weedman

I agree. It's so easy to forget about Steer because he just doesn't look like he'd be a good keeper, but Heaton aside he's been comfortably our most consistent keeper in recent times. Reina has made mistake after mistake, flaps at crosses and looks like he's totally comfortable with the ball at his feet but falls apart as soon as he has to do any goalkeeping. Nyland has been good and I think there's a keeper there since he got over his teething problems when he 1st joined, but you can't say he hasn't made a lot of errors since joining. Steer has just got on with it, he's small but seems confident to come for crosses, can make saves and pass the ball. Order should be... 1) Heaton 2) Steer 3) Nyland 4) Reina We know Heaton is out, so Steer should be in unless he's injured, in which case it should be Nyland. Reina should only be a last resort, I imagine he'll retire once his contracts up

It was only brought in to stop complete short termism that old school managers employed. Managers do not care about the future of the club, they care about their job and their paycheck. If the average span of a manager is 2 years why should they bring in 17/18/19 year olds for 5x the price of a 32 year old? Sure the club may reap the benefits in 5 years time, but if the manager has been sacked by then what does he care? With the managers in control you end up with us under MON or Bruce. Good team, good players, but no sell on value and a rapidly depleting bank balance that will, eventually, run dry and leave us with a team of 30+ year olds ready to retire and no way to replace them (short of a ridiculously lucky timing takeover from a couple of billionaires) If we hadn't been taken over after the playoff defeat, either Bruce would have left and been able to say "I did everything I could, the finances aren't my problem really" and he still would have eventually been picked up by a bottom feeder like Newcastle, or he'd have been forced to stay as we couldn't afford to sack him and probably would have kept us away from relegation and taken all the sympathy for our poor position as it's "not his fault we're bankrupt". And he'd be paid through the whole thing! Win win for him, the only losers would be us. That is why you have to take transfers out of the managers hand to a certain extent, to survive as a club you need young and improving players, to survive as a manager you need experienced, expensive players at their peak who'll never really grow in value. The club has to take priority

Absolutely spot on. I barely post here anymore because I just can't be bothered to read through a certain poster relentlessly trolling and constant biters. It ruins what was a really good forum prior to his arrival. You know he's a troll because he consistently ignores any points that prove him wrong, only to repeat the same statement again 20 minutes later like no-one ever responded. When it's quiet like now there's no point really coming here because there's no other conversation to blank him out with

Aren't all circles neverending? I'm not sure you fully understand circles

All life is valuable, and to ask people to risk it is massive and should only be done in extreme circumstances, like when your essential people during a global pandemic without whom many multiple thousands would suffer and die. Not when you're a dude getting paid £20-250k per week to kick a ball around. It's chalk and cheese

Not ok. Its NECESSARY. Without them thousands would die. Without footballers a few fat cats will have to wait a month or 2 before buying a 4th Lambo. It's not remotely comparable

I hear this all the time against him but being naturally gifted is surely the case for every PL player? Go watch Jack Grealish at 13 years old and tell me he isn't naturally gifted. Gabby was excellent for several years and you could tell he really worked on his game for those first 5/6 years or so, once we started the managerial merry go round he started to fall really, was OK under Lambert but awful from that point on. I thought the interview was really good and I fully agree regarding Petrov, he'd be perfect as a youth coach because of the type of player he was, hard working, professional, obviously went through something that not many do and will have a new outlook on the back of it, he's clearly hugely liked and respected by all at the club, and was a modern enough player that he won't be a dinosaur as soon as he arrives, I can't think of any better former players to have a role here tbh

It really is amazing with the history Leeds have they still jump the gun on everything. They seem to be celebrating our relegation with 10 games left and ditto for their promotion, didn't they do EXACTLY that last year only to fall away with a whimper? It's also amazing that a group of fans that desperately tries to convince everyone they're a "big club" is still bitter about some nothing rivalry we had for 1 season in the Championship, basically centered around them being upset that Grealish "dives" (ironic considering the last game we had their striker did a worse dive than anything I've seen a Villa player do in a decade that includes Ashley Young). They seem to find us more important than even Blues fans do, and it really is saying something to be more small time than Blues

Guys, I agree in part, but while all the talk of the integrity of the league, changing the rules and the playing field etc is correct, those things are gone regardless this season. Even if fans are allowed back to finish the season (which let's be honest definately won't happen), what if John McGinn scores the goals to keep us up or Wesley gets back just in time for our last game scoring to keep us up over West Ham? What if Reina decides he doesn't want to be in England any more so refuses to sign a short term extension and goes back to Spain? The "integrity" of the league is gone already. Every option is a compromise, given the money that teams have already spent this season for whatever reason, IF its declared that its safe to resume behind closed doors then that's a better option for just about everyone than voiding the season. For what it's worth I still think it will be null and voided. I've said it since the first game was cancelled and I still think that, I can't see how they get around the June 30th issue and I think they're posturing to make it look like they are doing everything possible while waiting for either 1) a government announcement forcing their hand or 2) another major league voiding the season and setting a precedent

I have to disagree with you both here. Sure, that would work out better for us as we have several big home games coming up and we don't want to go down but come on guys, if the season can be completed, even if it's behind closed doors, it is 100% a better option than just voiding it. It would suck for us as home advantage could end up being pretty crucial but come on, this is an unprecedented time and something is going to have to give somewhere. I'm not a fan of the idea of behind closed doors matches, but you can guarantee that if that becomes a viable option they will do it, if we can't get fans in stadiums it's the next fairest way to end the season. Not perfect of course, but let's be realistic none of the available options will be, it's about finding the fairest solution to an unprecedented time. Finishing the games, getting the TV money, getting an answer to promotions and relegation and champions etc after completing all matches is the fairest option. If that cannot happen, I just can't see the idea of promoting 2 but not relegating anyone working. It just seems so pie in the sky, for starters it's very clear that 3 teams should be promoted so by only promoting top 2 every team in the top 8 or 10 would have a grievance against the league for not allowing them the opportunity, which is potential legal action, secondly, how far down the pyramid do you go to keep the leagues even? What if there's 2 teams tied in 2nd and 3rd and one has a game in hand? If the games can't be completed I just can't see any realistic option apart from voiding it, which is why if behind closed doors becomes an option they will go for it 100%. If, at the end of the season we played 28 games with fans and were 19th in the league, it won't be the 10 games behind closed doors that relegated us. And at least everyone's in the same boat this way, it's just so much fairer than voiding the whole thing

Fairest things to do in order 1) finish the season as normal 2) finish the season behind closed doors 3) null and void the season 4) the no relegation, promote the top 2 idea 5) Call the league done, wipe out the last result of every team who have played an extra game to make it games played even 6) Use average points to finish the season 7) End the table as it stands Personally I think that only the first 3 options are remotely realistic, and with the finances involved in a full PL season they won't impact next season to finish this one. If a new season has to start by say, the start of September latest, players and clubs will need at least say a 2 week pre season, following at least a 2 week end of season break. I think they've said it'll take 6 weeks to finish the season, and players will need at least 2 weeks to get up to speed again. So that's 12 weeks between training restarting and next season started, which is a massive push of course, but these are trying times. Working back from September 5th (latest the new season could realistically start I'd reckon), that means players have to be back in full training by June 13th at the absolute latest. All that assumes that they can get around the 30th June deadline, which would surprise me given what's potentially at stake (although not a lot will be official, I'm sure there are a lot of out of contract players that have preliminarily agreed new deals, are they going to risk a career ending injury on a short term contract that scuppers their new contract?)

For some reason I read this in Karl Pilkintons voice

People should remember it's not just player contracts that change on June 30th. This will also affect sponsors, kit manufacturers, advertisers in general. Everything contractual and football related runs from 1st July to 30th June. It might not seem a big deal a team playing in Kappa for 2/3rds of the season but Nike for the last 1/3rd, but it will absolutely be a big deal to Kappa and Nike that have committed millions to those deals, especially as the latter is highly unlikely to have kit designs all done and distributed in the short time before games potentially start again. Having W88 on the shirt now but what if Bet365 have taken over from July? Can that even be changed mid season. I just can't see anything happening after June 30th, that's why I think they'll void it. And again, if the season cannot be completed, voiding it is the only way to realistically avoid lawsuits all round. It'll annoy teams for sure, but no-one has technically or legally achieved anything yet, so they wouldn't have any grounds to sue. Once you start throwing promotions and relegation and European places around it opens up a huge can of worms to every team that doesn't get awarded anything when they potentially might.

