HolteExile

Sigh, Do I have to repeat what I wrote a few pages back about Staunton ringing Ron Toss live on air to say that he wanted to stay at Villa but Doug **** him about to the poiunt where plop offered him the deal he wanted which he agreed to, only for Doug to then offer MORE money than either Dougs original offer OR plops offer, to which Stan said that he had made an agreement with plop and it was unprofessional to go back on it. He said that he was settled in the Midlands, that his family was settled, but that Doug messed him around so much over a new contract. I heard this with my own ears! No chap, you don't. But you did anyway. Truth be told I don't care what kind of spin Stan tried to put on it when -or after- he left. His leaving was on the cards since at least 94 -and possibly further back. We thought we had lost him in the summer of 94 and a number of senior Villa players even commented on it at the time. He played us off against the Redscouse a fair few times to get an improved offer and according to JG's book had made his mind up before JG had returned in Feb 98. He even said he was specifically off to join the Redscouse to win things - no mention of broken promises. Had he agreed the deal we had offered him at the time he would have been the highest paid player at the club -unusual for a defender- so I'm not sure how much finance came into it. He was one of the very first high profile Bosman's, exploiting the system to make it work for him. So attempts to paint him as some loyal club servant only leaving when the club let him down won't wash I'm afraid. I don't actually blame him for leaving truth be told. Not due to lack of ambition or anything like that on our part, we had a pretty decent squad at the time. Rather the pull of returning to his boyhood club proved too much in the end. He had started there as a youth, and his mother is originally from Merseyside IIRC. My point was that there is probably a perception out there that he is a popular ex Villa player. That doesn't tally with the reality. You rarely hear Villa fans talking about Stan as a 'Villa legend' (chronically overused term) for example. Which is unusual bearing in mind the longevity he had with us in two stints.

Houllier let staunton go at Liverpool certainly no link with him on this one . He did sign him in the first place though MM, back in 98. It would be an obvious choice (for Houllier), someone who knows the club, Kevin Mac and so on- and had a relatively successful career with us. Looking at his overall time spent with us, there might be a perception that Staunton is a popular ex pro. To a certain extent he probably should be. Over a decade at the club between two spells, the first infinitely better than the second. It's hard to shake the notion that he (Stan) had wanted out since around 94/95 though, was desperate to get back to the Redscouse and only returned to us when he was a busted flush. That more than anything else will probably mean he'll never be hugely popular with most Villa fans. A shame, when balanced against his long service overall.

And how about the 07/08 season, and the first part of the 08/09 season. Or pretty much any time he has featured in midfield for us. Should we overlook that too?

Aye. Which will be why a regular gripe about our performances last year was we would tire significantly after the 60-70 mark. Hell, even Terry called it. And said Chelsea planned their approach to the game at Stamford Bridge with that in mind. For good effect, they rammed the point home in the semi final too. Would we have folded so dramatically with NRC in the side? Unlikely. He brings a physical presence to our midfield that no other player can give us. NRC was a big part of our good form in the 2007/08 breakthrough campaign. And played a key role in our good start to the 08/09 one - before being dicked about at RB or not even featuring. In one of the rare games he played in midfield at Anfield last year we produced one of our best performances. Coincidence?

So why do a number of the polls on Villa sites have Nigel rated as up there for MOTM on Sunday. The poll on this site has him slightly higher than Stan (admittedly only 4% compared to 3%). **** if I know I watched the 2nd half back because I wanted to analyse NRC's performance given the differing opinions I've heard. I've always been of the opinion that NRC is a bustling, busy tackler. Maybe it was an isolated match, but he looked lost for vast periods of the 2nd half. He was never really busting a gut to make a challenge -always seemed eager to get close without really making a tackle. Maybe he was told by KMacD to close down but not tackle, I don't know. However, one successful tackle in 45 mins is not really good enough for a so-called defensive midfielder, wouldn't you agree? No, I wouldn't agree. It's a very simplistic approach to football that you can only judge on the blindingly obvious, like a bone crunching tackle or a spectacular last ditch one. Paul McGrath in his book said he knew when his time was close to an end because he was increasingly having to make more last ditch tackles. The crowd would cheer of course, but he knew he was firefighting, that being caught out in the first place led to the tackle. I'm not putting NRC on God's level, far from it. But what we can take from the above is there is often more merit in staying on your feet, being disciplined and -In NRC's case- using your strength and athleticism to prevent the opposition getting an upper hand. Basketball is a non-contact sport, yet physical players who can control the game are still valued.

Fair enough. But it's not as if Gerrard was a passenger in those succesful sides. He was the driving force, the go-to guy. At the same stage of his career (early 20's) JM was in and out of a pretty mediocre Newcastle side, playing RM, LM, off the forwards. Or sometimes not at all. One OK season for us at RM in 2008/09, and one decent year last year when he played most (but not all) of the campaign in the centre. You can understand why some might struggle with the comparison.

Exactly. Compared with Steven Gerrard at the same age, Milner is a marginally better player. By the age of 24 Steve Gerrard was an England regular and a focal point of a Liverpool side who had won the LC/ UEFA and FA Cup and were regular CL qualifiers (in fact I think he'd done a fair bit of that by the age of 21/22 -and played a key role in the demolition of ze Germans in 2001). In contrast -by the same age- Milner has had one decent season in CM and has just started to feature more regulary in the England set-up. Milner might -in time- go on to have a succesful career and become one of the most important players in the country. But comparisons with Gerrard -even now- are fanciful.

Cracking point, I made a similar one yesterday and was told I had no credibility, go figure In fairness Rich, when it comes to RL or any discussions relating to - you don't. You have a longstanding bee in your bonnet about him, for whatever reason. Whether it was your thread that came in for widescale ridicule last year that was the tipping point for you, I'm not sure. But advocating that he sell up last summer if he wasn't prepared to match Citeh's spending and laying the blame at his door for MON's cowardly walkout this summer indicates that any critique you offer is hardly balanced. In contrast, as far as Blandy is concerned -and as much as I disagree with a fair amount of that article- I at least get the feeling he is operating from a neutral standpoint, and not trying to fortify an entrentched position further. The example I gave yesterday that you had such an issue with was a hypothetical situation anyway. I have no information that leads me to believe RL will take more of a hands on approach in transfers (outside of the current Milner deal -when circumstances forced his hand somewhat). The point I (perhaps clumsily) was trying to make was that you don't always need a longstanding playing/ coaching background in the game to spot areas in need of improvement. There are probably posters on this site who might have only followed us for a year or two that could tell you we need a forward. RL has had an interest in football for 15+ years (possibly more) and now has money riding on that interest. Unlike Ellis, he would take advice from a number of sources and if he made a decision that a forward of sufficient quality was available and within our grasp financially -and if for the sake of argument this forward was in the Huntelaar/ Suarez bracket- I for one would not say "Oh no, don't like that. Only managers should be signing players." I think we're quite safe on the 'just like Ellis front,' too. As I don't envisage RL wanting/ needing the acclaim of the press; or instructing his new choice of manager to tell supporters in his programme notes that 'whenever I need help and advice the Chairman often acts as a sounding board,' or similar. To date he has never struck me as that delusional/ insecure. Generally, when a new appointment crops up clubs will quite often go for the opposite of what they've just had, so it's quite possible that we could move away from the traditional British model, with one guy having all the say. Whether that's a DOF taking care of all the signings, or a owner/chief exec and coach working together I'm not sure. You often hear that such an approach doesn't work in England. It's not widespread, I accept that. But Chelsea have operated under a variation of the above since 2003, and Tottenham were close to the top 4 on numerous occasions under Comoli. They also bagged the League Cup. So define 'doesn't work.' Both of those clubs have won more trophies than us in the last 14 years.

Spot on Dom. In the wider context, I see no problem with this deal being finalised by by people outside of the playing/coaching set-up. MON leaving when he did pretty much ensured we had little choice in the matter. The alternative was to keep an unhappy player in Milner and -despite a good performance v West Ham- it's unlikely that a disatified player can give you the required level of performance over an extended period. It's a clean break, as it were. The new manager inherits a very good player in Ireland and quite a few others, plus the cash we received was probably closer to Jimmy's true valuation anyway. I'm not too preturbed that he showed enough nous to make life difficult for Garry Cook at the end either. He was just getting what was his. If he delivers anything approaching the consistency Richard Dunne managed after a similar scenario; and if we can give him that security and sense of permanence that no player at Citeh can possibly enjoy we could reap the benefits for many years to come.

Definite no to Bradley from me. The ranking of the US side is bloated by results in the CONCACAF against some pretty poor sides. They have improved over the years, and have got some eye-catching results (largely in non competitive games, it must be said). He might be one to watch if he chances his arm in Europe with a smaller side, with lower expectations. But nothing in his record indicates he should be managing one the bigger sides in England yet. I'd rather go for Martinez than him, someone who has worked his way up the domestic leagues in England and got a limited side like Wigan to play a more expansive game. But then I'd rather go for Jol or Klinsmann than any of the above. Jol has managed both in this country and in Europe to a high standard and would be a relatively risk-free appointment. He also got Tottenham to finish 5th - something MON never managed. And by rights they should have finished 4th that year. I understand the reservations about Klinsmann, but the impact an arrival like might have could be immense, both from the point of view of the calibre of player we could attract and the overall image of the club. His club experience might be limited, but failing to win the title at Bayern doesn't automatically mean he'd be doomed to failure at VP. Different clubs, different expectations. His impact at international level with Germany was very positive, and the benefits are still being felt now. Loew was also his choice as assistant, so it's quite likely he'd be able to pick talented backroom staff to fill in any knowledge gaps he might have. For years I've felt we've lacked that player who could give us that 'lift off' moment, similar to what Gullit gave Chelsea. I had hoped MON might be brave enough and enough of a pull to attract such a player. But he largely played it safe, with journeymen pros such as Harewood, Heskey, Sidwell and the like. Klinsmann -or somebody similar- might be bold enough to take the next step.

Fantastic news if true. The major highlight of a difficult week. In fact, if you'd told me at the start of the summer that you could have: - (1)Ireland joining - (2)NRC and Luke Young remaining But had to jettison MON, I'd have probably said 'deal.'

Maybe those financial constraints only applied to MON after his waste in the transfer market, and a new guy = new conditions? Just a thought. There was a strong suggestion that the board wanted MON to sweat the assets he's aquired, so to speak. Either by making do and playing them more or giving him the freedom to trade them. In the end he wasn't up to it/ didn't fancy it and bailed. But those conditions wouldn't automatically apply to a new manager/ coach if he spotted a weakness at, say RB or CM and wanted a fair opportunity to strengthen that dept. Don't swallow the 'little Aston Villa' lined being peddled in the media by some of the more Pro MON elements. They always had more regard for him than they did us as a club. It was always an anomaly to them that he pitched up here in the first place. Don't be under the illusion that we aren't an attractive proposition to a high profile candidate either. The two previous managers were in that bracket (as much as DOL turned out to be a bellend) and took on the job with far less favourable conditions. Jol was very complimentary about us back in 2008 when we were drawn in the same group as Hamburg, has often stated his desire to return to England and -seeing as that's unlikely to be Chelsea/ United or even Citeh- a club who have been in contention for fourth for the past two seasons (and backed their previous manager to the tune of £120+ million) might hold some appeal. Realistically we are probably the best he could get if he wanted to return to England, and he probably knows that. It's all about just how keen he is to come back, to what extent is he prepared to burn his bridges at Ajax. He was also present at our greatest night in Rotterdam -in the Villa end of all places- so you can imagine how that would be spun if he pitched up. Sometimes we don't need the media to do us down -our own fans are more than capable of that- it seems.

It's a non starter (unless you mean Brian). Michael Laudrup has just took up the vacant managerial post as Mallorca this summer. A shame, as he would have been my first choice next summer, when I was pretty certain a vacancy would come up and we were in need of a fresh approach. Ticks all the boxes as far as I'm concerned: -Impeccable playing record -degree of success already in his short managerial career- without being so good as to be untouchable/ unrealistic -fluent in English In the same way as it pays to scout a good player early, sometimes you need to be ahead of the competition re managers/ coaches. His background in the game: and: Would indicate that he likes to see it played in a certain way. He would also have enough of a profile to attract a good calibre of player. Best of all: he was keen on the Villa job in 2006 - when we were in a far worse state. He was reportedly the choice of the Scandinavian consortium back then. So far his managerial career has been decent. Assitant manager of the Danish national side between 2000-2002. Took Brodby to the Danish title and CL qualification and got lowly Getafe to the Spanish cup final and latter stages of the UEFA Cup between 2007 and 2008 before stint in Russia with Spartak. And still only 46. Not an obvious candidate by any stretch. But that hasn't always served us well in the past. Besides, Wenger and even Ferguson were viewed as gambles at the time. Will be interesting to see how he gets on at Mallorca this year.

Please explain why Klinsmann. People keep saying his name. What has he done besides fail. 2006 WC was all Loew but Klinsmann took the glory. Why is Loew the current manager and not Klinsmann? What club has Klinsmann managed? Bayern Munich. How did that go? Terrible. He got the boot. FFS Holloway is a better manager. Why does it have to be an internationally-known former footballer with limited managerial experience over a lesser known one with years of experience. Why do people say Klinsmann and not Magath. It's a **** joke. Sorry. Valid points on Klinsmann. :winkold: Sorry for the rant. Just seen his name bandied about and it scares me to death that Lerner and Co. might actually consider him as a legitimate target. You do him a disservice to belittle his impact for the German national side. The DFB wanted him to stay, as did the vast majority of German supporters. What does that tell you? Loew stopping on was very much the next best option. But kudos to him for what he has done since. Klinsmann would be the most high profile of all the candidates listed, and if we were looking to go that route -to improve our global image and so forth- the appointment would make sense. If nothing else, think of the help he could give forwards like Gabby and The Fonz re movement and positioning (and diving). He has also been in the game long enough to have sufficient contacts to bridge any knowledge gaps he might have. Loew was his choice as an assistant, don't forget. Its not beyond the realms of possibility that he might appoint a very capable coaching staff to cover the things he is not so hot at.

Definite no to Trapattoni. Those bored of the style of football under MON will be on suicide watch with Traps attritional approach.

He stays, for now. But I'm more than happy to take money off anyone who is so utterly convinced that he is so good for us and we are in such good shape that he'll still be here in 12 months time. I reckon this will be his last season one way or another. - He delivers a measure of success, be that top 5 (4th is highly unlikely), an extended run in Europe or a cup win = he goes. But it will be his choice. -We have a solid season, finish 6-8th = he goes. The relationship will have ran it's course and he'll leave saying he can't take us any further in the current climate. -We have a shocker, a really bad run either early into the campaign or around Christmas = he goes. A mutual consent scenario, but we all know what that translates as.

Sweet Jesus no.

Any idea who they fancy as first choice RB, MM? I'm guessing not Luke Young.

Depends on the price. Barry might not be elite level, might not be as good as he thinks. But I'd still say he's plenty good enough for us. He'd bring some composure to the midfield again, and even if he doesn't always hit the final killer pass his brain is still sharp enough to start attacks.

That quote from RL has been so grossly misrepresented in the press it's untrue. Maz has done a good job of outlining why, but it's hard to see why this: has caused so much shite. I took that at the time to read that pretty much any well-run organisation in the world should take in more than they spend as a guiding principle. But just to clarify his position, he then confirmed it wouldn't be a deal prohibitive sell to buy restrictive policy we would operate if the right opportunities present themselves. To a man the papers ran with this as 'Lerner insists on Sell to Buy' when he clearly doesn't. At least not in the sense that we can only deal if we've moved players on. I'm glad they took that dimwit approach though (I do wonder if some of the feckers only have English as a second or possibly third language mind). The perception is out there and hopefully benefits us when selling clubs quote us a price. As opposed to the B-lose foghorn approach of 'We've got £20,30 possibly £40 million to spend' which tacks on an extra few million from the selling club. Great business, that.

Word is the sponsorship money has been set aside for the North Stand redevelopment.

Have the colours for the new away kit been announced yet? I like that black effort (would prefer black sleeves as well though), but I'd say it's highly unlikely we'll go that way. We had a decent black third strip for 2007/08 but I don't think we wore it once. Some superstition dating back to MON's time at Celtic IIRC.

I think in this scenario if he took three months, he needed three months. (In fact I'm not even sure it was that long, he was off initially, but was available for selection in September/Oct IIRC). I don't know the bloke, so second guessing is always dangerous. But part of his decision re England might also be a result of this. Easy to say on the outside looking in "get on with it, most people only get two weeks compassionate leave" et.c. But we truly don't know how much of an impact last summer had on his state of mind. I'm guessing as an older brother he would have in some way felt responsible. Sometimes you can't just crack on. If he decides that his time is better served with his family than training with England and not actually featuring, then fair play.

From memory, I think that's how it was reported at the time. Or there was at least a suggestion of foul play initially. But think they ruled it as a tragic accident in the end. On to his career with us: Luke has -for the most part- been solid and dependable when picked. Never let us down, one of the best RB's I can recall over the last 20 years. Not happy with his treatment at all, would be different if it was a good player keeping him out, or a promising youngster in the form of his life. But it's Carlos, FFS. The only (auxiliary) RB in world football with two left feet. Not CC's fault really, he's a stopper who can track, head and block but little else. He shouldn't be playing in a position that requires a fair degree of skill. Or any skill, in fact. Best wishes to Luke going forward. Hope he finds a manager that believes in him and gets back in the England reckoning. He's plenty good enough, if that's what he wants.

Given a choice, I'd much rather he went to Chelsea or United. They aren't direct rivals. At the moment, Citeh are.