Alec

Well then you'd be asking an entirely different question. I wonder if it still crosses the minds of the Barcelona hierarchy when they took a chance on the unproven Guardiola.

Yes, but the reason he is a big name is because he spent the best part of 15 years at the most successful, best run Club in the Premier League. An unknown Norwegian would be exactly that - unknown - because he doesn't have League Winners medals, FA Cup winners medals or League Cup Winners medals, and he probably wouldn't have scored the winning goal in a Champions League final. The reasons that make Solskjaer a big name are all rooted in his vast experience of our league and working under and alongside the best in the business. It's called pedigree - and its the kind that an unknown from any of Europe's peripheral leagues would not have. He wouldn't have played at the highest level, he wouldn't have studied under the greatest manager of all time and he wouldn't have coached one of the best groups of young players in this country whilst learning his trade. So in this respect, yes, you're right - if it was a complete unknown that had just won the Norwegian league, nobody would be excited. It's because Solskjaer has so much more going for him that has created such a buzz. Do you want Ince or Bruce or Mclaren ? They all have the same "pedigree" No they don't. Yes, Ince and Bruce played under Ferguson and won medals. However, they were not afforded the opportunity to play virtually all of their careers there and did not achieve nearly as much as Solskjaer did. They were also not invited to take charge of Utd's reserves - Solskjaer was. Solskjaer played until his retirement at Old Trafford and was given the job with the development of Utd's young players because he was held in higher regard by Ferguson who had always lauded his analytical ability to read the game - an ability that so far seems readily apparent in his short managerial career. As for McLaren - well, c'mon. Be serious. He spent all of three years as Ferguson's no. 2, a position the Utd manager has regularly changed throughout his tenure. And his record elsewhere speaks for itself. I'm not saying this is a slam-dunk. Of course there is an element of risk. But it would represent a calculated risk based on the highest credentials anyone of his standing could realistically have achieved under the age of 40. There is absolutely no basis with which to invoke names like Bruce, Ince or McLaren in comparison - certainly not before he has even had a chance to get to work.

Yes, but the reason he is a big name is because he spent the best part of 15 years at the most successful, best run Club in the Premier League. An unknown Norwegian would be exactly that - unknown - because he doesn't have League Winners medals, FA Cup winners medals or League Cup Winners medals, and he probably wouldn't have scored the winning goal in a Champions League final. The reasons that make Solskjaer a big name are all rooted in his vast experience of our league and working under and alongside the best in the business. It's called pedigree - and its the kind that an unknown from any of Europe's peripheral leagues would not have. He wouldn't have played at the highest level, he wouldn't have studied under the greatest manager of all time and he wouldn't have coached one of the best groups of young players in this country whilst learning his trade. So in this respect, yes, you're right - if it was a complete unknown that had just won the Norwegian league, nobody would be excited. It's because Solskjaer has so much more going for him that has created such a buzz.

Conclusive If that was our goal, I'd be fuming! Borderline at best I'd say it's conclusive. It's really **** close, that's for sure. But you can't be a bit offside, or offside a little bit. You're either offside or your not, and the rule is any part of the body you can score a goal with. He's offside. If anything it's conclusive that he is onside? Which parts of his body are offside apart from his arm? At the end of the day, who even understands the offside rule anymore? I bet if you lined up ten officials, they'd give you ten different decisions. I thought attacking players were supposed to get the advantage (in which case, we'd have been **** today), though that really never happens. All I know is, I didn't think it was offside as I watched it live and looking at the replay and that still, I don't think anyone would be saying that Villa got cheated if it had been given. But we've been on the end of some shocking decisions lately so it's about time one went our way. And maybe it technically was offside, but I guarantee you the linesman guessed that it was, rather than being certain.

If that's 'conclusive', I'd love to see your analysis of the Zapruder film.

To be completely honest, criticising the players at this point seems redundant. On the whole, the youngsters are acquitting themselves admirably, especially considering the absence of leadership, either on or off the field from those who should be providing it. Baker and Weimann have been especially impressive in the last couple of games and feel they could have a future in the first team. But ultimately, when it matters most, there's no composure and no quality. That's the McLeish effect. And though that wasn't the best nor the worst we've played this season, the fact is the Club are now counting the cost of McLeish being too cautious/negative/inept when he had a full squad at his disposal. There's little point getting on the backs of the young players - and, in all fairness, the crowds aren't. And that may be yet another very lucky break that McLeish is feeling the benefit of as it's ensuring the atmosphere remains muted rather than vitriolic. I've never endured a worse season of home performances and McLeish/Faulkner/Lerner deserve to be on the receiving end of sustained, unflagging hostility for every single passing minute they remain at the Club.

In terms of potential replacements, does anyone think that the man in the opposition dug-out yesterday is a reasonable shout? Di Matteo is sure to be out of work in the summer, did a fairly decent job at WBA, gets his teams organised and sets them up to play the right way. He's not what I would describe as top class but then we're not going to see anyone of that calibre anyway. Players seem to respond to him and in terms of communication and general likeability, would be the polar.opposite of McLeish.

I said I wouldn't renew last summer but I did. I won't be able to bring myself to do so again this year though unless major changes happen. I think those that are suggesting that you stand by the Club through thick and thin are underestimating how much not going will hurt those that believe it to be their only form of protest available. It must be obvious to all at the Club by now that supporters are not happy but if they decide to persist with McLeish and the current way of doing things, refusing to go to matches (and I, for one, will also not be spending another penny on any Club merchandise for as long as things remain as they are) will be the only meaningful action left for supporters to affect change. It pains me that I feel so dramatically at odds with the Club but I still haven't rebounded from the contemptuous way we were all treated last summer, let alone the miserable experience that has been this season, so I feel it is ultimately in the best interests of the Club's future that protest continues and supporters cease ploughing money into the Club until reason finally prevails among the hierarchy.

No point rating individuals or discussing the continuing tactical ineptitude and bizarre team selection. It was another of what are fast becoming a trademark in McLeish's management of the Club - the 'non-performance'. It's when you send out the team with no intention of trying to win the game and focus entirely on limiting the opposition to as few goals as possible. The opposition, quick to realise this, barely bother themselves to get out of second gear, doing the minimal amount required to take the points. The match descends into an abject routine of going through the motions until the referee puts everyone watching out of their misery. See also the matches against Man City (a), Man Utd (h), Spurs (a), Liverpool (h) so far this season for further examples. This is, simply put, the most cowardly way to play football.

Check the first few pages in the match thread - hes not on his own. The rest of your post - I agree with. It is acceptable to lose a closely contested match against superior opposition. It is not acceptable to keep enduring what can only be described as 'non-performances' where the team doesn't even try to get over the halfway line. That display just demonstrated the chronic lack of ambition in how McLeish approaches the game. Villa don't struggle at home because they are nervous playing in front of their supporters, it is because McLeish is clueless when it comes to setting up a team that has to take the game to the opposition. That's why our home record is as appalling as it is. I'm not suggesting that we can dominate a side like City for 90 mins but the Villa players took to the field today looking like they were beaten before a ball was even kicked. And it's far from the first time that has been the case this season. These 'non-performances' show nothing but contempt for Villa supporters and the scoreline does not accurately reflect just how much of a disgrace they are.

A very articulate argument - and a commendable one. However, at this point how we as supporters are perceived is largely immaterial. The Club is already a laughing stock, let alone the fans, and has been since the calamitous bungling of the selection process that led to the appointment of McLeish. Every key decision that Lerner and Faulkner have made in the last year has succeeded only in rendering the Club an irrelevance to the English game. Villa are not taken seriously on a national level and won't be for as long as the current regime remains in place. I have no doubt that McLeish is only a symptom of the cancerous ineptitude running throughout the Club, but seeing as there are no signs of Lerner selling up any time soon, the best supporters can hope for is a better man in charge of first team affairs. Newcastle fans ousted Sam Allardyce and Liverpool fans hunted Roy Hodgson down like a dog until matters came to a head in less time than McLeish has already had, with superior track records, less baggage and a less pitiful performance on the pitch to justify such rancour. Whether an organised protest on a match day is the right course of action is debatable, but the fact is when the Club turned around and very publicly told every supporter dead-set against McLeish's appointment to go away and **** themselves, this kind of circus was always going to be inevitable and will continue for as long as he remains in place. The Club have only themselves to blame for causing this division, McLeish should've known better than to take the job and everyone concerned needs to stop burying their heads in the sand and accept that change must happen one way or another. And frankly, with the level of deplorable behaviour currently rife in the national game, the expression of discontent on the part of our supporters will barely register as a blip on the radar, and will be long since forgotten once a better manager is in place. Football coverage in this country is dictated by Sky who love to paint the rosy image of the Premier League being the best in the world because it fuels their coffers. If Villa appoint a manager that can take them back toward the top six and playing superior football, they'll be all over us and as keen to sweep any unpleasantness associated with McLeish's removal under the rug as anyone. Just look at the way we are suddenly presented with the picture of unity at St. James Park - the Geordies have always hated Mike Ashley and were as unimpressed by the appointment of Pardew as they were with Allardyce. Now it's one big happy family that the media can't get enough of. All football fans are tribal and all are as reactionary as the next. If a protest goes ahead today, it may not look good but if it's not today, it will happen another day and keep happening. There is good reason for the dissatisfaction and frustration that supporters feel and I hope this does not get lost in any furore caused by events coming to a head. As such, I would only advise that supporters keep things vocal but respectful - and above all, make sure that the Sky cameras are aware that it is McLeish's style of football, outdated methods, appalling track record and NOT his past association with Blues that is why he is, and always was, unwanted here. Because this is the message that isn't getting across whenever the subject is discussed - and I blame the local media for this as much as the national press.

A look at the last seven days tells you all you need to know; One good half against Arsenal, one woefully inept second-half capitulation. One truly abysmal half against QPR that would be generous to describe as merely dire, one vastly improved second half. One encouraging, inventive half against Newcastle, one naïve 'let's just sit back and protect what we have' second half, replete with awful substitions that destroyed the shape of the team. This is a pretty accurate reflection of the whole season. We have quality players but they desperately need guidance and a plan to work to. The only way you get this kind of inconsistency is down to a lack of leadership. McLeish is out of his depth, doesn't know what to do with the creative players at his disposal and is at a complete loss to get anything out of the more limited players in the squad. The club aren't going to act now but he HAS to go in the summer.

Good first half - obviously too much football being played on the ground for McLeish's liking so a return to the negative tactics,mind-blowingly inept substitutions and plenty of hoofball from the back in the second half ensured we lost the game. McLeish's ability to do the inexplicable continues - and if the players are starting to show signs of having had enough, it's not surprising to me.

It's almost as if he we ended the first half having played some reasonable decent stuff and looking better than the opposition and McLeish decided the second half plan was to protect what we had. Largely hopeless in the second half, tactically negative, sitting back and inviting pressure, compounded by awful substitions that killed the shape of the team. Gardner did ok against Wolves and would be the most natural replacement for Ireland (if he had to come off). Why does McLeish persist in drafting in players to play out of position and keeps the one player back who looked like he could make a difference when he came on.until the last five minutes. This was far from the worst we've seen from a McLeish team but that second half was pitifully mediocre just when it looked like we were in a position to take the game to Newcastle. The man needs to go.

their bottom of league and he got a straight red card in last league game Don't say it too loud - that sounds like the kind of criteria Faulkner would buy a player on if his process of selecting a manager is anything to go by.