KentVillan

Can everyone please just remember that Steve Bruce is a human being who lost both his parents in quick succession less than a year ago. From https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-boss-steve-bruce-14327932 (23 Feb 2018): There's no need to keep sticking the boot in. Edit: apologies to moderators for not including a quote from the article - have amended.

I want Bruce to go. I don't think he has the tactical or coaching nous to get the most out of this squad, and he doesn't seem to have the behind-the-scenes managerial skills to get the whole club pulling in the right direction in terms of scouting, match preparation, etc. However, he's a decent man, and the players seem to respect him (even though he plays them out of position). Let's not get too unrealistic about what kind of managerial genius we can attract at this level. The rot set in years ago, and Bruce has helped to partially turn things around. Now he's reached his limits and we need him to go, but he's not the worst person who's ever lived.

To try and inject a little bit of positivity - Kyle Walker and James Milner were inspired loan signings. As for bad loan signings... quite a few to choose from. I'll stick with loan signings when we were in the Premier League. Think a certain amount of dross coming down on loan when you're in the Championship is normal. I don't like Phil Bardsley as a player or a human being. Carlton Cole scored 3 in 30 - great return for an England striker. I never understood the point of the Michael Bradley loan. And yeah, Jenas. The other weird one was Curtis Davies. He came across well as a person, and you couldn't fault his effort, but that loan signing was part of a long, expensive process of us paying big money for a 6/10 player. What did MON see that nobody else did?

Jack Grealish drives me nuts. Part of me thinks he's got some ability and could be a decent asset for Villa, but part of me suspects he is just another garbage player with an oversized ego who will end up in League One. You don't get the impression that a lot of people outside Villa Park are paying much attention to him. I've not seen him really humiliate a quality defender (happy to be corrected on this point) and his final ball is often disappointingly weak. Ultimately, Carles Gil, for all his flaws, looks far more dangerous and has less of the stupid ego and behavioural problems. Jack thinks he's made it already. Berk.

Westwood is the kind of player who joins a team together with good positioning, sensible passes, a cool head, intelligent game management, and overall reliability. Players like that will look good when the team is going well, and poor when the team is struggling. The idea that getting rid of Westwood will fix Villa is slightly preposterous and shows an ignorance of football (remember, it's not a PlayStation game). If we were pushing for Champions League then yeah, by all means beat up on him, but at our current level he is perfectly adequate and the problems lie elsewhere: wingers who don't create chances, strikers who don't score goals, defenders who make mistakes... it's not that complicated.

This is what I said back in May, and most people seemed to disagree. But today really confirmed all these points I thought? If Okore hadn't got injured, we might have found out whether PL agrees with this assessment too.

I don't understand how people are so continually forgiving of Baker. He has a really obvious weakness, and whenever it's exposed we leak goals. He can't turn quickly, he has no turn of pace, and the neat through-ball inside the fullback destroys him every time. He was a spectator for the Cleverley goal today, despite having a head start. Unfortunately, he can't improve into a top class centre back - he doesn't have the physical attributes. It's a shame, as he is a good all-round footballer with a great attitude, but he has the turning circle of an oil tanker.

Baker was absolutely appalling. He is just too slow and lumbering to survive at this level. Watch him turn and chase on the Cleverley goal - it's embarrassing. Cleverley is not an unusually quick player. Sylla, who is normally pretty reliable in possession, got carried away today and gave the ball away with unfailing regularity. If you could bet on a player completing less than 5% of passes, then I'd suspect him of spot fixing. Albrighton was the standout player, although Moyes' habit of playing quite a narrow shape might have helped him. I thought KEA was okay too. Bit unfair to criticise Benteke - he should have done better with that great pass in off the wing by Albrighton on the break, but otherwise didn't get a lot of service. As a club focusing on finding value in the transfer market, we should really be looking at buying a top class centre half. They are much cheaper than midfielders and forwards of the same calibre, and our squad is sorely lacking some real defensive nous. What a shame about Okore - we could have done with him today.

Sorry I was just typing up a translation which my iPad helpfully refreshed before I could post. Key points: Journo says changing clubs one season before the World Cup could be risky. CB agrees. Journo asks him if they'll have to wait till midnight on 31st August for his transfer to go through. CB says if he does get transferred he hopes it'll be much quicker. Journal asks him if he's up for "going to war this time", referring to his last transfer. He says no, that wouldn't achieve anything. He says of course if a good offer came in, he is certain that a compromise could be reached which would suit both sides well [i.e. loads of money for Villa]. And he clarifies that he has no problem with playing an additional season at Villa. The language there is interesting actually, because it suggests that next season definitely would be his last. Overall, I think he manages to speak both honestly and respectfully.

Trying to put myself in CB's shoes for a moment (they're too big for my feet), I reckon there are logical arguments either side: - playing for Villa ought not to affect his chances of playing in the WC, so let's rule that one out - playing for Villa is fun. We play attacking football, built around him. Who doesn't enjoy that? - he's young enough for another season at Villa, without worrying too much about wages - in all likelihood, if we keep him we'll get a top 10 finish, possibly challenging for Europa League. - most of the major teams in England (and he's built for English football) are in flux at the moment - out of the top 7, only Arsenal have a manager who's been in place longer than a year. On the other hand... - besides maybe City, none of the top clubs has a proper target man. He would be a natural replacement for Drogba at Mourinho's Chelsea Mk II. Huge statement of intent for Arsenal/Spurs. - he knows the Villa fans probably won't begrudge him leaving if we get a decent price for him (which we almost certainly would) - he's already good enough to play Champions League football, and might think the earlier the better in terms of getting used to the tactics and psychology of that level of football - he has a special relationship with Villa at the moment, but you could see him developing something similar at Arsenal or Spurs (he might be overshadowed a bit at United, and Chelsea fans are complete words removed). - his agent makes a helluva lot more money by shifting him on now So let's see what happens. If he does leave, I hope he continues to get the credit he deserves. Top top player, pleasure to watch.

Is there any way of breaking the stats down into the various stages of our season, or against different levels of opposition? I'm not sure if averages across the whole season (where our form and starting 11s changed considerably) tell us very much. Stats are a good complement to "actually watching games" though, I agree. I was fortunate enough to be living overseas for much of the past season, so I watched most of our games live in full in HD (and sober, because of the time difference!) and I still find the stats really useful. Where your eyes tell you one thing and the stats something else, then you can go back and work out why the stats might be wrong or misleading. Benteke supposedly has poor passing accuracy, but we know flick-ons and final balls are the hardest passes to get right. But we know that defensive mids and centre halves should have very high passing accuracy, and if they don't then there's an issue. I very much dislike long ball stats, as I think there are lots of different types of long pass, and it's very hard to separate that out into stats. I would trust your eyes on this one. We all know what a route one team looks like. For example, a low, long driven pass down the right wing to get Gabby breaking could be a very fine ball (Arsenal do this with Walcott), as would one of Scholes' diagonal passes to switch play. These are hardly comparable with Fat Sam's dreary lump it up to the big man approach (although admittedly his West Ham team can play some decent stuff at times). All to clubs use stats to monitor their performances and inform player selection and tactics, but it's no coincidence that the best managers are the ones who also understand the art and psychology of football. Football is much harder to reduce to numbers than baseball, cricket, American football, etc. That's part of what makes it such a great sport.

I think those are the finances for last season, though? I also don't subscribe to the idea that wage bills alone indicate where you should be finishing each season. Wage bills obviously correlate with performance, but correlation is not causation. If you sign a manager like McLeish who is clearly only going to last one season, then you guarantee that another manager is going to have to spend a season fixing things. Changing manager two seasons running is very bad for your wage efficiency, because you'll have two sets of high wage earners (Houllier signings and McLeish signings) who don't fit the new manager's style. A lot of your wage bill is wasted in a transitional season, with something very similar happening at Liverpool this year. The most important thing is that we get good value for the players we sell, and that Lambert is backed to continue his successful work in the transfer market. Bent's goal against Wigan has probably done us some favours, and I don't really mind either way what happens with Benteke - I assume the options are either 25m+ or having a potentially world class striker for another season. An experienced centre half and a replacement for Petrov, along with some more young talent, and we're looking like a pretty useful squad. Plus you'd assume that the vast majority of our current starters will keep getting better.

As I said before to quite a bit of mirth, there are two types of centre-back. Playmaking CB and traditional CB. Baker's a traditional CB. Traditional CBs have character, strength, height, strong basic defending skills like tackling and heading. Examples of traditional CB: Vidic, Ivanovic, Mertesacker, Huth. Baker is still building strength so will be bit beefier in a few years, but he will have to be a CB in this mould. Traditional CBs are usually most effectively paired with playmaking CBs - Ferdinand, Cahill, Koscielny - who are more talented footballers Well that's not rocket science, but the really good "traditional" CBs nowadays tend to have a bit more pace than they used to. Vidic is quick, Campbell was very quick in his prime, Terry used to have a burst of pace (and started getting dropped when that went). Now of course these guys were among the very best in the world, so maybe I'm expecting too much. Mertesacker seems to get away with it, but he is a fantastic reader of the game. I don't think Baker is. I look forward to him proving me wrong. As for the self-centred players comment. Bannan has done some silly things off the pitch which you don't do if you're committed to the team. And while Zog has put in a great shift, he is known for being a slightly difficult character and he does tend to go for the highlight reels rather than the easy ball. I'm not criticising him, but I think Lambert has an idea about the kind of people he wants in his squad, and they are committed, down-to-earth characters who pull for the team. I think that's why he likes getting players from the lower leagues and from unfashionable clubs and countries - they're less likely to bring any baggage with them. Playing for Villa is a massive swell of pride for players like Sylla, Bowery, etc. while Given and Zog probably feel they've taken a wrong turn somewhere.

Fantastic post. Found the Weimann stats particularly interesting. In the gif you posted, is it Weimann overlapping on the left? It seems to make the defender (Skrtel?) hesitate a split second, allowing Benteke in to score. Even if it is another player, Weimann was making runs like that all season, and I really enjoy watching him. Nowadays the focus is so much on technique, but having that kind of awareness at such a young age is a real gift. As you can see from the stats, when Gabby came back into the side, we ended up with an incredibly balanced front 3, each with different strengths. This meant we could play long ball football, counter attacks down the wings, Arsenal-style pass and move, and so on. Westwood clearly had a great season as well. I think Lambert is a good judge of character, and that's really important when you're building a team for the future. Westwood and Lowton in particular seem very mature, but so do Sylla, Bennett, Baker, and Weimann. Delph is growing, and the more self-centred players like Bent, Bannan, possibly N'Zogbia are being phased out of the team. I'm not a huge fan of Baker as a player (he seems like a good lad) but you make the very fair point that our perceived weakness on set pieces pretty much disappeared after he came in. He is excellent in the air. What I'm concerned about is his lack of pace and clumsiness on the deck, but maybe he will work around these issues, a la John Terry. All in all, an interesting season. I much prefer watching the team improve over the course of the season, as opposed to the slow grinding halt we watched under MON each year. Lambert will need to buy wisely this summer, and I think the retirement of Petrov and probable sale of Bent, etc. mean we need to buy some experience, preferably in the spine of the team (I don't agree with this idea of getting an experienced left back to challenge Bennett, it wouldn't offer good value). Has anyone recorded the key stat of how many times Guzan stormed out to shout at his defenders this season? That hair dryer has a future in management.

There are certain types of players who get more stick than they deserve. Attacking full backs have always been one of them. Bennett offers a lot going forward, but whenever he is within 20 yards of a defensive error, he gets all the blame. Vlaar's header to Baker exposed both their shortcomings - Vlaar's proneness to lapses in concentration and Baker's complete lack of pace (he got rinsed). And yet still everyone takes it out on Bennett because he got out jumped on a header. I agree his awareness of what was happening around him was poor, but that is the kind of thing that can improve with experience. What you can't improve much is the natural skills like touch, passing, etc. and I think Bennett looks tidy in these areas. He would definitely benefit from a summer down the gym. Doesn't deserve to be written off, certainly doesn't deserve abuse - it's not like his attitude has ever been poor.

Our defenders are one-dimensional, with the possible exception of Lowton. They are all PL standard at one aspect of play, but tend to have glaring weaknesses that are easily exposed. Lambert basically plays the Alex Ferguson style, where the front six are pretty gung ho. Fergie never particularly bothered with specialist defensive midfielders (obviously he had grafters like Keane, Fletcher, Hargreaves, Park, etc. but they were there to press or play box-to-box). This approach worked for Fergie because he always signed quality defenders. Look at the 1995-6 team of "youngsters": the defence included Schmeichel, Bruce, Irwin and Pallister. You can risk youngsters elsewhere on the park because their flaws won't always cost you goals. When you have flaws in a defensive player (or worse, in every player in your defence) it only takes a half-decent manager to tear it apart. I think the way our front six moves about so fluidly, while making for some great attacking play, must make it hard to find a good shape when the ball is turned over to the opposition. You often see Gabby or Weimann making a lung busting run back to cover, which is obviously great, but does make you wonder how we're so overrun that they need to do it. The solution seems pretty obvious - spend more money on defenders. Presumably you can get much better value on a top 10 defender than on a top 10 striker (ignoring the occasional Benteke-esque stroke of luck). I don't think we need a specialist DM, as I expect Westwood and Delph will grow into their roles, and unless you're facing a specialist number 10 of the Zidane / Bergkamp ilk, it's often just a waste of a player. The Makelele role went out of fashion with the demise of the number 10. If we were to strengthen our midfield, I think just getting a slightly calmer, more experienced version of what we've already got would do the trick. James Milner maybe! Hah.

