il_serpente

Watching Carruthers or "The Man They Call Carruthers" (i.e., Johnson)?

rightly so, though.

Should offer Wigan to swap Zog for Moses. They charged us $10M for Zog after Whelan went on and on about how good he was and how much they should get for him, and they're insisting on $10M for Moses now. Surely Whelan can't claim it's not a fair deal! I really want to see the back of Zog. The only thing he seems to offer is giving his teammates a break from having to look for the ball cuz they know it'll never come their way once he's got it. Showed tonight that last year was no fluke, but the supposedly great year he had at Wigan was the fluke.

Watched the first half while preparing dinner, so I may have missed a bit, but play looked a bit sloppy and disjointed. Gabby looked good and the goal was nice, but form the standpoint of controlling the ball I wasn't too impressed. Second half looked much better minus a few periods where Chicago kept the pressure on. After KEA and Bannan came on I thought the passing and possession play was great. I think Ireland suffered from being surrounded by shit in comparison. There's no question that KEA should be in the starting 11 and that Delph, N'Zogbia and Gardner should not. I'd like to see Ireland playing with KEA and Bannan in some of the friendlies to see how they work together. Maybe a bit lightweight to have Ireland and Bannan on at the same time, but with Albrighton out and N'Zogbia looking no better than last year I don't see playing with true wingers as the way to go, so a diamond of KEA and either/both of Ireland and Bannan plus Holman and perhaps Carruthers is the best shout. Gabby's looking too good to leave out if his injury isn't serious, though I'm still not sold on Gabby and Bent up front together. Tough choices for PL ahead. Hopefully, the remaining friendlies will make things a bit clearer.

Gotta love the web translator: ..it has good technique... ...he even has a big ball striking...

What makes it so clear that we've turned OGS down? I thought he said he no longer wants to be considered? Also, I'm not at all surprised that Bryan Doogan hasn't made an official statement (I suspect his comment to TV2 was not on the record). Villa didn't make statements in the past each time they either ruled out a candidate or one rejected them. Their method has been to hold discussions in private and make an announcement when a deal is done, not give play by play on the status of negotiations with each target. To the detriment of this process, the media learned the goings-on of discussions with Solskjaer and the courtship process became public. That doesn't mean that Villa would make any kind of statement beyond acknowledging the obvious fact that we inquired. As with Martinez (or Whelan) last year, Villa will leave it to Solskjaer or Molde to make a statement that he's not in the running.

Saw that in one of the Norwegian articles (can still read a little despite moving away as a small child many years ago). I thought it said he could go for free at the end of the season if an opportunity arose in the Manchester area. I think that's more to do with the fact that it was his home for 15 yeas and his kids have spent most of their lives there than with expectations that the ManU job might come open. Do you think he'd blow us off for Wigan if Martinez goes to plop?

fitting!

I don't think he's talking about us, somehow. Why not? Because we're not one of the top jobs in Europe? I think you're missing out the bit about the ladder. He's hardly going to go from Wigan to Real Madrid is he? And he's not exactly in the shop window for a big European side whilst battling relegation. FWIW I think he's a bit overrated because of the run Wigan are on at the moment. He's done a good job overall but he wouldn't be my first choice. As I recall, Whelan was saying we weren't big enough for Martinez last year when we were linked with him, and that's when we finished 9th and they were 17th. I doubt his view will be different after we finish below them Wigan.

Please don't line up with Ireland in the hole. He always ends up having to come deep to help get the ball across the midline, leaving us with 2 wingers who can't (Albrighton) or won't (N'Zogbia) cross, a lone striker and a gap where Ireland is supposed to be. Better to play Ireland as a CM and Heskey and Weimann up top together. Didn't see the Sunderland game, but it sounds like Heskey and Weimann actually worked pretty well together. ----------------Given----------------- Lichaj Cuellar Baker Warnock Carruthers Herd Ireland N'Zogbia Heskey Weimann

This should be winnable, but will probably end in a draw. The wheels are starting to come back off the Sunderland bus a bit as the lift from the MON appointment wears off. They haven't scored in their last 3 games, including a spanking by Everton and a draw at home to Wolves. I say go for the win which would pretty much guiarantee safety rather than counting on draws against Sunderland, Bolton and Norwich. I like dakid007's idea of putting Ireland in the middle rather than in the hole. It's where he always ends up playing anyway since no one else is able to bring the ball forward (I swear I saw Lichaj pass the ball back to Ireland at the center line once against ManU). Putting Zog in the middle gives him more options to move with the ball without getting trapped in a blind alley and more chance of finding an open teammate to pass to if he actually lifts his head up.

