AntrimBlack Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 If Holt is better than our other options on the bench yesterday, it really indicates the problems there are in our squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MikeMcKenna Posted January 19, 2014 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted January 19, 2014 (edited) Another absolutely pointless debate going on here. Whether some like it or not, Holt is for now a Villa player and even though I didn't agree with bringing him in, I will now support him till proved otherwise. Introducing Heskey into the debate is stupid IMO and just shows how far some will go to build up an argument. This forum is increasingly only about discussing the negatives. Yesterday the first half was the best football Villa have played for a long, long time and we got a point from a top 4 team when many, maybe most of us were expecting Villa to get stuffed. Yesterday will have had a huge impact on the squads confidence and maybe Holt can help even more to build their confidence simply by being around. I have no idea whether he will contribute significantly on the pitch and have my doubts but yesterday told me very little one way or the other. He obviously isn't part of our long term future plans but if he can help steady the ship or even do as Robbie Keane did and contribute a couple of goals I will be satisfied for now. Edited January 19, 2014 by MikeMcKenna 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 I've never, ever, ever seen Emile Heskey show any sort of technical ability as per Holt's cute flick against Liverpool. Creating that sort of space for someone to run into alone is valuable enough. I was impressed because I thought he'd be much more immobile. I love the pointless stat quoting by the way. Did you see that Holt had more touches, won more tackles and committed less fouls than Gabby did against Liverpool?Not sure they're pointless stats. He's a striker, we need him to be involved, hold up the ball and be a threat. He kept the ball 5 times and won 1 header.He attempted more passes, had more touches and won more headers than Agbonlahor. Who would you rather have in the side?Gabby isn't in there to win headers and hold the ball up. He's there to provide an outlet, to take players on and try to create chances.So Holt offers us something different?Than gabby? Of course. Did we need something different to gabby? Is that something different better than what gabby offers?Some games it will be better, some games it won't, its different. He didn't plan to bring him on for gabby yesterday, injury forced it. He'll win us more points than he'll lose us. I really don't see anything to be negative about the signing.Not sure how you can say that. The fact we replaced gabby with such an inferior player played a part in us not getting all 3 points. Whichever of our attackers holt replaces he is an inferior option to them and we are weaker having him on the pitch over any of them. So how can you confidently predict he'll win more points than lose? So if a teams comfortably dealing with gabby, it gives us a different option. What's the point in having 2 strikers exactly the same? Surely Benteke and Holt are exactly the same, notwithstanding the difference in quality. Bentekes the first choice striker, we then need another 3 different strikers. We have this in gabby, Holt and andi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazvfc Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Another absolutely pointless debate going on here. Whether some like it or not, Holt is for now a Villa player and even though I didn't agree with bringing him in, I will now support him till proved otherwise. Introducing Heskey into the debate is stupid IMO and just shows how far some will go to build up an argument. This forum is increasingly only about discussing the negatives. Yesterday the first half was the best football Villa have played for a long, long time and we got a point from a top 4 team when many, maybe most of us were expecting Villa to get stuffed. Yesterday will have had a huge impact on the squads confidence and maybe Holt can help even more to build their confidence simply by being around. I have no idea whether he will contribute significantly on the pitch and have my doubts but yesterday told me very little one way or the other. He obviously isn't part of our long term future plans but if he can help steady the ship or even do as Robbie Keane did and contribute a couple of goals I will be satisfied for now. Well said Mike - agree wholeheartedly. Confidence is the key and there are so many similarities to last season too. Keep this going and we can build a foundation where we can now start adding quality to the quantity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Gabby created two goals and was a threat that Liverpool feared. Holt ran around and did what we expected him to do and Liverpool also knew what to expect and dealt with him comfortably. Exactly, our game was significantly reduced on his appearance. The pace and movement we had was worrying them, Holt was not the right player to be introduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 I've never, ever, ever seen Emile Heskey show any sort of technical ability as per Holt's cute flick against Liverpool. Creating that sort of space for someone to run into alone is valuable enough. I was impressed because I thought he'd be much more immobile. I love the pointless stat quoting by the way. Did you see that Holt had more touches, won more tackles and committed less fouls than Gabby did against Liverpool?Not sure they're pointless stats. He's a striker, we need him to be involved, hold up the ball and be a threat. He kept the ball 5 times and won 1 header.He attempted more passes, had more touches and won more headers than Agbonlahor. Who would you rather have in the side?Gabby isn't in there to win headers and hold the ball up. He's there to provide an outlet, to take players on and try to create chances.So Holt offers us something different?Than gabby? Of course. Did we need something different to gabby? Is that something different better than what gabby offers?Some games it will be better, some games it won't, its different. He didn't plan to bring him on for gabby yesterday, injury forced it. He'll win us more points than he'll lose us. I really don't see anything to be negative about the signing. Not sure how you can say that. The fact we replaced gabby with such an inferior player played a part in us not getting all 3 points. Whichever of our attackers holt replaces he is an inferior option to them and we are weaker having him on the pitch over any of them. So how can you confidently predict he'll win more points than lose? Oh! so now he was indirectly the cause that cost us all three points - funny I thought you and many others were confident we wouldn't get a point against Liverpool seeing we are shite. I am glad that some of you lot re not managing our team and have gained your indepth knowledge from many a computer game that is Championship Manager and the like. He was not 'fat', 'lazy' blah blah blah. If you lot (not aimed at any individual) seem to know so much - how do you know bringing on someone else would have resulted in a different result? Oh! I forget - we are all experts in this field - we know how to man manage and motivate - I can see that from where I sit in the upper holte. One of our own make a sloppy pass and the moans go up and the slagging off starts - and don't say it doesn't or you have a right to do so. The players (manager included) have a duty to perform and we as SUPPORTERS have a duty to encourage support and breed confidence in the players - not moan at every mistake. Jeez - the positivity didn't last long and reasoned debate for that matter too. Ready for the flaming because I dared to criticise the fans ( I won't call them supporters because support has a totally different meaning in my dictionary). Iv'e not been a fan personally - I have been a supporter for 53 years Actually before the game I said I thought benteke would be unplayable and we might surprise liverpool like we did against city. The rest of the post is just a quite ridiculous rant against fans who's opinions you don't like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chappy Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 I think the intention would have been to bring him on for Weimann on around 75 minutes rather than for Gabby earlier on. As much as I'd like to see more of Helenius I really don't think 2-1 up at Anfield with Liverpool coming back into the game would have been the right time. I'm not sure bringing Albrighton on at that moment would have been better than bringing Holt on either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 I think albrighton would have offered that bit more pace and option out wide. Would have helped us stretch Liverpool more and continue in the way we were playing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilchard Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 I think albrighton would have offered that bit more pace and option out wide. Would have helped us stretch Liverpool more and continue in the way we were playing. Agreed - however....we got an unexpected point against a side much better than us - so whilst we can pick at substitutions etc - clearly something out there worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Oh completely agree. At the end of the day we got a good result and it was a good performance. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electric Avenue Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 He's been with us what 3 days and we have 70 pages on the big man. Impressive 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted January 19, 2014 Author Share Posted January 19, 2014 (edited) If anything, it looks like he'll be able to do a good job towards the end of matches, holding up play and such when we're winning tight games. Edited January 19, 2014 by samjp26 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 it looks like he'll be able to do a good job towards the end of matches, holding up play and such when we're winning tight games. I keep reading about his hold up play. In nearly a half of football he held the ball up and kept it 5 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chappy Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 I think albrighton would have offered that bit more pace and option out wide. Would have helped us stretch Liverpool more and continue in the way we were playing. I see where you're coming from but we already had Weimann and Benteke (those two in particular) clearly becoming agitated at the amount of 50-50 decisions going in favour of Liverpool. Albrighton is known for similar. Holt was a good option as a steadying influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVTuco Posted January 19, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted January 19, 2014 Did a sweet back heel in the 2nd half for delph who crossed the ball into the box but no one got on the end of it. Yes, that was a clever and skilfull bit of play that should've resulted in a goal. He did fine, but he is slow and glumsy. Hope he is good in the locker room. Slow and clumsy...did you miss the above backheel which therefore contradicts the point you make? No, that was a good play. Just like I said in the match thread. However, I maintain he is what I said. There's no question. It doesn't mean he couldn't be useful in some situations and in some games. But for counter attacking??? My feeling is he was brought in mostly to mentor and bring calmness to our young squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Did a sweet back heel in the 2nd half for delph who crossed the ball into the box but no one got on the end of it. Yes, that was a clever and skilfull bit of play that should've resulted in a goal. He did fine, but he is slow and glumsy. Hope he is good in the locker room. Slow and clumsy...did you miss the above backheel which therefore contradicts the point you make? No, that was a good play. Just like I said in the match thread. However, I maintain he is what I said. There's no question. It doesn't mean he couldn't be useful in some situations and in some games. But for counter attacking??? My feeling is he was brought in mostly to mentor and bring calmness to our young squad. Agree with this! The team (on form ofcourse) is much to pacey for a player like Holt. Visually slowed the play down yesterday, though I think he can still do a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickjacobjr Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 I thought he had a decent game when he came on worked hard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Another absolutely pointless debate going on here. Whether some like it or not, Holt is for now a Villa player and even though I didn't agree with bringing him in, I will now support him till proved otherwise. Introducing Heskey into the debate is stupid IMO and just shows how far some will go to build up an argument. This forum is increasingly only about discussing the negatives. Yesterday the first half was the best football Villa have played for a long, long time and we got a point from a top 4 team when many, maybe most of us were expecting Villa to get stuffed. Yesterday will have had a huge impact on the squads confidence and maybe Holt can help even more to build their confidence simply by being around. I have no idea whether he will contribute significantly on the pitch and have my doubts but yesterday told me very little one way or the other. He obviously isn't part of our long term future plans but if he can help steady the ship or even do as Robbie Keane did and contribute a couple of goals I will be satisfied for now. Great post, it certainly isn't a 'meltdown'signing but I think (given our young squad) Holt could have just a bigger impact off the pitch that he does on it. I mean that as a compliment btw, certainly not a criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One For The Road Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I thought he had a decent game when he came on worked hard Funny that because I thought he looked piss poor. I am not against the signing as cover until the end of the season and appreciate that he may be good to have around the dressing room, but to me looked Championship all over when he came on. Still, I will get behind him as he is a Villa player for now, I just hope he does better in the future than he did yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 thought he did ok when he came on, looks like lacking fitness so maybe a reserve game before WBA match to get some sharpness and then hope eh does that word removed Olsson to become a Villa hero 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts