Jump to content

Carles Gil


bose

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Doesn't mean a thing, I wish people would stop bringing this up like it does.

In some ways true, but sooner or later like all statistics, it does attain a significance that you can't ignore.

If you had theoretically large enough squad, if you were selecting and you could pick a team of 11 players who had only won games, or  a team of 11 players that had never been on a winning side, which would you pick? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Literally every one of our players haven't won since August.

Jordan Ayew had never been on the winning side in his Villa career. Does that preclude him from being our best player? Gareth Bale once famously went on a 24 game streak without being on the winning side. It's a pointless stat, especially for a team that never wins anyway.

 

Edit: So Ayew did start in our only win of the season but my point remains

Edited by Keyblade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't his greatest performance but he was sent out wide again. He's a big reason why we tend to dominate the lesser teams when he's playing. His movement off the ball.. He keeps possession and is always available for a pass. That second half team is close to our best. With traore on for Westwood and Richards for Hutton/lescott.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, KSV said:

Wasn't his greatest performance but he was sent out wide again. He's a big reason why we tend to dominate the lesser teams when he's playing. His movement off the ball.. He keeps possession and is always available for a pass. That second half team is close to our best. With traore on for Westwood and Richards for Hutton/lescott.

I dont think we have ever dominated a team when he has played or even when he isnt playing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't his greatest performance but he was sent out wide again. He's a big reason why we tend to dominate the lesser teams when he's playing. His movement off the ball.. He keeps possession and is always available for a pass. That second half team is close to our best. With traore on for Westwood and Richards for Hutton/lescott.

He started out wide when he came on because he's shown nowhere near enough of late to deserve that central spot over Veretout. When he moved central later on, he still didn't do enough.

Very tidy on the ball yet again, but his game awareness when he's not on it is dreadful at times.

I think the team that started the game is our best at present.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think him being used as a sub to try to shake things up if required is probably about right at the moment. Weirdly his stand out performances for me are more often from the bench when we're chasing the game. He is still pretty young and I think if you add up all his premier league minutes it probably amounts to about 10 or 11 games.

Still a good option to have and I feel he comes across well regarding his attitude and his general demeanour, not just on the pitch but with things like that recent Acorns visit etc. It doesn't help us much in our current predicament but I think he's one of the "good guys" and I guess for that, I can't help but like him. 

Edited by Shropshire Lad
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zatman said:

I dont think we have ever dominated a team when he has played or even when he isnt playing

We arguably dominated the game today, and maybe against Leicster as well, until something happened...

Edited by WooJung
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lengths people go to in order to justify Gil as a footballer..

He is an absolutely nothing footballer, I don't want neat and tidy, anybody can do that. I want goal(s), assist(s), cutting edge passing,beating a man.

He can't do any of those things. If he was called Charles Hill I wonder if people would see anything in him.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, rodders0223 said:

The lengths people go to in order to justify Gil as a footballer..

He is an absolutely nothing footballer, I don't want neat and tidy, anybody can do that. I want goal(s), assist(s), cutting edge passing,beating a man.

He can't do any of those things. If he was called Charles Hill I wonder if people would see anything in him.

Everybody can do neat and tidy and he can't pass or beat a man?

For realsies?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, rodders0223 said:

The lengths people go to in order to justify Gil as a footballer..

He is an absolutely nothing footballer, I don't want neat and tidy, anybody can do that. I want goal(s), assist(s), cutting edge passing,beating a man.

He can't do any of those things. If he was called Charles Hill I wonder if people would see anything in him.

Everybody can do neat and tidy and he can't pass or beat a man?

For realsies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry he is so NOT a NOTHING footballer (As someone above said), this, again, is an example of what I always say is one of the issues with our fans, fickle is a bloody understatement. I will admit he was not great yesterday, and the last time, but it could also have to do with nerves etc. He did not just become shite overnight. He has skill and a finish, to say he is a nothing footballer is hilarious to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only midfielder we have who tries to get in the box and support the forwards.Always looking to receive the ball on the edge of the area.He might not be top class, he needs to stregthen up, but he has a bit of the David Silva about him, and atm hes the better option in that role, for me, than Grealish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ROTTERDAM1982 said:

 but he has a bit of the David Silva about him, and atm hes the better option in that role, for me, than Grealish.

The only thing he as in common with Silva is they both have heads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â