Godders

5 minutes ago, icouldtelltheworld said:

I didn't say that though, I said if we got promoted we'd be in a position of hoping a by then nearly 38 year old JT would be up to playing a season in the Prem, which doesn't fill me with much confidence. Difference of opinions is all I guess

With an option to extend, we hold the cards. 

If it's his legs have gone, we don't extend the contract. 

If Bruce wants him for a season in the PL, but JT himself doesn't feel as though he'd be up to it, we don't extend the contract. 

If Bruce wants him in the PL and JT feels he's got another PL season in him, we extend the contract. 

At no point are we hoping that a 38yo JT would be able to do it in the PL. We're only extending the contract if there's a good deal of certainty that he can. 

Edit: assuming there is a option for the club to extend his contract. 

17 minutes ago, icouldtelltheworld said:

Point taken, but then where does that leave us in a years time? Either JT isn't up to it and it's a waste of resources and holds us back this year, or we get promoted and either have to start all over again with a new main CB, or hope that a nearly 38 year old JT is up to a season in the PL. Along with the rest of our transfer policy under Bruce ( and RDM) thus far, this doesn't really give me any confidence that there is a long term plan in place. 

What makes you think we don't have an option to extend his contract if we want? 

There's your long term plan. If JT proves he's still up to it, and Bruce has him in his plans for next season in the PL, we add another year on his contract. 

If he's not up to it, which by the way would probably be pretty obvious early on in the season, we don't exercise the option to extend and plan to get in a new CB for next season. 

Oh, and welcome John!! 

Just for anyone interested, here's a link to the verdict in full. Grab yourselves a brew and a spare 30 mins if you want to read through; it's long

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/9398132/John-Terry-found-not-guilty-of-racism-the-verdict-in-full.html

John Terry found not guilty of racism: the verdict in full

4 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Sorry i meant there was no need for John Terry to use it! As in he went to far but I doubt it was in hatred because of the guys colour. It was just in very bad taste! 

Edit: what I'm trying to say is although there is never an excuse for this type of anguage I do believe there is a difference in using racist language in the heat of the moment than being a racist person. 

Ah OK. Apologies for misunderstanding! 

He's always maintained the only reason he said it was because Anton Ferdinand accused him of saying it, ie... 

AF: "did you just call me x?!" 

JT: "No I didn't just call you x!" 

X obviously being the phrase in question. 

If that version of events is true, it suggests he's not a racist, even though he used that language towards Ferdinand.

Ultimately though, there's only one person who knows exactly what went down that day, and he's said it's this version of events. 

49 minutes ago, alreadyexists said:

According to this source (which is probs nonsense) we're favourites to sign Hart. I wouldn't be averse to it as I think he's good enough (not as good as the media made him out to be though), but I would believe it when I see it! 

It's incredibly misleading click bait. It's saying we're the favourites out of the Championship clubs. Not favourites overall (which is West Ham). 

21 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

Dont like it and the sponsor logo is piss poor

Guys, come on. It comes with a light sabre. Why wouldn't you buy this?!  

28 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I don't think anybody is saying it wasn't wrong. There was no need to use 'black'. 

I'm not one for using this language, but in the context of what's being discussed, it's probably inevitable.

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

Isn't that intent though? As you say there's no dispute he used racist language, it's the intention of how it was used that couldn't be proved in court. Was it a question or was he racially abusing someone. 

At the end of the day it's still the England captain having to resign before they stripped him of his captaincy because he used racist language on a football pitch. Not your everyday occurence. 

Apologies, thought you were talking about his intent to use racist language.

I seem to remember he resigned because he felt his position had become untenable. Certainly not an admission of guilt on his part. The FA would have had their own public relations motivations as well. 

Look, you think JT is a racist word removed based on his previous. I fully respect your opinion. I don't personally think he's a racist though. 

2 hours ago, DCJonah said:

They couldn't prove intent. He used racist language, that's why the f.a found him guilty and were going to take the England captaincy off him. 

That's not strictly speaking true. What couldn't be proved is whether JT was responding to an accusation from Ferdinand that he'd used a racist slur, or whether he'd made the statement without the accusation. JT had always maintained he was using the same words Ferdinand had accused him of using just prior, but as a question; as in "you really think I'd call you a ...?" 

The Judge also cited the FA report in his judgement (which was used as evidence by the prosecution), and said that the context of JT's interview was that he was responding to Ferdinand's accusation. I believe the FA found him guilty of using racially abusive language towards Ferdinand. That's never been in doubt - he's always maintained he used that language towards Ferdinand. What is important though, and the reason why he wasn't found guilty in court, is that it wasn't clear whether or not he was responding to an accusation made by Ferdinand that he'd called him that.

Agree with all of that @Eastie. I was disputing the original claim he's dropping down to get promoted with us. He's not- he's dropping down because he doesn't want to move abroad and we're the ones who have so far seemingly offered the best contract. 

6 minutes ago, Eastie said:

Don't necessarily agree with that - he probably sees villa a big club and promotion a challenge that maybe gives him a hunger - I don't think he's another journeyman coming here to see out his days and he will very much want promotion with villa with some passion .

he has that kind of hunger that many players his age don't have anymore.

As we've seen reports around him wanting his coaches badges, and now around future management as well, I suspect that he's more mindful of that side of things now. I strongly suspect that if 'Arry told him he was retiring after the upcoming season, and the club board were guaranteeing offering him the managers spot when it happens, he'd be giving serious consideration to a SHA deal. 

10 minutes ago, Eastie said:

The championship is more competitive than MLS or china .

Vreitti suggested that he was coming here for silverware. If that was his motivation, I'm sure clubs like LA Galaxy or Guangzhou would have him on more money than we could offer. 

50 minutes ago, vreitti said:

Thus the only logical conclusion I'm able to come to, would be that he actually still wants to compete for real. Perhaps the lure of promotion, and added 'silverware' is a thing. 

The reason he's expected to drop to the Championship is because apparently he doesn't want to play against Chelsea, so he's not going to sign for a PL team, and he apparently doesn't want to move abroad. Assuming that to be true, the Championship is the top league he's going play in now. 

He's had two offers that fit his criteria - us and Birmingham. He's going to sign whichever contract suits him best, which at the moment is us if you believe the press and bookies. 

Thats why he's dropping down, not necessarily because he still wants to compete for real, which he would probably achieve, with far more money playing in MLS or China. 

Now If I was Dr Tone, I wouldn't mind offering JT this as a sweetener. However, I'd be stipulating that he won't be taking over within the next 3 or so years if Bruce goes within that time- he's basically on an apprenticeship that must be finished.

Point is, we don't know the specifics of the clause, or even if it exists, so I would urge caution before jumping to the conclusion that we're hiring Bruce's immediate successor in JT. 

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

Oh and just checked, Terry got a court super injunction to initially stop the story coming out. Does that usually happen with stories that are completely false? 

Here's a conversation that may have happened between Terry's PR rep and the papers:

PR rep: "Guys, don't run the story. You're misrepresenting the facts. She wasn't with Wayne Bridge when he slept with her. "

Papers: "Sorry, this is golden for sales. We're running it. Front page." 

PR rep: "We'll just head on over to the court then and have them order you to not run it." 

There we have a court injunction granted, at Terry's request, even though in this scenario, he's innocent of any wrongdoing. 

Also I doubt that court injunctions are given out willy nilley anytime someone asks for one. I suspect (though I haven't verified this) that there has to be reasonable doubt that the report is inaccurate before a court grants an injunction. If that weren't the case, we'd be in a situation where the Government of the day could control the press through the courts, which kind of makes a mockery of the whole freedom of the press thing. 

You are of course fully entitled to draw conclusions using any evidence you choose. I'm just pointing out the fact that actually, getting a court injunction is absolutely not an admission of guilt. It is in fact more likely, I believe, to suggest that what we've read in the press may not be fully representative of what actually happened. 

I don't like the term "Bruce out-ers": it's a bit of a mouthful. 

Perhaps there's some sort of portmentau we can come up with on Bruce and out. Brouters? What about exit instead of out. Brexiters maybe? 

2 hours ago, Jareth said:

What I'm going to find so hard to take is after all the bruce out vitriol these last few months, if the bookies prediction actually plays out and we get promoted, is the speed at which all those who are vehemently bruce out change their tune and say oh well I got it wrong.

Whilst I will have the utmost respect for anyone man enough to admit they were wrong, Im also mindful of the fact that a leopard rarely changes it's spots. I suspect that, when promoted, this thread will subtly change into pages and pages of "yeah but, Bruce isn't a premier league manager. We should get rid now and bring in someone for the long term."

1 minute ago, Mjvilla said:

Terry and??

Alex Bruce??

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

What a strange post. I can't judge a man on his actions? 

You can, it's just you said "it's not just the reports in the papers" , implying you know him outside of what's been reported. I was just interested to see when you met him since this isn't the impression of him I've had from others who have met him. 

You are of course fully entitled to your opinion though, regardless of whether or not it's formed on the basis of press reports, or otherwise. 

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

It's really not just reports in papers. He's an absolute piece of shit as a person. 

Really? I've generally heard the opposite from people. When did you meet him? 

If we sign Terry, am I right in thinking that in the last couple of summers, we'd have signed a current PL champion? 

Nice to see we've still got pulling power if true, even in the Championship. 

1 hour ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

Anyone think we should go for largely untested players from league one or two or perhaps even lower? I think it could be a worthwhile approach

Yeah they'll have a point to prove- playing at a higher level with us, they'll want to prove they're capable of doing so: they'll be well fired up. Get them in young too - give them time to develop at our level. You could be on to something here SGC! We could call them young and hungry!!

I mean, we could be getting our next star midfielder from someone like Crewe!! 

3 minutes ago, Mjvilla said:

My guess would be that Bruce wants to keep the 3 and the board want them gone. That's the disagreement and the decision to make is based on Bruce's future.

My guess is it has nothing to do with Bruce, by virtue of the fact that Bruce and the board probably agreed who was staying and who was going months ago. Hence why Wyness is already working on ins.

My guess is the players kicking up a stink.

That's if there is actually a thing at all.

14 hours ago, NottingVilla said:

Wolves getting in Nuno is a massive coup for them and almost guarantees we will finish behind them. We continue to fall behind in all aspects. Don't expect automatic promotion, you will be disappointed. 

No manager is ever guaranteed success at any club, let alone immediate success. Look at Pep: best manager on the planet, bar none. Really really struggled this season at City.

7 minutes ago, thabucks said:

Interesting fact about this seasons promotion race from a BBC article relations to wolves new managerial appointment. 

"Five of the top six clubs in the Championship in 2016-17 had foreign managers, including three - Newcastle's Rafael Benitez, Huddersfield's David Wagner and Reading's Jaap Stam - who had not experienced a full season in the division before", 

I keep reading about his previous x4 promotions being a reason to keep him on. As if it's a sure guarantee he will do it again (I'm not dismissing those achievements btw) but football is  ever evolving and time moves on & circumstances change. It's no barometer of future success or failure and a flimsy reason to persevere IMO. 

 

I agree that just because he's been promoted before, there is no guarantee he will be again. I don't think anyone at all is suggesting he is completely nailed on to get us back up, and those of us in the Bruce in camp probably all agree with the notion that he has to hit the ground running next season otherwise he will be gone. The difference is that those in the Bruce in camp beleive he can, and will, hit the ground running next season (note that everyone will have their own reasons for reaching this conclusion and it probably won't be based solely on his previous 4 promotions). 

I completely disagree with the notion that things have changed now, and that Bruce is/is becoming a relic of a bygone age. He was last promoted from this league 12 months ago. No way in hell has the league changed that dramatically in one single season, regardless of how many foreign managers are now with us. And he did it with a Hull side that was one of the better teams in the league at keeping hold of the ball and scoring goals.

11 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

So you think fans would be calling for him to be sacked while sat in the top 5 most of the season and get promoted after spending around £3 million?

Yeah that's utter rubbish. 

Sorry, should have said some of our supporters, but yes, I genuinely do. Some of our supporters were calling for Bruce's head during our late season surge because, despite winning games, we weren't playing nice football. I can't see some idely standing by if we lose 4-0 to Bristol City, or 5-0 to Fulham.