Silent_Bob

2 hours ago, Panto_Villan said:

Everything I've read suggests the AZ vaccine still prevents serious illness from the SA variant.

True, but it also allows for the virus to spread and create new mutations. 

2 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

Is this in addition to what we knew. If its new news I can’t locate anything regarding researcher categorically linking the az vaccine and the deaths. 

You would if you could read Norwegian.

That it doesn't work well against South African mutation should be well known. It's proven here and South Africa has stopped using it. Probably for a reason.

21 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Only younger people? 

I think so. Depends on your definition of young. All under 50 as far as I know. One dead is around 30. But it hasn't been given to 65 or older. This was the vaccine that initally was meant for health workers. But they have so far been very reluctant to take it, as it is perceived to be a second rate vaccine.

Good news is that now that they know about it, they can perhaps treat you if you have symptoms of blood clot. And if you survive for more than two weeks, you're probably safe.

But it doesn't protect as well as the others, it doesn't protect you against the South African mutation, it has rare, but lethal side effects and it is in short supply. Would not be surprised at all if some countries just stop using this one now. 

Reports from Norway says researchers have found that the death of younger people who had the AZ vaccine is caused by the AZ vaccine... 

It creates a rare immune reponse that subsequently causes blood clot . Two or three deaths so far.

Not that many cases that it will be visible in statistics, but no doubt of what have caused these few spesific deaths.

How about a low bid for Van de Beek? 

1 hour ago, Wainy316 said:

**** Covid.  It has denied us playing Spurs and Everton at a good time to play them and then we'll walk into a game with in form Man City next week.

The **** Covid  part I agree on. But it did probably save us from relegation as well. At least we are playing Spurs and Everton this season and not Brentford and Nottingham Forest

31 minutes ago, lexicon said:

Surely you can get a player for 30m who can play the vast majority of games and is of a very similar level to Barkley. 

True. You can even get one at £10m if you're lucky. Or a £50m player that is shit if you're unlucky.

That's why a loan is good. Trying before buying.  And that's why Barkley is a good deal at £30m. There will be no setteling in period. We know how he has performed here, not just how he has performed in another club. We know that he fit in as a person and not just as a player. And those things have a value on their own.

If we can get Barkley for £30m I'm all for it. It's not much more than buying someone from Brentford. And much less risk.

7 minutes ago, MrBlack said:

It's probably still value in todays Post brexit-covid market, but it's also a gamble.

Every player is a gamble. Don't think Wes or Heaton had any injury record before they joined us. But then suddenly both of them were out for a year.

If Barkley give us 25 games with good quality it's still better than signing someone cheaper that play like shit in all 38 games.

5 hours ago, paul514 said:

He allows Davis to go out and prove himself if you have him on a 6 month deal, that’s the best thing I have to say about a deal for someone like him.

Six months from now we would know a lot more about Davis and Wes. Davis to go out on a loan and Wesley to fully recover.

At the moment we don’t know if we need one, two or none strikers in before next season. But we need a short term solution while we find out.

As we probably have limited funds, I would like us to spend it on players in positions where we’re already know we need to strengthen. As we’re not desperate we can bring in players that’s 50/50 short term and long term. They don’t have to walk straight into our starting lineup and perform from day 1.

We’re in an excellent position for that right now. We should be an attractive destination for talented playere from the Championship and we probably don’t want to bring in too many experienced players at the same time.

3 hours ago, sne said:

Media has started to speculate about Josh King again. Really hope there is nothing in those rumors unless it's a season long loan.

 

He has 6 months left on his contract. Price, age and experience would make him a good squad player I guess.

I still think he can make it here. But I also think that if we’re offered £10m for him next summer we will take it. So while I hope he prove the doubters wrong, I think a fresh start for hin elsewhere is the most likely outcome.

Priorities should be to get Barkley to sign a permanent deal and to get rid of the buy back clause for Luiz.

Then we need a third central defender and a left back option.

If we manage that I think we have an upper mid table squad this season and next. 

As long as we can use our first choice 11 we’re an upper mid table team. The real test will be when 2-3 are missing.

Probably need to spend £100m next summer to keep Barkley, keep Luiz and bring in some options in defence and midfield.

It’s the 11 that started last night, Traorè, perhaps Nakamba and Wesley and hopefully also Engels and Heaton.

3 hours ago, YouUnastanFren said:

Their account balance is, to put it simply, red.

Their money’s too tight to mention.

2 hours ago, sharkyvilla said:

I wonder if Bournemouth would consider a loan just to get him off the wage bill for a year.  I guess it depends on what offers they actually get for a permanent transfer.  He would definitely fit in the squad quite nicely in the short term but long term isn't really what we look for in a signing.

Only this season left on his contract I believe. Could be a deadline day bargain if they haven’t sold him by then. He want to go and Bournemouth want to get some money for him.

Not so sure about what we need most. We’re one injury or suspension away from having to put Taylor, Hause or Engels in the starting lineup.

41 minutes ago, Lord Willard said:

I think it's tough bringing in a decent striker or AML of a decent quality now. 

I can't see Rashica, Benramha or Eduoard coming to sit on the bench waiting for their chance. Anyone of a high standard will want to be starting in the first 11. We just can't guarantee them that. 

 

I think Watkins, Traore, Grealish, Barkley, McGinn and Luiz has real quality. Wesley too, when he's back. There are 36 more league games and some in the cups as well. At some point in time some of these guys will be injured, tired, suspended or loosing form. 

If these three players are looking for better clubs with zero competition,  then good luck with that.

Last seasons stats shows that Jack got 94% playing time. But beyond that Mings got 89%, Luiz 76%. Players that we consider the backbone of the team. A player that plays well and play around 65% or of the total 3420 minutes of football a 38 game league season actually last has probably had a good season. 

So a fairly ambitious club need 4 players just to cover 3 positions over a season. That's without any serious injuries. Then there is a need of impact players and some younger players will also get some gametime to develop. This is especially valid for midfielders and forwards.

Players know this. And Rashica or Benramha could sign and know that they might not have as much gametime as Jack had last season. Benrahma had 85% gametime for Brentford last season, and I doubt he would expect similar or more in his first PL season. If we move Jack back into midfield then the front three picks itself. It's Watkins, Traore and whoever we bring in to play LW. It's not getting any easier than this at this level, so I wouldn't worry too much if I was either Rashica or Benrahma. I doubt Edouard is seriously considered now, as he is a central striker where we have Watkins, Davis and hopefully soon also Wesley.

28 minutes ago, KMitch said:

Regardless, I'm absolutely chuffed, lads.  I haven't been this excited about Villa since we were knocking on the door of the Champions League under O'Neill.  It's amazing to see our progress under our new owners.  We've gone from mid table in the Championship with a lopsided financial sheet, to a mid-table Premier League side who plays exciting football and a lot of room to grow, both on the pitch and in the front office.  

I totally agree. Look back to the start of the 2018/19 season and compare with where we are now. Two games into our second season in the PL we have a £200m+ squad, six points and two clean sheets.

But I predict the next step will be a bit more difficult for us. This summer we're buying/loaning players around £20-25m each.  Next step is to upgrade already good players with even better players.  

The good thing is that we're mostly buying players on their way up. Which means they might be £40-50m players in two years time, at least some of them.

52 minutes ago, Jareth said:

At 6ft 1, he's an inch shorter than Tommy Elphick - he's nano.  

Joe Short doesn’t tweet about tall players

24 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Why are no other teams after these kind of players? It's odd that we seem the be in the frame almost unchallenged for some of these quite high profile names. 

JT is probably an advantage for us. And where we currently are as a club.

I think we can be a likely destination for Barkley on a permanent deal next summer. Right now we're may be percieved as a team that just avoided relegation. Next summer we are hopefully a mid table team with an upward trajectory. And a club that might be able to attract players that aren't quite good enough for the very best, but want to be part of an interesting project. 

So we offer first team football which means Barkley has an opportunity to get into the Euro squad, which again means he will keep his market value. And we can afford the player. on a permanent deal, only not right now due to FFP. They are not loaning him out and expect to get a better player back in 12 months time. They are loaning him out because no clubs currently are likely to offer Chelsea £30m and the player himself €120K per week.  

2 minutes ago, thunderball said:

Purslow sounds just like Malcom McLaren

Does he want to go double Dutch?

Let’s hope we have a few more players on our Dradis system

1 minute ago, avfcDJ said:

I don’t think we should worry so much. We need players but we don’t need to rush them in like last season. We could quite easily add players up to the close of the window and still have enough for the season. Last year we needed recruits very quickly because we had nothing.

I agree. But the season start in two weeks, altough we're starting a week later than that. We might not need to have done all our business in three weeks time. But we need some new faces in before the season start.

4 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

I'm slightly puzzled as to why a club like Celtic would spend £ 10 million on a striker (which is a LOT of money in that league), and while doing so accepting a 40% sell on. Seems like a very high risk deal. 

Even if it's actually a 40% sell on profit I'd say it's a high risk move. 

It's more risk for the player. He would have to stay unless someone offered silly money.

We should just offer £1 for the player and £29 999 999 for a Celtic raincoat or something.

But it's not high risk move for Celtic. They get their money back and 60% of any profit. If they didn't accept that clause to begin with they would probably have had to pay more than £10m for him.

For Celtic it's actually a good deal. Low initial cost, but profit sharing. For the player it's not a good deal. Why would Celtic accept an offer that reflects his actual value?