foreveryoung Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 They'll be questions marks over most of the squad. Saying he's undecided probably means just that. We won't know if Gil was set to play against Burnley so only time will tell. He looked a good player but I think he's becoming better every time he doesn't play. We have seen his quality, e.g the goal he scored, his dribbling with the ball. Its not a case of getting better everytime he doesn't play. The limited time he has played, for me he looked better than Weimann, Gabby and is definately on par if not better than Zog (an I do rate Zog). So we don't need to justify his qualtiy, its not as though he was shit and is now better since he hasn't played (i.e Bent), not at all. It's looking like if you rate Sherwood 100% you believe he has made the right decision not playing Gil. The guys who still have reservations are not so biased can see its a bad move not to give Gil his chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 They'll be questions marks over most of the squad. Saying he's undecided probably means just that. We won't know if Gil was set to play against Burnley so only time will tell. He looked a good player but I think he's becoming better every time he doesn't play. We have seen his quality, e.g the goal he scored, his dribbling with the ball. Its not a case of getting better everytime he doesn't play. The limited time he has played, for me he looked better than Weimann, Gabby and is definately on par if not better than Zog (an I do rate Zog). So we don't need to justify his qualtiy, its not as though he was shit and is now better since he hasn't played (i.e Bent), not at all. It's looking like if you rate Sherwood 100% you believe he has made the right decision not playing Gil. The guys who still have reservations are not so biased can see its a bad move not to give Gil his chance. I don't rate Sherwood 100%, but his job was to somehow get the team playing much, much better than it did under Lambert, and to somehow stay up. He achieved this using the players he thought would best do the job, and that didn't include Gil. Yes, Gil possibly is better than some of the players picked, but Sherwood possibly saw that the players he was picking were better for the way he wanted to play, to achieve survival. So, next season is a different kettle of fish altogether. If Gil stays, and isn't injured, I'm sure he'll get his chance. Hopefully we'll buy better better defenders and improve the team all round so Sherwood feels more confident in playing the "icing on the cake" players. When we beat Arsenal, we'll need a big squad for Europe, and would need Gil then too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dn1982 Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 They'll be questions marks over most of the squad. Saying he's undecided probably means just that. We won't know if Gil was set to play against Burnley so only time will tell. He looked a good player but I think he's becoming better every time he doesn't play. We have seen his quality, e.g the goal he scored, his dribbling with the ball. Its not a case of getting better everytime he doesn't play. The limited time he has played, for me he looked better than Weimann, Gabby and is definately on par if not better than Zog (an I do rate Zog). So we don't need to justify his qualtiy, its not as though he was shit and is now better since he hasn't played (i.e Bent), not at all. It's looking like if you rate Sherwood 100% you believe he has made the right decision not playing Gil. The guys who still have reservations are not so biased can see its a bad move not to give Gil his chance. I don't rate Sherwood 100%, but his job was to somehow get the team playing much, much better than it did under Lambert, and to somehow stay up. He achieved this using the players he thought would best do the job, and that didn't include Gil. Yes, Gil possibly is better than some of the players picked, but Sherwood possibly saw that the players he was picking were better for the way he wanted to play, to achieve survival. So, next season is a different kettle of fish altogether. If Gil stays, and isn't injured, I'm sure he'll get his chance. Hopefully we'll buy better better defenders and improve the team all round so Sherwood feels more confident in playing the "icing on the cake" players. When we beat Arsenal, we'll need a big squad for Europe, and would need Gil then too. That's exactly my thoughts. Sherwoods stated this yet people ignore that and the fact we were playing well and getting the results needed. I back Sherwood as he's our manager and at the moment he's doing exactly what he came to do and more only time will tell if he can continue to do so. Next year it'll be his squad I hope Gil can impress him enough to get in the side but Sherwoods done enough for me to be able to make those decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isaid Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Theres probably something going on between the manager and the player. Its also likely that Gil was centre of attention for Lambert and took offence to Sherwood giving more importance to Benteke, Delph, Sinclair etc . We dont know all that goes on in training either. Maybe Sherwood doesnt feel Gil is trying his best. One way or another it will be resolved sooner or later. Im sure there must be a good reason why he isnt playing. Would a manager deliberately try to get rid of a player who would make a positive contribution without any good reasoning and in turn hurt his own chances? Its unlikely. In any case people jumping on the managers back and some £%"%$ actually wanting him out over this Gil thing...thats just not intelligent. We have a manager who has just saved us from relegation and got us to the FA Cup Final, and we want him gone already beThe level of importance between the two is there for all to see. Hopefully it just a case of injuries and no time for 'icing on the cake' players until the new season starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingman Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Its obvious we have been resting him for 3 months for the FA Cup Final! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Got to love the dedication to the cause on here: "If Gil doesn't play against Burnley, he's finished at Villa and it's a huge mistake by Sherwood!" On finding out he's injured: "Well he wouldn't have played anyway, he's finished at Villa, huge mistake by Sherwood!" So out of interest, he has been injured since that U21 game but was pictured in full training in the build up to the Burnley game? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 They'll be questions marks over most of the squad. Saying he's undecided probably means just that. We won't know if Gil was set to play against Burnley so only time will tell. He looked a good player but I think he's becoming better every time he doesn't play. We have seen his quality, e.g the goal he scored, his dribbling with the ball. Its not a case of getting better everytime he doesn't play. The limited time he has played, for me he looked better than Weimann, Gabby and is definately on par if not better than Zog (an I do rate Zog). So we don't need to justify his qualtiy, its not as though he was shit and is now better since he hasn't played (i.e Bent), not at all. It's looking like if you rate Sherwood 100% you believe he has made the right decision not playing Gil. The guys who still have reservations are not so biased can see its a bad move not to give Gil his chance. I don't rate Sherwood 100%, but his job was to somehow get the team playing much, much better than it did under Lambert, and to somehow stay up. He achieved this using the players he thought would best do the job, and that didn't include Gil. Yes, Gil possibly is better than some of the players picked, but Sherwood possibly saw that the players he was picking were better for the way he wanted to play, to achieve survival. So, next season is a different kettle of fish altogether. If Gil stays, and isn't injured, I'm sure he'll get his chance. Hopefully we'll buy better better defenders and improve the team all round so Sherwood feels more confident in playing the "icing on the cake" players. When we beat Arsenal, we'll need a big squad for Europe, and would need Gil then too. That's exactly my thoughts. Sherwoods stated this yet people ignore that and the fact we were playing well and getting the results needed. I back Sherwood as he's our manager and at the moment he's doing exactly what he came to do and more only time will tell if he can continue to do so. Next year it'll be his squad I hope Gil can impress him enough to get in the side but Sherwoods done enough for me to be able to make those decisions. Doesn't explain why he wasn't even in the squad for Burnley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 (edited) Doesn't explain why he wasn't even in the squad for Burnley. BTW, welcome back, "foreveryoung". Missed ya! Are you now in a position either to validate or withdraw your claim that Sherwood said in an interview that Kozak and Gil were to be sold in the summer? Edited May 25, 2015 by briny_ear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 They'll be questions marks over most of the squad. Saying he's undecided probably means just that. We won't know if Gil was set to play against Burnley so only time will tell. He looked a good player but I think he's becoming better every time he doesn't play. We have seen his quality, e.g the goal he scored, his dribbling with the ball. Its not a case of getting better everytime he doesn't play. The limited time he has played, for me he looked better than Weimann, Gabby and is definately on par if not better than Zog (an I do rate Zog). So we don't need to justify his qualtiy, its not as though he was shit and is now better since he hasn't played (i.e Bent), not at all. It's looking like if you rate Sherwood 100% you believe he has made the right decision not playing Gil. The guys who still have reservations are not so biased can see its a bad move not to give Gil his chance. I don't rate Sherwood 100%, but his job was to somehow get the team playing much, much better than it did under Lambert, and to somehow stay up. He achieved this using the players he thought would best do the job, and that didn't include Gil. Yes, Gil possibly is better than some of the players picked, but Sherwood possibly saw that the players he was picking were better for the way he wanted to play, to achieve survival. So, next season is a different kettle of fish altogether. If Gil stays, and isn't injured, I'm sure he'll get his chance. Hopefully we'll buy better better defenders and improve the team all round so Sherwood feels more confident in playing the "icing on the cake" players. When we beat Arsenal, we'll need a big squad for Europe, and would need Gil then too. Perfectly said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Got to love the dedication to the cause on here: "If Gil doesn't play against Burnley, he's finished at Villa and it's a huge mistake by Sherwood!" On finding out he's injured: "Well he wouldn't have played anyway, he's finished at Villa, huge mistake by Sherwood!" So out of interest, he has been injured since that U21 game but was pictured in full training in the build up to the Burnley game? Well even if he was in such a picture, it's obviously possible to do certain things in training without being fully fit. Or do you think that people are either "injured" or "fit" with nothing in between? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Got to love the dedication to the cause on here: "If Gil doesn't play against Burnley, he's finished at Villa and it's a huge mistake by Sherwood!" On finding out he's injured: "Well he wouldn't have played anyway, he's finished at Villa, huge mistake by Sherwood!" So out of interest, he has been injured since that U21 game but was pictured in full training in the build up to the Burnley game? Well even if he was in such a picture, it's obviously possible to do certain things in training without being fully fit. Or do you think that people are either "injured" or "fit" with nothing in between? Yep, pretty daft thing to say. Perfect example is Kozak, able to train but not ready to play a part yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted May 25, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted May 25, 2015 Got to love the dedication to the cause on here: "If Gil doesn't play against Burnley, he's finished at Villa and it's a huge mistake by Sherwood!" On finding out he's injured: "Well he wouldn't have played anyway, he's finished at Villa, huge mistake by Sherwood!" So out of interest, he has been injured since that U21 game but was pictured in full training in the build up to the Burnley game? Well even if he was in such a picture, it's obviously possible to do certain things in training without being fully fit. Or do you think that people are either "injured" or "fit" with nothing in between? Yep, pretty daft thing to say. Perfect example is Kozak, able to train but not ready to play a part yet. Hardly a perfect example, Kozak broke his leg and has been injured for 18months. It was always going to take him longer than other players to recover from injury. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Got to love the dedication to the cause on here: "If Gil doesn't play against Burnley, he's finished at Villa and it's a huge mistake by Sherwood!" On finding out he's injured: "Well he wouldn't have played anyway, he's finished at Villa, huge mistake by Sherwood!" So out of interest, he has been injured since that U21 game but was pictured in full training in the build up to the Burnley game? Well even if he was in such a picture, it's obviously possible to do certain things in training without being fully fit. Or do you think that people are either "injured" or "fit" with nothing in between? Yep, pretty daft thing to say. Perfect example is Kozak, able to train but not ready to play a part yet. Hardly a perfect example, Kozak broke his leg and has been injured for 18months. It was always going to take him longer than other players to recover from injury. Broke his leg, then played on a broken leg. Ridiculous example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Got to love the dedication to the cause on here: "If Gil doesn't play against Burnley, he's finished at Villa and it's a huge mistake by Sherwood!" On finding out he's injured: "Well he wouldn't have played anyway, he's finished at Villa, huge mistake by Sherwood!" So out of interest, he has been injured since that U21 game but was pictured in full training in the build up to the Burnley game? Well even if he was in such a picture, it's obviously possible to do certain things in training without being fully fit. Or do you think that people are either "injured" or "fit" with nothing in between? Yep, pretty daft thing to say. Perfect example is Kozak, able to train but not ready to play a part yet. Hardly a perfect example, Kozak broke his leg and has been injured for 18months. It was always going to take him longer than other players to recover from injury. Broke his leg, then played on a broken leg. Ridiculous example. So, even with Kozak, you don't think there's a time where he'd be OK to do certain things in training, but not fit enough to start a match? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 (edited) Got to love the dedication to the cause on here: "If Gil doesn't play against Burnley, he's finished at Villa and it's a huge mistake by Sherwood!" On finding out he's injured: "Well he wouldn't have played anyway, he's finished at Villa, huge mistake by Sherwood!" So out of interest, he has been injured since that U21 game but was pictured in full training in the build up to the Burnley game? Well even if he was in such a picture, it's obviously possible to do certain things in training without being fully fit. Or do you think that people are either "injured" or "fit" with nothing in between? Yep, pretty daft thing to say. Perfect example is Kozak, able to train but not ready to play a part yet. Hardly a perfect example, Kozak broke his leg and has been injured for 18months. It was always going to take him longer than other players to recover from injury. Broke his leg, then played on a broken leg. Ridiculous example. So, even with Kozak, you don't think there's a time where he'd be OK to do certain things in training, but not fit enough to start a match? Really? No, clearly there is. I was just saying using Kozak as an example is bad though as 18 months out will lead to weeks and weeks of training before he's match fit. Gil disappeared when there was no sign of an injury. He's been injured since his last appearance? Don't buy it. He may be injured but he's clearly out of favour as well. Edited May 25, 2015 by StefanAVFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 The comparison is photographed in training but not fit to take part in a match. What's difficult to follow. I'm not comparing injuries or fitness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Well even if he was in such a picture, it's obviously possible to do certain things in training without being fully fit. Or do you think that people are either "injured" or "fit" with nothing in between? Well no, but I mean there is basis to suspect that he wasn't really still injured. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 And it's a rubbish comparison. Of course Kozak would be pictured in training without featuring in games. He broke his leg, twice. Surely the fact he was playing for the U21's in the first place is enough evidence to show he was initially out of favour, before getting injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 (edited) He has instead featured for Villa’s Under-21s, limping out of the match against Wolverhampton Wanderers at Molineux on April 6 with a dead leg. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3061648/Carles-Gil-hold-talks-Tim-Sherwood-Aston-Villa-future-end-season.html#ixzz3bA31QRIm Sherwood will assess Carles Gil, who came off against Wolves in the U21 clash on Wednesday with a deadleg. http://www.avfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10265~4626648,00.html That's one seriously dead leg he's suffered that's for sure. Edited May 25, 2015 by sexbelowsound 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazvfc Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 (edited) He has instead featured for Villa’s Under-21s, limping out of the match against Wolverhampton Wanderers at Molineux on April 6 with a dead leg. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3061648/Carles-Gil-hold-talks-Tim-Sherwood-Aston-Villa-future-end-season.html#ixzz3bA31QRIm Sherwood will assess Carles Gil, who came off against Wolves in the U21 clash on Wednesday with a deadleg. http://www.avfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10265~4626648,00.html That's one seriously dead leg he's suffered that's for sure. It can be. My mate I sit next to at villa had a dead leg in a match. He turned up yesterday with a walking stick. Turns out that said dead leg turned out to be serious - a torn muscle. So yea injuries can turn out to be worse after being as innocuous as a simple dead leg. could be nohing more than an injury and I'm not going to make up stuff to say he's out of favour thatca manager doesn't fancy him. Not long ago when Sinclair was out the team people said he was on his way back to Man city as the manager didn't want him as he was a lambert signing. I think myself Gil will be here next season. He will have preseason to 'get back in favour' if ever he was out of favour. Edited May 25, 2015 by nazvfc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts