Alec

Man City could've got De Jong for free at the end of the season (he was in the last year of his contract) but instead chose to buy him for £18m in the January transfer window. Shows how rich they are really... There was 18 months left on his contract. I'm pretty sure there wasn't, pretty sure they'd signed him when he was in his final 6 months. Reports state he signed a four and a half year contract with Hamburg in January 2006, so he would've been tied to them until summer 2010. Though just done some checking and apparently there was a release clause that would've enabled him to leave summer 2009 for the rather arbitrary sounding figure of £2.3m. Go figure.

Man City could've got De Jong for free at the end of the season (he was in the last year of his contract) but instead chose to buy him for £18m in the January transfer window. Shows how rich they are really... There was 18 months left on his contract.

Looks like De Jong went for £18m - but considering we had £12m in the coffers from the sale of Barry, it shouldn't have been beyond us. Kompany cost £6m the year before, which has turned out to be an absolute steal - I think we spent £7m on Warnock! On a side note, those players are only now 26 and 25 respectively. Certainly puts our transfer policy during those years in perspective.

I'd say his signings of Tevez, De Jong and Kompany have built the spine of Man City. Very much agree. One has to wonder if it would've been unrealistic for Villa to have signed De Jong and Kompany back in 2009. We were arguably still looking a better bet at the time as far as challenging the top four was concerned but seemed to become increasingly less ambitious in our transfer plans. Those two have been invaluable to City ever since.

Mark Hughes would be a good, solid appointment. He's highly respected within the game by all accounts and reports over the last few years have suggested players like playing for him (Tevez being probably the most high-profile). As a player, he was a winner, and although that doesn't necessarily always translate to coaching and management, he knows what it takes to perform under pressure in this league. His appointment would likely have more of a quietly unifying effect than one that perhaps galvanises optimism that a Champions League challenge will all of a sudden be back on the agenda - but then that is probably as it should be. Restoring much-needed stability and a tougher backbone to the team in order to get comfortably back among the top six or seven is the realistic aim for next season and I think Hughes would provide that. His teams generally tend to play good football - one of the reasons he got the sack at City was the number of high-scoring matches took their toll after a while, resulting in inconsistent results. I can remember their 4-2 home win against Arsenal and the famous 4-3 defeat at Old Trafford against Utd early in the 09-10 season being good examples of the intent to always take the game to the opposition but inevitably results weren't always going to go in their favour. The City players - and fans if I recall correctly - felt he was harshly treated, even if the success Mancini has since had may ultimately prove that their board was right. But it has to be acknowledged that their agenda is different to ours at present and their managers will get graded on a much harsher scale. Hughes' level - which I would probably rate as being good but not quite good enough to break up the established order - is a pretty accurate reflection of our own level, one that we've allowed to slip this season. So after twelve months of poor performances, player unrest, public relations disasters and a relegation battle, Hughes would act quickly to put many of these basic problems to rest and set about taking us back to where we were before O'Neill departed. Right now, I would be happy with that. Whether he - and we - could kick on from there I don't know, but I would suggest that would probably take the appointment of a manager that is unlikely to take on the job at present. It's also worth considering his transfer record. It's difficult to draw too many conclusions from what he did at Man City as there were a lot of peripheral reasons why players like Barry, Bellamy, Adebayor, Toure, Given, Tevez, Robinho et al. elected to go there and I don't think for one minute that Mark Hughes was the chief motivating factor. But it demonstrates someone who can balance the ambition to secure the more glamourous, continental headliners with the pragmatism of establishing a core of British (or at the very least Premier League) experience, and this perhaps strikes a happier balance than what we saw in O'Neill's more myopic recruitment policy. We may not be shopping in quite such exclusive outlets but fundamentally this can still apply. Like David Moyes, he also has a good record when it comes to getting the most from what resources he has available. Players as otherwise erratic, troublesome or inconsistent as Craig Bellamy, Stephen Ireland, David Bentley, Roque Santa Cruz and Bobby Zamora to name but a few have all played arguably their best football under him, and one need only look at how much more influential our own departee Steve Sidwell looks at Fulham in comparison to the anonymous figure who coasted invisibly through so many games for Villa. After a patchy first half of the season, he has ensured Fulham have been nowhere near the relegation zone by the time the business end of the season has come around, and done so with a squad considerably inferior to ours. For all of these reasons - plus the added prospect of seeing what one of British football's all-time great goalscorers can do working with Darren Bent - he would not only be a sensible, realistic choice but one that would suit us. He will know Villa's potential, the size and history of the club and demonstrate a visible understanding of what the job entails and the fans expect a lot better than the management team have shown this season. There may possibly be better choices but not that many as far as I can see (Moyes would still be the preference on balance), so I'd be happy to see him in the dug-out come August and could see him doing a very respectable job here.

