The Tim Sherwood Thread

[VillaCas]

So what's the excuse for picking all the other players that were also awful but for game after game rather then one game?

I like Jack - he'll be a top talent - but what has he done so far that anyone else hasn't?  From the top of my head, I can remember one goal (Leicester, this season) and one assist (Liverpool, semi-final).  He's had some decent performances and some crap ones.  He's basically been in exactly the same boat as "other players".

I think he'll go on to be a lot better than most of what we currently have, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with protecting a young lad in the early stages of his career.  Lambert (FWIW) managed it pretty perfectly.  Sherwood thrust him in immediately and bigged him up (fair play Timmy) and we get media coverage over the summer and a more drained, less sharp Grealish so far this season.

Playing every minute of every game isn't necessarily for the best when you're a 19 year old kid.

 

                  Andy Gray.....Brian little.....Gary Shaw......Gareth Barry.......Trevor Francis......Wayne Rooney

                   Alan shearer...........

                   If you are good enough, you are old enough.

 

         

[jackbauer24]

You know it is quite likely that Sherwood isn't good enough AND our players aren't too! People seem to think changing the manager will make everything better, I highly doubt it.

Amavi is in improvement on last year's XI, as is Richards probably. Everyone else either was already here (Gil, Sinclair and Grealish), has had injury issues (Traore and Gana), struggled to settle (Ayew), isn't as good as what they're supposed to replace (Veretout & Gestede) or simply squad fillers or downright worse (Bunn, Ilori, Crespo and Lescott). Ultimately, regardless of the manager I think it's just a case this squad isn't good enough. We've tried cheap gambles and it hasn't paid off. The squad isn't stronger, the quality is just more evenly spread so small improvements in some positions are used to paper up cracks caused by significant regression in other areas.

Sherwood or someone else, this team is going down without investment in January. The fact is we came 17th last season and, personal issues aside, we'd kill to still have Cleverly, Delph and Benteke in our team. None of them have been improved on. Sherwood prefered Given too, so in his eyes we must have made ourselves weaker there as well. I'd prefer an over the hill, downward spiral highly paid Vlaar to Lescott too! 

[VillaCas]

I don't know if you can give him massive credit for it as surely anyone would have done the same, but Sherwood is responsible for giving Grealish his starting role. Maybe it was because he was ready, but then again he got to manage Benteke 'at the right time so was lucky' etc etc. I'm not a Sherwood fan but i'm not going to snatch away the small wins he has managed as manager.

that is the danger at present......he has done some weird things I.e. Leicester.....but some of the stuff the derogatory stuff is a figment of some fans imagination. I can only think, that it is manifested from a personal dislike for him and manufactured in to criticism of his work.

it seems, we have the ability to cut slack for a developing player, but not for a developing manager.

we have instances where the previous manager mumbled his way through interviews like a shrinking violet and that was criticised......now we gave one who is cocky and forthright and that too is criticised.

i think managers need far more time with certain elements of their job, some elements take longer than others....but to get the all singing all dancing manager it takes a lot longer than some of us are expecting.

we cannot survive on a constant serving of "manager bounce"

You continually come out with this management zen

Are you saying that you think Sherwood should stay or not?  If yes, and assuming we don't win anytime soon, when would enough be enough for you? Spurs? MC? Everton? Watford? Xmas? Next Season

You were at this yesterday with your "there is a much more intelligent solution" which when challenged you admitted that you didn't know what that would look like

Are you backing Sherwood or do you want him out??

                   

                   you are missing my point entirely, that is clear.

                   Our results are not what any of us want.....that bit is crystal.....the rest isn't so easy to explain.

 

                   We have a relatively inexperienced manager, an inexperienced team and to compound the problem most are from other leagues..... well, it wouldn't be stretching the bounds of compassion to say " can I have a bit of time"

                    I am not close enough to Tim Sherwood or his work at BMH to make the criticisms that some are.....I can only go on results and match day performances from what I have seen in the main its more to do with individual player errors, lack of leadership and lack of mental strength to take responsibility for the task of seeing a game through and securing a win.....that has been letting us down.....that could be more to do with the individual in question than the manager.

                    We could be getting rid of a good  up and coming manager due to the profoundly difficult circumstances we have found ourselves in....he too is developing.

                    I was one of those 99%'s that thought we had bought well in the summer, I must confess ( i have not given up on them) i am having second thoughts about how long this will take.

                    I am not from the camp that, just get anyone in as long as it isn't Sherwood, we HAVE to start developing things and move away from short termism, when it comes to our managers, we need continuity.

                    You challenge me for being nebulous towards Sherwoods position as manager, but that is reflected in so many variables he is having to deal with.

                    I say again, without apology, I don't know enough about what goes on at BMH.....someone who does might observe that he is doing everything that a good manager would do, conversely it could be a pile of poo, which would make my answer to you ...... easy.

                    You, tease me with my line of "intelligent solution" I was referring to the Top Management having the ability to see through smokescreens and Identify a good manager when the have one or not which ever the case maybe.....they must know what is going on behind the scenes and they should act accordingly......sack him or back him.

                    Managers must be held responsible for team results, we all agree on that, but they are not magicians, even the great SAF took a number of years for it to get right, but David Gill Knew what work was being done at carrington, despite the fans being uneasy with results.

                     Sometimes it takes big conkers to back a manager when results are suggesting you are Mad.....but only they will know or should know.

                     I hope I have been able to explain, why I am unsure about his exit or not, on the basis of results alone there would be one simple answer, if only life, even football life was so simple.

                     We haven't exactly been the envy of the football world in our efforts to recruit, players,managers etc.... we need to make that change.

 

Ps                The one thing i will refuse to do is lambast him on his personality and attempt to pass it off as his work......and criticise him for things that are simply conjecture. That for me is unhelpful, when we all want a solution.

                   

It's probably me but I have real difficulty understanding what you mean?  The best I can understand is that you feel it is the players who are to blame not the manager and have no opinion whether he should go or not and you are putting your faith in Fox to know when the time is right. 

I don't agree with you about short termism by the way - McLeish had longer than his acheivements warranted and Lambert had nearly three years (that's twice as long as the average prem manager gets). So were not changing managers every 5 minutes.

What appears on here is all opinion based on the parts of the situation we can see (games, interviews, etc).  If you're not a fan of conjecture a fan forum is probably not the ideal place for you.  The idea is that we state our opinions and mine is Sherwood will take us down - I imagine Fox will join me in that view around 5.00pm Saturday

 

[dounavilla]

Sherwood love a win.

[Brumstopdogs]

Right for me saturday is a must win no arguments its a must win. Tim needs to stick with his lineup stop changing it every bloody week. As it stands if the players are fit this is how i line up this week we attack attack attack.

                                Guzan

Hutton     richards    okore    amavi

                            Sanchez    gana

             Gil            ayew or veretout     grealish

                            Gestede

That team looks a bit lopsided to me.

[TRO]

I watched Stoke vs Swansea on monday and saw a midfield pairing of Charlie Adam and Glenn Wheelan control the game. Leicester regularly play Morgan, Huth, Simpson, Schlupp, Drinkwater, Vardy. Palace play Dann, Hangeland, Delaney, Gayle, McArthur, Puncheon. I see players such as James Collins, Marc Albrighton, Ryan Betrand and Steven Davies, who were deemed not good enough for us, playing well and making a positive impact at their current clubs.

I remember the uproar when we were linked with Lennon, Townsend and Huddlestone

                               This problem you touch on has been in evidence way before Tim Sherwood, not that it makes it better or different.....I remember talking about this very point outside the Aston social club and mooting that we should have gone for Robbie savage just after he left Leicester .....after a bunch of scowls my mate turning to me and said " that's what your up against here" they all want touch players.

                                 Something for me is wrong with the character of the players we are going for.

[Zatman]

Is Okore back?

my team would be if all fit for saturday

            Bunn

Hutton Richards Okore Amavi

          Sanchez Gana

Adama             Gil             Grealish

                 Gabby

[TRO]

I don't know if you can give him massive credit for it as surely anyone would have done the same, but Sherwood is responsible for giving Grealish his starting role. Maybe it was because he was ready, but then again he got to manage Benteke 'at the right time so was lucky' etc etc. I'm not a Sherwood fan but i'm not going to snatch away the small wins he has managed as manager.

that is the danger at present......he has done some weird things I.e. Leicester.....but some of the stuff the derogatory stuff is a figment of some fans imagination. I can only think, that it is manifested from a personal dislike for him and manufactured in to criticism of his work.

it seems, we have the ability to cut slack for a developing player, but not for a developing manager.

we have instances where the previous manager mumbled his way through interviews like a shrinking violet and that was criticised......now we gave one who is cocky and forthright and that too is criticised.

i think managers need far more time with certain elements of their job, some elements take longer than others....but to get the all singing all dancing manager it takes a lot longer than some of us are expecting.

we cannot survive on a constant serving of "manager bounce"

You continually come out with this management zen

Are you saying that you think Sherwood should stay or not?  If yes, and assuming we don't win anytime soon, when would enough be enough for you? Spurs? MC? Everton? Watford? Xmas? Next Season

You were at this yesterday with your "there is a much more intelligent solution" which when challenged you admitted that you didn't know what that would look like

Are you backing Sherwood or do you want him out??

                   

                   you are missing my point entirely, that is clear.

                   Our results are not what any of us want.....that bit is crystal.....the rest isn't so easy to explain.

 

                   We have a relatively inexperienced manager, an inexperienced team and to compound the problem most are from other leagues..... well, it wouldn't be stretching the bounds of compassion to say " can I have a bit of time"

                    I am not close enough to Tim Sherwood or his work at BMH to make the criticisms that some are.....I can only go on results and match day performances from what I have seen in the main its more to do with individual player errors, lack of leadership and lack of mental strength to take responsibility for the task of seeing a game through and securing a win.....that has been letting us down.....that could be more to do with the individual in question than the manager.

                    We could be getting rid of a good  up and coming manager due to the profoundly difficult circumstances we have found ourselves in....he too is developing.

                    I was one of those 99%'s that thought we had bought well in the summer, I must confess ( i have not given up on them) i am having second thoughts about how long this will take.

                    I am not from the camp that, just get anyone in as long as it isn't Sherwood, we HAVE to start developing things and move away from short termism, when it comes to our managers, we need continuity.

                    You challenge me for being nebulous towards Sherwoods position as manager, but that is reflected in so many variables he is having to deal with.

                    I say again, without apology, I don't know enough about what goes on at BMH.....someone who does might observe that he is doing everything that a good manager would do, conversely it could be a pile of poo, which would make my answer to you ...... easy.

                    You, tease me with my line of "intelligent solution" I was referring to the Top Management having the ability to see through smokescreens and Identify a good manager when the have one or not which ever the case maybe.....they must know what is going on behind the scenes and they should act accordingly......sack him or back him.

                    Managers must be held responsible for team results, we all agree on that, but they are not magicians, even the great SAF took a number of years for it to get right, but David Gill Knew what work was being done at carrington, despite the fans being uneasy with results.

                     Sometimes it takes big conkers to back a manager when results are suggesting you are Mad.....but only they will know or should know.

                     I hope I have been able to explain, why I am unsure about his exit or not, on the basis of results alone there would be one simple answer, if only life, even football life was so simple.

                     We haven't exactly been the envy of the football world in our efforts to recruit, players,managers etc.... we need to make that change.

 

Ps                The one thing i will refuse to do is lambast him on his personality and attempt to pass it off as his work......and criticise him for things that are simply conjecture. That for me is unhelpful, when we all want a solution.

                   

 

It's probably me but I have real difficulty understanding what you mean?  The best I can understand is that you feel it is the players who are to blame not the manager and have no opinion whether he should go or not and you are putting your faith in Fox to know when the time is right. 

I don't agree with you about short termism by the way - McLeish had longer than his acheivements warranted and Lambert had nearly three years (that's twice as long as the average prem manager gets). So were not changing managers every 5 minutes.

What appears on here is all opinion based on the parts of the situation we can see (games, interviews, etc).  If you're not a fan of conjecture a fan forum is probably not the ideal place for you.  The idea is that we state our opinions and mine is Sherwood will take us down - I imagine Fox will join me in that view around 5.00pm Saturday

 

You said you didn't understand what I meant and went on to appraise it perfectly.

many managers have often said over the years.....you are only as good as your players.

if you put a turd on a potters wheel, it's unlikely the potter will turn it in to a piece of royal doulton.......a conductor cannot make a violinist a better player.....so yes, I have issues with the players, but as I have said before, it's a combination.

Tom Fox is the man to make the decision and he should be the man to know what decision that should be.

I'm a villa fan, I'll just support the manager until he is no longer representing our team.

look, we don' t agree, but so what, it's good to study all the different views, you believe in managers ability more than me....I think they can guide them, they can't do it for them.

[Marka Ragnos]

 

look, we don' t agree, but so what, it's good to study all the different views, you believe in managers ability more than me....I think they can guide them, they can't do it for them.

Countless forums on the internet loathe this sentiment, and thankfully Villa Talk's aren't (usually) among them.

[TRO]

So what's the excuse for picking all the other players that were also awful but for game after game rather then one game?

I like Jack - he'll be a top talent - but what has he done so far that anyone else hasn't?  From the top of my head, I can remember one goal (Leicester, this season) and one assist (Liverpool, semi-final).  He's had some decent performances and some crap ones.  He's basically been in exactly the same boat as "other players".

I think he'll go on to be a lot better than most of what we currently have, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with protecting a young lad in the early stages of his career.  Lambert (FWIW) managed it pretty perfectly.  Sherwood thrust him in immediately and bigged him up (fair play Timmy) and we get media coverage over the summer and a more drained, less sharp Grealish so far this season.

Playing every minute of every game isn't necessarily for the best when you're a 19 year old kid.

 

                  Andy Gray.....Brian little.....Gary Shaw......Gareth Barry.......Trevor Francis......Wayne Rooney

                   Alan shearer...........

                   If you are good enough, you are old enough.

 

                  

That statement refers to the quality of a player.

Jack is still developing. Yes he is young but he really shouldn't be playing every game at his age, not down to lack of ability, but to preserve him physically and most importantly mentally.

                     it was said.... it doesn't do you much good playing every game at 19......didn't do them much harm

Shaw and Little had their careers ended early by injury, so define harm!

They did more damage to the opposition than I have seen some of our players of late do if they played for a hundred years

[TRO]

To be competitive in this league. To survive even. The vast majority of those players have so far shown that they're not up to it.

West Brom are currently outside the relegation zone are very likely to survive this season. Their team in the last game, which they won, was Myhill / Dawson / McAuley / Evans / Brunt / Sessegnon / Fletcher / Yacob / McClean / Rondon / Berahino. 

I don't honestly believe our players are far worse, or that it's absolutely impossible to manage Villa into some better results. 

it depends what is specifically meant by our players are not worse......technically, I think we are better....but the Albion players are far more premier league savvy.....it takes time and much work on the training ground to improve that.....we have had too many players who are not only young and still learning their trade, but new to a league too.....one or two will blend in, we have too many all at once.

we play some good football at times, but the TEAM is too light in its approach, we are like a pretty flower Been broken  in the wind.....we are not durable enough and not mentally strong.

That's kind of the point though. 'Savvy' isn't something that you just have or don't have, it gets taught and it accrues over time. If we observe that the players haven't had very much time to develop 'Premier League savvy', then really we're saying that the quality of the instruction they're getting is that much more important. 

Does Sherwood seem 'savvy' to you? It's not an adjective I would use to describe him. 

                   He comes over to me like he has savvy, but I am not close enough to what he does to be sure.

                   I do think you could have the best tutor, but if you have not got the stuff between the ears it will fall on stoney ground.

                   For instance, I don't think sir Alex would have done any better than anyone else with gabby or vassell....just an example of my point.....or equally opposite I don't think any of the worst managers like MacLeish would have stopped Trevor Francis being a star.

Edited October 22, 2015 by TRO

[TRO]

I watched Stoke vs Swansea on monday and saw a midfield pairing of Charlie Adam and Glenn Wheelan control the game. Leicester regularly play Morgan, Huth, Simpson, Schlupp, Drinkwater, Vardy. Palace play Dann, Hangeland, Delaney, Gayle, McArthur, Puncheon. I see players such as James Collins, Marc Albrighton, Ryan Betrand and Steven Davies, who were deemed not good enough for us, playing well and making a positive impact at their current clubs.

Had we signed any of those players in the summer, i think people would have gone mad. I'm sure we have been linked to a few of them in the not too distant past and the general consensus has been 'not good enough'. 

However, under their respective managers the teams with these players are doing ok, and should comfortably stay up. These managers are able to get the most out of some pretty average players, and their teams look organised, well drilled, are able to maintain concentration and composure. This means as a team they are able to do better than their individual parts would suggest.

Does it look like Tim Sherwood is doing any of that? Does it look like we work on any of these qualities on the training pitch? 

And how many points have we dropped because Sherwood has got it wrong tactically? Palace and Leicester away, the negative approach at Liverpool, a team who were on the ropes spotting them a 2 goal lead, bizarre selection at home to Stoke. There's also the first half Blues line up. Go back to last season and there's the cup final, Southampton away, somehow letting QPR, the worst away side in the league score 3 goals and get a point (chris ramsey made subs that changed the game and tim didnt react).

I suspect that people would give Sherwood more time if it looked like he was learning and improving. But hes not, hes arguably getting worse. The same tactical errors he making this season he was making last season and when he was at Spurs. The slagging off of players - happened last season and at Spurs, the leaks to the press -- happened at Spurs. Hes not going to change.

                   The first 3 paragraphs I totally agree with....the next 3 I have more difficulty with.

                    E.g.Leaks to the press, sorry, I don't understand, what you know.

[TRO]

 

I think he'll go on to be a lot better than most of what we currently have, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with protecting a young lad in the early stages of his career.  Lambert (FWIW) managed it pretty perfectly.  Sherwood thrust him in immediately and bigged him up (fair play Timmy) and we get media coverage over the summer and a more drained, less sharp Grealish so far this season.

 

That's probably more to do with him missing the entire preseason through injury, I suspect.

                             Or doing the dying fly in the middle of the road".......ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh just teasing

[srsmithusa]

TRO - appreciate your tone and for the most part, you and I are both prone to a more nuanced view.  But I do have one disagreement with you.  I don't think I need to see or know what's going on at bodymoor heath.  For me, based on what I see on the pitch, too much of the problem is down to a mismatch between the tactic taken, the formation adopted, and the players placed into roles.  A key thing for a manager is to make sure the tactics, formation, and players strengths are aligned.    

Gestede up top with Gil and Grealish carrying the ball into the middle of the pitch is just wrong.  But that was most of the second half (v Stoke, I think).  The tactics, formation, and player selection and/or the player instructions are coming from three different "pages."  I'm oversimplifying, but if you want to beat an opponent with speed, you need Gabby and Sinclair in the game, and you need to instruct them to run the channels.  And you need to tell Gil and Grealish to play the ball over the top into that space.  The player strength, the role they are asked to play and the formation all need to be in concert.  They are not.  we're playing over the top to Gestede, or making crosses to Gabby. (oversimplifying for clarity, not precision) The point is, we never seem to end up on one coherent page.

That's why I'm in the Sherwood out camp.  I'm historically one of the last ones calling for ouster of a manager (or player) but the match day plan is so clearly disjointed that I don't care what he's doing at Bodymoor heath.  All I know is, it's not the right thing(s).  He's showing me that he cannot manage a match.  He can motivate.  He cannot manage.

in his defense, based on last year, i thought he could.  He settled on a tactic based on the strengths of one player (Benteke)  Our clear and often effective plan was to get him the ball for him to "flick" on to a runner nearby, or if deeper, cross the ball into him and let him finish it.  It worked.  But the reason it worked was not just Benteke.  It worked because the player strengths, roles, and formation all aligned into one coherent tactic.   That's a crucial  part of the manager's job, IMO.  It's not happening.

I actually hope he proves me wrong very soon.  I will change my tune if we play with a formation, tactic, player roles, and strategy that are in alignment.  If we do all that and keep losing, then the problem is likely that the players just aren't good enough.

                  I appreciate, your comments and I understand where you are coming from.

                   I have to say I am not unequivocally defending him.

                    I also appreciate there is more to it than BMH.....but where I am struggling is that he is doing what you suggested....playing gabby (before injury) and Sinclair for their pace, but they simply make no consistent impact, so he try's other things.....at present he seems to have an inconsistent bunch that he can't rely on.

 

My problem, was that when he played Gabby and Sinclair (for their pace) he didn't set up the rest of the team, or instruct them, to match that.  Rather than having Gil and or Grealish push the ball into the channels or over the top into space, Amavi and Bacuna were going deep toward the end line and crossing it in.  It didn't work, but not entirely because the players aren't good enough.  largely because the rest of the players were playing a different tactic.  it was the same problem.  He wasn't setting the rest of the formation to play to that same tactic. The formation was OK for Gabby and Sinclair, but the rest of the team were playing a different tactic.  Getting the strategy, formation, player strengths,and player roles all on the same wavelength is what Sherwood is not doing.  

I'm OK with whatever strategy or tactic he decides on.  At BMH he needs to decide on a tactic based on fit players strengths and the opponent.  Then set a formation to suit that, and select the players with the strengths to fit the roles of the formation and the tactic.  Tactic or strategy, formation, player selection, roles.  at least 4 things that must be aligned.  He's setting them in conflict with each other.

Many (but agreed not all) of the player ""errors" are, IMO caused by this same disjointed approach. The players are too often in the wrong roles and not on the same understanding of how to advance. 

Actually, if I really wanted to agree with you that it might not be Tim's fault, I would say that opponents can see our tactic by our line-up and they thwart it by leaving ineffective options open and our players are too naive not to fall for it.  When Gabby and Sinclair start, the opponents pressure the midfield and leave the wings open to draw the attack down and deep which takes our forward's strengths out of the equation.  The opponents do something roughly the opposite when Rudy starts.  This explanation puts much greater blame on naive players.  Rather than staying with the plan, they are playing to what the opponent gives them and getting suckered into blind alleys.  It's possible, but it's hard to believe because Tim has blamed everything but that.  it also assumes that the opponents are geniuses at manipulating us.  In this hypothesis, Opposition managers can get 11 players to adapt on the fly to what Tim is trying to do and thwart it, while Tim can't get his players to follow instructions.  Tim remains the problem.

[Tomaszk]

This will be over soon.

Swansea, a side with no win in six, are going to do us by at least two clear goals at the weekend.

Then he can go away and we can get someone in who is actually a professional, not some Sunday league joke.

[lexicon]

This will be over soon.

Swansea, a side with no win in six, are going to do us by at least two clear goals at the weekend.

Then he can go away and we can get someone in who is actually a professional, not some Sunday league joke.

As weird/bad as this sounds - I'm worried that we'll get a result and he'll get a stay of execution.

[BG_Villa_Fan]

 

I know many on here loathe O'Neill and whilst I think he can be criticized for paying too much for the squad he assembled he did in the main get the best out of the players he had and to do so he kept things pretty simple. We played with a big man up top, usually Carew, got Ash and Gabby either side of him and nine times out of ten our attack consisted of breaking quickly and getting it into the channels for Ash or Gabby to get on to and cross into the box or getting it up to the big man and playing off him. We have the players do do that now. Gestede thrives on balls into the box, two of Gabby, Sinclair, Traore, Ayew can be the pace merchants either side of him. Where we may struggle is in midfield as we don't have Stan, Barry and Milner but we have Westwood or Sanchez who can sit and be a poor mans Stan, Gana a poor mans Milner and Grealish or Gil are capable of offering the cultured quick to the wide lads passing that Barry did.

Disagree entirely - we don't have the players to do that now, not even close. Gestede cannot keep the ball and invite others into play, he has zero game with his back to the goal and there's little point in using him as a target man. Grealish and Gil aren't wingers, they can't do what Ash could down the left and cross to Gestede. The only possible comparison could be Traore who could do what Gabby used to be able to with his pace. Sinclair can't beat a man down the flank if his life depended on it and Ayew is a striker. Not to mention we don't have the defensive protection from the fullbacks to even think of affording to play so openly. 

Moreover, our current midfilders cannot make runs like Milner, they don't have the motor, only Gana has shown little glimpses but at the cost of being completely out of position. Which would be fine if we had intelligent midfielders like Barry and Petrov who could cover for him, but Westwood and Sanchez can't.

Edited October 23, 2015 by BG_Villa_Fan

[jon_c]

I keep hearing people say it's not the managers it's the club. But I am struggling to remember the last manager who left us and went on to success elsewhere. Even Taylor mk1, who was the best we've had in a long time.

I'm not saying the club doesn't have problems but the manager can certainly exacerbate them.

On top of that I'm 100% certain that when Sherwood leaves, he will not go on to have any success anywhere else in club management.

[Demitri_C]

This will be over soon.

Swansea, a side with no win in six, are going to do us by at least two clear goals at the weekend.

Then he can go away and we can get someone in who is actually a professional, not some Sunday league joke.

As weird/bad as this sounds - I'm worried that we'll get a result and he'll get a stay of execution.

Fundamentally its all about Aston Villa not Tim Sherwood. If he pulls a win great that helps our cause. I certainly wont be down if we win Saturday as much as I dont want Sherwood here. 

[Stevo985]

I think "the players aren't good enough" is a lazy argument.

They are.

They're not world beaters by any stretch. And I'm not expecting us to be getting into Europe, or even troubling the top half of the table.

But our squad is good enough to be better than 3 other teams in the league. Nobody can convince me that that isn't the case.