StefanAVFC Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Still waiting for the complaints too (and recent ones as well considering people are still banging on about it daily) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Still waiting for the complaints too (and recent ones as well considering people are still banging on about it daily) I'm not going to spend my day going through the last 10 match threads, this one and the Sherwood one. Risso already did a decent short summary of some mental posts about Sherwood/Gil a few pages back anyway. I do find it funny seeing a few posts about "Why does he bring Joe Cole on instead of Gil". Joe Cole has played less minutes than Gil under Sherwood. So seeing as people on here seemingly only care about how many minutes players accumulate (judging by the "why not bring him on" posts) then we should all get to the Joe Cole thread and have that debate there too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 (edited) Still waiting for the complaints too (and recent ones as well considering people are still banging on about it daily) I'm not going to spend my day going through the last 10 match threads, this one and the Sherwood one. Risso already did a decent short summary of some mental posts about Sherwood/Gil a few pages back anyway. I do find it funny seeing a few posts about "Why does he bring Joe Cole on instead of Gil". Joe Cole has played less minutes than Gil under Sherwood. So seeing as people on here seemingly only care about how many minutes players accumulate (judging by the "why not bring him on" posts) then we should all get to the Joe Cole thread and have that debate there too. Yeah there were some mental posts. Two. Minority. My point is the way some bang on about it, you'd think everyone was complaining. Really, it's a small minority. Joe Cole didn't look fantastic in his appearances under Lambert and he's not 22 years old. That point has been made numerous times so not sure of your point on the bolded. Edited April 30, 2015 by StefanAVFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 (edited) Granted it has been nowhere near as prevelant of late but not too long ago the amount of people going way overboard about the lack of Gil, even to the point of wanting Sherwood out, certainly seemed more than the small minority. Particularly in match threads if memory serves me correctly. Personally I have found it a little disappointing that he hasn't featured more but I have also been very impressed with recent performances, so have felt Sherwood's decision to play others instead has been vindicated. Edited April 30, 2015 by penguin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Granted it has been nowhere near as prevelant of late but not too long ago the amount of people going way overboard about the lack of Gil, even to the point of wanting Sherwood out, certainly seemed more than the small minority. Particularly in match threads if memory serves me correctly. Personally I have found it a little disappointing that he hasn't featured more but I have also been very impressed with recent performances, so have felt Sherwood's decision to play others has been vindicated. Very much this all over. As I mentioned, he isn't playing partly because of our good play of lately and also in part that he, IMO, is not a Sherwood player. Technically he has looked good, but Sherwood wants running and pace in his side. Gil doesn't offer either of those IMO. Given the amount of late goals we concede and that every Sherwood game, with the exception of Sunderland, has been close it's hardly shocking that he's putting out players that fit his type of player (in my view) on as substitutes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Granted it has been nowhere near as prevelant of late but not too long ago the amount of people going way overboard about the lack of Gil, even to the point of wanting Sherwood out, certainly seemed more than the small minority. Particularly in match threads if memory serves me correctly. Not that I agreed with people's reactions to him not playing, but 'not too long ago' it was more understandable as we lost to Newcastle and Swansea. Context is important. Now, hardly anybody is complaining and those who are aren't being taken seriously. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 (edited) Fair point, although it was also happening after we did the double over the Albion. So whilst I do agree that it was, somewhat understandable, at that particular time I personally believe it had little to do with the results. But as mentioned the overreactions now seem few and far between and most references of the tongue-in-cheek variety. Edited April 30, 2015 by penguin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 The main issue appears to be that comment. If that was made now, it would have been ridiculed and forgotten. It was made at a time when we aren't great under Sherwood. Certainly better than under Lambert. Context is important. Yes I think context is important. That ridiculous comment was made a couple of weeks after a new manager took over one of the worst performing sides in the league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 So reading the latest in this thread, it seems Sherwood has no bottle to play Gil, as we are winning football matches without him and would be a big risk to bring him in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 You're really not helping buddy! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillanousOne Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 (edited) It's "Reo-Coker's Law" whereby their reputation grows exponentially bigger than their time sat on the bench. R=B squared, where R = reputation and B = time out of the team. I really don't think it is. no-one is/should be saying Gil should replace anyone starting in the side no-one is/should be saying Gil has really proved anything in the shirt, yet everyone should acknowledge has had some time on the pitch where his close control, dribbling and technical qualities made him look like he had the potential to be quite some player for us. also worth acknowledging he got forward and retained possession at a time most of the rest of the team weren't doing that as we were struggling we have waited years for a creative midfielder, Ireland was the last to fail in the shirt, so maybe our need for Gil to succeed means some of us are overstating his talent or ability. But most just want him to be given a fair chance to impress, which in my opinion he hasn't yet had under Sherwood. He should make the bench at least. He does make the bench. only if we have a lot of injuries and he it doesn't look like Tim has any intention of playing him at the moment, i don't think that's in question. Edited April 30, 2015 by VillanousOne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 So reading the latest in this thread, it seems Sherwood has no bottle to play Gil, as we are winning football matches without him and would be a big risk to bring him in. Nothing to do with having the "bottle" to play him really, we are winning football matches and more importantly we are playing well. Sherwood has seemingly found a regular starting 11, bar injuries, that he believes is the most capable of keeping us in the Premier League. He sees them train on a daily basis, he has had a short time to get to know their characters and their skillsets, and based on those things he has chosen the team he sees most suited to our situation. I really don't understand why it is such a problem. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubberman Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 If we're winning with 10 to go and Grealish is tiring, I'm happy to see Young Joe Cole come on and use his experience to close things down. If we're a goal down I'd like to see Gil come on as I think he's more likely to spark something. I don't want to see Weimann come on at all. When we're safe / going into next season I'd really hope that Gil will get a bit more game time, but as things stand can't fault Tim's selections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 There's a story out saying Gil drove away from VP before the QPR match cuz he wasn't picked to start...If true, I guess we have our answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MessiWillSignForVilla Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 (edited) There's a story out saying Gil drove away from VP before the QPR match cuz he wasn't picked to start...If true, I guess we have our answer. Pretty sure that was disproved at the time with a pic of him next to the pitch. I think it was anyway. Edit: Looked back through this thread, no picture, but there was a tweet from Nick Mashiter, journo for the Independant, confirming he was in the players box, so the Mirror is full of bullshit. Also, why would they wait a month to report that, I doubt if it was true it would have been kept a secret, hell there were rumours at the time. Edited May 3, 2015 by MessiWillSignForVilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 I think it's safe to say sherwood will probably sell him come the summer which is rather odd considerinh he looks like a handy and tidy little player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 Would really like to see him get a run where Zog is playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 There's a story out saying Gil drove away from VP before the QPR match cuz he wasn't picked to start...If true, I guess we have our answer. Pretty sure that was disproved at the time with a pic of him next to the pitch. I think it was anyway. Edit: Looked back through this thread, no picture, but there was a tweet from Nick Mashiter, journo for the Independant, confirming he was in the players box, so the Mirror is full of bullshit. Also, why would they wait a month to report that, I doubt if it was true it would have been kept a secret, hell there were rumours at the time. Not necessarily. He could've driven off and then have been ordered to return for half-time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 If we're safe or near as after West Ham (not sure it's actually possible with Sunderland having an extra game) then a big clue will be whether he's involved in the Southampton and Burnley games. If he isn't he's finished here. It's a shame as he showed quality in let's remember was our worst run under Lambert which is saying something. Now in a team full of confidence going forward that is passing and moving he'd do well. I have no issue with him starting atm. I do however consider him one of the best 18 players at this club so he should still be getting on the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condimentalist Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 He should definitely be playing ahead of N'Zogbia, but there we are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts