rjshare

atm warnock,downing,ireland are no better than just squad players not first teamers

You can add Dunne to that, he's been our worst player this season so far.

I'd agree with that, think he has been shite.

he surely isnt fit.

i cant see how he could have changed so much since last season otherwise.

On talksport they said we will be wondering how we're drawing as we have had much the better chances and play. Ash apparently ran to KMac after the goal too. Nice touch.

yes he did - theyl had a nice manly hug - with no suggestion of any gheyness or anything like that.

Why does no-one seem to notice that Warnock has been shit for about 9 months?

A changed player since he hurt his neck at Old Trafford in my view.

Can we stop buying ex liverpool players - with the exception of friedel they have been shite

Carson

Heskey

Warnock

Just hope an ex manager is better !

it used to work : saunders, houghton, staunton...

its liverpools fault - they just arent as good as they used to be!!!

Downing should come off, Young on the left, Ireland behind Gabby and NRC beside Petrov.

yup, doubt it will happen but it is definately the obvious change to make.

Why does no-one seem to notice that Warnock has been shit for about 9 months?

he made a fookin great tackle at the end of the half there.

i dont think he has been that bad to be honest - he makes mistakes but i like him because he is a blood and guts player. if he loses the ball at least you know it isnt because he chickened out of something.

Anyone watching the game (i don't have a stream) tell me how Ireland is doing? It doesn't really make much sense KMac said he realised the mistakes he made with selection against Newcastle (which I assumed meant Ireland playing too deep) but now our line up is the same bar Collins and Gabby returning!

he seemed to be a bit of a weak link when we were playing well earlier on to be honest, and since we have decided to make bolton look like argentina all of a sudden i havent seen him.

its because of dunne.

you know how mcgraths leg seemed to stretch an extra six inches just when you thought he wasnt going to make a tackle? well dunne has the opposite - its seems to shrink just as you think he is going to get the ball!

I've lost my semi-erection, by the way.

i know a good site that will bring it back...

do you like midgets by the way?

doesn he like ALWAYS score against us?

cant we just mark the one single player who knows where the back of our fùcking net is????

This football is as sexy as a midget having its face rubbed in a fat birds shitty arse.

ah - you found the same site as me?

Ahhh, ball retention. It's given me a semiI've not seen it for so long.

A what?

A semi-erection. He is joking that the attractive football is sexually exciting him.

i thought it was having a similar effect on me also, however i have just made the connection between my semi erect state and the 'other' web site i am looking at.

get in ash!!! at last - he connected with a free kick!

what a dreadful pass by dunne

is this irelands home league debut?

i dont know what people are getting so wound up for.

before the season loads of people were saying that young might be worth trying in the middle/hole, and he has said himself that he likes it. ok, he might not have perfected the art of playing there yet but he cant be expected to sudenly change position and play like cantona having being out on the wing for the last however many seasons. chill out a bit and have some patience.

We didn't have Ireland when people were saying that. Now we have Ireland, a perfect link player, we don't need to be trying out Ashley in there and subsequently playing 2 players out of position.

in my opinion, i dont see the point of playing two out and out wingers anyway if you arent going to play carew in the middle.

i think we are getting too taken in by the "holding midfielder" thing. its a buzz word of the last few years, it didnt exist until makelele - and barry is the only player in the england team who has effectively done it. in years gone by two central midfielders played together as a unit and one covered the other when he went forward. petrov is actually quite good at going forward but has been pidgeon-holed as a holding player since he came to villa. whats wrong with ireland and petrov playing side by side as any other two central midfielders would have done in the past before the advent of the "makelele role"?

The problem is not Petrov, it's Ireland. He's just not a central midfielder.

what is he then?

he isnt a defender, he isnt a forward and he isnt a winger...

He's an attacking midfielder. Lampard and Gerrard don't play in a 2 man central midfield do they? Why not? Because their managers know how to get the best out of them.

our midfield will line up effectively as a diamond with the two wingers out wide and petrov playing behind ireland. petrov holding, ireland = your attacking mid. its exactly what we are doing today with young up front playing off gabby. we have a four man midfield with two up front. i dont see how anyone is out of position except perhaps young if you think he should play on the wing.

i dont know what people are getting so wound up for.

before the season loads of people were saying that young might be worth trying in the middle/hole, and he has said himself that he likes it. ok, he might not have perfected the art of playing there yet but he cant be expected to sudenly change position and play like cantona having being out on the wing for the last however many seasons. chill out a bit and have some patience.

We didn't have Ireland when people were saying that. Now we have Ireland, a perfect link player, we don't need to be trying out Ashley in there and subsequently playing 2 players out of position.

in my opinion, i dont see the point of playing two out and out wingers anyway if you arent going to play carew in the middle.

i think we are getting too taken in by the "holding midfielder" thing. its a buzz word of the last few years, it didnt exist until makelele - and barry is the only player in the england team who has effectively done it. in years gone by two central midfielders played together as a unit and one covered the other when he went forward. petrov is actually quite good at going forward but has been pidgeon-holed as a holding player since he came to villa. whats wrong with ireland and petrov playing side by side as any other two central midfielders would have done in the past before the advent of the "makelele role"?

The problem is not Petrov, it's Ireland. He's just not a central midfielder.

what is he then?

he isnt a defender, he isnt a forward and he isnt a winger...

i dont know what people are getting so wound up for.

before the season loads of people were saying that young might be worth trying in the middle/hole, and he has said himself that he likes it. ok, he might not have perfected the art of playing there yet but he cant be expected to sudenly change position and play like cantona having being out on the wing for the last however many seasons. chill out a bit and have some patience.

We didn't have Ireland when people were saying that. Now we have Ireland, a perfect link player, we don't need to be trying out Ashley in there and subsequently playing 2 players out of position.

in my opinion, i dont see the point of playing two out and out wingers anyway if you arent going to play carew in the middle.

i think we are getting too taken in by the "holding midfielder" thing. its a buzz word of the last few years, it didnt exist until makelele - and barry is the only player in the england team who has effectively done it. in years gone by two central midfielders played together as a unit and one covered the other when he went forward. petrov is actually quite good at going forward but has been pidgeon-holed as a holding player since he came to villa. whats wrong with ireland and petrov playing side by side as any other two central midfielders would have done in the past before the advent of the "makelele role"?

i dont know what people are getting so wound up for.

before the season loads of people were saying that young might be worth trying in the middle/hole, and he has said himself that he likes it. ok, he might not have perfected the art of playing there yet but he cant be expected to sudenly change position and play like cantona having being out on the wing for the last however many seasons. chill out a bit and have some patience.

well we have got plenty of attacking options from the midfield!

Burnley at home last year, I got asked to move my car just at the start of the 2nd half. Missed ALL four goals!!..Heard VP erupt every time!.. Gabby scoring the last just as I got back to the ground. Security at gate said.. "You've missed four goals lass!!!"....I nearly punched him!!

Speed management this time. Anger management instead of the Chelski game??

its a course in speed-parking that she needs!

I see nothing wrong with Houllier myself, everyone is making something out of nothing.

Nothing wrong with Houllier?

You mean other than his previously questionable health, the fact he is 63, has been out the game for a couple of years and out of the Premier league even longer and despite some success at Liverpool spent a lot of money on some utter utter shite.

He may well be the best or one of the better options available but to say there is nothing wrong with his selection or should I say possible selection is staggering.

Bah humbug. There isn't a prospective manager out there that we couldn't make a list of 'perceived negatives' about.

1) 'Previously questionable health' - well you said it, previously, he's had no problems in the last 9 years or so.

2) 63 - there have been much older managers and it need not be a detriment to the job, indeed 37 years of managerial experience might actually be a good thing. Wenger, Ferguson, Redknapp 3 managers in the top four that are all over 60.

3) Out the game for a couple of years - well no he hasn't he's been technical director for France, something which also might prove invaluable here.

4) Out of the premiership for a couple of years - So? So has Mourhinho. Means nothing.

5) Despite some success - 6 years 6 trophies, yes please. Despite? IMO if he wins that amount of trophies his player purchases are justified.

6) Spent money on utter shite - See 5, plus he also brought in some great players for the time and developed players like Gerrard. Fair play to the man he also admitted that he bought some shite players after he was ill which also shows he's open to learning from his mistakes.

This kind of post is exactly the problem with this thread, as soon as any manager is mentioned there are a load of people that are all too willing to shoot them down in a hail of negatives, often when they are not even justified.

i said something similar a few pages back albeit less detailed and i think you are totally right.

it doesnt mean that houllier will be our next manager and it certainly doesnt mean that he will be a success if he is but no appointment is going to make everyone happy so you have to look at the best you can do. its easy to knock someone but it is kind of pointless in doing so if you cant come up with a better proposition.

Nothing to suggest we have not approached for all these managers just people getting into a tizzy.

Sadly there's nothing to suugest we have either. Which is why people are getting in a 'tizzy'

The only names we're hearing from people allegedly ITK, are out of work managers, most of whom havent been employed for a while.

Is it that we have offered the job to some top names who are in work and all have turned us down flat or is it that we havent even tried ?

That's the only question I can see that folks are worried about. If we're that an unattractive proposition to top names then i'm very worried.

its totally unreasonable logic though isnt it?

why would we be an attractive proposition to a top name? the top names are all currently employed at top clubs or are way out of our league.

examples:

jol - well he is at the biggest club his home country have ever known.

moyes - why swap the seventh best club in england for the sixth?

mclaren - he is two league games into a new job

hughes - three

fergy, wenger, mourinho - yeah right...

sven, capello, quieroz, scolari...

WHO exactly are you refering to when you talk about top name managers who we should be able to get?

i cant think of anyone with a bigger reputation/name and better track record in the prem who we could realistically attract than houllier.

Jol - wanted to go to Fulham - so there is a chance he would find villa an attractive proposition.

Moyes - well in recent years the villa manager has had more available funds than the everton manager - it would be a step up - agreed not a massive one.

Hughes - Pretty sure he would rather be villa manager than fulham manager. Agree the timing stinks.

I don't know but by the laws of probability - if you pursued those 3 with some determination - pretty sure you would get one.

well, with all three of them you are speculating on whether they would come or not and i dont believe that any of them would leave their current jobs for us. jol knocked back fulham eventually and having pledged himself to ajax he isnt going to change his mind on it a week later.

if you are implying that they are your top three targets it is perhaps worth pointing out that they have won/achieved less combined together than houllier did in his time at liverpool. i appreciate that houllier was at a bigger club than those three have ever managed but surely that kind of puts into perspective whether or not they are "top level" or "big name" managers.

i cant think of anyone with a bigger reputation/name and better track record in the prem who we could realistically attract than houllier.

That's depressed me. I'm going back to bed.

so throw names at me. dont be shy...

you quoted the last line of my post so obviously read the rest of it too but didnt try to answer the question.

its getting a bit like the annual "we need a 20 goals a season striker" debate but no one can actually name one that could do it and we could sign.

Nothing to suggest we have not approached for all these managers just people getting into a tizzy.

Sadly there's nothing to suugest we have either. Which is why people are getting in a 'tizzy'

The only names we're hearing from people allegedly ITK, are out of work managers, most of whom havent been employed for a while.

Is it that we have offered the job to some top names who are in work and all have turned us down flat or is it that we havent even tried ?

That's the only question I can see that folks are worried about. If we're that an unattractive proposition to top names then i'm very worried.

its totally unreasonable logic though isnt it?

why would we be an attractive proposition to a top name? the top names are all currently employed at top clubs or are way out of our league.

examples:

jol - well he is at the biggest club his home country have ever known.

moyes - why swap the seventh best club in england for the sixth?

mclaren - he is two league games into a new job

hughes - three

fergy, wenger, mourinho - yeah right...

sven, capello, quieroz, scolari...

WHO exactly are you refering to when you talk about top name managers who we should be able to get?

i cant think of anyone with a bigger reputation/name and better track record in the prem who we could realistically attract than houllier.

Why would we go after managers that are unemployed, generally they are unemployed for a reason.

because they are available and dont cost compensation.

when sven, jol, ramos, ranieri, zola, grant etc got sacked they were unemployed but not necessarily bad managers.