TB

or 4) That player is simply shit. I don't care if he does anything worthwhile on the pitch. He's just shit, and anyone able to spot any positive or even faintly redeeming qualities doesn't watch the game in the right way.

Erm... well, yeah, I feel yours too. Sort of. Henceforth, a pinch of salt won't be enough when reading numbers on here. Possibly by the barrel-load.

Oh, yes, certainly. But I still cannot get my head around those numbers. 369 games is certainly worse than 369 hours, but 369 hours of football is still 246 games. Wikipedia claims that the longest goalless run record in English football was 11 games (jointly held by Coventry and Hartlepool). 369 minutes cannot be right, either. That's just four games. And 369 days without goals would see Villa not scoring for more than a year. I'm stumped. @ dont_do_it_doug. : where did you get those numbers from? Your blog post make sense. But to me, those numbers don't.

Ah. You've edited your post. :-) I was trying to make a joke about the absurdity of a team unable to score even once in 369 games. Edit: I've re-read your updated post. Cannot disagree with any of that.

How can anyone defend Gabby (or anyone involved in those 369 games, for that matter)?. Truly stunning stat.

I don't disagree with anything in your post, really. I'm not prepared to stand in their corner in any kind of fight :-) I won't grieve the day those two are replaced with better players. My point was that some fans are way too eager to accept any kind of dubious stat / rumour as being the absolute gospel truth if it matches with their perception of a player / manager / club / referee / etc. Unless they had first-hand experience, that is. But even then, a faulty stat that's published online has already become a 'truth' that won't ever go away completely, no matter in how many ways it's disproved at a later stage. It's out there, available for all and sundry wanting to prove a point.

Of course it is, as this is a Villa forum. And as for now, it's in the past. Until the next time Westwood or Gardner plays for Villa. I believe those '9 combined passes' will be referenced several times in some way in the future, by someone wanting to denigrate the player(s) or the club. If you want to believe it, you probably will. Unless you were there.

That's really the problem, isn't it? You were at the game, and you realised that the stats had to be wrong. But that's now an established internet 'truth' about the Villa CM's having 9 touches between them in an entire half, and it won't go away for a very long time. Someone not present at the time and wanting it to be true will always want to buy it.

For a second, I thought I was in the '21st Century Managers' thread when I read this. It fits one of the previous incumbents to a 'T'.

It is: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/skittle

True enough. But even then opinions would differ wildly afterwards. (Cue various manager/player threads on here, where waiting and seeing is still disagreeing several years later). I just don't think Gabby will be able to return to anywhere near the player he once was, in which case playing him wouldn't help the team or the supporters' confidence in the manager. A new manager needs to gain the trust of both the players and the supporters. IMO, SB shouldn't give Gabby that one last chance unless he's confident that Gabby is up to the task. Once (/if) he has the team performing well and winning games on a regular basis, demonstrating to all and sundry (if anyone can at Villa) that he knows what he's doing, I think he may choose any player available to him without the majority challenging/criticising his selections.

Well, a fit, agile and motivated Gabby would definitely be an asset. But then again, if SB is able to make Gabby fit that description again*, we wouldn't have to worry about promotion this season. With that kind of manager, it'd be nailed on. Even without Gabby anywhere near the squad. * Promotion to the PL may precede this (if it happens at all...) by several years.

I don't think the Dr. really wants to give him another chance, but rather tries to address the 'clean slate' idea frequently suggested whenever a new manager takes over. I think this is the equivalent of the airport 'last, and final call' before the gate is closed, leaving any stragglers behind.

I don't mind a glass of Jose Cuervo Especial Gold tequila myself, but my favourite tipple would be any Islay single malt. I believe the border between on topic and off topic has become somewhat blurred in the last two pages anyway.

I beg to differ. IMO, the liquid version, if pure and uncontaminated, may enhance a single malt when applied in moderation. The solid form should only be applied to blended whisky.

And as for Garde being brought in to build a side to compete...

Lambert and RDM, possibly. But I'd say anyone brought in mid-season would be a short term choice.

He's hardly on a roll, is he?

Well. I'd say that wraps it up.

Agreed. I don't want the mods to bánh mì.

He might scrape a win or two. But I think he'd lose most games. Sherwood made a difference when he could get talented players fired up. Setting up a team tactically proved to be way beyond him. IMO TS was the root cause of the fairly obvious 'us' and 'them' split in last year's squad. Some of those players are still here. I don't think they'd welcome him back. I believe he'd be relieved of his duties well before May. And then he'd continue to wash his hands of us, as he has done before. He might have had his moment at Capitol before the Cup final, but then he hit the Tarpeian Rock.

There's quite enough to blame him for already. But I bet he won't mind RDM leaving.

English is a second language for me. But I'm fairly certain that 'going on a bender' and 'being a bender' are two very different things...

Agreed. He claimed he had followed some of the younger for years, and he had the final say in every signing. Then when things started to go tits up, he got busy washing his hands. The only reason I'd have him back for a single minute would be to watch him being sacked again the next minute. Possibly with tar and feathers present at the time.

Way, way before my time, obviously, but when taverns allowed a customer to drink all day for tuppence, the sixpence coin contained enough silver to allow it to be easily bent, so it was nicknamed 'a bender'. Hence the expression 'going on a bender'.