Dave-R

Had a good standing round of applause from UTD fans soon as he entered on the pitch. Had about 15 or so mins. I were trying to see him as much as I could but I were working lol.

3 minutes ago, M_Afro said:

There’s no scenario that leads to Jed keeping his place if Emi is fit. This is not a first amongst equals scenario. Emi is significantly better than Jed. Jed knows his place in the pecking order and has shown that he is happy to play second/third choice. If Emi is fit then he plays. Nobody at the club will have a problem with that. Who do you think Ty and Ez would rather have behind them?

Not someone pointing out theres soap on the floor

16 hours ago, TRO said:

without any question...but we equally need to address the respect for Steer and how fairness plays a part in team spirit.

Emi left Arsenal for the self same reason...being left out, when playing well.....IMV Its Steers shirt to lose now, no matter how unpalatable that seems

We have to create fairness in a squad......If he struggles or plays bad, then fine Emi comes in.....otherwise I think we are sending out the wrong message of maybe pandering to individuals.

We have to have genuine competition for places. and genuine situations where players can lose the shirt.

as an example....do you remember when Chelsea played Blackpool in the cup and they, went out on the Razzle......they asked Docherty what he as going to do? he said "I would sooner play the kids"

I know football is a different place and player power is enhanced....but we have to remain in control too.

I'm not in favour of fines on this, but losing the shirt for a game is an option IMO.

I agree, if Steer is playing good then he should be given the chance and keep the shirt despite how Martinez is ready to jump back in. Competition is pointless if you do not allow a way for other players to debunk the no1 of that position.

I think you are right in that Martinez left for that reason and it's a position that we ourselves should not find ourselves in with our players.

The way I see it is Martinez and Buendia both decided to go play for their country,there is nothing wrong with that, but they possibly knew they would be missing out at club level. Gaps are left as a result and so players jump in knowing those two went off to play for there country. At the same time those players who jump in if they play well should by all means keep there place leaving Martinez and Buendia to regain there position again.

We do have to remain in control otherwise it will be telling players they can go do this whenever they please regardless of the outcomes and they can just regain there place at the club instantaneously. 

9 hours ago, a m ole said:

Please. Shut the **** up about Tammy Abraham.

2 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

Do u believe that City bought Jack to restrict AVFC's progress?

Me myself I believe it's one of the many reasons but we won't ever know and we can speculate about it all day long. I reckon there are several reason or were several to of taken Jack away from us and in that case it makes spending 100 mill justified.

There is a pecking order even in football you know.

The strong eat the weak or should I say the better the club that club will sign the best player from the weaker club most of the time when they have someone of value. The best players will fit into the better teams and it continue to filter on up like that unless they fade away.

2 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Well big teams have been doing that for decades openly so to assume this I find strange.  Teams openly want to make opposition weaker, we even joked on this forum re Saints and Arsenal around JWP and ESR that our interest likely caused them being paid more than they were likely to get thus weakening the clubs ability in the market.

Agreed, are being relieved of our best by the usual big lot of the league but at same time weve gone past alot of the teams in the league and are also doing the exact same to those now below us.

I think it all boils down to ambition, Ambition will of course in someway or another take players from clubs, were all in the pecking order.

1 minute ago, Peter Griffin said:

I really don't think so. City bough Jack to win the Champions League as KDB is getting older and has injury problems. There isn't one iota of a chance that City bought Jack to restrict our advancement.

I didn't say that City did buy him just for that, I said they bought him for exactly the things you said but also realised that in doing so that it was a double whammy that they would also slow our progress also.

There can be more than just one reason why a player is relieved from a club that is constantly improving with that player. It makes 100 mill even more worth spending when there are a number of reasons. Main reason being they wanted another high quality player, secondly they feel that he can once KDB leaves, be there creativity. Hey it also stops Villa from progressing and reaching Europe this season, all while maybe they don't go ahead and spend that money we gave them well. If you think all these things wouldn't of been talked about in the City board room then think again.

3 minutes ago, Sulberto21 said:

 

 

 

*I know your name's Dave but come here baby....

3 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

Come on. Chelsea is not worried about Villa. They are European Champions and they are trying to win the Premier League this season. Maybe Tammy would have elevated us, as I said I would love him at Villa with Ollie and Ings but Ings will score more goals this season imo, I think that is why we bought Ings ahead of Tammy

I am not saying they are worried about Villa, at least not at the moment. It's the idea that selling to us that they'd be aiding in us improving that worrys them and so they will not do it because were in the same league. They have time and time again said no to good offers for players all because rivals or other clubs in the league wanted there players. If anything they are smart about choosing that approach despite putting themselves out from sales.

Why do you think one of the reasons City relieved us of Grealish, we may not be it at the moment but we could be a direct threat in some years. If we had of kept Grealish and still got our players we got this window then wed be in contention for a euro place. Sure they wanted Jack but it was a two in one whammy that they'd relieve our best player while gaining one heck of a talent but at the same time it halted our progress.

Chelsea are europe champs and while that's Excellent they have to go do it again. The rest of the league is getting better apart from a few teams. See Chelsea,City, UTD  Spurs are all expected to do ace and achieve all these things but if other clubs catch them out they will soon be a laughing stock like what Arsenal are having at the moment. The pressure is massive for the players at those clubs that teams like Leicester, Everton, Westham and even us who caught some of the big boys out last season, the so called big boys are starting to not feel so big anymore. 

We will see this season but I feel theres going to be some shocks for the usual big clubs.

2 hours ago, nick76 said:

We worry a lot about things we dont have insight on dont we? 

We sure do on VT, worry about all sorts its mental.

I'd say wait until the team is announced.

I bet they wouldn't of worried Nick if Tammy were brought in alongside Ings and we had three quality strikers, all while packing Wesley and Davis off to wherever the F they can be of use.

We certainly  would of had enough without the need to worry about Injuries in our strikeforce. We just seem to always have an injury related problem popping up where a few thought that players were so indestructible like they were the man o steel.

Worrying could be better put to rest with better planning and preparation.. 

12 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

So there would have been no problem selling him to Villa 

We got 4 points from Chelsea last season. I'd say that is a cause for concern for Chelsea and they do not sell to teams in there league who they could be aiding to make them potentially be a future and potential dangerous team.

Tammy would of pissed Chelsea off if he'd of come here, there fans would been going as mad as what Arsenals fans still go mad over Martinez now. I said it much last season, but I believed he would of been that Martinez type signing much to what ings also is, it's those type of players you know if they come here they will elevate the club in alot of ways. These type of signings that raise the clubs bar and profile that give themselves and there club recognition by how they play, finding these players cheap isn't easy but it can be done. 

2 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

Absolutely, that would be the dream but I would very much doubt that we would be banking on that coming to fruition, hopefully it will.

Indeed,i think the plan isn't just to be successful in the league but also successful  at attracting bidders who will pay above what you paid for talent. That all takes time and practice with a good team at making players more attractive. If you can buy a 30 million player and in a season or two regardless of age get a profit out of him,you know full well the club is on the right track. You may be right and it won't come to pass but if it did and Ings has one ace season at Villa before moving on and the club pockets a swift bag of cash we will be singing Lange's name. Lange has done an amazing job amongst the other staff at the club like Nicola, Purslow and shakespear and there work largely goes unnoticed unfortunately because they are the ninjas that make the shadows work.

The dream is that we buy these players and we get a season or more out of them, they in turn make the club more successful. When that offer finally comes in, if it does, its that we then sell at the right time that benefits the club and player and part ways on good terms without no Bullshit said.

5 minutes ago, Monkeypuzzle said:

Wait! Are GIFs back?

Sorry I lied!

I use an app called (gif master)

40 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

Cowpat. Also found in the middle of the field.

Bet that looks like SunPat

Seen glimpses of this guys speed and he looked fast as hell, it's a shame we've not seen the best of him yet and were I to next season and still waiting.

38 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

They grow em good there in Australia. 

Those Kangaroo balls must be some good food.

10 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Waiting for the usual suspects to pipe in overnight!

 

 

Yes waiting for the usual suspect will be an interesting read mate

We should make a certain day all about Tammy like a sunday and pull everyone away from their rest day.

14 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

I never said we should limit ourselves to one striker. As for Tammy becoming an extra striker with Ollie and Ings, then yes I would love him at Villa. I was just ruling out buying Tammy and Ings. But I would prefer to see 34m spent on upgrading Targett or Nakamba

 

He was also very useful at defending set pieces. He helped out or CBs a lot

I agree that next season should be about upgrading midfield, I certainly  do.

I'm not saying you said we should only have one striker but in the window if you take a look at the Tammy thread you soon see the culprits for that one lol. Who knows down the line and where our position will be in terms of who we need to go for in what positions and who were selling and need to replace.

Something Just tells me that Ings won't be here for long and that both club and Ings see this as an opportunity for business that propells Ings above us while the club makes abit of profit. Sure the club had to of made the payement to southampton knowing it could beings final destination and a loss would be made, but wernt the reports that we beat spurs to Ings true? If so maybe kane would of been sold if they could of signed Ings. Maybe in a season or two they will decide to still come for him and the offer of European football providing they qualify and we don't. It will be to much to turn down for Ings and I couldn't say I'd blame him given his age. So long as it benefits the club as well thenIngs would be amazing business done in such a short period.

15 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

I do believe if we wanted Tammy he would be a Villa player now, we would have overcome the obstacles.

 

We are not going to make a profit on Ings, that is clear. So the strategy behind buying Ings is clearly that we want as close as we can get to guaranteed goals this season and next. I think this is for a push to qualify for the Europa. Goals are expensive and we are obviously happy to pay 15m a year for them

It depends, a club up the top may see Ings firing a ton in for us and may see the same as we did, he guarantees goals. See spurs as stingy as Levi is could sell Kane for over 100 mill. Spurs come in for Ings who's a suitable replacement and a fix for a while and I believe if they offered us 50 or 60 mill,then we would snap there arm off for that and we've profited.

As I said in my long ass post lol, Ings is also at that age where he need to be looking at ways into europe. Through a solid season with us and some luck from a bit of selling from the likes of spurs, could see him quickly snapped up. Ings will be good easy in his 30s so he would pay it all off. I certainly think if by any chance a crazy offer came in for Ings in a season or two time, then we would be absolutely bonkers not to take it and allow him to leave. If all he did was give us one good season and we got our money back and then some then that's ace business by Villa.

6 minutes ago, nick76 said:

See how easy it is to change the conversation from one thing to Tammy.

Like taking candy from babies.

Lol it's like taking there favourite toy

32 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Tammy is good enough for Villa.

A front three of Ings, Tammy and Ollie…..bloody awesome

 would be F'in awesome

                 Tammy

                 Watkins

        Ings-Buendia-Bailey

                    CDM

Target-Mings-Konsa-Cash

                 Martinez

A 4-1-3-1-1 formation?

plenty of inter changing between Watkins and Tammy, Likewise with Ings and Bailey.

30 minutes ago, Sulberto21 said:

Tammy's shit.

Wooooow that is one of the craziest things I've ever seen from you and one other on VT.

Tammy is an ace player capable of amazing things and you couldn't of paid much attention to his career after he left Villa to make such a comment..

Crazy lol

Just now, Peter Griffin said:

But Tammy isn't good enough for Villa. We can do better than Tammy and he wouldn't get a game ahead of Ings or Ollie

I dont full agree with this.

Tammy could in seasons on in a window be brought to the club. Ings and Watkins have both been a proven player on the wings for a start by there previous clubs, which could pave the way for Tammy up front even still. This whole idea of we should limit ourselves to just one striker happened a lot through the window by a few of you, then low and behold we brought in another and it shut you all up. Now if Wesley is going and won't be back and we should sell Davis by all means as he's useless with his constant injury and can't score for owt, it would leave a place open for the likes of Tammy. Now there is no reason why any player brought should be confined to play where they played for other clubs they came from, god knows we've altered alot of players positions and how they play. One thing you can't deny is Tammy can get around the pitch and press the hell out of teams even in a front CF role. If we had Ings on the left, Bailey on the right and Buendia in the center, we can still swap between Watkins and Tammy and have a quality second striker on the bench out of the two of them and still offer them both sufficient game time and jobs a good one because it could be done. Now we have been injury ridden and we can't seem to get a full team together yet so depth is needed. Its obvious, as the tougher we keep trying in the league and our players grind more on field, the more injury will occur.

Sure we have more pressing problems at the moment with signings and midfield seems to be a key discussion and I totally agree. My point is however is I can still see a place for Tammy down the line especially if either Ings or Watkins gets snapped up by a team down the line above us for big money. Let's face it after Grealish i won't never say Loyalty can conquer money ever again and when the clubs above us come crawling I'll not question as much as i did that a player of ours wont be looking to jump ship. I think Ings would certainly look to move on and were just a stepping stone for him and he will want to win some things if he can, only have to look at his age. It certainly wouldn't surprise me if someone like Spurs or City came and offered alot, especially if Kane were sold and Ings has a cracker of a season. We would also be mad to turn down an offer for Ings of it was well above what we paid. No i don't agree with the selling but if it's a quick buck and we can replace no problem then so be it and Tammy down the line could be a quick and easy fix and then the process starts all over again. See it may not even be Tammy it maybe some other younger player who joins when we've sold Ings but this will happen at some point.

I also don't thing Mings will be sold for abit, I don't think any Top team above us is going to give us what we paid and then some on top. We simply brought Mings knowing we would make a loss on him and that's why he won't be going anywhere for such a long time at least till we come around to needing to find a replacement for him.

2 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

For Konsa, due to his age and potential. IMO, Konsa is going to be an elite CB and will be one of the first names on the England team sheet in the coming years. I believe Konsa will be worth a lot more more in the coming years so we shouldn't sell him. Targett, I like Targett but I feel he has reached his ceiling, I can't see him getting much better than he currently is. If we got an offer for him I would have no issue selling him but I don't think he would command much of a fee, maybe 10m?

Yes when DikGate is no longer manager and leading the England team to embarrassment.