Woodytom

Thought he was ok v spurs. Always looking to go forward..... not his fault that the options ahead were zero.

Him and Johnstone were our best players I felt.

4 minutes ago, alreadyexists said:

Think we should go for:

 

                  Freidel

Hutton  Laurson  Mellberg  Amavi

Young  Milner  Barry  Delph

          Benteke Carew

 

Just need Bruce to pull his finger out and get those loans sorted. 

 

(Hutton is in there for lolz)

Frightening how amavi makes the cut

I merely asked a question?

Did he even touch the ball?

This really isn't something new. He's been playing poorly for a few weeks now.

Yet more schoolboy defending from this man.

Not a great event actually but I quite enjoyed that.

Saw some balance and a plan that has been executed well.

Tshibola has been my motm so far.

Want to see us go for it a bit now. Don't want to lose 1-0 playing like this for 90 mins.

7 minutes ago, Don_Simon said:

Randy bottled it. They jumped ship.

Nah, they bottled it. Stoke at home springs to mind 

Let's face it, we've had so little to shout about over the last 2 decades that it's hardly surprising there is no stand out player that can be considered a legend.

A lot of the players around the years 2008-10 had the opportunity to make themselves legends...... They bottled it.

Petrov is the closest for me. Then Barry. Then Taylor. 

The rest bare into insignificance.

Seriously, if we sign this guy, I don't just think he will be a good player, I think he could go down in villa history as the guy that dragged us to promotion.

36 minutes ago, avfc1982 said:

Disagree again. I thought he was excellent in his second spell, especially when Gregory put him in a back 3. He used to pick passes for fun. Bloody good player was Staunton and if I remember rightly was Gregory's choice for Villa player of the season that year. 

Fair enough. Maybe a debate for a different topic. 

3 minutes ago, avfc1982 said:

Staunton was a fine player for us. Can't think of many (if any) better left backs for Villa in all my years. He was bloody good in midfield too. Honestly to say he was gash is just nonsense. 

Not for me. Gash harsh but not great. Especially his second spell. Thought he was awful.

25 minutes ago, villa82 said:

Delph, highly rated at that time, signed a new contract when he could have left us on a bosman 3 months later.

He signed for ManCity giving us back the money we spent on him coming from Leeds. Regrets and says he will stay, but then regrets again, and signed for the best club in the PL.

stupid to say he would stay, and then leave. But he gave us £8m, and did not leave us lightly. Steve Staunton left us for nothing, and he came back when he lost his place at Liverpool, I can't think of a better player for us then Fabian. 

Never rated Staunton myself. Thought he was gash.

55 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Very good. Underrated in fact. 3 England caps don't do his ability justice IMO, particularly between 93 and 97. 

Tall, rangy, tough, good eye for a pass, could chip in with a goal now and then. Oh and he was a massive pain in the arse, obviously!

Why would anyone want Zidane when they have tim sherwood?

Would be delighted with this. Up there with our best signings over the last few years. Doesn't say a great deal of course but nevertheless... A definite move in the right direction imo.

43 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

If you don't have the ability to improve in a position, it doesn't mean you're any less of a pro.

No it doesn't no. But if you're ability is declining along with the level you're playing at, Imo, it speaks volumes about your application.

37 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

How can you gauge any of that from watching a player on the pitch without projecting your own biases? What if Milner didn't actually have much motivation or desire as you say, but was actually just really gifted at learning new positions and improving as a player? Conversely If you don't have the ability to improve in a position, it doesn't mean you're any less of a pro. 

But yeah it does seem like your definition of a model pro is different from most. Most people refer to conduct, how they train, application etc. Westwood hasn't put a foot wrong in those areas, and has been praised by his previous managers and people like Stan Petrov in that respect. So while you might say that calling him a model pro is a bit too much, is it really such an egregious statement that you have to bring it up again months after the initial discussion?

Firstly, I brought it up because.... as I said..... The current accolades associated with James milner. But in addition to your complaint (as want of a better word) regarding Me bringing it up....don't reply if it's not something you feel needs discussing further.

What is the key flaw in your debate is that you reference how they train, and application. How can you possibly refer to a professional footballer as a model pro based on training/application when it's widely accepted on here (I'm sure you're included but not certain) that he's getting worse.

If you apply yourself right and train right (as you suggest he does), you DON'T get worse. You just don't. Especially when you consider he has dropped a level also.

2 minutes ago, Mjvilla said:

Personally, I think it is all about ability. There is no saying (you and I can both admit we have no clue) that Westwood works his bollocks off in training trying to improve everything and anything. But his ability limits what he can/can't do on the pitch. 

Milner has a very good footballing brain and is clearly more talented than Westwood which is why he is able to slot in at a number of positions and do well there.

neither of us can state, 100%, that Westwood doesn't train hard and look to improve because we simply don't know if it's his attitude or simply his footballing ability that's causing him to perform the way he is.

We know that he doesn't look to improve because he hasn't. The chances are that if you're a pro footballer and you look to improve.... you do.

Take Gary neville for example. Better rb than Westwood is cm.. obviously.

However what neville did was take a weakness of his game.... crossing and developed it so he became a very good crosser. 

What example of that do we have for Westwood?

4 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

But you're still basing all this on ability.

Not at all. This is where I think a lot of ppl are missing the point.

There are better players than James milner who I don't think are as good of a pro.

My point is that having been chosen to play LB because he 'can do a job', he hasn't stopped at just 'doing a job'. He's looked to improve and work at his game so that actually they don't even need to get a new LB now because James has become a very good one himself. That's not just about ability. It's about attitude, Desire, willing to learn, motivation and knowing what's good for the team.

Just on Westwood as a few disagreed with Me when I didn't see him as a model professional. I used James milner as a reason why and for me, he's confirmed that even more in recent weeks.

Forget the training hard out of the limelight..... that's a given for me. Basic requirements of the job.

Ashley Westwood is coming to the peak of his career and is getting worse (somehow ). He hasn't improved one jot. Some of that will be down to the environment he's in but that's a minor point for me as we've seen players improve at this club.

James Milner has recently been asked to play out of position. Of course he's more of a utility man than Westwood but he hasnt just gone in at left back and done a job. He's gone in and has actually become arguably one of the best performing left backs in the league. I can't think of many, if any that have been better (I realise that Chelsea play a back 3). 

A lot of players sulk and moan and use it as an excuse.... being played out of position. Instead Milner, makes the position his own and develops his game further. That's above and beyond imo and the very definition of a model professional.

6 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I don't think you have disagreed with me to be honest.

I and others have long said that Westwood's form has basically mirrored Villa's. For a time under Lambert he was decent and promising, then went downhill, had a brief resurgence under Sherwood and has slid ever since.

Well I suppose the part I disagree with is you saying he had a couple of 'seasons'. I took that as he spent the whole year playing well.

5 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

He looked a much more confident player when he first joined us and settled in. Contrary to what you and others will say, he did have a couple of decent seasons here.

Yeah I disagree. I think it's fair to say that for periods of time during a couple of seasons he played well. I would say during Tim's revolution and around the time we went to Stoke and won 3-1. I think that was about the time he played a great ball to gabby v Norwich?

That said, those periods of time coincided with an upturn in form for the whole team particularly the sherwood example where Delph and cleverly were excellent and subsequently earned moves to better clubs. 

I don't think there has ever been a time where, Westwood alone (or at least as part of a few players) has been a stand out performer for a group of games. It was always Delph, benteke, vlaar, dragging us out the shit when the rest of the team were garbage.

So I kind of put any decent form of Westwood down to the overall form of the team which only supports the belief that due to his limits, he heavily relies on those around him.... and always has imo.