Lol at people who think they'll just end the season with the table as it stands. They'd be sued by just about everyone and they'd lose. There's no justification whatsoever to punishing teams when they haven't had an opportunity to compete. Not just the likes of us at the bottom but the likes of Sheff Utd at the top. Besides what about the playoffs below? No time to play them, do they just assume 3rd place goes up even though that's not in their rules? Only relegate and promote 2? Although everyone would be annoyed at a voided season, they may try and sue, but realistically no one has achieved anything yet, so nothing is being taken away and therefore there really are no grounds for a lawsuit from the likes of Leeds or West Brom or Liverpool etc. Its not like the FA have got together to find a way to screw teams over, it's a global pandemic which is forcing us into this situation. Who would you sue? China? Even the oft cited promote the top 2 don't relegate anyone and have a 22 team league opens the FA up to lawsuits from everyone that misses out. That would mean the FA are saying that a teams "achievements" this season DO matter. The likes of Brentford or Forest nailed on for playoffs for example get that taken away from them in that situation. IMO the season has to be completed or voided. There can't be a middle ground

This is what I think too, I think there'll be some kind of deal struck like the companies getting their contracts extended in exchange for not kicking up a fuss, they'll take the hit and move on to next year. A £700m hit sounds a lot, but when they make billions every year from the football they won't want to piss off the people who decide who gets those contracts with more and more emerging rivals as you say

And Dyche was relegated in his 1st season in the league

Double post

I really don't think the TV money or sponsorship would be a big issue, the negative PR a company would get for suing clubs or the PL for missed fixtures in the wake of a global pandemic is simply not worth it for these companies. If sky decided to sue the PL and clubs ended up in severe financial trouble on the back of it you'd see people cancelling sky en masse and even the PL refusing to deal with them afterwards. It just wouldn't be worth it. I think they won't kick up a fuss, get their contracts extended by a year as compensation and take the hit.

I swear people on this forum are obsessed with Rafa Benitez, he did a shit job at Newcastle for years before retiring in China on about £12m a year. Plays the exact same football as Steve Bruce and very publicly is not liked by Purslow. You say he's not unobtainable, you are wrong. We couldn't afford him even if we wanted to, and we definately don't want to as the man in charge of those decisions hates him. There's more chance of this season finishing with a 9 game winning run for us then us appointing Benitez at any point I've never heard of the other guy so can't comment on him

This is entirely assuming clubs will only vote for whatever outcome suits the club more, and ignore any implications or health issues to players, staff and their extended families.

I think you mistook my point, by foresight I meant planning for the medium to long term, rather than short. Say we get a Steve Bruce type in again, I'd have little doubt that we'd see an improvement in the results, he'd bring in a certain type of player to solidify us (experienced players) and get good results in the short term. However 2 years down the line those experienced players are old has beens, so we have to release them and bring in more experienced players to continue playing the same way. It's an endless cycle that costs an absolute fortune while bringing in extremely little, therefore completely unsustainable in the medium to long term. This is literally what we have done since Randy first bought the club, where has it got us? A few good years finishing 6th followed by a decade of abject misery and embarrassment. A dinosaur isn't someone that "plays defensive football" it's someone that comes in, brings a short term boost before bailing and/or getting sacked just as the bust comes. That's the sort of manager we don't want. I would rather go down with Dean Smith than see Villa appoint another "dinosaur", even if it kept us up this year

There is clearly a difference between having 15 players leave on a free transfer because they're all way past their prime and needing to spend £120m replacing them and selling maybe 6 players for £100-150m which we can reinvest in the team. That's the reason people don't want a dinosaur. No-one denies that the players brought in generally do well, it's the lack of foresight that's the issue. It's completely unsustainable to have to completely rebuild every couple of years while bringing in zero transfer money

He might not want to work for 3 years, but he absolutely will want to earn 3 years worth of salary. Any manager taking over now will demand a 3 year contract for the simple point that they'll probably be sacked well before then and take the compensation

Such a shame Steve Bruce never had a transfer window here so he could have replaced some of our older players with his own men. I'd bet he'd have turned his nose up at expensive short term fixes and really helped to mould us into a PL ready team. Guess we'll never know how that would have turned out