That's someone ITK about most footballing matters. I'm not sure - I like Guillem and think he has a pretty good grasp of all things related to Spanish football but I can't imagine he's as well informed when it comes to the daily goings-on at Villa. And how can any Premier League manager realistically reduce his workload? It's not a role where there's any place to hide and you're either fit to do it or you're not. If there was any truth in the idea, and more responsibility was to pass to Gary McAllister in order to facilitate Houllier continuing, I think we would be looking at serious problems ahead. In my opinion, the decision concerning our manager will be as emphatic an indication of the club's ambition as we are likely to see. Any attempt to work around Houllier's health concerns to keep him in the job will be a loud and clear signal that rather than go through the upheaval of implementing big changes, the board are ready to settle for mid-table stability (and based upon this year's overall performance, that would not be guaranteed). Regardless of what Houllier's doctors might attest to, it will be too big a risk to gamble on him being able to make it through the season without missing games - a farcical scenario for a major club. The fans also need to see a degree of ruthlessness in the club's appraisal of team affairs this season when the last ball is kicked and the merest hint of persevering with a management team that has failed at virtually every turn both on and off the field will, again, signal a lack of intent to make us genuinely competitive nearer the top end of the table. Ordinarily, I would always advocate continuity but there are simply too many possible risks to starting again next season with the same personnel, not the least of which will be the negativity and doubt that will continue to fester. If the club remain committed to achieving tangible success, major changes are required this summer and everyone - from the fans to the players - needs to know what the plan is as quickly as possible. In the meantime, little snippets like Guillem's will just feed the overall sense of uncertainty.

In a two he has been predominantly alongside Stan. I am struggling to remember him in a two with NRC? I see him as the playmaker alongside a DCM and an ACM, as he was against Man U at home last year with Stan and Jimmy alongside. Only problem is I also see Makoun and Bannan as this type of player? I think he played alongside NRC against Spurs on Boxing Day - admittedly can't think of any other occasions. I agree that Bannan would also get much more of a chance to influence games as part of a three so with current personnel it would certainly seem that 4-3-3 / 4-3-2-1 is the way to go.

It all comes down to the formation - 4-3-3 (or 4-3-2-1 as may have been the case yesterday) suits Delph. He's tended to look overwhelmed at times in a central two, whether that be alongside Petrov or Reo-Coker, and the team as a whole has looked lightweight. Play him in a central three though and he can really be an asset. This may, in fact, be best for Makoun as well and I would venture that if Reo-Coker signs a new contract that a trio of Makoun, Reo-Coker and Delph could work very well, especially with Downing and Young (or a similar replacement) getting forward and drifting in from out wide. We'd be a lot stronger in the middle and this would allow Makoun's passing game and Delph's attacking instincts to come to the fore without leaving the rest of team exposed. We'd be a lot less flat and predictable at home and ideally set up to counter-attack in away games. I like Delph - rustiness aside, thought he coped well yesterday and despite getting caught in possession a few times looks like he could develop into a key player for us if given time and stays clear of injury.

