wishywashy

2 hours ago, Dante_Lockhart said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-68609729?src_origin=BBCS_BBC

What on earth?

Sad day, although not overly surprising. An amicable departure has felt like the most likely scenario for a few months imo. Big job to do next season.

Hopefully it's genuinely for the reasons given and not a reaction to the budget given for the upcoming season. From her statements in prior weeks she did seem to imply that she wanted something bigger...

I'm surprised nobody's really tried this before!

I think for the CMs at this stage you either go with Luiz and someone like Tim, or go Tielemans and McGinn, who clearly manage to make it work.

Luiz and McGinn just don't really complement eachother.

Played well tonight IMO. Frustration definitely got to him towards the end though, I think he might have accidentally booted the ball at a steward at once point!

1 hour ago, AshVilla said:

Were only 1 point ahead of Spurs if you take into account the free wins against Sheff United and Burnley.

1 win is still required and I don't know where it's coming from if we play like we did tonight though.

They're not free wins until they've been won. Burnley definitely aren't a free win now: they've lost 1 in 8 and will be fighting for their lives now they have a chance. Even Sheffield United can spring a surprise draw now and again (against us for example)

0/10 performance tonight!

The hell happened to him?

Shadow of his former self, very schoolboy errors and and he's been picking fights with opposition players non-stop as of late.

No excuse for having arms up like superman in your own box

95% chance of 4th according to Opta.

Take something from today!

3 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

Spurs like to leak goals if Chelsea feel up for it they will score. 

On paper, they're two teams who both have strong attacks but very leaky defences, so it promises to be a high scoring game.

It'll finish 0-0.

24 minutes ago, sne said:

Was in the Barcelona directors box for the Barca-Valencia game earlier in the week apparently. Might be nothing, might be something.

Having a look at Javi Guerra, maybe? He does goes back to Spain a lot, so might have just wanted to watch some football.

8 minutes ago, Pongo Waring said:

Is he joining us this summer? 

Yes. Turns 18 in May so he'll sign for us once the window opens.

https://www.instagram.com/p/C6Y2XozIanv/?hl=en

Quote

Nice day doing some filming with the club! Exciting plans for the future of the club and the stadium is in good hands ️

Shame Gabby's involved in this prospective video but the info is nice enough!

19 minutes ago, Delphinho123 said:

Any good?

Managed to get a hattrick of assists two days ago, and is La Liga's top assister. Emery was the one who brought him through into the Villareal first team, I believe.

Loves a through ball apparently.

17 minutes ago, thabucks said:

We need to turn the space we have into a place non Villa fans want to visit. Spurs are building an extreme sports centre with deep dive pool and massive indoor climbing wall. In Folkestone they’ve built a multi story indoor skate park and climbing centre. These are the sorts of developments that will attract people to the ground daily all year round and I’ve just used them as an example of what we could look to build. The increased footfall will make the Holte hotel / warehouse more financially viable. 

Diving platforms? Grealish will be signing for them in a flash

6 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

It's a classic example of players that aren't actually that good being the ones who become "legends" at a club, but they're actually just mediocre.

The players who are actually really **** good only play for a few seasons and then move to a better club (when you're a club at our level). The ones that stick around are the ones who aren't good enough to make that jump. There are some exceptions, but generally that's how it works.

If Gabby had been a bit better he'd have gone to Arsenal or Chelsea or something in his mid to late 20s and wouldn't be seen as a villa legend by some. As it is he was actually quite shit so nobody wanted him. So he stayed and has legendary status in some people's eyes. And our PL goalscoring record

Still, at least with a lot of club legends they're just mediocre or average at best: our club legend indirectly helped to almost bankrupt the club!

Sticking this in here and doing a runner

Crazy how our Premier League top scorer, one of our 'greatest' academy graduates and an (essentially) one-club player was genuinely one of the worst things to happen to this club, given his indirectly huge role in setting the wheels in motion for the 2010s being as disastrous for Villa as they were. 

There's a not too different reality out there where the decline set in motion from failing to secure CL that season (which he clearly willingly played a part in) leads to us going bust in 2018.

9 hours ago, ThunderPower_14 said:

 

This will be the one you mean I think. We know it can't be accurate because of the sponsor, but, it is Adidas's 2024 template and i'd suggest it's not far off what we'll end up with.

I'd be surprised if the PL allow us to have that AV150 logo there at the size they've done it.

Obviously a fake (the stitching is terrible) but does really emphasise how awful the current branding coming out of the club is. It's such a shame, because without the AV150/HIOSU/whatever it is & the genuinely eyesore badge it'd be a great kit...

9 hours ago, GlobalVillan said:

It gets better.

They have a thread entitled "who" (such a shit, poorly moderated mess of a forum) and it's about who they will get as manager if they go down.

Potter! Robbins! Edwards! Marsch! Cooper!

All seriously being discussed. 

Even Moyes has been suggested. 

"We are in the best 25 managerial posts in England" says one idiot.

Wtf is wrong with them?

They're very close to being right, to be fair. Just had to say "in Birmingham" instead of "in England".

And they'd be 25th.

As for their thread "who", they're finally managing to string enough letters together to make a coherent word. Very impressive. A few more years and they might be able to manage typing a second word in their sentences

1 hour ago, ender4 said:

It’s funny that we both read the same articles and have interpreted it completely different.  
 

As far as I can tell, and I’m pretty confident that is what The Times and The Athletic are trying to say, is that this new fixed cap will REPLACE the 85% PSR limits. The key word there in both articles is the word “replace”.   
 

Of course, they might be wrong themselves, but that is what they are telling us.  In my interpretation of course.

I get what you mean in how they can be perceived both ways, and some articles are definitely saying it like you're interpreting it (like the BBC), hence why we've both been confused all day! I've found that The Guardian takes the winners medal for being the least ambiguous about its claims.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/apr/29/majority-of-premier-league-clubs-vote-in-favour-of-exploring-spending-cap-plans

Quote

The Premier League hopes to put a full set of new financial regulations to the vote at its AGM in June. The league has agreed to go ahead with controls that would limit clubs’ spending on player-related costs to 85% of their revenues (or 70% in the case of clubs playing in Europe). These “squad cost ratios” would run alongside anchoring, if approved.

I think it's a case of we'll have to see what happens in June when it's all formalised: it clearly hasn't been very well communicated in the press releases that have been going round!

2 minutes ago, imavillan said:

there's a pretty good summation here

I've put all the posts for those who are not on x/twitter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This thread is under the impression that there won't be a 85% spending cap for Prem clubs, which The Times and The Athletic have both said will remain.

The UEFA rules being 70% of turnover are valid from 2025/26 (although the only competition where it wouldn't really be worth it would be the Conference League) but that's got nothing to do with the measure voted on today.

Still baffled as to why Villa voted against.

6 minutes ago, ender4 said:

Though The Times also suggests a conflicting viewpoint in the same sentence - the sentence starts with "The Premier League has already agreed to replace..."  using the word replace.  But then continues by talking about 85% limit.   I now have no idea lol.

https://theathletic.com/5457496/2024/04/29/premier-league-spending-salary-cap/

The Athletic are much more clear in their claim that it'll be an addition rather than a replacement. Still would prefer definitive clarity from the Premier League itself at this rate.

Quote

The introduction of the squad cost rule from 2025-26 was unanimously approved at a Premier League shareholder’s meeting earlier this month and is expected to be finalised during June’s AGM.

The spending cap is intended to function as a backstop to the squad cost rule, which will see clubs’ spending tied to a percentage of their revenue.