Risso Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. I can now exclusively reveal why. The manager has chosen somebody to else to play instead. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put above Why is that even an issue? It's completely fine to question a managers' decisions. Generally, it's not done so much when the club is performing well - but it's still done. Some fans feel miffed about the exclusion of Carles Gil. That's the issue, not whether or not people are slagging off the messiah, Tim Sherwood. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSV Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 (edited) We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. I can now exclusively reveal why. The manager has chosen somebody to else to play instead.Wow your so cleverWe rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of.You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put aboveLike his internet bodyguards. Can't speak badly about the Messiah. We are aloud to have opinions and question his decisions for discussional purposes on a forum. Edited April 22, 2015 by KSV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isaid Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 I want him to play if for no other reason than that we owe him better after the way he's played for us so far. Not that he's likely to get a chance under this useless clown of a manager (I'm being 110% serious, possibly) Im 111% sure that you arent 110% serious. While Gil was good early on, the players who've replaced him like nzog and grealish have provided a lot more balance. Surely we cant complain about reaching an FA Cup Final, beating w.brom twice and spurs and liverpool back to back and Benteke scoring like hes the best striker in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. I can now exclusively reveal why. The manager has chosen somebody to else to play instead. Wow your so clever We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put above Like his internet bodyguards. Can't speak badly about the Messiah. We are aloud to have opinions and question his decisions for discussional purposes on a forum. I'm clever enough to know the difference between "your" and "you're", and "aloud" and "allowed". And if you're allowed an opinion, then aren't others allowed to question nonsense like "he's not playing Gil, in case Gil plays really well"? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Wow your so clever We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put above Like his internet bodyguards. Can't speak badly about the Messiah. We are aloud to have opinions and question his decisions for discussional purposes on a forum. The issue is that there doesn't seem to be any flexibility. There were valid questions about why he wasn't starting games, but surely over the past couple of months those questions have been answered by results on the pitch. The manager fancies others for whatever reason, it doesn't really matter why, and those "others" are doing the business. If given the choice between Grealish and Gil, based on what i have seen from both of them, I would chose Grealish. N'Zogbia is not so clear a choice, but they are different players. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myko Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Wow your so clever We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put above Like his internet bodyguards. Can't speak badly about the Messiah. We are aloud to have opinions and question his decisions for discussional purposes on a forum. The issue is that there doesn't seem to be any flexibility. There were valid questions about why he wasn't starting games, but surely over the past couple of months those questions have been answered by results on the pitch. The manager fancies others for whatever reason, it doesn't really matter why, and those "others" are doing the business. If given the choice between Grealish and Gil, based on what i have seen from both of them, I would chose Grealish Why is that? I'm genuinely curious. I love Grealish, and if one of the two had to leave I would choose it to be Jack that stayed - partly due to him coming through the academy/being a Villa lad and partly due to him being younger with possibly more potential. However, at this moment in time, I would argue (at the risk of being exiled from VT) that Gil has shown that he is at least as good, if not better, than Grealish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSV Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 (edited) We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. I can now exclusively reveal why. The manager has chosen somebody to else to play instead. Wow your so clever We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of.You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put aboveLike his internet bodyguards. Can't speak badly about the Messiah. We are aloud to have opinions and question his decisions for discussional purposes on a forum. I'm clever enough to know the difference between "your" and "you're", and "aloud" and "allowed". And if you're allowed an opinion, then aren't others allowed to question nonsense like "he's not playing Gil, in case Gil plays really well"? Resulting to spelling police. Well played. Im not writing an essay and i use my phone to post so I'm lazy. It's not nonsense it's your opinion. Just how my opinion is you speak nonsense too. As I said move on and get over it. Edited April 22, 2015 by KSV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 I think a few have missed the point. Of course you can have opinions and question the manager. No ones jumped on that. Its the ridiculous theories (designed to have a go at Sherwood) and the fact a comment that said I'd rather gill than Sherwood next season got about 11 likes that people have jumped on. Question away, make ridiculous digs because you don't like the managers decision while the team are doing well and people are bound to respond. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Well, I don't think you need to worry any further, I'm sure anyone with any unorthodox opinions has been thoroughly ground into submission at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Well, I don't think you need to worry any further, I'm sure anyone with any unorthodox opinions has been thoroughly ground into submission at this point. I think people should post what ever opinions they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Wow your so clever We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put above Like his internet bodyguards. Can't speak badly about the Messiah. We are aloud to have opinions and question his decisions for discussional purposes on a forum. The issue is that there doesn't seem to be any flexibility. There were valid questions about why he wasn't starting games, but surely over the past couple of months those questions have been answered by results on the pitch. The manager fancies others for whatever reason, it doesn't really matter why, and those "others" are doing the business. If given the choice between Grealish and Gil, based on what i have seen from both of them, I would chose Grealish Why is that? I'm genuinely curious. I love Grealish, and if one of the two had to leave I would choose it to be Jack that stayed - partly due to him coming through the academy/being a Villa lad and partly due to him being younger with possibly more potential. However, at this moment in time, I would argue (at the risk of being exiled from VT) that Gil has shown that he is at least as good, if not better, than Grealish. not much between Gil and Grealish IMO, both have had good games and both have played really really badly at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Well, I don't think you need to worry any further, I'm sure anyone with any unorthodox opinions has been thoroughly ground into submission at this point. Unorthodox opinions should be welcomed and discussed, ridiculous theories will always attract a strong response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Wow your so clever We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put above Like his internet bodyguards. Can't speak badly about the Messiah. We are aloud to have opinions and question his decisions for discussional purposes on a forum. The issue is that there doesn't seem to be any flexibility. There were valid questions about why he wasn't starting games, but surely over the past couple of months those questions have been answered by results on the pitch. The manager fancies others for whatever reason, it doesn't really matter why, and those "others" are doing the business. If given the choice between Grealish and Gil, based on what i have seen from both of them, I would chose Grealish Why is that? I'm genuinely curious. I love Grealish, and if one of the two had to leave I would choose it to be Jack that stayed - partly due to him coming through the academy/being a Villa lad and partly due to him being younger with possibly more potential. However, at this moment in time, I would argue (at the risk of being exiled from VT) that Gil has shown that he is at least as good, if not better, than Grealish. Because I think Grealish has much more natural talent and a much higher ceiling and should be afforded the time to progress. I also believe that he produced a performance on Sunday that was head and shoulders above anything Gil showed in his brief stint and I also see in Grealish a player completely in tune with his team mates, whilst for whatever reason Gil struggled to "fit". I accept that a lot of that was down to poor management, but I can only report on what I see. I do like Gil and I think he has a good future in the game. He's clearly carrying a lot of natural talent himself. But I questioned his decision making at the time, I also questioned his work rate and I think Grealish despite being the younger of the two is the more mature player. As I said, I do like Gil. That hasn't come across in this thread for a while because we seem to discuss the managers decisions more than the player himself! I do hope we see more of him towards the end of this season and in to next. Just not at the expense of Grealish unless his form really nosedives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicho Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisVillan Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Wow, messiah jibes already? That didn't take long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myko Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Wow your so clever We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of.You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put aboveLike his internet bodyguards. Can't speak badly about the Messiah. We are aloud to have opinions and question his decisions for discussional purposes on a forum. The issue is that there doesn't seem to be any flexibility. There were valid questions about why he wasn't starting games, but surely over the past couple of months those questions have been answered by results on the pitch. The manager fancies others for whatever reason, it doesn't really matter why, and those "others" are doing the business. If given the choice between Grealish and Gil, based on what i have seen from both of them, I would chose Grealish Why is that? I'm genuinely curious. I love Grealish, and if one of the two had to leave I would choose it to be Jack that stayed - partly due to him coming through the academy/being a Villa lad and partly due to him being younger with possibly more potential. However, at this moment in time, I would argue (at the risk of being exiled from VT) that Gil has shown that he is at least as good, if not better, than Grealish. Because I think Grealish has much more natural talent and a much higher ceiling and should be afforded the time to progress. I also believe that he produced a performance on Sunday that was head and shoulders above anything Gil showed in his brief stint and I also see in Grealish a player completely in tune with his team mates, whilst for whatever reason Gil struggled to "fit". I accept that a lot of that was down to poor management, but I can only report on what I see. I do like Gil and I think he has a good future in the game. He's clearly carrying a lot of natural talent himself. But I questioned his decision making at the time, I also questioned his work rate and I think Grealish despite being the younger of the two is the more mature player. As I said, I do like Gil. That hasn't come across in this thread for a while because we seem to discuss the managers decisions more than the player himself! I do hope we see more of him towards the end of this season and in to next. Just not at the expense of Grealish unless his form really nosedives. Fair. I don't think I can agree or argue as I don't feel I've seen enough of either. However, I do wonder whether Jack is capable of producing an assist such as the Chelsea game or a goal such as against Bournemouth... I don't feel as though (and this is no big gripe against him, as he hasn't had enough of a chance to show himself yet) Jack has shown the greatest amount of end product as of yet. One thing is for sure though and that is that these two have individually shown some of the best bits of technical ability I've personally seen from a Villa player and I look forward to seeing how they both develop :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSV Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 (edited) I agree he shouldnt be in the side at the moment as we are winning but when our starting side is subbed i would prefer Gil to replace Jack rather than Wiemann or even Cole. yes we are bringing up wild reasons as to why because Sherwood not rating him doesnt make sense especially when Tim first came in he praised Gil quite a bit and even picked him where as now he cant get off the bench. We havent had player with his techical ability in a long time and im sure Tim can keep us winning with Gil more involved... its not like Gil is the main reason for the side losing. As for the post about preferring Gil over Sherwood just highlight how much some of us want to see him play...and noone actually meant it..reading too much into it...i dont actually prefer Lambert to come back to play Gil. however if a new owner wanted to bring in Klopp......... Edited April 22, 2015 by KSV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Wow your so clever We rate him as a player and hes not getting games.. we are wondering why. End of. You missed out having a go at Sherwood. That's the issue, not what you've put above Like his internet bodyguards. Can't speak badly about the Messiah. We are aloud to have opinions and question his decisions for discussional purposes on a forum. The issue is that there doesn't seem to be any flexibility. There were valid questions about why he wasn't starting games, but surely over the past couple of months those questions have been answered by results on the pitch. The manager fancies others for whatever reason, it doesn't really matter why, and those "others" are doing the business. If given the choice between Grealish and Gil, based on what i have seen from both of them, I would chose Grealish Why is that? I'm genuinely curious. I love Grealish, and if one of the two had to leave I would choose it to be Jack that stayed - partly due to him coming through the academy/being a Villa lad and partly due to him being younger with possibly more potential. However, at this moment in time, I would argue (at the risk of being exiled from VT) that Gil has shown that he is at least as good, if not better, than Grealish. Because I think Grealish has much more natural talent and a much higher ceiling and should be afforded the time to progress. I also believe that he produced a performance on Sunday that was head and shoulders above anything Gil showed in his brief stint and I also see in Grealish a player completely in tune with his team mates, whilst for whatever reason Gil struggled to "fit". I accept that a lot of that was down to poor management, but I can only report on what I see. I do like Gil and I think he has a good future in the game. He's clearly carrying a lot of natural talent himself. But I questioned his decision making at the time, I also questioned his work rate and I think Grealish despite being the younger of the two is the more mature player. As I said, I do like Gil. That hasn't come across in this thread for a while because we seem to discuss the managers decisions more than the player himself! I do hope we see more of him towards the end of this season and in to next. Just not at the expense of Grealish unless his form really nosedives. What about the choice between Gil and N'Zogbia? Gil and Weimann? I know who I'd have, and I know who is the best player of those three. Think what sort of results we could be having if Gil was playing ahead of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 If we weren't winning games, not playing CG would seem a monumentally stupid thing to do, let's be honest. But we are, so we have to believe there's method in the madness, and just maybe there is (just don't ask me what it might be). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts