The Rémi Garde thread

[BOF]

15 hours ago, JamieZ said:

This is not a rational argument, but at the moment Rémi Garde is the only thing at Aston Villa about which I can say, "I am fully in support of this aspect of the club." I'm not attached to the players; I'm not attached to the ownership or the "ethic"; I'm an American, so I can't walk by the ground and feel an attachment to its physical presence—hell, the closest I've even been to Birmingham is the M6 on my way from Manchester down to London and I was asleep at the time; so aside from the investment I have made in the club in the form of time and emotion, the fact that the club has a manager whom I can look at and say, "This man is a class act and he is trying his level best to steer the club in the right direction in spite of everything," is all I have to hold on to at the moment.

[srsmithusa]

12 hours ago, Zatman said:

that is no basis to judge a manager though. He is still doing crap

Sorry Zat.  Is that sarcasm?   

Points earned per match played no basis to judge a manager?  Surely you're pulling one?

I may be wrong but I think they base the league standing on points gained over an equal number of matches.  But maybe they base it on win % (to which I was responding), or attacking intent, or how much players think the manager approves of them, or which manager inherited better players when he started, or something else.

[Stevo985]

I think Zat meant that judging Remi as a success because he's better than Sherwood isn't a very good measure because he could still be crap but be easily better than Sherwood.

Which is fair enough. I'm pretty sure I'd be doing a better job than Sherwood. 

Although Garde's points to game ratio isn't far off the ratio required to stay up over the course of a full season. It wouldn't be surprising if he gets there by the end of the season. And to have that sort of form with this squad would be an achievement, imo.

But it will fall short of the ratio we needed to stay in the league from the position Sherwood left us in.

Edited February 26, 2016 by Stevo985

[briny_ear]

3 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

I think Zat meant that judging Remi as a success because he's better than Sherwood isn't a very good measure because he could still be crap but be easily better than Sherwood.

Which is fair enough. I'm pretty sure I'd be doing a better job than Sherwood. 

Although Garde's points to game ratio isn't far off the ratio required to stay up over the course of a full season. It wouldn't be surprising if he gets there by the end of the season. And to have that sort of form with this squad would be an achievement, imo.

But it will fall short of the ratio we needed to stay in the league from the position Sherwood left us in.

Garde has got 12 points from 15 league matches, a ratio of 0.8 points per match. That would not have been enough to keep us up in any but one of the twenty premier league seasons since 1995-6 when its size was reduced to twenty clubs.It would only have come anything like close in another four seasons. In most seasons it would not have got us anywhere near the grade. The scoring ratio of 0.7 - 1.7 per match has also been deeply unsatisfactory.

It seems wrong to claim that Garde has got us anywhere near the standard needed to stay up.

I don't think this is Garde's fault.

He wasn't the right manager to save Villa and undoubtedly needs to go to a different, better run, club, to develop his career.

Whether anyone else could have saved us this season is a moot point - probably not. Garde clearly feels he has been sorely let down at all levels of the club, from owner to players, and I have rarely felt more miserable for a manager than when I watched the extended video above where Garde is left to face the humiliating task of having to answer questions about the ramblings of Doug Ellis, player tweets, fan walk-outs, etc.

So he is a nice guy, a dignified man, who has been badly misled and hung out to dry and we all feel for him.

But that should not get confused with a belief that his time at Villa has been anything like a success, out of his hands though much of that has been.

[onmeedson]

That's a bit to real for many posters briny, reality takes a back step and goal posts are moved.

[Dr_Pangloss]

He's a distinctly average manager but has carried himself extremely well, but it's hardly imperative for us as a football club that he remains here next season. 

[Stevo985]

5 hours ago, briny_ear said:

Garde has got 12 points from 15 league matches, a ratio of 0.8 points per match. That would not have been enough to keep us up in any but one of the twenty premier league seasons since 1995-6 when its size was reduced to twenty clubs.It would only have come anything like close in another four seasons. In most seasons it would not have got us anywhere near the grade. The scoring ratio of 0.7 - 1.7 per match has also been deeply unsatisfactory.

It seems wrong to claim that Garde has got us anywhere near the standard needed to stay up.

 

I didn't say his points to game ratio was enough to keep us up over the course of a season. You even bolded the bit you were referencing, which specifically said that, yet you still seem to have misinterpreted it. 

I said it "wasn't far off" the ratio required. Which it isn't. In fact had we scored 1 goal against West Brom then Garde's points to game ratio would be the equivalent of 36 over a whole season. Which would be enough to keep us up quite a lot of the time.

I also didn't claim Garde had gotten us near to the standard to stay up this season. I said he was close to a ratio that would keep us up over the course of a whole season.

So nice post and all (sincerely, I don't disagree with a lot of it), but it bears little relevance to the one you've quoted.

Edited February 26, 2016 by Stevo985

[briny_ear]

16 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I didn't say his points to game ratio was enough to keep us up over the course of a season. You even bolded the bit you were referencing, which specifically said that, yet you still seem to have misinterpreted it. 

I said it "wasn't far off" the ratio required. Which it isn't. In fact had we scored 1 goal against West Brom then Garde's points to game ratio would be the equivalent of 36 over a whole season. Which would be enough to keep us up quite a lot of the time.

I also didn't claim Garde had gotten us near to the standard to stay up this season. I said he was close to a ratio that would keep us up over the course of a whole season.

So nice post and all (sincerely, I don't disagree with a lot of it), but it bears little relevance to the one you've quoted.

Oh Lordy.

You said his points to game ratio "isn't far off the ratio required to  stay up over the course of a full season".  I was just pointing out that it IS far off the required ratio, based on premier league history so far. 0.8 points x 38 = 30.4 points = nowhere near enough in all but one season, or being very generous, in all but 5 seasons in premier league history since the league reduced to 20 clubs.

I was just commenting on that claim; I wasn't making any comment about staying up this season, because we won't unless a miracle happens, so it's not worth discussing.

I don't care what would have happened IF some games had turned out differently. If we had scored 7 against Liverpool, we would be sitting pretty. If we hadn't conceded 3 against Leicester, we would be even better off. So what?

As I have had cause to mention before when responding to your posts, as far as I am concerned, this correspondence is now closed. There is no point in flogging a dead horse

[NSmith22]

1 hour ago, briny_ear said:

Oh Lordy.

You said his points to game ratio "isn't far off the ratio required to  stay up over the course of a full season".  I was just pointing out that it IS far off the required ratio, based on premier league history so far. 0.8 points x 38 = 30.4 points = nowhere near enough in all but one season, or being very generous, in all but 5 seasons in premier league history since the league reduced to 20 clubs.

I was just commenting on that claim; I wasn't making any comment about staying up this season, because we won't unless a miracle happens, so it's not worth discussing.

I don't care what would have happened IF some games had turned out differently. If we had scored 7 against Liverpool, we would be sitting pretty. If we hadn't conceded 3 against Leicester, we would be even better off. So what?

As I have had cause to mention before when responding to your posts, as far as I am concerned, this correspondence is now closed. There is no point in flogging a dead horse

Regardless, 0.8 points per game is likely an achievement in and of itself with 90% of the squad sleepwalking through this season.

Edited February 27, 2016 by NSmith22

[Keyblade]

7 hours ago, briny_ear said:

Oh Lordy.

You said his points to game ratio "isn't far off the ratio required to  stay up over the course of a full season".  I was just pointing out that it IS far off the required ratio, based on premier league history so far. 0.8 points x 38 = 30.4 points = nowhere near enough in all but one season, or being very generous, in all but 5 seasons in premier league history since the league reduced to 20 clubs.

I was just commenting on that claim; I wasn't making any comment about staying up this season, because we won't unless a miracle happens, so it's not worth discussing.

I don't care what would have happened IF some games had turned out differently. If we had scored 7 against Liverpool, we would be sitting pretty. If we hadn't conceded 3 against Leicester, we would be even better off. So what?

As I have had cause to mention before when responding to your posts, as far as I am concerned, this correspondence is now closed. There is no point in flogging a dead horse

0.8 ppg compared to 1 ppg is not far off by any stretch and neither is 30 points compared to 36. The point of mentioning the West Brom result isn't to show what would have happened but to illustrate how close it is, and so you've completely missed the point there.

[Stevo985]

10 hours ago, briny_ear said:

Oh Lordy.

You said his points to game ratio "isn't far off the ratio required to  stay up over the course of a full season".  I was just pointing out that it IS far off the required ratio, based on premier league history so far. 0.8 points x 38 = 30.4 points = nowhere near enough in all but one season, or being very generous, in all but 5 seasons in premier league history since the league reduced to 20 clubs.

But it isn't far off. Like I pointed out it is literally 2 points away from being the required ratio to keep us up over a season (well a lot of seasons anyway). One goal against West Brom is the difference between Garde's current ratio, and the ratio to keep us up over a season. Another way to look at it is if we won today then his points ratio would again swing into the amount needed to stay up over a season. And whilst I think that win is unlikely, it indicates that his current ratio is right on the boundary. I'm not trying to give Garde credit for results he didn't get or is yet to get. I'm using those to show how one result turning in his favour would have bumped his ratio enough to the required amount. It's to demonstrate how close it is.

 

So I think in this instance you're demonstrably wrong.

 

Edited February 27, 2016 by Stevo985

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, Keyblade said:

0.8 ppg compared to 1 ppg is not far off by any stretch and neither is 30 points compared to 36. The point of mentioning the West Brom result isn't to show what would have happened but to illustrate how close it is, and so you've completely missed the point there.

A running theme in Briny's posts. The master of taking a post completely the wrong way and starting an argument over what he's wrongly inferred.

[VillaCas]

11 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

He's a distinctly average manager but has carried himself extremely well, but it's hardly imperative for us as a football club that he remains here next season. 

I'll give him more than four months taking over the weakest squad with the worst morale I've ever seen, before making a judgement on his abilities. Personally, I think he could turn out to be an excellent manager although sadly probably not with us

[onmeedson]

Would we stay up with 30 points. ?

[TheMightyVillans]

If press conferences got you points we would be near the top of the table. 

[TRO]

On 25 February 2016 at 22:01, PaulC said:

Cummings I can't comment on but under Mcneil I don't think we were quite as bad as this were we?

It's all subjective, Paul, but possibly yes

[DCJonah]

I can't believe he's put that team out. 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

1 minute ago, DCJonah said:

I can't believe he's put that team out. 

Neither can I frankly. Lescott as captain is a horrendous decision. I accept that being captain is a mostly symbolic gesture, in which case what kind of message does that send out the the fans? These fans that he keeps telling us are so very important? 

Lescott. Hutton. Bacuna. I'd rather we'd started with 8 men. 

[Ingram85]

Wind up the fans, offer to fight the fans, lie to fans and admit he didn't try. 

Stays captain.

[Dr_Pangloss]

2 minutes ago, Ingram85 said:

Wind up the fans, offer to fight the fans, lie to fans and admit he didn't try. 

Stays captain.

Extremely poor from Garde IMO, just goes to show how much he doesn't have the finger on the pulse. The fact that Lescott continues to have any involvement in the squad is a total disgrace and Garde is highly culpable.