Absolutely listless, especially in the second half when a very limited Wigan team controlled possession. We are crying out for change all over the pitch, particularly in the centre of midfield where the lack of movement, absence of guile and inability to receive the ball comfortably brings everything to a crashing halt time and again. You can almost feel that the growing apathy of the supporters has well and truly taken hold of certain players who seem more than content to simply pick up their wages. New ideas are need to get everyone interested and motivated again. A very big job awaits for the man coming in this summer, whoever he may be; one thing is for certain, the prospect of Houllier and McAllister continuing in charge at this point will only reinforce the malaise.

General, In light of the fact that my earlier comment regarding the new kit appears to have drawn some flak (and thanks to one insanely excitable/extremely sensitive forum member, I have just discovered I've even been quoted as declaring this is 'the end of days' on a YouTube video - rest assured I'll be basking in the minor celebrity of that little honour for as long as I can milk it), I thought I'd offer a little more context to what I thought was a fairly politely and moderately voiced opinion. As I stated earlier, of course there are more pressing issues but our colours are still important. Yes, the shirt is the first and most visible piece we are identified by, but consider the full kits of Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool; each are predominantly associated with red but I can't imagine Utd ever discarding their black socks, Arsenal their use of white in their shirts, shorts and socks or Liverpool tampering with their all-red. These are among the chief elements that differentiate them not only from each other as immediate rivals but the many other teams that play in the colour. Claret and blue may not be as prevalent, and over more than a hundred years of history we may have had more different variations than some might think, but the basic model as I described in my earlier post is, for better or worse, what is perceived as 'our' kit. The claret socks of this year took us toward what is recognised as West Ham's traditional kit so, in this respect, white may be seen as an improvement. I also have no doubt that we will return to blue socks, make other changes and experiment with other aspects of the kit over time but when we are trying to establish ourselves as a brand that can compete both here and further afield, having a consistent iconography is significant (as demonstrated by the three clubs I mentioned - although winning league titles, FA Cups and playing in Champions League finals may also have something to do with it!). Given we, like most Premiership clubs, change our kit every twelve months it's a relatively short period to put up with any aspects that aren't especially liked. But it's worth remembering that there was a real clamour for the first Nike kit ('07-'08 ) and I think it contributed to the general feel-good factor around the club at the time. I actually quite like the new shirt (if it does, in fact, turn out to be very close to the one 'previewed' this week) and with the right sponsor think it will look pretty good. I just don't think the white socks seem like they suit us and don't feel like they seem traditionally Villa. On another note, I think the club have done a good job with this morning's unveiling of season ticket details. Although the 'added' benefits are negligible, the payment options are good and offer greater flexibility and the I think the minor price increases are satisfactory (+£15 for me). I know some will be unhappy with any increment after such a disappointing season but from a commercial perspective, between rising VAT and slow progress made pulling out of recession, the prices seem like a sensible compromise. The only caveat would be that the club will need to sort out the manager's position very quickly after the season ends in order for people to take advantage of the more attractive payment plan which I believe will have to be applied for by June 15th. This option will give many the chance to go for a season ticket where they may not have previously been able to but if they're in two minds, they club will only have a small window of opportunity to convince them. Many thanks.

General, Having seen reports indicating that the kit images used by JJB are taken from prototypes and that the final design has not yet been confirmed, can the club please take this window of opportunity to take on board fan reaction in order to sidestep any further dissatisfaction? Everyone can feel free to argue the merits of collars versus crew necks and various detailing choices but we ALL agree on the following; Shirt - Claret body, blue sleeves Shorts - White Socks - Blue Any divergence from this is going to frustrate, disappoint and add to the growing feeling of apathy throughout a fanbase that feel the club simply aren't listening. It would've been nice, for instance, to see the new kit designs pay homage to those of thirty years ago when the club embarked upon its most famous and celebrated season. Obviously, there are more fundamental issues that need resolving in order to bolster the confidence of the supporters and renew enthusiasm ahead of next season with the appointment of a new manager being the first priority - but getting the kit right is an easy win for all involved so do us, yourself and Randy all a favour and forget about the white socks and just keep things simple! Many thanks.

I think today offered further evidence why it will be in our best interest to sell Ashley Young in the summer. Very poor delivery throughout, both from open play and from set-pieces, but more alarmingly was his complete lack of positional discipline. He was sent out to play wide and he simply didn't provide the outlet for the team that he was supposed to, continually drifting inside, and on a number of occasions in the second half Luke Young was running the entire left flank without any support at all. Whether Houllier's absence had anything to do with it or not, it felt as though he was essentially doing whatever he pleased. Too often this season it has seemed that he is playing for himself first and the team second. He still works hard and he's still capable of turning a match but we are accomodating him too much. He looks stale and has done for a long time. We finally have a truly special goalscorer leading the line and we should be setting ourselves up to maximise this; instead, it still seems like Young is wrongly seen as the pivotal figure. Of course, it should be noted that Stoke's cynical tactics are hard for everyone to play against (though this hasn't stopped every home team that they've encountered since Boxing Day from beating them) and his service to the club should - and will - be applauded. However, a change will do both him and us good. Bent gets MOTM for a brilliant finish that got us our equaliser. Otherwise, 90 minutes to forget.

David O'Leary made the mistake of taking on the fans directly - which if you're doing your job properly and getting good results you can get away with. He was doing neither and the "fickle" comments were the first of many self-inflicted wounds that ultimately led him being ushered out. The fact that no other football club has gone anywhere near him in five years should indicate exactly what his standing inside the game is. Graham Taylor made the mistake of thinking he could revive past glories but the club and the game had changed a lot since his earlier tenure and the job he took on was a very different beast - one that he looked ill-prepared for. He did, in all fairness, get a bit of grief that year - no doubt exacerbated by two embarrassing performances and results against Blues - but nothing compared what Houllier is receiving now. The fans knew he loved the club and the fact that he walked away and acknowledged that he couldn't do the job properly was, for me, a dignified way to demonstrate that he understood what the club needed. He will always be welcomed back. John Gregory was generally well-liked by the fans, but was technically limited and at times tactically naive. He also, it has to be said, spent a lot of money of some poor players. But I think everyone knew that he loved the club and always acted with the best of intentions towards Villa. He only left because of his deteriorating relationship with Doug Ellis. Brian Little was never abused. With the way performances were going, I think many were worried that things could turn sour at some point but there was - and still is - huge affection for him. Unfortunately, when the pressure of results and working for Ellis combined, he gave the impression of not being able to handle the pressure and walked. Villa fans are no different from any other club's in this regard. But saddle us with a man that demonstrates no visible understanding or appreciation for the size, history and expectations of the club and patience will run out fast when performances on the pitch are so pitiful. I never said the reason any of them left was because of the fans but ALL of them received abuse. Little was rounded upon at Ewood in his final weeks with the very same chant from Saturday, during a 5-0 thrashing that comepleted and agg 9-0 defeat to them that season. All I am saying is that we as fans are far worse than the majority of other fans around the country and we have a reputation for it too. And that in the 'future AV manager' thread it is a point to be made. I appreciate what you're saying but I disagree; the club will almost remain an attractive proposition for managers and the fans are not regarded any worse or differently than those of other clubs. And I maintain that those previous managers did not receive anything that could be construed as out and out abuse. Criticism, yes, but that's very different from the kind of abuse GH is getting at present. Even during that 5-0 defeat to Blackburn (and I remember that well - one of the most truly awful afternoons I've endured as a Villa fan), the fans' vitriol was reserved almost entirely for Savo Milosevic rather than Brian Little.

David O'Leary made the mistake of taking on the fans directly - which if you're doing your job properly and getting good results you can get away with. He was doing neither and the "fickle" comments were the first of many self-inflicted wounds that ultimately led him being ushered out. The fact that no other football club has gone anywhere near him in five years should indicate exactly what his standing inside the game is. Graham Taylor made the mistake of thinking he could revive past glories but the club and the game had changed a lot since his earlier tenure and the job he took on was a very different beast - one that he looked ill-prepared for. He did, in all fairness, get a bit of grief that year - no doubt exacerbated by two embarrassing performances and results against Blues - but nothing compared what Houllier is receiving now. The fans knew he loved the club and the fact that he walked away and acknowledged that he couldn't do the job properly was, for me, a dignified way to demonstrate that he understood what the club needed. He will always be welcomed back. John Gregory was generally well-liked by the fans, but was technically limited and at times tactically naive. He also, it has to be said, spent a lot of money of some poor players. But I think everyone knew that he loved the club and always acted with the best of intentions towards Villa. He only left because of his deteriorating relationship with Doug Ellis. Brian Little was never abused. With the way performances were going, I think many were worried that things could turn sour at some point but there was - and still is - huge affection for him. Unfortunately, when the pressure of results and working for Ellis combined, he gave the impression of not being able to handle the pressure and walked. Villa fans are no different from any other club's in this regard. But saddle us with a man that demonstrates no visible understanding or appreciation for the size, history and expectations of the club and patience will run out fast when performances on the pitch are so pitiful.

General, I sincerely appreciate those sentiments but with nearly five years experience of dealing with professional football, do you truly believe in them? Unfortunately, I just don't feel that the modern footballer thinks this way at all. When your Marines put on their uniform, they weren't doing so in the knowledge that regardless of how well they did their job they would still be collecting £50,000+ at the end of every week. Fans like battle analogies because its puts us in the right frame of mind for the fight ahead - and we're in a hell of a fight right now - and under other regimes I may have been inclined to believe some of the rhetoric would filter through all of the bling and ignite something in enough of the players that would inspire change. That's not happening at all right now. Instead, we are witnessing a selection of highly-pampered individuals go through the motions until some real guidance emerges from the leadership. For them, the consequences are not at all grave; they are rich and will continue getting richer regardless of final scores and league positions. I honestly don't know how you produce a work ethic from anybody so vastly rewarded but that's another conversation entirely. What we are increasingly aware of is the fact that other clubs with lesser quality among their squads are outfighting us on a weekly basis. I don't believe that we have a roster of players so extravagantly less personally motivated or ambitious than all of the other clubs around us so their listless performances over the course of the season have to be attributed to something. For all of the frustrations that Martin O'Neill's tenure produced, a lack of fight was rarely, if ever, something we could criticise the team for. This is the same basic group of players so it is not exactly difficult to pinpoint where the fault for this change in mentality is coming from; the new leadership (or lack thereof). Without a strong manager, the players can NOT be trusted to simply do it for the uniform. In this day and age, they won't. They weren't raised like that, they don't think like that and they certainly don't play like that. I wish they did but too much evidence has been seen to the contrary to argue otherwise. If they did play for the badge, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. Continue putting your faith alone in the professional pride of the modern Premier League footballer and you will get badly burned. I stated in a post to you on Saturday that I believed Mr. Houllier's position had become untenable. He has gone beyond the stage of simply being divisive; I think this past couple of weeks has united virtually every supporter in opposition to him and a football club cannot function in any form, let alone a league as competitive as this, with a fanbase that feels totally and utterly alienated by the club's most prominent figurehead. I'd like to say that we're all in this together but at present the fans are feeling completely disconnected from the team, unable to affect any kind of response from the players. With all of the subsequent furore, many may forget that the atmosphere at the outset of Saturday's game was actually very good. The stadium felt alive and the team can have no complaints of not being urged on. The supporters only turned in the wake of the inexplicable decisions made by Mr. Houllier throughout, gradually becoming more and more poisonous. We know this isn't doing anybody any good, least of all the image of the club we love. But protest is the only course of action available to us and Saturday's reaction will seem like little more than a minor tremor compared to what will be forthcoming if Mr. Houllier takes us down. I implore you, Randy Lerner and Paul Faulkner to seize this window of opportunity between fixtures to replace him, re-unite the club with the supporters so that we can hopefully galvanise and ready ourselves for the remaining eight games. These matches will be the biggest and most important of Mr. Lerner's stewardship and we cannot approach them as we have been during the bulk of the previous thirty or we will not prevail. Thank you.

General, I wasn't thrilled when Gerard Houllier was appointed but felt that having taken the job he could make a positive impact on the playing squad once he was able to get his players in and gradually introduce a slightly different style of football to his predecessor. I kept the faith and continued to back him during numerous episodes throughout this interminable season when he has variously disappointed, embarrassed and let down supporters until the Manchester City FA Cup tie when he squandered what little good will he had left by conning fans out of their hard-earned wages who had paid to watch a senior side try to get into the quarter-finals of the world's most revered club football competition. He lost my support that day but what I have seen this afternoon against Wolves is an abject demonstration of total and utter incompetence. Whether it be the tactics, team selection, formation, the substitutions, we were all subjected to a clueless performance devoid of anything resembling organisation. It was, in short, a grossly unprofessional excuse of an effort by all concerned. The players should not be immune from criticism as there was very little fight out there on the pitch but it is not hard to see where this attitude stems from. The reaction of the supporters at Villa Park was the most vitriolic I have ever heard in over twenty years of attending matches, through good times and bad. I implore you, Randy and the board to acknowledge the fact that Mr. Houllier's position has become untenable at the club. Short of a miracle, he will never win back the favour of those he has spurned by the continuing laundry list of basic errors on the pitch and feckless behaviour off it, including his own. I've been left hurt by the Villa before, but usually by way of the perennial hard-luck stories that seem to have blighted us through many a trophy-less season. I don't think I've ever felt as disillusioned as this though because right now I feel humiliated by the shambles I have witnessed - not only today, but on countless occasions over the course of this season. We look ill-prepared for both individual matches and the battle to survive in this division. We are being made to look small-time by the comical mismanagement of events that are finding the most public forums for scrutinisation. And we look like we don't know how to make it all stop. Mr. Houllier's malignant reign is spreading throughout the club like a cancer and it is eating everyone alive. This would be the worst possible time to attempt to appoint a new manager - even worse than the circumstances we found ourselves in at the beginning of the season upon Martin O'Neill's departure. There are, however, options - and, right now, it's hard to imagine any of them could be worse than the prospect of Mr. Houllier remaining in charge. The fans will forgive Randy Lerner for what has proven to be a grave mistake in appointing Mr. Houllier. Football is not a exact science and he is certainly not the first chairman to make such an error of judgement. The supporters will be a lot less forgiving if such things are allowed to continue though because with games running out, things could quickly spiral out of control. Action needs to be taken and preferably now. If not, and by some stroke of fortune we can muster together enough points to keep us in the Premier League, Mr. Houllier must not, under any circumstances, still be here next season. If for no other reason, there will be severe financial consequences when season ticket sales and attendances continue to dwindle. Thank you for reading sir.

Like last week against Fulham, Villa made a terrific start in a game that was just begging for the team to take control of it and put poor opposition to the sword. That we didn't can be put down to a complete lack of composure, decisiveness and quality in the final third. In the first half we absolutely murdered them down the right flank and time and time again we failed to put in a single good delivery. Apart from an excellent lay-off that set up Agbonlahor for the goal, Bent was a peripheral figure throughout and, whilst he needs to do more himself and can't be entirely absolved of any criticism, the service to him is appallingly bad at present. Even a team as wildly erratic as Blackpool weren't going to continue to give us such free licence to keep tearing them apart and they were much more solid in a second half where, again like last week against Fulham, we were disjointed and clueless. In many ways, today felt like Martin O'Neill Redux; dominating possession with no cutting edge, not making the most of territorial advantage when we had it and being made to pay later on, playing out the game with our backs to the wall. The lack of tactical changes when we're struggling is also becoming worryingly familiar under Houllier. Many will point to the players lining up out of position again but the fact is all had the opportunity to hurt Blackpool today and they simply squandered the chance. Agbonlahor is clearly not comfortable on the left and though he took his goal very well couldn't get consistently into the game to affect the play. Downing is actually fine on the right and the fact he can cut in or go outside makes him our most likely creator at the moment; what I can't figure out though is why these two don't ever interchange throughout a game. Even under someone as intractable as O'Neill, Downing and Young regularly switched wings every 10-20 minutes or so last season to vary things up. This would ensure we can utilise Downing to best effect from both sides at different stages. Unfortunately, even he barely put over one good delivery today meaning Bent had little more than scraps to chase. Of most concern still is the use of Ashley Young. This was yet another occasion where he has simply not impacted the game at all; the fact of the matter is that he is too easily brushed off the ball to play as the second striker and the amount of times he loses possession is unforgivable at this level. He took every opportunity he could to fall over way too easily every time a defender got near him and the referee wasn't having any of it. Maybe he was fouled at the death and a penalty could've been awarded but these decisions are not going to go your way when you cry wolf as often as Young did today. On top of that, his set-piece delivery was chronic - as it has been for as long as memory goes back at this point - and one must now seriously wonder whether the prospect of him signing a new contract in the summer may well be detrimental to our progress. Too much revolves around him - evidenced by him being given the captaincy this afternoon - and the blunt truth is that not only are there significantly better options out there who can play off Bent but there are also wingers who can do an equally good, if not better, job out wide. One of them was sitting idly on our bench today. Friedel: 6 Didn't have anything to do except pick the ball out of his net. Walker: 7 Good going forward again - his runs deep into the opposition half are not only threatening in and of themselves but take pressure off our backline. Even if his delivery isn't there yet, his ability to win free-kicks, throw-ins and corners up the field could be invaluable if others could make the most of it. Clark: 6 Solid at the back, can't give much more than he is going forward. Have a feeling that Nathan Baker will get further chances before the end of the season. Dunne: 6 Distribution poor and was at fault for Blackpool's goal when he was yards off the pace of his man. Recovered to play well in the latter stages but needs to be replaced in the summer if we are to move forward. Cuellar: 6 Not really on long enough to stake a claim for his place. Looks like a hamstring strain. Reo-Coker: 7 Easily our best player; kept the midfield together, protected the backline and showed energy throughout. Also the closest thing we had to a leader out there. Makoun: 6 Thought he'd struggle on that awful pitch but he was doing fine until that ill-advised lunge. No complaints about the red; it was two-footed and right under Howard Webb's nose. Agbonlahor: 6 Great run and finish for the goal; faded in and out after that. Can't play this position. Downing: 6 Got into some great positions but his delivery failed him every time. Great shot mid-way through the first half that clipped a post and always looks our most dangerous player but needs to make more of the space he finds. Young: 4 Arrogant, petulant and frustrating; most geniuses are all of those things but currently Young is a luxury we can't afford. Bent: 5 Not in the game unfortunately but the service he's getting at the moment is diabolical. Great touch to set up the goal so it's at least encouraging that he still has had a positive impact on a game he struggled to impose himself on - which is more than can be said for some of his teammates. Still a lot of work to do before we can feel fully confident of our Premier League status. We may have a good run-in but we're not winning 'winnable' games and that needs to change sooner rather than later.

General, Hope you're well sir. A further ticketing question - and one that ties in with hopefully turning around any disappointment with recent attendances; I have been attempting to purchase the Spring Hat-trick Ticket package for the past week (since it started advertising) to no avail. I keep getting the message that I don't have the correct priveleges but, unless I am mistaken, there are no prerequisites listed as being needed to buy these tickets. I waited until the Blackburn tickets went on general sale (as they have this morning) but this has made no difference. The Wolves and Newcastle games are not currently on general sale but I assume the latter two won't be until after the Blackburn match has already been played which makes the fact that there is no information that would confirm when I will be able to buy the ticket package or what I need on my booking history in order to qualify, confusing and frustrating. Now, having bought my first house last year, football had to take a bit of a backseat for much of 2010 but having got Christmas out of the way I have been able to start attending again in the last few weeks and hopefully I will be able to go back to having a season ticket again in the summer. In the meantime, any saving I can take advantage of (such as the 20% on offer here) is massively welcomed and would make it possible to go to each of these three matches where previously I would maybe have had to choose two. I'm sure there are many others that would agree and this would hopefully go some way to ensuring that each of these games - none of which, with the best will in the world, are going to sell out - will have higher attendances. So does one just continue to wait? Or do you take the plunge, forget about the deal and buy a Blackburn ticket then choose one of the remaining two nearer the time? You have a good product to sell, at a good price - and I can't currently buy it. If others are in the same boat then it makes even less sense. I appreciate that priority should be given to those who have attended more games where tickets are scarce but that situation is plainly not an issue at Villa Park at the moment and with no indication as to when this offer will be available or what one needs to have in order to take advantage of it, I am frustrated that I need to chase the club for information that should be clear for all whenever these things go on sale. I haven't been able to get through to ticketing as of yet this morning but I'm sure I will soon enough - my point is that there are simply too many variables that are not satisfactory regarding tickets and, as others have said, the system in place is both not good enough in respect of other ticket-purchasing facilities for sports or other events, nor the management of what is still in place. Attendances need to be higher; I think we all appreciate that. And as nice as family fun days and pre-match entertainment is, the club could be doing a lot more to help itself by making the process of buying tickets a lot easier. If not, this will continue to be another factor as to why turn-outs are lower than hoped for. Thanks.

Obviously there were unexpected difficulties that meant this season's kits were delayed going on sale but the fact is Villa have been one of the last clubs (wouldn't surprise me if we were the last) to get new shirts on sale every season for as long as I can remember. I don't know if contractually Nike are obliged to get Man Utd, Arsenal etc. on sale before all others (though I can't really see why this would make a difference - it's not like Villa fans will go out and buy their shirts while we wait for our own) but we definitely seem to rank low down on their list of priorities and this has been reflected in the designs too in my opinion. Whether we go forward with Nike or go for another brand, this is another area where we never seem to be punching our weight and we need to assert ourselves more and get our kits in stores from June onwards like the other leading clubs. I haven't bought a new shirt for years but I know I'd be more likely to if I was going to get to wear it over the summer in anticipation of a new season. Other than that, a simple, retro style would be the preferred approach.

Overall, good point from a difficult fixture and our defence is rapidly becoming the best we've seen for a long, long time. I cannot for the life of me understand the continuing short-sightedness of O'Neill's substitutions. I was thinking during the game that we shouldn't be too harsh on Carew thrown back in so soon after injury but that would be covering up the fact that his level of performance has been the same whenever he's played for at least 12 months now. Given the way Spurs were asserting themselves in midfield, I would have replaced Heskey with an additional midfielder and tried to wrestle back a little more possession. The like-for-like swapping of Heskey for Carew offers us nothing on a day like yesterday and it means the other ten players on the field have to work even harder to carry our monumentally lazy no. 10. If it's one of those days when he produces a killer moment that leads to a goal it offsets the balance but the fact is those days are very, very few and far between. I genuinely think that if O'Neill is so dead set on playing 4-4-2 we are much better off giving Delfouneso a chance - he has greater stamina, better movement and for all his comparative inexperience, gets into the right positions to ask opposition defences more serious questions. The esteem in which Carew is held by Villa fans baffles me - I can only think that we are collectively so desperate for a talismanic centre forward that we have tried to help manufacture one out of Carew given his presence and generally likeable personality. The fact is he's not an especially good footballer - he has bad touch, always need one more than the Premier League allows, is slow off the mark to react to situations and doesn't match the effort of his teammates. Heskey, for his faults and limitations, at least offers better link up play and we've looked better with him as a regular start over the last two months. Bottom line - neither are good enough and we can't finish in the top four without a striker alongside Agbonlahor who is vastly superior to these two in every department. The rest of team is looking very solid - add some true class up top and could break in. But this will undoubtedly require O'Neill to make his biggest gamble in the transfer market yet - let's hope in the summer he is up to the task.

Twice - 1996 3-0 v. Leeds - one of the best performances by a Villa team in the modern era and what (unfortunately) turned out to be the high point of Brian Little's initially very promising tenure. 2000 0-1 v. Chelsea - one of the worst FA Cup finals of any era and my most bitterly disappointing experience as a Villa fan.