That season Gabby scored 16 goals in all competitions and helped us finish 6th and have two good cup runs. See what I was responding to though - the accusation that Gabby was to blame for bulking up. Was that not also the season where Gabby completely burnt out, costing us a realistic shot at a Champions League place, because MON refused to rotate the team? I've always thought most of the subsequent problems we've had with him were a direct result of that. When he isn't overplayed and f--ked about by bad managers, he always seems to me to give 100%.

I hope you're right, but I think his lack of pace is something that's going to trouble him for the rest of his career. He looks good against lumbering target men, but I'm worried a quick, technical team like Chelsea will tear him apart. Agree on Vlaar, though.

Just wondering if anyone else thinks that Baker is a liability? I like his attitude, strength, and his aerial ability, but he seems to be lacking almost everything else you'd want of a defender - no pace, rash decision making, often in the wrong position, zero skill on the ball. He seems to be getting a free pass at the moment, and I just don't understand it when Bennett, Lichaj, even Vlaar get torn apart for their defensive performances. In the first half against Sunderland, Baker looked completely out of his depth. He did okay against Norwich because Holt and Hoolahan are the slowest front two in football. How on earth this guy is the answer at LB against big 4 opposition is beyond me. We seem to think he's some kind of Ivanovich. I'd hope that top of PL's list would be an experienced centre half, maybe even two. It's the one position where youthful exuberance doesn't get you anywhere.

Using the word retarded to describe anyone is nothing short of ignorant. Apologies, didn't think that through, and you're right. Sacking Lambert would be very very ill-advised.

On current form, they're definitely not the worst. The string of results needed for us to go down isn't out of the question. I think we need 1 more point to stay up, especially if Chelsea do another job on our goal difference. Over the course of 36 games in the league to date (granted, it`s 35 for them) only the 2 relegated teams have picked up less points. Why the hell are we so terrified of them? You talk about form too... why does their form get taken into account, but ours doesnt? Ours is better, remember? Nobody's ignoring our form. The point is that in recent weeks Wigan are the relegation battlers (besides us) you'd least like to face. Of course we can still beat them, but things would be much more comfortable if the Wigan game wasn't crucial. Edit: and check out the quality of the teams Wigan have outplayed in the last two weeks - Spurs and West Brom. Spurs are challenging for Champions League. When was the last time we outplayed a team of that quality? And don't say Liverpool.

The point is that it suggests the players weren't given sufficient instruction by coaching staff. I suspect Gaby isn't the only vain and somewhat idiotic player in the Premier League, and yet you don't see this happening to players at United, City, Chelsea, Arsenal, etc. because those clubs would never let it happen. You hear about Rooney or Michael Johnson, but never someone completely f--king up their physique with inappropriate fitness work. MON should have given his players training schemes, rules, etc. for the close season, and they should have been monitoring the players over the summer (just a simple meeting and weigh-in every few weeks would have put a stop to it). I just think it's really off the mark to attack Gaby for getting buff, and also for falling out with GH and AM. He clearly loves the club.

On current form, they're definitely not the worst. The string of results needed for us to go down isn't out of the question. I think we need 1 more point to stay up, especially if Chelsea do another job on our goal difference.

What I'm saying is that he bulked up a whole season before Houllier became manager (i.e. the summer before 09-10). GH may have told him to stop, but by that point it was too late. I remember Beckham and Owen both made similar mistakes (which is when Beckham lost the ability to beat a man), but nowadays it's very rare that a manager lets his players take personal responsibility for their fitness regimes. MON was too old school - didn't believe in squad rotation and clearly didn't bother with sports science post-1980. I think Gaby was one of the big victims of this, because physically he's a thoroughbred, one of the fastest players in PL history. We should have looked after him better.

No, it was at least a season before that. Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009–10_Premier_League - check the results chart. It was the summer before this that Gaby got stacked.