AVTuco Posted September 26, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted September 26, 2015 (edited) Sinclair did score a couple goals earlier though... Edited September 26, 2015 by AVTuco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skruff Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 How deep is your love?Is it like the ocean?What devotion?AYEEEW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gharperr Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 (edited) It really isnt that outrageous choosing sinclair over ayew. Both have been wank this season. Sinclair could easily be chosen over Ayew for this game as hes more used to the prem and possibly could be more disciplined when defending, results in less mistakes (all well an good saying ayew had a good 45 mins, but blues full backs arnt going to get up the pitch half as much as plops FB's are) whilst providing more pace to potentially exploit when their fb is OOP.Think its incredibly simplistic way to view football if youre just thinking "had good 45 mins, must start, bad manager if not start player." and pretty unfair to bash sherwood for it.Also didnt ayew come on against Leicester and get moved out left? i think i can remember a lot of people moaning about him defensivly that game and i can remember them coming down our left very often towards end of that game. (think people said bringing him on that game was stupid and bashed sherwood for it) Edited September 27, 2015 by gharperr 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 It really isnt that outrageous choosing sinclair over ayew. Both have been wank this season. Sinclair could easily be chosen over Ayew for this game as hes more used to the prem and possibly could be more disciplined when defending, results in less mistakes (all well an good saying ayew had a good 45 mins, but blues full backs arnt going to get up the pitch half as much as plops FB's are) whilst providing more pace to potentially exploit when their fb is OOP.Think its incredibly simplistic way to view football if youre just thinking "had good 45 mins, must start, bad manager if not start player." and pretty unfair to bash sherwood for it.Also didnt ayew come on against Leicester and get moved out left? i think i can remember a lot of people moaning about him defensivly that game and i can remember them coming down our left very often towards end of that game. (think people said bringing him on that game was stupid and bashed sherwood for it)It really is outrageous to not give him any game time at all though. I know some are desperate to make excuses, but I fail to see the excuse for not bringing on an attacking player who just had a fantastic game 4 days previously when we are chasing a game. There's no logic to it all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 It really isnt that outrageous choosing sinclair over ayew. Both have been wank this season. Sinclair could easily be chosen over Ayew for this game as hes more used to the prem and possibly could be more disciplined when defending, results in less mistakes (all well an good saying ayew had a good 45 mins, but blues full backs arnt going to get up the pitch half as much as plops FB's are) whilst providing more pace to potentially exploit when their fb is OOP.Think its incredibly simplistic way to view football if youre just thinking "had good 45 mins, must start, bad manager if not start player." and pretty unfair to bash sherwood for it.Also didnt ayew come on against Leicester and get moved out left? i think i can remember a lot of people moaning about him defensivly that game and i can remember them coming down our left very often towards end of that game. (think people said bringing him on that game was stupid and bashed sherwood for it)It really is outrageous to not give him any game time at all though. I know some are desperate to make excuses, but I fail to see the excuse for not bringing on an attacking player who just had a fantastic game 4 days previously when we are chasing a game. There's no logic to it all.It's not outrageous at all.Ayew has been **** terrible this season bar one half of football against a Championship club. **** VT, jesus christ. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Xela Posted September 27, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted September 27, 2015 (edited) Written off after a handful of games but now its outrageous that he isn't playing instead of our leading goalscorer! Gotta love VT Edited September 27, 2015 by Xela 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 It really isnt that outrageous choosing sinclair over ayew. Both have been wank this season. Sinclair could easily be chosen over Ayew for this game as hes more used to the prem and possibly could be more disciplined when defending, results in less mistakes (all well an good saying ayew had a good 45 mins, but blues full backs arnt going to get up the pitch half as much as plops FB's are) whilst providing more pace to potentially exploit when their fb is OOP.Think its incredibly simplistic way to view football if youre just thinking "had good 45 mins, must start, bad manager if not start player." and pretty unfair to bash sherwood for it.Also didnt ayew come on against Leicester and get moved out left? i think i can remember a lot of people moaning about him defensivly that game and i can remember them coming down our left very often towards end of that game. (think people said bringing him on that game was stupid and bashed sherwood for it)It really is outrageous to not give him any game time at all though. I know some are desperate to make excuses, but I fail to see the excuse for not bringing on an attacking player who just had a fantastic game 4 days previously when we are chasing a game. There's no logic to it all.It's not outrageous at all.Ayew has been **** terrible this season bar one half of football against a Championship club. **** VT, jesus christ.That is total, unmitigated nonsense.He changed the game on Tuesday night, it was an absolutely exceptional performance. He obviously was very poor before then but Tuesday appeared to be a real turning point. To not give him any sort of time, and leave an anonymous Sinclair on the field for 90 mins was an outrageous decision.But I guess we don't want to play players who appear to be in good form then? Brilliant stuff. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 It really isnt that outrageous choosing sinclair over ayew. Both have been wank this season. Sinclair could easily be chosen over Ayew for this game as hes more used to the prem and possibly could be more disciplined when defending, results in less mistakes (all well an good saying ayew had a good 45 mins, but blues full backs arnt going to get up the pitch half as much as plops FB's are) whilst providing more pace to potentially exploit when their fb is OOP.Think its incredibly simplistic way to view football if youre just thinking "had good 45 mins, must start, bad manager if not start player." and pretty unfair to bash sherwood for it.Also didnt ayew come on against Leicester and get moved out left? i think i can remember a lot of people moaning about him defensivly that game and i can remember them coming down our left very often towards end of that game. (think people said bringing him on that game was stupid and bashed sherwood for it)It really is outrageous to not give him any game time at all though. I know some are desperate to make excuses, but I fail to see the excuse for not bringing on an attacking player who just had a fantastic game 4 days previously when we are chasing a game. There's no logic to it all.It's not outrageous at all.Ayew has been **** terrible this season bar one half of football against a Championship club. **** VT, jesus christ.Do you not think it would have been a good idea to sub him on instead of Sinclair, who was having a very poor game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 When a new player who's struggled so far actually has a very good half of football would you not assume it's logical and common sense to give him more minutes in the next game to continue to build up his confidence?I was expecting him to start yesterday. To not actually bring him on at any point yesterday despite losing for 89 minutes of the game is imo bonkers, same for Gil. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 Its a reason im not feeling Sherwood will come good. He has a 10 million pound player who found his confindence, an then leaves him on the bench when its obvious Sinclair was having a stinker. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Its a reason im not feeling Sherwood will come good. He has a 10 million pound player who found his confindence, an then leaves him on the bench when its obvious Sinclair was having a stinker.It paled in comparison to subbing Sanchez off instead of Westwood IMO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 It really isnt that outrageous choosing sinclair over ayew. Both have been wank this season. Sinclair could easily be chosen over Ayew for this game as hes more used to the prem and possibly could be more disciplined when defending, results in less mistakes (all well an good saying ayew had a good 45 mins, but blues full backs arnt going to get up the pitch half as much as plops FB's are) whilst providing more pace to potentially exploit when their fb is OOP.Think its incredibly simplistic way to view football if youre just thinking "had good 45 mins, must start, bad manager if not start player." and pretty unfair to bash sherwood for it.Also didnt ayew come on against Leicester and get moved out left? i think i can remember a lot of people moaning about him defensivly that game and i can remember them coming down our left very often towards end of that game. (think people said bringing him on that game was stupid and bashed sherwood for it)It really is outrageous to not give him any game time at all though. I know some are desperate to make excuses, but I fail to see the excuse for not bringing on an attacking player who just had a fantastic game 4 days previously when we are chasing a game. There's no logic to it all.It's not outrageous at all.Ayew has been **** terrible this season bar one half of football against a Championship club. **** VT, jesus christ.Do you not think it would have been a good idea to sub him on instead of Sinclair, who was having a very poor game?Maybe so, maybe no. It absolutely isn't "outrageous" that this wasn't the case, though.Part of our problem is that we don't have a settled first team at the moment. If we're going to base the starting eleven on which players have played the best 45 minutes recently, we'll continue to never have a settled first team. Maybe Ayew should've come on, but against Leicester, he came on and was absolutely woeful at tracking back. Maybe this was in Sherwood's mind? Who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubberman Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Against Leicester we needed a midfielder on, not Ayew (who was in no sort of form). Against Liverpool we were behind and having shown some form midweek he must have been worth a shout as we were already losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcTheObsession Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Shocked he got no game time at all at the weekend. Even if Sherwood felt it was too big a gamble starting him, for him not to get at least 20-30 mins when it looked like he could be finding his feet after Tues was very poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacketspuds Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 It's disappointing that some people have already written off players like Veretout and Ayew but say that Sherwood needs to be given until December to prove himself. The logic doesn't stack up for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 It's difficult for Ayew, Gestede certainly deserves to start as he is finding the net and the wide berths should be Grealish and Adama. As Adama is only now getting his fitness back I think Ayew may deserve a look instead of Sinclair who has been woeful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom13 Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Glad we're all agreed on Sinclair at least! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Time for this lad to start. If he doesn't come good we are in trouble so we might as well throw him in and see what he can do. Can't be any worse than Gabby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 2, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted October 2, 2015 People really are only as good as their last game or two on here aren't they? Sinclair has been crap the past 2 games but one of our best players for the first few games of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 People really are only as good as their last game or two on here aren't they? Sinclair has been crap the past 2 games but one of our best players for the first few games of the season.Agreed. He's a very good player. But I'd still maybe have a go starting Ayew in his place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts