left back who could cover the position giving him the time learn the prem. Like Gareth Bale?

How can only staying if the top 4 dont want him be considered loyal though? You're either loyal or you're not, right?

Don't see why people keep putting sneijder as out of our league. He plays in the dutch league, just like bouma did, has less CL exp than Bouma had and whilst he has been sniffed around by a few clubs, they havent signed him have they? He'd come to us like a shot.

I agree. Myself and Glastonspur disagreed on something a few days ago (and probably still do!) yet he always tries to get his point across rather than point scoring.

This Times article is poorly researched and mostly rubbish. Apart from anything else, it doesn't even say whether or not the predicted figures relate to net spending (i.e. money spent after subtracting money received from player sales). Let's take the case of W.Ham, for example. Sure they now have a wealthy owner, but they've already spent a load on new players in January in their desperate efforts to stay up, to say nothing of the huge wages they've committed themselves to in the case of several of their new signings. They've also just been fined 6m by the FA over the Tevez and Mascherano 'registrations'. And on top of that they'll receive something like 6m less than Spurs (for example) in league prize money due to their final finishing place (if they stay up). Yet despite all this, and the despite the fact that Spurs have had a bumper income this season from all their cup runs (TV money, gate receipts etc.) and have a big wadge of cash saved up from their low net spending during the last 5 transfer windows, we're supposed to believe that W.Ham will spend perhaps three times as much as Spurs this summer (10m versus 30m) as we push for top 4 next season. It just doesn't add up. Here's another example of why the article is largely nonsense in the article: It's very likely that Spurs will shortly (next couple of weeks) finalise a deal for Younes Kaboul (a French U-21 centre-back from Auxerre) for 7 - 7.5m. So that's possibly 70 - 75% of our summer budget gone already if you believe the times article. Sunderland to spend 30m? I strongly doubt that. Derby (Birmingham, W.Brom etc.) to spend 3 times the small amount that Portsmouth can supposedly only afford? Portsmouth now also have a wealthy owner, so it doesn't seem very likely. I'm not saying that all the figures in the article are wide of the mark (from what I read on this board it seems that your wealthy new owner will spend big this summer, so maybe the 40m for Villa is correct - I wouldn't know), but a lot of the figures seem to me like they've plucked out of the air with very little substance to back them up.. Portsmouth spent everything Gaydamak had to offer in the summer. They went for broke aiming for europe. Plus the new stadium is going to cost 600m. Theirs is accurate, though some could be questioned.

They dont play right wingers. In fact they only use him when robben/cole/ballack is injured. If this was the case they wouldn't have accepted offers from two clubs in January. they change there system, as they have done lately and anyway if SWP was performing like he did before january we would have a chance to sign him but he has been quality and has looked more chelsea standard, i don't see why they would sell their only right winger without a replacement it would just make there system to predictable, as if cole/robben gets injured they won't have 2 wingers available. SWP will also feel that he has done enough to deserve to stay at Chelsea, he was obviously reluctant to leave Chelsea in january, and now he's putting on good performances he will see no reason to why he should drop down a level and come to us. He will if after feeling like he's played better they STILL accept offers for him. He hasn't played better, he's had two good games, and he's been playing cos they've been forced to play him. Fact is in a week where they score 1 goal in a two leg CL semi, and a period where they thrown away the league by being unable to score enough goals, SWP has to be considered weak as he is supposed to be one of the main attacking threats.

He's been playing very well at Chelsea recently. I think they'll keep hold of him. I'd be happy to see swp turn up at villa park, but wouldn't put him at the top of my wish list. However, he's 25, and he could definitely return to the form that had him in the england set up. Chelsea don't play to his strengths which to me is an expansive game using width and pace to stretch the opposition. I think he'd get in either of the arsenal or liverpool sides and do a lot better for either those sides than he currently does. Its just that at the minute that position isnt a priority for either of those sides, leaving the door open for us. Any of the other prem sides bar maybe spurs (because of Lennon) would love to sign him but many could not afford him. I only think he's played well in two games (west ham/arsenal) and he's played plenty. If Mourinho stays he'll go. And the fact he's played more this year won't be an improvement because he only played due to injuries and still didnt look right in their system. He'll be available.

They dont play right wingers. In fact they only use him when robben/cole/ballack is injured. If this was the case they wouldn't have accepted offers from two clubs in January.

who needs world class at right back anyway. Luke young is- A) an improvement a bargain Thus settling a problem, freeing us up to buy more talented players for the more pressing important areas

I'd rather have Craig Gordon than Boruc

On the whole he's just a better player. Just like Little was better than Gray even though Gray got more goals. Villa has a little bit of everything and in fact for me Totti is the closest comparison, and a fit firing on all cylinders Henry. This has drifted, that much we can agree on. The only reason I have brought Villa up is in response to the idea that Eto'o is unsignable because he is europes top striker. And based on demand, he isnt because the tops clubs have largely ignored him even after his very public issues at Barca. If the tops clubs arent an option for him then we could be. i dont think we'd ever have more than a 10% chance, I just disagree with the idea that we have 0% chance, given the circumstances AT THIS TIME. 0% chances are out there i agree. The Totti's the Kaka's, Ronaldinho's, Villa's and Adriano's. Just at this point in his career Eto'o is at a crossroads.

Yes if of course a strikers only contribution is to put the ball in the net. And again on that token, that means Eto'o has NEVER been Europes top striker. In fact on that basis Shevchenko has NEVER. It must mean that last year it was Luca Toni and at one point Kevin Phillips was better than Shearer.