TB

I don't understand how Ivory Coast can be winners of their group at this time - still one game left to play with a two point lead. And Benin might actually win their group and qualify directly - in second place two points behind Mali.

If any headline on Birmingham Evening Mail in general is the headline of a well-researched, professionally sound article with no anti-Villa bias whatsoever and not merely click-bait - well then: yes.

A club of Villa's stature really should have someone on their staff helping foreign players settling in. Oh, wait....

Not really that familiar with Villa players throughout the years, but I'm pretty sure that if we ever sign a Johnathan he will be the first ever,

Consider this: A young, talented player, persuaded to move to a new country with his wife and a young baby. Trying to get comfortable with his new role as a father - and as a new player at the club that brought him to the UK, getting instructed in a non-native language - and then not even been given the time of the day by the manager (who apparently told media that he didn't want you signed at all). And then (after having a manager you actually could understand for a period of time, even though he proved unable to improve results sufficiently): an interim manager that didn't play you even once. Ever. Why should he 'want to play for us'? Really? Being in his shoes, I'd look to get my career back on track, shortish.

Don't think any of our players should be put on a pedestal, but if some of the squad enjoy doing BMX tricks they may do it in their spare time, Not on the pitch.

Agree. No foundation or base whatsoever.

Yes, but do we really have to peddle our players at stalls now?

I don't think this idea will get any support.

Then I stand corrected (even though I'm not wearing orthopaedic shoes...) Very, very OT: Being Norwegian, I'm obviously no expert on Swedish pronunciation (and the finer aspects of the various dialects), but I've always thought that the first part of 'Källstrom' would be pronounced in the same way as 'källa', 'kär' and 'käpp'. No 's' sibilant (skär, skälla?) involved whatsoever, as the 'shell' would suggest. Hopefully, you won't be afflicted with the current Norwegian youth fad - not bothering to differentiate between the 'sj/skj' and 'kj' sounds. There's a vast difference between going to the jeweller's in order to buy a silver 'kjede' (chain) for your girlfriend, and then asking for a silver 'skjede' (sheath / vagina). And then just imagine her asking asking all and sundry to have a look at it? And to all non-Scandinavians on here: I apologize once again for going wildly off topic.

Oh, and Christ himself called himself and his disciples 'fishers of men'. No need to be cross about it. Don't go on pouting.

At least it isn't entirely witless... No need to crucify anone, surely?

Not sure. Hope they mullet over. Cod do batter.

Looking back to when I joined Villatalk (roughly ten years ago), I remember reading several comments on here about what particular part of his game young Gabby obviously had been working on during the summer break, thus potentially adding another string to his bow and (at some time in the future) not being merely a speed merchant anymore. It seemed that each summer he had been working on a particular skill in order to augment his repertoire. At the time, I was impressed. Then he chose to focus on his muscular strength over the summer, and not any of his remaining weaknesses, but I thought it was him wanting to improve even further as a footballer. Nowadays? Ah well, these last seasons he surely has augmented something... (But not his desire or ability to play, I'm afraid)

Well, they tried, at least. There's still some visible HTML code left in the article directly after the Ireland section - and the next section starts with 'A c'. I find it a bit odd, though, that it's fairly obvious that they've tried to use the original spellings, including various umlauts, accents and any other diacritics - and then substituted the Icelandic eth (ð) with a plain old 'd' in Haukur Heiðar Hauksson - and the suggested pronunciation makes me think of the unvoiced thorn (þ). Oh, and @sne and any other Swedes on here: Källström – Shell-strome? Really?

Feed that phrase though Google Translate once again, and you get 'Dung fat', which seems kind of weird, but not wholly inappropriate. Keep on clicking on the 'swap languages' icon, however, and you eventually end up with 'Fat manure'. It would appear that a turd is still a turd, no matter how you try to Polish it up. And it seems that a turd is still a turd in Amharic, Burmese or Catalan...

Seriously? It's hardly a major offence...

Well, whoever told you must have a very unique insight.

This could easily be put in any Villa CB thread, but from what highlights I've seen and the comments I've read on diverse Villa boards on player's threads and match threads, the Lescott/Clark, Lescott/Okore and Clark/Okore CB pairings has had favorable comments. IMO, the ideal CB pair is two players knowing their own abilities and shortcomings (and those of their fellow CB as well), therefore knowing what each player should do in each situation: not needing to be led, nor having to lead - just dealing with the situation at hand as one. Obviously, that's not the case currently . The next best alternative is an experienced/older CB able to instruct another younger/faster CB - one that's willing to be instructed, that is. I believe this is a rather common CB pairing. But Villa CB pairings? Ignoring Lescott's off-pitch/in back-pocket etc. shenanigans (and Okore's purported refusal to sit on the bench/be involved in any games for the rest of the season - for any Eric Black aficionados out there), and the actual success/failure in individual games, just consider each pairing: Lescott/Clark? One possibly unable to perform, but able to lead - and another physically able/willing to be led. Lescott/Okore? One possibly unable to perform, but able to lead - and another physically able/willing to be led. Clark/Okore? One able to lead, and another physically able/willing to be led. ----------------------- Lescott/Richards? One possibly unable to perform, but able to lead - but the other unwilling/unable to be lead, just going meandering wherever his fancy takes him. And taking his own sweet time to return to where he should be. Richards/anyone? You gotta be joking. If the 'senior player' is unable/unwilling to lead, it doesn't really matter who's partnering him, does it? And Clark/Baker? Well, one is able to lead, and I don't question Baker's willingness...

He did refute it in Danish media (and on twitter). Remember, this is a player that didn't want a Chelsea move because he wanted sufficient time on the pitch. IMO, that's Okore's main concern: to be in consideration for the Danish National team. He has stated that he didn't think playing in the Championship would affect his chances to get into the Danish squad that much, but not playing regularly would, and that a new manager might be make-or-break for him at Villa. I cannot remember any report of Okore having any problems with being on the bench throughout his time at Villa - before Black, that is. AFAIK Okore hasn't been fined by the club for the alleged incident, either. Someone is telling porkies here. I wonder who?

Blaming a 23-year old footballer for stating that he would like to play every week, and at the highest possible level? We don't want ambitious players anymore? Of course, he might not be good enough (but what CB is at 23?), but surely Villa has had enough players that have been happy to just sit on the bench (or even happier to be left out of the match squad altogether in some cases) and still collect their weekly King's ransom. In the original Danish article, he says that a new manager at Villa might mean a new start for him at the club, but that it also might mean the end of his time at Aston Villa. All about being given as much time on the pitch as possible, I guess, as surely any ambitious player in their early twenties would want to do - and especially with a view to getting into the national side.

Caveat: I'm Norwegian, so I only know the English game (and its history) from the outside, and I'm sure there'll be someone around this site more acquainted with the concept, but nevertheless: AFAIK an testimonial/benefit match (not necessarily after 10 years) originally was arranged in order to give a long-serving player an economical base for the rest of his life. (Flashback: apparently the wage cap in 1959 was £20 p/w for any football player in England. During the football season. In 1945: £10 p/w in-season, £7 p/w off-season.) I remember reading about a benefit match where the player was promised £250 before the match (yes, a very, very long time ago), and the directors of the club ended up having to pay out of their own pocket due to very few spectators actually turning up. Of course the club wouldn't arrange this kind of game for any bit-part player, so the show of appreciation bit was there from the outset. Nowadays, the show of appreciation for a player having spent ten years at the same club has emerged as the most important part. Modern-era players don't / shouldn't really need that kind of economical help. Most do want the accolade, though, even if they don't need the money.

I think rodders' point was that if Gabby wanted to leave, no-one at Villa would lift a finger to stop him, and he hasn't shown any sign to do so at this point in time. Of course, any transfer fee would be welcome, but it really is a moot point, isn't it? Getting rid of his wages is the important bit. And any club (any business, at that) needs to have someone in charge at any time - someone able to make business decisions and approve deals, even without a manager present.

... oh, a testimonial game? IMO, that kind of game is an utter absurdity in the days of modern multi-million wage football, as players really shouldn't need any additional help to set them up for life after their professional career - provided they have even half-decent advisers or, indeed, any kind of brains themselves. In the past, clubs occasionally bought a pub for loyal players at the end of their active career to help them out. I don't think Gabby needs any additional money thrown at him from Aston Villa beyond his wages. But if there absolutely has to be a game: a testimonial is held after ten years. Well, then: let him play the 1st half to the best of his ability (hah!). Then, after the break, his side play for the entirety of the second half with ten men. No Gabby to be seen anywhere.

Why would he? I don't think he'd be able to put any testimonials written by Villa fans to good use in any way. Possibly he'd appreciate a testimonial dinner, but I can't see it. "Table for one, sir?"