Mjvilla

On 05/04/2021 at 21:10, mjmooney said:

It's inaccurate of course. Should be Doctor Brown Bear (or possibly Nurse Miss Rabbit). 

Exactly the reason I can't like it. We all know Doctor Brown Bear would be the man for the job. He attends the most basic of ailments, such as a cough or the like. 

I'd you're going to do a picture like this, get it right. 

21 hours ago, villalad21 said:

Can want revenge all they want but they simply aren't the same prospect without Van Dijk.

Our players should go out there feeling confident.

We put 7 past them WITH Van Dijk.

It's football, it happens. I'm not saying we will do it again or even come close, just that these sort of comments are ridiculous. Any team that loses all 3 of its main defenders would struggle, with no exception. 

My opinion, you are just setting us up for the fall so you can take digs if we lose on Saturday.

I fully expect us to lose, they are still Liverpool. Still world class internationals all over the pitch. 

Anything from this game is a bonus.

17 hours ago, Cjay said:

Sorry but this is a myth that seems to have become a fact.

He has turned down the Inter Milan job more than once, quotes from the President of Inter Milan confirm this.

He also had major support for the Barcelona job when Pep left from Guardiola himself, Lionel Messi and Johan Cruyff. Not to say he turned it down or was ever offered it but to say he couldn't have had it would be wrong imo. 

And finally he turned down the Real Madrid job when offered it in 2004 by Jorge Valdano, his close friend and at the time Real Madrid Sporting Director.

He probably is to difficult a personality for jobs like Madrid and Barcelona but to say no top team would touch him isnt true. 

He is extremely picky and simply wouldn't get the control he would want at teams like that.

I cant find anything online to confirm this, just a couple of dodgy sites reporting it as rumours. 

So, apart from Inter Milan (I can only find confirmation of him turning it down once over 10 years ago), and rumours (unconfirmed) 6 months later where moratti, who was inters president during both these times, said he was one name amongst many others considered. 

Barcelona, he had backers I've no doubt. But he wasn't selected and never considered where it matters. Why?

I think you'd be absolutely daft not to think that his managerial career has been held back because of the way he is. It's not a myth when you consider what he's achieved.

He has won hardly anything really. There's a reason for that. He's never managed right at the top. There's a reason for that.

Is he good enough? You'd probably think he is when you read everything about him. Does he have the right attitude and personality, then no. I think that's quite clear and is what held him back. 

To not consider this is blind faith, in my opinion.

21 hours ago, villalad21 said:

Good team? Are you kidding me?

Most of those players were a bunch of nobodys, average championship players and still would be had not Bielsa arrived.

When i look at Leeds squad i see a bang average squad of players that are massively overachieving.

Really? It's a team full of internationals or players close to international football.

A team that's been together for years in the main (Sheffield United showed how important that can be) knows their job and has been having coaching from a well renowned coach for a few years now.

Bielsa has clearly done a good job, clearly developed a number of those players. To say he hasn't would just be bitter.

But to say it's a 'bang average squad' is a bit false in my opinion. It's a decent squad. 

1 minute ago, TRO said:

Er try Wood then,

Insert Kenneth GIF.

54 minutes ago, TRO said:

I want him to stay too.....but I can see the points Nick makes too....and agree with them.

What did Jack say? "strongest player in the club"......surely he could be another Chris Woods or am I being ambitious.

I don't think Keinan has ever or will ever play in goal.

12 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Agree, I think the main responsibility is on Davis to do it though, the coaching staff to help him but he needs do to most of it himself because it’s about his attitude and him wanting it.  He’s at a great club, great coaching and will get his opportunity if he wants it and then if he does he needs to put in performances like yesterday not his usual performance.

1 minute ago, TRO said:

I agree, coaches can only do so much, its intrinsic.

I was listening to Brian Little, talking about Savo/Dwight and Stan Collymore, to Dan Bardell....He said " I only pointed them in the right direction"......" It was all down to them" .....He also said " He looks back now, and thinks he was wrong to play all 3"......very honest of him and shows managers do get it wrong.....but in the main, players do it themselves.....How could you coach Geroge Best?

Of course, the player has to want it and earn it when it comes to making it I'm this game.

My point was more that he came from biggleswade town (I think) so perhaps has lot to learn in comparison to most other strikers who have played/trained alongside seasoned professional players. He may be a late bloomer as a result. I.e Vardy or even our very own Watkins.

I think we can all agree he probably deserves the chance to continue within our squad, developing and playing around better players.

17 minutes ago, nick76 said:

I completely agree and I praised him on this forum in several threads yesterday.  My point since then is that’s not the usual Davis we see is it?  Same with Trez yesterday, same with the El Ghazi in January when he scored those five goals.  Some players seem to do it once in ten, fifteen, twenty games but the next game they are poor.  

i get the whole lack of minutes argument but he’s obviously not doing enough in training to warrant a start.  If he did that in training he’d be starting wouldn’t he.  The coaches aren’t obviously seeing that and that is shown more in this past two months when even poorer players like Trez and El Ghazi are getting material game time but he isn’t.

He did really well yesterday and I was delighted no doubt! That player I will love, the usual Davis can leave and enjoy Championship football next season in my opinion.

This exactly. If he played week in/week out like he did in that cameo yesterday, he'd be pushing for regular starter. We just don't see it anywhere near enough. He's extremely inconsistent, alike the rest of our developing squad. 

We picked him up from the footballing scrapheap really. If he can develop into someone who puts yesterday's performances out more regularly then it's brilliant business. That's the challenge for our coaching staff.

43 minutes ago, TRO said:

Yes.

The one winger has licence to switch flanks, you can only cross a ball at one time.....but the school of thought is that wingers do drift in an out of the game and can be semi-idle for long minutes.....as an example...Sir Alf Ramsey, never had any when we won the World cup....its seeking efficiency and industry.....you then keep you 3 midfielders, whilst also keeping your 2 strikers.....but a lot is dictated to, by the attributes of the players, in my opinion we have too many too samey, not enough variation to complete the whole team balance.....I am hoping that will be addressed in the forth coming window, but I do tend to think we are attracted to more offensive semi- lightweights, than robust, dominating Generals... like Gareth Barry or Mortimer, and too many of either is no good.....its getting the balance right, is key for me

In those halcyon days we played 4-3-3.....with Morley ( winger) Shaw ( inside forward) withe ( centre forward)......and then 3 in midfielders in Bremner, Cowans and Mortimer.....but all those players could do so many other things other than their main function and they were all different, had different qualities....Cowans could defend, by winning the ball in his unique style, he could scheme and he could drop a ball on a sixpence like Hoddle.

 

We'd be a long way from being able to do anything of that nature with the current squad I'd my understanding is correct. 

You can only cross one ball at a time is very true, but the opposite winger has a job to do when the ball is on the other side. The back post. You are a huge advocate of back post prudency so surely missing something here?

Also, in the times where the high press is becoming more and more prevalent (something I don't think we do well enough), having 1 winger just gives the keeper/centre backs of the opposition an easy out ball. The opposite side to the one in which the winger is.

Does a central midfielder come out to close the full back and leave holes in the midfield against our opponents who break so quick usually (Something we tend to do anyway) Does our full back push forward to stop the attack high up thus leaving space in behind? Is one of the 2 strikers (who should both be in the box) supposed to hold off attacking and defend the potential counter leaving us in our original position (and current problematic position) of having one striker and 2 wingers so problem isn't solved? 

I don't know, there's obviously a number of flaws with every formation / style of play. Otherwise every team would play 1 way and 1 way only. Because we are still such a squad in development, it limits what we can do. For sure, in my eyes. 

Another huge summer upcoming, will be fascinating to see what we do. I hope we all get a little bit of what we want. 

2 minutes ago, TRO said:

4-1-3-2 while Jack is out.....which is a form of 4-4-2 (one winger)

Can you explain this 'one winger' approach to me please? It's a concept I've not heard of before. I've seen you mention it a few times now and Morley played the role. Morley was before my time, unfortunately. Although I have had the privilege of meeting him a large number of times.

Do you have a winger who plays on one side? Or both sides? Or is it more like a '10' who drifts around that whole area behind the front 2?

I presume this winger comes from the '3' in that formation and you play with 2 up top? 

I think we need to explore a way of getting 2 up top whilst Grealish is out.

9 hours ago, Zatman said:

Smith cant win games without Grealish

Smith cant make game changing subs

 

If I recall correctly Smith did both today and is still being criticized

Also:

Smith criticised when we win for not making subs..

Smith criticised when we lose for not making subs..

Smith criticised when we lose for making subs..

Smith has sarcastic comments made for making subs that see his side turn the tide and win the game. 

Literally, he can't win. 

8 hours ago, Big Salad said:

Pretty simple for me:No manager or player is above criticism as long as it doesn't go over the top.

Has Smith been off as it were last stretch of games?Yes.

Did he make good decisions today though towards the end? Also yes.

I am confident that he is the right man still for us going forward.

 

Here's the problem as I see it, however. Yes, he made good subs which changed the game positively. 

We've seen trezeguet score a brace, 2 excellent finishes. Keinan Davis, we all know he is capable of bullying defenders, but he doesn't show it enough. He does today and creates a goal. Traore, sets up the third with a brilliant bit of skill to take 2 defenders out the game. Again, we know he is capable of that but doesn't show it enough. 

El ghazi is capable of fantastic goals but showed so, so little today. Next week, we could start trez and drop el ghazi and trez would probably do sod all.

Is this all just showing how inconsistent our squad is? These same players could probably play the same game tomorrow and do absolutely nothing for 90 minutes, all of them.

For me, that game yesterday was where we are at in a nutshell, inconsistent but players who are capable of producing brilliant moments but don't do it nearly enough. 

Could you blame the manager? If you choose, of course. Could he get these magic moments out of them more often, that's the difficult question.

Could you blame a whole squad rebuild meaning we are starting to outgrow a number of these players who were bought on a budget? Yes, I think you'd be very daft to not consider this. 

Could you blame these players just not being good enough quality? Or one or two of them settling into the squad and needing a bit more time (traore, Sanson)

I know what I think and it's makes me happy watching the development of this squad. To just dismiss the last 2 and a half years because someone isn't happy with the performances the last couple of months. Bizarre.

By the way @Big Salad, I started the post because I wanted to use it as a reason for our inconsistency. It became longer the more I thought and it in no way reflects on you.

9 minutes ago, TRO said:

Its an observation that can be levelled at many players.

It's still one of the reasons, i still cringe when we go in to the transfer Market.....I am still not convinced, despite us being better of late.

To have the character to help lift a team in adversity, is a hugely valueable attribute....I think we are short, in the squad of those types.

Luxury players are great, in great times, but when the going gets tough, they disappear...we want some players for "all seasons" players with more consistency.

Perhaps a little harsh, if we had wasted the money that almost every other premier league club had wastedbon their squad builds, we would almost certainly be a championship club right now. We haven't been perfect but we've been better than most.

12 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

The same better sides that are struggling against Bosnia, Lithuania and North Macedonia right now?  Spain needed a last minute goal to beat Georgia the other day.  
 

England don’t look great but there’s really no stand out team in Europe at the moment.  Hasn’t been a better chance to win the Euros in a while. 
 

Belgium are probably the most settled with most of the first team playing together for quite few years now. 

These sides always step it up a gear at tournaments, or at least a few of them will and will win a tournament. We don't. 

1 minute ago, will87 said:

You'd think our club side were spoiling us every week the way some are so hypercritical of England on here, but we know that's not the case.

I think we see the attacking options we have at international level, and get frustrated with the poor attacking performance we put in. We've pressed well, and nothing else. We will win, 1 or 2-0 against an extremely disappointing side. 

When we come up against the better sides, we get found out. It's the same old story. 

This is england, not villa. Expectations are different.

Just now, Rino8 said:

We've had 3 really good chances to score. We're usually dire, we've been okay tonight so far.

Sterling shouldn't be starting with his form/general decision making but nevermind

You're going to have to remind me of these? We were given a seriously dodgy penalty? I remember sterling and foden breaking through 2 against 1 in which we should've come away with a goalscoring opportunity at least.

Kane shot from 20 yards which was a simple save for the keeper?

1 minute ago, Rino8 said:

We've been good honestly.

Are some people being brainwashed by Lee Dixon talking about us like were 74 Brazil?

Have we? We've created very, very little against what looks like a very below average Poland side. I'm bored out my mind, only watching because I'm at work. 

We've pressed well at times, what else have we done well?

29 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

What I like about him is that he has the ability to play slower than everyone else. He's so calm and he eats up the ground whilst looking like he's strolling. He's a tall athletic player who will fill out to be an athlete that could dominate a midfield - if I can borrow the modern Villa phrase de jour, he's got a very, very high ceiling.

He is only 17 though. No rush.

 

This needs to come up as a prompt every time we enter this thread, before we start getting the 'just put him in, he can't be any worse than (insert any of the villa midfield here)'

5 minutes ago, BOF said:

Yep I agree with all of that. I just think the fact this is a brand new role suggests we may be doing more loaning out than we have previously, and it coincides with the increased investment in the junior side that we've seen in the last year.

Yep. Which would be the exact correct thing to do.

4 minutes ago, Philosopher said:

Not really because to get such a player you to spend 10 to 20m which you are suggesting we mustn't do. To get a ready made player to take Targett's place you're talking 20m plus even in the foreign market.

Not necessarily. Would Lee Buchanan cost £10m to £20m? Probably not. In fact, almost certainly not. Does he have the potential to be better than targett, then absolutely why not? Derby rate him very highly. 30 appearances this season and just turned 20.

The idea is in 4/5 years time when targett starts to get a bit older... Then we have Buchanan/someone else hitting his prime and chrisene (for example) as the heir to the throne then. 

How much did Hickey cost last year? So long as we get our scouting correct, it's certainly achievable. This is the type of signing I expect us to make. We could probably spend almost our entire budget on attacking players this summer. We have to be shrewd when we are buying players in positions where the first choice is of a very good standard. 

It's easier said than done, of course. 

3 minutes ago, BOF said:

Definitely hope giving Ross a kick in the arse is part of the remit, but I suspect it's just your first bit.  It does suggest an expansion of outward loans, which makes sense given the rate at which the reserve side is churning out genuine talent now which will soon outgrow the PL2 competition  

My opinion is he will be visiting loan players, making sure they are happy and doing well with training, games and the like. Also, could be someone who finds the best clubs for these loan players but mainly looks after them when they are there.

It's inportant role in my opinion and having a genuine model professional in the role will hopefully provide these youngsters with someone to look up to and admire.

3 minutes ago, Philosopher said:

You don't buy back ups. That only takes midtable clubs backwards.

Targett is good, but has his limitations. He lacks pace and his stamina isn't the best either.  Ideally we'd sign an improvement.

He has turned in some average performances since Jack's injury. His lack of pace hold us back somewhat, as one of the advantages of playing 2 holding mids is to give freedom to your fullbacks to get forward. But his lack of pace means he has to be very measured in his forays forward. This is one of the reason why his game has improved. He pick his forward forays better and is being more conservative. 

Fullback is a very important tactical position in today's game if your fullbacks lack pace they have to play in the old fashioned defensive manner and only really cross from deep when going forward. 

The thing is Targett has performed well, and so replacing him outright isn't a priority. But to buy a back up for a limited player is just a waste of money.

The ideal solution is buy a pacy young left back capable of taking Targett's place on merit and make Targett the back up. The compromise is sign a pacey young player that we expect to develop into a better left back then Targett, but isn't quite there yet.

Which is not what I was suggesting at all. The suggestion I made, or a player along these lines, would fit into the categories in your final paragraph. (Someone to develop into a better player than targett)

So, based on this, I'm not sure why you felt the need to quote me saying you wanted something different? 

On 27/04/2005 at 20:40, The_Rev said:

Quote

Did you see the stylish kids in the riot

We were shovelled up like muck

Set the night on fire

Wombles bleed truncheons and shields

You know I cherish you my love

 

But there's a rumour spread nasty disease around town

Caught round the houses with your trousers down

A headrush in the bush

You know I cherish you my love

How i cherish you my love

 

What can you want now you've got it all

The whole scene is obscene

Time will strip it away

A year and a day

And Bill Bones

Bill Bones he knows what I mean

 

Yes it's eating no it's chewing me up

It's not right for young lungs to be coughing up blood

Oh it's all

It's all trouble in my hands

And its all up the walls

 

Well the stale chips are up and the hopes stakes are down

Its these ignorant faces that bring this town down

Yeah I sighed and sunken with pride

I passed myself down on my knees

Yes I passed myself down on my knees

 

What can you want now you've got it all

The whole scene is obscene

Time will strip it away

A year and a day

And Bill Bones

Bill Bones knows what I really mean

 

There are fewer more distressing sights than that

Of an Englishman in a baseball cap

Yeah we'll die in the class we were born

That's a class of our own my love

Were in a class of our own my love

 

Did you see the stylish kids in the riot

We were shovelled up like muck

Then set the night on fire

Wombles bleed truncheons and shields

You know I cherish you my love

Oh how I cherish you my love.

 

 

The first thing that came to my head when I saw this thread (I've never seen it before), was this song. 

Have to wear a baseball style bump cap for work and I bloody hate it. Never, ever wear one away from that. Not even on the golf course, wear they seem rife.

21 hours ago, Philosopher said:

I don't want back up to targett I want stiff competition from a pacy player.

Yes, we all want someone to provide 'stiff competition', of course. We all want someone on a si ilar level to Targett. However, that's going to cost us £15m-£20m realistically. Are we in a position to go spending huge amounts on backups?

Do many clubs spend such huge amounts on backups/competition? In our position? Our squad still needs huge work, spending large amounts on backups/competition isn't feasible. Signing a young, upcoming back up/competition is what we will do and what I'd expect us to do and want us to do. 

The big money can go on improving the first team in the areas we all know need it. 

12 minutes ago, TRO said:

You have shown me nothing.

Nick, this is getting silly now....you can disagree, to your hearts content, but your suppositions are way off.....I mentioned those players, so you know who they are, if I mentioned some obscure player, you would baulk at the point, based on not knowing who my examlpe was( you have done the same to argue your point).....you have turned my point, in to your own definition of it.....what you say I allude to, is wrong, its more about what you think, dressing it up to say, its what I think.....isn't that a strawman?

The height it takes to be dominant in the air.....I guess you will agree, that 5'8/5'9 is kinda difficult.

You are now off on a tangent of buying the best strikers in world football, where has that come from?.....You.

let me remind you of my point, before you disappear more into  your own interpretation of it......I said "at 6'3 and No 9 you would think he would be decent in the air".....from that you have managed to concoct a compendium of alternative counter points.......you should be on "countdown" you would do well.

 

I do agree with your points, and you'd certainly expect Wes to be better in the air. Hopefully it's something they were / are working on.

But the bolded bit just reminds me of Crouch. He was pretty hopeless in the air really. (although I seem to remember him scoring a debut goal with his head for us, Graham Taylor's first game - second stint? I was there but may be completely wrong however). Despite being 6'6 or whatever he was and a striker, he was shit in the air but actually really good on the deck. Couldn't be more opposite to what you'd expect. Always just makes me smile.