Better or Worse?

[ahamaad]

Had DOL been in charge, we would have lost 3-0 and Barry wouldn't have been on the pitch

thats opinion and not fact, and its also not accurate. When he had an injury free team to pick from the corresponding fixture last season we won 4-0.

[LukeMoore]

Had DOL been in charge, we would have lost 3-0 and Barry wouldn't have been on the pitch

thats opinion and not fact, and its also not accurate. When he had an injury free team to pick from the corresponding fixture last season we won 4-0.

comparing exact results against teams last season to the results this season will not help your argument that things are worse.

[Faust]

Had DOL been in charge, we would have lost 3-0 and Barry wouldn't have been on the pitch.

What absolute rubbish.

Really? The way I remember it, apart from in the derby games (where we picked up 10 of our 35 points) we had very little fight at all and looked completely incapable of turning a game round after going behind.

There were TEN games last season when we shipped three or more goals - two of those games, unforgivably, were against Wycombe and Doncaster.

This season, there have been six games when we've conceded three. More importantly, we've come from behind to win or rescue a point against Reading, Chelsea, Tottenham, Boro, Portsmouth, and Everton - and we threatened to do the same against Reading away and Newcastle away also.

With the possible exception of the games against Man City and Liverpool, I haven't seen us just roll over against anyone - we've given everyone some kind of a challenge.

But we all see things differently.

[Faust]

Had DOL been in charge, we would have lost 3-0 and Barry wouldn't have been on the pitch

thats opinion and not fact, and its also not accurate. When he had an injury free team to pick from the corresponding fixture last season we won 4-0.

What's that? My suggestion that we would have caved in and lost 3-0 had O'Leary been in charge last night is not fact?

Thanks for pointing that out, mate.

[ahamaad]

Had DOL been in charge, we would have lost 3-0 and Barry wouldn't have been on the pitch

thats opinion and not fact, and its also not accurate. When he had an injury free team to pick from the corresponding fixture last season we won 4-0.

What's that? My suggestion that we would have caved in and lost 3-0 had O'Leary been in charge last night is not fact?

Thanks for pointing that out, mate.

You made it sound like it was. As if your word was the only word out there, whatever newspaper you claim to represent.

[Faust]

Is that a fact?

last season we did seem to roll over and die at times and it was very rare that DOL would make tactical changes at half time to have a positive impact so i don't think it's crazy to suggest we would have lost by a few goals last night.

You're right - it's not crazy in the slightest. We conceded 55 goals last season.

Did you know that's the worst defensive record we'd had since the 94-95 season?

[Faust]

Had DOL been in charge, we would have lost 3-0 and Barry wouldn't have been on the pitch

thats opinion and not fact, and its also not accurate. When he had an injury free team to pick from the corresponding fixture last season we won 4-0.

What's that? My suggestion that we would have caved in and lost 3-0 had O'Leary been in charge last night is not fact?

Thanks for pointing that out, mate.

You made it sound like it was. As if your word was the only word out there, whatever newspaper you claim to represent.

How could my claim about a completely hypothetical situation be anything other than an opinion?

Still - if it'll make life easier, I'll add an "IMHO" to any statements of opinion from now on. I think that's a bit of a waste of time, IMHO, and IMHO it shouldn't be necessary, but it's important to try and keep the peace when discussing things online IMHO.

[OldFart]

Had DOL been in charge, we would have lost 3-0 and Barry wouldn't have been on the pitch

thats opinion and not fact, and its also not accurate. When he had an injury free team to pick from the corresponding fixture last season we won 4-0.

What's that? My suggestion that we would have caved in and lost 3-0 had O'Leary been in charge last night is not fact?

Thanks for pointing that out, mate.

You made it sound like it was. As if your word was the only word out there, whatever newspaper you claim to represent.

Nothing new there.

Changing the subject, if one may, Faust, how do you rate our attacking prowess so far this season by the way? 3 against Leicester, 3 against... erm, erm, ah well, I guess they may have got a few in some friendly game. Of course, if DOL had still been in charge no doubt we wouldn't just gave got 1s and 2s, we'd have minus quantities in the "for" column, correct? Too much West Brom, too much Morrissey and too much lager IMHO.

FWIW I don't think it's a problem of DOL, MON or whoever the manager may be.

[PauloBarnesi]

Things are better in some ways this season, worse in others, though the general feeling is that we have more cause for optimism than pessimism. Generally I think we are a harder team to beat, and in some ways a more consistent team. This isn’t a fantastic thing as we seem to draw alot, we should have won three or four more games at home.

I ve seen the team more times than last year; I ve seen an impressive display; West Ham (A). Some ok displays; Charlton (H). Some typically medicore Villa performances; Watford (H), Fulham (A) and some god damm awful performances; Charlton (A). But nothing compares to the nadir of Arsenal (A) last year. That is the worse I have ever seen Villa. Much much worse than the so called worse Villa manager of the last ten years (Yes GTII) ever put out.

[NurembergVillan]

We got a few good hidings last year. Cant say that this season.

[ml1dch]

But nothing compares to the nadir of Arsenal (A) last year. That is the worse I have ever seen Villa. Much much worse than the so called worse Villa manager of the last ten years (Yes GTII) ever put out.

In addition to the above, if we were to make a list of the five worst performances of the last three years, I do think that all of them would be under DOL. This year's home game against Man City would probably squeeze into the Top 10.

[Faust]

You made it sound like it was. As if your word was the only word out there, whatever newspaper you claim to represent.

Nothing new there.

Miaow!

Changing the subject, if one may, Faust, how do you rate our attacking prowess so far this season by the way? 3 against Leicester, 3 against... erm, erm, ah well, I guess they may have got a few in some friendly game. Of course, if DOL had still been in charge no doubt we wouldn't just gave got 1s and 2s, we'd have minus quantities in the "for" column, correct? Too much West Brom, too much Morrissey and too much lager IMHO.

Since Carew, Young and Maloney arrived, I think we've started to look a lot better. Certainly, in spells, we've really put teams under pressure - unfortunately, a lot of possession and neat approach play hasn't translated into goals. I think we'll "click" at some point, though.

Across the course of the season, we certainly don't have much to crow about. No-one's received a stuffing from us. West Ham should have. Bolton and Newcastle could have. But it hasn't happened and no-one's going to dispute that: you just need to look at the scorelines.

But, I don't think we disagree on this. What we do seem to disagree about is the defensive frailties of last year's team: would you care to explain why you think it's nonsense to suggest that the manager who led us to our worst defensive record in ten years would also have been in charge of a capitulation last night?

[runetune]

I've put this year being better - just.

Sure nothing in it as far as points go, but.......

We've taken points off the main clubs at some point.

While we've had a couple of losses that were pretty horrendous to watch, so far *and god I hope I am not tempting fate by typing this* we haven't had an absolute mauling *West Spam and Doncaster spring to mind especially*.

Finally, a game like yesterday we would have just lost once we got behind. I never felt last year once we were behind we were ever likely to get back even a point, and while its not been the same for every game this year, at least we've tried to fight back at times this season.

[OldFart]

What we do seem to disagree about is the defensive frailties of last year's team: would you care to explain why you think it's nonsense to suggest that the manager who led us to our worst defensive record in ten years would also have been in charge of a capitulation last night?

Spell-checkers are great but... I never said that. I said* the manager who led us to our worst defensive record in ten years wouldn't have been in charge of a capitulation last night.

* Only I didn't say that (sometimes you manage to put words in people's mouths, sometimes you don't). I simply said that your AFFIRMATION was rubbish. Since when you have stated that it was just an opinion. In fact it was a supposition. Anyway, I've now answered your last post. Shan't do it twice!

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

This idea that we've got more fight keeps being trotted out.

If you read the things written on here, you'd think e never, ever fought our way back into games last season (except the five times in the league that we came back to draw & the other time we went on to win) Never, Ever! No fightback you see.

How many times have we done it this season? Oh, six to draw and one to win. So about the same then!

And what about letting teams back in to draw/ lose.....3/2 last season and 6/1 this season.

So we're marginally better at pulling games back, but we're now more likely to allow the other team back in.

Fight/resolve works in two ways - coming back in when you're behind and fighting to stop the opposition coming back into it.

[LukeMoore]

This idea that we've got more fight keeps being trotted out.

If you read the things written on here, you'd think e never, ever fought our way back into games last season (except the five times in the league that we came back to draw & the other time we went on to win) Never, Ever! No fightback you see.

How many times have we done it this season? Oh, six to draw and one to win. So about the same then!

And what about letting teams back in to draw/ lose.....3/2 last season and 6/1 this season.

So we're marginally better at pulling games back, but we're now more likely to allow the other team back in.

Fight/resolve works in two ways - coming back in when you're behind and fighting to stop the opposition coming back into it.

thats why stats shouldn't be the only source of an argument.

I've seen with my own eyes at games a better fighting spirit and determination to get back into the game once we've gone behind. And as others have said games like reading (a) newcastle (a) bolton (h) arsenal (h) won't appear on your stats because we didn't manage to bring it back but it doesn't mean that the commintment, fight and determination that was lacking last season wasn't shown during them

[LancsVillan]

Fighting without results is all well and good, the side in 1987 had plenty of fight but couldn't win a raffle if they held the only ticket.

[LukeMoore]

Fighting without results is all well and good, the side in 1987 had plenty of fight but couldn't win a raffle if they held the only ticket.

i agree we still lack quality in the team.

we are talking about improvements and the fighting spirit is an improvement. Once quality gets added it will be a good combination to have.

[villasquare]

Drawing Chelse in the carling cup ,Playing Manure 3 times in 3 weeks, then 4 games spaced out over 6/7 weeks have conspired against us to get any kind of run together. Long periods not playing is no good for any player. We have 7 games left with no big gaps in between, just watch us now improve.

[Faust]

What we do seem to disagree about is the defensive frailties of last year's team: would you care to explain why you think it's nonsense to suggest that the manager who led us to our worst defensive record in ten years would also have been in charge of a capitulation last night?

Spell-checkers are great but... I never said that. I said* the manager who led us to our worst defensive record in ten years wouldn't have been in charge of a capitulation last night.

Right: you thought it was nonsense (or rubbish, if you prefer) to suggest that O'Leary would have been in charge of a capitulation last night.

That's what I said.

But you haven't explained why you think that suggestion was rubbish.