Teale's 'tache

He was linked with Wolves yesterday, think he may be a lot of teams fall back option this late in the window.

I think Sanson would be a decent rotation option with Ramsey if given the chance, not a direct replacement as such, but tactically we'd become more flexible with that extra option and it would allow Ramsey a bit of rest when needed. If he hit a patch of good form then all the better, but as things are right now I things it's wrong to expect 8/9/10 performances when he's played so little, and had so little faith shown in him. I wouldn't be surprised if a new manager came in and he got a new lease of life, and equally I wouldn't be surprised if he never played for us again.

The issue I would say is players have had considerably worse performances than that numerous times and kept their places, both McGinn and Ramsey included, if he has to be perfect every time he plays it's no wonder he's not been given many minutes. I don't think the 8's as we play them particularly suits his game and maybe he has struggled to adapt, but it's difficult to know when we've barely seen him.

It's his head on the line, but form comes and goes, Ramsey was overplayed last season, McGinn seems to be having a crisis of form/confidence so far this season, a little more rotation and man management last season and he could of had a decent midfielder ready to come in and help out right now. That is not currently the case, I don't know if he was expecting another signing in midfield, but I see no benefit in ostracising Sanson either way. It's poor man management.

I take your point on not doing the same job as McGinn, but then it's a weird role that took McGinn himself a number of games to get used to, our 8's being so involved in getting the fullbacks up the pitch and covering them is pretty unusual and not something I'd expect most number 8's to be able to do off the cuff as it were. It's not like he'd had a run of games to get used it.

Possibly, my memory of that game is not great, just another up and down team performance like so many others and he seemed to do okay from memory, tidy on the ball and showing for it, being an out ball for the defence rather than running off up field the second we get possession, it was refreshing. I think another thing that gets overlooked a little is, it's not like he's come in to a settled confident club/environment, it's been a total mess in terms of the switch of manager and tactics and coupled with his luck with injuries it's really not conducive to good performance. You can't expect to get good performance when the minutes are here and there and often months apart. He's simply not played enough and not had a run of any kind in the team.

I thought he did pretty well against Man Utd at home barring one incident (that led to a goal), and in fairness Mings got himself in a bit of trouble, Sanson went to give him an option, and Mings played him a bit of a hospital pass. I'd say the blame for that one should at least be shared. The problem is every time he's got minutes, he's either got injured, or been dropped the next game, he's not had anything like a run in the team.

Well I'm not sure why anyone would point to that specific game in argument for his inclusion, he's had a few cameos and I'd say mixed performances in those, his debut he looked good but didn't make it long into the second half before being subbed, so not overly surprised he wasn't voted MOM. He's not completed 90 minutes for us, barely had any minutes total, certain not enough to build up any form. In my opinion he needs to play more before he's judged, but our midfield is not working and he could be an option.

Interesting, are you sure they didn't mean his debut (also against Wolves but at home the season before)? I remember him being somewhat impressive in that game before coming off injured.

Okay, I'll bite for you. I take it all these stats are from Wolves vs Villa last season? I've popped over to whoscored and had a look at that game, as I don't really remember it other than us being awful. First thing I note is Sanson wasn't predicted to start the game, odd, was he a last minute inclusion? I don't know certainly he'd not played a whole lot in the lead up to it. Anyway, a quick scan and Sanson has a whoscored rating of 6.1, the same as Cash, Konsa, Ramsey and better than his replacement Luiz (6.0). In fact, most of the team score pretty poorly because we were useless. However, what's this? McGinn scores a mighty 7.7, the best rating by any player on either team! His average across the whole season is 7.17, so he had a bit of a worldy there. So pretty much you've chosen a game where stone wall first choice, future captain, McGinn has by the looks of it one of his best games of the season, and compared it to Sanson who has hardly played, likely barely match fit, certainly unused to the system, and was was drafted in last minute. It doesn't seem the fairest of comparisons to me. Now I'm no Sanson superfan, but the guy has pedigree, over 20 games in Europe and started in a Europa League final. Personally, I'd like to see a bit more of him, especially as our midfield is bobbins and we've now got a player he's played alongside with decent success before. I'm not sure the point in binning the guy off.

I'm sorry you got called things just for having an opinion, that's not cool. It's clear that Gerrard is not going to be part of the solution, is Purslow going to be? I think that is open to some debate. I feel a bit for Lange, he's the Sporting Director and should be overseeing everything on the football side of things, but I think it's clear Purslow took over the recruitment process for appointing Gerrard, and Gerrard has been allowed to dictate transfer policy over him. He's not been in control. Maybe he should be stronger? Or maybe he's had no option but to accept it? I don't know but it should be reviewed, as should pretty much everything.

The whole thing is a mess. Pete the Canadian summed it up nicely in his latest video posted a few pages back (quite a 360 from him after the Palace game video as well). This goes higher than Gerrard within the club, we've gambled too much on him, we've thrown away the previous playing philosophy, the transfer strategy, and no insignificant amount of money, all in the hope that Gerrard would take us to the next level. When Smith was appointed as head coach we wanted to put in place a structure, whereby if Smith ever needed to be replaced, it wouldn't be a case of everything being thrown out and starting again, it would be a seamless transition from head coach to head coach, look at Brentford for an idea of the kind of thing we were looking to achieve, but on a grander scale. Then Gerrard arrived, and he was given the keys to the kingdom to do as he pleases. Lange is no longer out looking for hidden gems, and good value , he's searching for experienced 'winners' to fit a completely different style of play, all his previous work seemingly discarded. Everything the players had previously been coached, cast aside to roll in a new system that doesn't work. All the wingers sold (bar Bailey), making it near impossible to change the system. A wage bill ever increasing with no discernible improvement on the pitch. When he goes, and it is inevitable, we need to restructure from the top down. Purslow has a lot of questions to answer and a lot of wrongs to right if he wishes to keep his job. Gerrard should never have been given so much control, and that starts and ends with Purslow. I don't think Gerrard can claim he hasn't been supported, I think he's been given every possible chance to be a success, and to be fair in his interviews he's said as much. It hasn't worked out, his plan, his philosophy has failed, and he will rightly be dismissed for it, eventually, but I don't blame him for all of the mess this club is in, an inexperienced manager like Gerrard shouldn't of been given so much control. The bomb squad is definitely on him though, does Klopp have a bomb squad? Guardiola? Ancelotti? No, they are good man managers, they understand that there's no benefit in discarding players, you never know when you might need them, and what's the benefit in reducing their value? It only piles pressure on yourself. No, they find ways to keep everyone happy, keep everyone on the same page, pushing in the same direction, and they do it with superstars.

It's all good mate, if I let critique rule my world I'd be a pretty miserable soul! Design is very much about opinions, if you don't like it now then chances are that no amount of tinkering will change that, but I have had pretty good feedback generally and it's just good fun to give it a go. What I like about the design is that it is original, there's no other diamond badge in the Premier League, it's unique to us with the AV (nobody could steal the idea), and it links back to my past with the club (the old flood lights, the old Trinity façade .etc), whilst also remaining modern. But it has it's issues, I won't deny, it's not perfect. If I had more time I'd probably try changing the lion, I've considered switching it to look to the right, facing forward rather than back, but it doesn't look right with the current lion, probably because I'm so used to seeing it the other way. If I get more time I might have a look at trying a few more designs, but work is piling up at the moment, so I can't make any promises.

It's so obvious now you've said it, can't believe I missed it, the 1874 is never going to be seen at smaller sizes. @Jas10 I also agree with some of your critiques, I'm not happy with how it sits on the shirt, though it's more colour related than size I think, the current crest is mainly light blue sitting on claret which stands out, whereas mine doesn't as much, I guess it depends on how much you want it to stand out in that context. I could play around with the colours, have light blue diamond perhaps... The render I'm not so concerned about, I think if the space it sat on was diamond rather than rectangular it would work a lot better, also I've not done a great job swapping the crests on it, kind of a last minute idea.

Found a little more time to make some more adjustments to this concept. After reading the @NurembergVillan post I decided to remove the star, I've also flattened the diamond out a little and changed the font-face. I've also just knocked up a few graphics to better present the idea, which I've thrown up on Behance https://www.behance.net/gallery/147539317/Aston-Villa-Crest-Redesign-Concept for the people who like that sort of thing. I'll post the images below for those who don't. Think I'm going to leave at that, should probably get some work done at some point... but because I love you all, here's a few more bits I did playing around.

I really like Pete and his channel and he makes many good points in this video, but he's being quite selective here. He doesn't mention the complete lack of progress, the previous season of poor performances, and if you are going to ask for patience and to give him time then you need to balance that with reasons to do so, but the lack of any discernible positives to how we are playing right now makes that pretty much impossible. I don't buy the financial argument either, yes it costs money to pay him off and get the next guy in, but it's not going to be anywhere near the £25m we seemed happy to chuck at Watford for a player in a position we hardly need.

Gerrard was always a risky appointment, I think we knew that from the beginning. The lack of any tangible improvement on the pitch, in any area, despite the time and money afforded him thus far, is really poor. His record with us is now very poor, and the recent performances we are seeing on the pitch are just horrid. He doesn't have any experience of this type of situation in his managerial career, and he's shown nothing to suggest he has any idea how to turn things around. I'm sure the club will give him a few more games, because they've invested so much in him, but I've no doubt he'll be gone soon enough. I don't dislike the man, he's always spoken well and I'm sure he genuinely wanted to do great things with us, but he's not addressing our weaknesses or issues, in fact it feels like he's now causing more issues than he is solving. When he first arrived he immediately saw the problems we had in midfield, the gaps being too big and it being too easy to play through us, he tightened things up and we went on a nice little run getting ourselves out of trouble. We now have exactly the same issue in midfield, he arrived with what seemed like a pretty clear plan, but that plan has now chopped and changed with no real benefit to anybody. The only player that I think has improved is Cash, that's it. His job is to get the best out of the players we have and ideally improve them, he simply hasn't done that. The only real positive I can really take from his time here is that he has improved the quality of the squad, and I'm very excited to see what a genuinely competent manager with a clear idea and system could do with them. However, I'm afraid we still have a few games of misery heading our way before that becomes a possibility, and that itself depends upon if you trust the club to employ the right manager... FWIW I don't think Purslow will have any issues binning Gerrard, he's a cut throat business man, and a successful one at that, you don't get in to that position by being overly sentimental. He'll see the warning signs, and he'll know what he has to do.

48 PL Appearances, 36 as a substitute, for 1 goal and 1 assist in 1368 minutes played (15.2 games). It's more than I expected, but it would be quite a stretch to say he's proven at this level. That said Chelsea paid £20m for Chukwuemeka who only has 312 minutes of PL experience. It's all a bit mental really.

Wolves have rightly held out because they didn't want to sell, until the money became too good to turn down, especially considering the FFP boost they get. Why Forest are bidding so much for somebody so unproven is the most baffling part for me. If they don't stay up, I would imagine they may regret it. If they stay up then you'd have to say it's justified. Is he good enough to make that much difference? I have my doubts, it's a hell of a risk.

I'm not sure how great Holding is, I've not seen him play enough to really make a judgment. However, I would imagine most people's immediate memory of him, is the brainless red card he received against Spurs at the back end of last season. It was an very important game which they went on to lose 3-0, he was sent off after 33 minutes for repeatedly trying to rough up Hueng-min Son, he got plenty of warnings but persisted. It was a very stupid and very costly dismissal. If that is most peoples immediate thoughts, then you are going to have a hard time selling him to us.

I kind of feel like his 'scampering' style is sometimes misconstrued as panic, but he's yet to be dispossessed this season, certainly not the liability some would have you believe. I know a lot of people see a midfielder who can keep the ball as being vital to progression, but in my opinion it's more of a team issue we have, as a team I don't think we recognise situations quickly enough, like when to keep the ball, or when to progress it quickly. For a long time the default has been to progress it quickly no matter the situation, and changing that mentality is taking time. We have a lot of good footballers, they should all be capable of passing it around when needed providing the rest of the team are giving them enough options. Although getting in another midfielder who can take care of the ball would improve us, I'm not sure it outright solves the issue, the movement and options provided by the whole teams needs to improve as well.

I would imagine we do in fact have a plan, it's just that Gregg Evans isn't privy to it, so he's had to guess, which seems to be the sum total of his job. I'd be very very surprised if Lange doesn't have a long list of potential candidates in various price ranges, because you know, it's his job, and he seems to be pretty good at it. Very few transfers are straight forward though, so it might take a little while before we hear anything.

I think the reactions in general have been a little over the top both fans and media, and Gerrard should certainly be given some time to correct things. How much time really depends on him. Performances like Bournemouth can not continue, if we are that inept against Everton then there's going to be plenty more calling for his head and at some point those calls will become too loud to ignore. There has to be improvement, and continuous improvement for the foreseeable future.

I'd be interested in reading this book, do you have a link for it? A quick search brings back a lot of books called 'the science of coaching', just want to be sure I grab the right one.

I've never been particularly pro/anti Gerrard, I just kind of accepted that it was a risky appointment and trusted the powers that be that he was worth giving a chance. After an initial upturn it's been very bitty, some good stuff here and there but an awful lot of dross, none worse than was served up on Saturday. My main gripe is that none of the issues we had when he arrived have been corrected. We can't put on a 90 minute performance, we still give away really really avoidable goals, and we still give the ball away far too easily. We are too easy to play against, more often than not we will defeat ourselves without the opposition having to do anything, and this was the same under Smith for his last year or so. It was easy to accept some of it last season as a work in progress, and that Gerrard was discovering these weaknesses as we trundled along and would fix them in due time. Unfortunately, the time is due and the problems persist, on top of that he seems to have created new problems. Coutinho, although a great signing for the profile of the club, forced one of our best players (Buendia) out of the team, which would be fine if Coutinho was consistently putting in performances, but he's not, and that's not entirely down to him, in a functional team I'm sure we'd get more out of him. The question is, was it worth it? Did we really need him? I like Coutinho, I still can't believe he plays for us, I'm just not sure his signing has been entirely beneficial. The whole captaincy debacle is weird, if he wanted to pick his own captain fine, do it when you arrive, or if you want to assess and not upset the apple cart do it as soon as the season ends. I see no benefit to making the change weeks before a season begins and alienating a good player in the process. I feel like something has happened to force the timing of it, but the feeling remains it has been handled poorly. Making players train with the kids, what is the purpose? Where's the benefit? It feels like man management is lacking there. I am surprised by the reaction after Bournemouth, the fans, and the media have really jumped on it, and if you lose the fans and possibly some of the dressing room you are in big trouble, there's not really any coming back from that. I'm not sure if we are at that stage yet, but it feels like it's on the precipice. We have a good squad of players, and they are not performing to their potential or anywhere near it, and at the end of the day in part that is what Mr Gerrard is paid handsomely to do. He needs a good start against Everton, because if we concede early again the atmosphere will become unbearable, if I was Lampard I'd be looking to take advantage of that.