Sadly amusing story about the Cleveland Browns and fans' frustration with perpetual mediocrity: http://tinyurl.com/7rxwfbe

Yes, least effective. Zog ran himself into dead ends time and again. TV commentator was pointing out that he looked lively but every time he got the ball in a good position he wasted it with the wrong decision, usually by trying to do it all himself. He contrasted the lack of end product from all of N'Zogbia's possession in good positions with Duff, who had the ball in Villa territory something like 3 times and turned all into chances. Albrighton wasted a number of crosses, but some were into good spots where a teammate should have been waiting; and at least he recognized that a teammate was in a better position than himself to make something happen. The only thing wrong with the team's play today was inability to turn promising possession into real chances. That's not McLeish's fault. Whatever you think of him, if you watched this game objectively you could not fault him at all. Team selection, strategy, tactics and substitutions were all good today. He can't make the final pass himself. Yet reading some comments on this match thread you'd think he'd f**ked it up royally. Save the McLeish bashing for when he really deserves it. It's not as though you've been starved for opportunities...

36 points should be enough to stay up. 3 of the bottom 5 would have to get 15 or more points from the last 11 games in order to send Villa down with 36. Not looking likely they way they're all playing (Villa has actually increased the gap to relegation in the last couple of weeks despite the shit being served up ffs)

Match fitness is going to be critical for our full backs since City will have most of the possession and will be running at them constantly. Lichaj and Herd don't have match fitness. They've just gotten back into full training and maybe a reserve match after months off. Hutton has actually been better the last couple of games and should start. Warnock vs. Clark is a tough call- No right answer, just 2 wrong ones.

My thoughts exactly, though I was thinking take Bent off for either Gardner or Bannan. Bent had done his job and what we needed most was possession to keep the pressure off and an extra body in the middle to slow down Arsenal's attack after we invariably hoofed it right to them or gave it away cheaply via Hutton. Keane can come deeper to help link up and Gabby can run off the shoulders of the CBs and both can score. Bent couldn't give us what we were likely to need most and others could potentially give us what he had to offer if we ended up needing it.

Claims that Hughes is interested in Bannan for QPR and Vill a might be willing to sell. Also an article linking Newcastle with a swoop for CNZ: http://www.squeakybumtime.com/premiership/3315/mark-hughes-offer-aston-villas-barry-bannan-qpr/

The fact that their goal came from a defensive mid waiting in the box for a cross says alot. How many times did we get the ball back (finally) after United passed it around and then passed it directly to their CBs and the half line without even trying to find a Villa player first? Last season the ball would have found its way to Downing or Young and they would have started a quick counter. Now it's just hoooof

Didn't see any of the game. Went to Eurosport play by play after reading some of this thread and was surprised to see they thought Delph had a good game and Collins had played excellent. Were they really that clueless or are posters on here being overly critical of players they don't rate?

Interestingly, Eurosport put Collins in their Premier League Team of the Week! Said he played like McLeish did when he was a top defender. I didn't view his performance quite as negatively as some on here, but don't get how he got into TOTW. Different people see things differently! I was thinking that Zog was actually starting to play pretty well and then he suddenly went and dribbled straight at QPR players on a couple of occasions when he should have passed and went on to lose the ball. How long can it go on?

Agree completely! Disagree. See above. The difference in the defence this year is mainly that Given has been miles better than Friedel. McLeish gets some credit for buying him, though that happened only because Friedel left. N'Zogbia shouldn't even make the bench next game. I agreed with bringing on Ireland and Albrighton, but he took the wrong 2 players off!

I would put Bannan in Delph's place and Albrighton on the wing, with N'Zogbia and Albrighton switching back and forth.

I sure hope N'Zogbia turns out to be better than I expect. Other than Bent we had no attacking player for Chelsea to worry about. Of course, Villa hardly had the ball in an attacking position to give them reason to worry. This was something like the 5th preseason match for Chelsea and they're still pretty much the same side a last year. The extra fitness and familiarity with each other showed. They kept the pressure on and our guys couldn't get an attack started at all. Young and Downing might have had some difficulties, too, though I think they would have done much better. In fairness to Delph, his teamates kept giving him the ball with a Chealsea player already on top of him and no outlet. Hard to look good in those circumstances. Delfouneso showed skill in heading, bringing high balls down and dribbling but doesn't seem to know what to do when he has it on the wing. Crossing was woeful. Keep him off the wing, please. Getting Heskey on for Albrighton was like having an extra player. I missed a bit toward the end admittedly, but didn't see Makoun have much of a chance to show anything. Surprised others saw enough to have a real opinion but glad to see he impressed. Gardner look energetic, but saw him make a couple of out of control passes. Again, surprised others saw enough good to form an opinion.

-I thought Bannan did fairly well, though wing is not the place for him. -As someone mentioned, Makoun was great at showing for the ball and keeping it moving when playing it out of defense, with some nice passes forward as well. Nothing spectacular, so his contributions aren't noticed as easily. -Delph looked really good. A totally different style than Makoun of getting the ball forward when under a little pressure: He can carry it out himself. This is something Villa have been missing and will be a great asset. it would be great if Delph and Makoun could be on the pitch together, but don't know that they can keep hold of the ball with an opponent riding them as Petrov does so well. -Thought Delfouneso did well also, except when he lost the ball trying to dribble out of his own half. He's the only attacker who seems inclined and able to go directly at a defender and beat him. He created space for himself nicely a couple of times. In one case I remember he got in good shooting position and unleashed a powerful strike that was blocked in the box. -Clark looked completely out of his depth. I've never understood the lovefest with him last season. Filled in well for a newbie last year but hasn't convinced me he will be a star.

Here's a novel idea: I'll actually post on the thread's topic instead of using 15 posts to repeat the same criticisms of Houllier that I've already posted about 50 other times on 3 or 4 different threads. Hope this approach doesn't confuse the serial whingers. 1. Houllier is not going to go now or in the summer, relegation or no relegation, nor should he. I personally think relegation is extremely unlikely. Defending of set-pieces aside, the quality of play has improved significantly over the last couple of months, though results have unfortunately improved only modestly. I think they're playing too well to go down. Wolves will be a critical game to counter the deflation after dropping the points at Bolton, however. 2. Houllier was not brought in with any expectation of keeping us in the top 6 this season. O'Neill would never have kept us in the top 6 this season, either, for that matter. Randy needed to change the approach to get the wage bill under control. He let MON spend pretty freely to bring in his players and negotiate wages for 4 years and he got close to CL but couldn't quite do it because he didn't spend wisely. Too little of the money he spent actually went to improving the quality of player on the pitch (for every Milner, Young and initially Carew, there was a Sidwell, Beye and Shorey). That shotgun approach was not sustainable and MON was unwilling/unable to try a different way when his fundng was cut. Houllier was willing to move forward by bringing along the youth and get rid of the vastly overpaid bench warmers in return for getting funds to spend selectively on key starters. This was always going to mean an initial step backward. Throw in the fact that he has a different vision of how the team should play and it's not too shocking that results and the quality of play (not always in lock-step with each other!) took a hit. I suspect Houllier made it clear to the board that this should be expected and I think they recognized and accepted this and committed to a plan they thought would give us a chance to challenge again in a year or two without continuing to hemorrhage cash. 3. I expect there will be a massive clearout in the summer, as has been predicted by any number of posters and journos. But it's not just so Houllier "can get in the players he wants." It's all to do with the wage bill and the fact that the youngsters have gotten blooded this season and can serve as equally good squad players as the expensive crap MON had, and in some cases fill starting roles. I think Houllier will be give some cash, but he will target the spending on key gaps that can't be filled yet by the youth. There will be fewer but bigger signings than MON had. With our excellent youth having experience, an improved starting 11, and a pre-season to make it all gel I think next season will look very good. Maybe still not top 6, but the following season it should come. Abandoning this plan now or in the summer will just put us back at square one, whether you like Houllier or not. Letting him finish what he's started at least has the chance of getting us back up where we should be. It's true that staying the course with Ged COULD leave us in worse position than changing, but it's unlikely that switching now or in the summer is going to leave us in a better postion in a year's time. Regardless, I think the board went all in with the plan and aren't going to panic and bail out partway through when things are playing out roughly how they anticipated.