Peter Griffin

On 10/09/2022 at 08:21, Vive_La_Villa said:

With Klopp having a poor start to the season I just wonder if he did get sacked would Gerrard have had a chance of the job had he not joined Villa.  He could have potentially won another league in Scotland and had a good European campaign.  His stock has fallen considerably since joining Villa. 

I hadn't thought of that, its a good point

5 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I think the biggest issue is policing

I get the thoughts on policing but I just don't really see it as an issue myself. The police are very experienced and capable of policing football matches and have always managed to multitask with other major events happening at the same time

3 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

He probably was put up for sale. No club are going to pay his wages.  

That would suggest that Elmo was backup to Cash and Fred was down the pecking order imo

1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

No, but he got loaned out rather than be backup to Cash. I think it was his decision just as much as the clubs.

But surely that mean Elmo was back up to Cash for the 2nd half of that season? The fact that we sent him out on loan would suggest we preferred Elmo to Fred as backup RB. If we wanted him to stay as backup RB and he wanted to go out on loan instead, he should have been put up for sale then. Players can't be refusing to play as a backup

Initially I was of the belief that this game would be cancelled but I am starting to think it will go ahead. With the cricket, golf, European games and other sports returning to action I am feeling the PL will try and get a game week in next weekend

Is the removing of him from the website not just because we are only permitted to have a 25 man squad and there are only 25 players listed on the team. There is a list of players out on loan. We are hardly going to have another list of 'Players not in squad and not out on loan'

17 hours ago, Zatman said:

He played 25 games and Elmo 18, seems to be a myth on here he was Elmo backup

After the first half of the first season that Fred was at Villa wasn't Cash first choice RB and Elmo backup to Cash and Fred further down the pecking order? 

2 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Absolutely. But we went into the season with Wesley and Davis as our only forwards. Suso ended up losing his job. I give a lot of credit for our survival down to super jack and Deano using the covid break well to get us sorted. 

I'm not anti purslow and don't think he should be sacked. I do think he should be questioned and I don't buy into this idea that he seems untouchable. 

 

Where is the idea coming from that he is untouchable nor should be questioned? I haven't seen that on here, is it somewhere else?

19 minutes ago, Villatillidie95 said:

Not necessarily, often they can come up with a mutual agreement to pay up a portion of it, arsenal did something similar with Bellerin. Often when managers are sacked they negotiate for a lump sum which might be 3 years of a 5 year contract up front, with the option that they can then work again straight away.

So personally i think the decent thing would have been to do that and that way there is no more discord in the squad.

We are doing the decent thing by paying him 40k a week. We are not a charity, we are a business and the decisions with players and wages etc should be taken in the best interest of the business and not to 'be nice' to a player. Yes, there are occasions when AVFC should do the 'nice thing' e.g. giving Barrow all of the revenue from our Cup tie, that is good for the business and good for our image. Players are commodities and very highly paid ones. Have you considered Fred doing the decent thing and suggesting to Villa that it isn't working out and it is unfair that we should pay him 40k a week for doing naff all and just ripping up his contract and pursuing a footballing career elsewhere? I am sure he could get a club in France on much lower wages if he was a free agent 

7 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Just stinks of something going on.

It might be that guilbert is a problem, maybe he isn't, we don't know  but what I know is that on face value it doesn't make sense to not register him, its idiotic.

Absolutely this, and not just under SG, he was loaned out under Deano too, only played the first half of one season for us. We don't know what is going on but as many people don't like Gerrard and or Purslow it is to be expected to see the blame land with them

2 minutes ago, VillaChris said:

At the time his stock was high, had just guided Fulham to europa league final and top half in premier lesgue.

It just didn't work out, Hodgson not a great manager in spotlight, exactly like Moyes at Man. United.

Rafa is a very strong personality and has a bit of a reputation for being quite political and underhand. I suspect Purslow wanted rid of Rafa from early on as he had the potential to cause too much noise during a sale or due diligence. Roy would be perfect for putting in front of a potential investor / buyer and much easier to manage imo

1 minute ago, VillaChris said:

We gave Elmo a new 12 month deal as he finished the staying up season very strongly with run of games and he was Cash's backup for start of the new one so writing was on the wall for Freddie back then.

I had forgotten that, I had actually completely forgotten about Elmo . Giving Elmo the extension was probably the precursor to these problems and getting stuck with a player that doesn't contribute to the 1st team

1 minute ago, Keyblade said:

I think the problem for Fred is he couldn't get a loan/permanent move this time around. All the other guys in the bomb squad (not sure why we even have one in 2022, but that's another topic) got moves so they aren't in this awkward situation. Like Traore for example. He only got sub appearances here and there after a lengthy injury, which apparently was enough to decide he wasn't good enough. But he got his loan move away so it's all forgotten.

Again, that cause me more confusion. His wages are not that big and he played regular football last season. Why couldn't he get a loan. If we can sell Trez and ElGhazi and get Traore, Davis and Hause out on loan, what the f**k is wrong with Fred

Just now, Keyblade said:

I think it's been enough time since his first loan that it's clear, even to him, that he's not going to usurp Cash...at least under Deano in 2021. It might not have been that way to him initially which is why he left to be first choice in France. But since he's come back (on 2 occasions now), he's always indicated that he's happy to play for us so I imagine his position on being #2 has softened in the last couple of years. But then he's not even #2 right now. Or #3 or #4 it seems. 

Fred is the one player at Villa in the last number of years that poses some unanswerable questions for me. Everyone else it is fairly easy to see what is going on, even if it requires reading between the line e.g. I think SG would like to replace Mings, I just can't get my head around the Fred situation 

Just now, DCJonah said:

But if everyone knew that was his remit. And e everyone viewed the end game as a huge success, why so much criticism for what he did to achieve it? 

Why that safe pair of hands for a manager telling the press he was right to ignore Purslow getting involved in football business?

Why all the criticism? Why hated by the fans?

I doubt he was trying to make friends at Liverpool and I also understand why we would want players sold while trying to sell the club. But this discussion is a bit crazy, it is not talking about hypothetical, we have the benefit of hindsight to see what happened. Purslow was employed to sell the club. He sold the club. Liverpool has gone on to have amazing success under the new owners. That is a success, it could not have worked out much better. Dragging up comments from fans who wanted to see Liverpool competing on the pitch while Purslow was there or ex staff is completely irrelevant. 

5 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

He was pretty much first choice in our first season up. Then we upgraded, and we were happy to let him go on loan to play football. It happens, it's football. Cash is just better than him. But I think 2 years removed from that and 2 good loans I think he has no issues with being second choice and pushing Cash for the shirt, but he never got a chance to even do that. His social media posts imply he's as surprised as anyone else, which if it weren't football related I think he'd know the reason behind it right?

But why would Deano have let him go on loan, that's the bit I don't get. If he is happy to push Cash for the shirt and there are no issues I can't understand why he was not kept at Villa

6 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

So such a clear and obvious success that only the odd villa fan sees it. Strange. 

I think the whole footballing world would see Purslow's sale of Liverpool as a huge success. 

1 minute ago, DCJonah said:

Clutching at straws? 

This was in response to someone claiming he was a success at Liverpool. I think I'd trust Liverpool fans and the reporting of his time there over a villa fan on VT who leaps to defend every aspect of the club in every single post. 

It is not clutching at straws. You clearly don't understand what his objective at Liverpool was, yet you even posted it in a comment above. He was brought into Liverpool to sell the club. That was his objective and focus

1 minute ago, DCJonah said:

The point I'm making is that he wasn't viewed as the success you seem to make out. Like I said, type in Google and see how many positive articles come out. 

And whilst you keep mentioning his remit was to sell the club, that's the business side of things, whereas quite clearly he is heavily involved in the football side of things here. So not sure that means much. 

That's because the comments are from people that were judging success as success on the football pitch. He probably didn't care what happened on the pitch, his job was to sell the club which he did. And the sale could not have worked out much better for Liverpool

6 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

He did make almost 30 appearances for Deano, so you can at least point to it being a footballing decision there. We also upgraded on him and bought Cash, so he was loaned out. It made sense. When a new manager comes in you expect them to try out all the players at their disposal to see if they could use him. Maybe there is something else behind the scenes because it makes no sense that he wouldn't at least want to try him out as back up.

I didn't realise he had played 30 times for Deano. I have something in my head that always wondered why Fred is not getting in the squad. There have been times under Deano or SG that I thought Fred would be ideal on the bench and coming on as a sub or evening starting games but it didn't happen. I think there is something dodgy there, hence my suggestion it may not be football related

1 minute ago, Keyblade said:

I don't know if he's a good PL RB, I'm saying is it possible for Gerrard to know this too without ever playing him? . First thought is maybe his loan was a disaster...but then it wasn't. I've seen players excised from their manager's plans, but never after they've not kicked a ball under them.

There is clearly some issue that is preventing Fred getting in the 1st team. It was the same with Deano too. It could well be non footballing related, I just don't know. But I am fairly confident that a problem exists as I just can't imagine Deano not playing him for no good reason. In France he appears to play well, I haven't seen him play but I think he was in the Lique 1 team of the year last season. I think all the fans like Fred (me included) as his social media comments are always very positive about Villa and anytime I have seen him in Claret & Blue he has looked a decent player. But, two managers over the course of 2 or 3 years haven't been swayed to put him in the first team squad says to me there is a problem

3 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Is he really so bad in training that Gerrard has deemed that he isn't good enough as a backup without ever playing him competitively? Did he even play in any of our preseason games. I don't even think he traveled to Australia. Don't think anyone, not even Fred is suggesting he should be in the team without question but he at least deserves a fair shake at it.

Clearly both Gerrard and Deano think so as he didn't fit into either of their plans.  Is the suggestion that Fred is actually a good RB for the Premier League and the problem is that Gerrard is badly managing him?

1 minute ago, VillaParkAvenue said:

Hodgson was given a 3 year contract by CP, but sacked by FSG after being at the club for 6 months. Some expensive safe hands.

And FSG didn't want a safe pair of hands as they wanted to improve the football and bring the club forward from a footballing perspective. CP wanted to sell the club

3 minutes ago, VillaParkAvenue said:

He got the club sold to good owners. Selling the club was his main objective and he succeeded.

FSG have played a big part in Liverpool’s success but CP hasn’t been involved in that. Purslow was however disappointed when FSG sacked Dalglish:

https://www.tribalfootball.com/index.php/articles/ex-liverpool-chief-purslow-shocked-dalglish-sacking-3180241

While at Liverpool, CP also made some smaller and more football related decisions. He signed a couple of shit players on high wages. He appointed a shit manager. And he tried to interfere with signings even when the new manager was in place:

https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2010/dec/11/roy-hodgson-liverpool-nesv

He signed Hodgson to be a safe pair of hands that would accept not spending money in the transfer market and wouldn't cause any trouble during the sale of the club. Emotional fans may call that shit, smart business people would call it astute. 

I don't get the notion that he has been treated disgracefully. We bought him and pay his very significant wages, its a job, not a marriage. Neither current nor previous managers saw him as a first team player, yes that is hard on the lad but that's just the way it worked out. What are we supposed to do?