The Rémi Garde thread

[DCJonah]

I do find it odd, that the people defending team selections and liking posts defending team selections are mainly the people who wanted the last manager sacked for not picking their favourite player. 

And amazingly that was while we were winning games and on course to survive. 

[dudevillaisnice]

We are in the bottom three because of the clown before him.

Let's not make out Sherwood was going to get us survival this season because he was most certainly wasn't.

[useless]

4 minutes ago, useless said:

I like Garde and think he'll do well. But I think he needs to be braver with his teams selections.

In an attacking sense.

Edited December 29, 2015 by useless

[DCJonah]

1 minute ago, dudevillaisnice said:

We are in the bottom three because of the clown before him.

Let's not make out Sherwood was going to get us survival this season because he was most certainly wasn't.

We are in the bottom 3 because of lerner and the last few failed managers. 

[markavfc40]

2 hours ago, decamoto said:

It possibly is the worst start. But then again it's probably also the worst team/squad that a new villa manager has had to work with in history. 

Your possibly right and in that case it may be an idea if someone told Tom Fox as he is under the impression this is a good squad of players and we did well over the summer with our recruitment. So convinced in fact that he was instrumental in making yet another manager a scapegoat and pissing another 4 mill+ down the drain in sacking Sherwood and his coaching staff after 10 games. Nine games later we have gone from 4 points from safety to 11. Changing manager has made no difference and had zero positive effect.

Edited December 29, 2015 by markavfc40

[KSV]

Im not impressed with Garde. His team selections are baffling. We had a shocking result against Norwich. But look at the pre match thread. We all knew it would happen once we all saw the line up. Surely a manager who is getting paid millions would know this was not a good side/tactics to pick. We should have attacked Norwich. Starting with Grealish and Gil and Gestede with Ayew. I dont buy this 'carrying' players bullshit. Every other team can use Arnautovic, Delofeu Bojan etc etc and dont struggle. Theres no balance... You cannot score goals when you have only 3 true attacking players in the starting line up. When there is 4 defenders in the opposition plus 1-2 defensive midfielders to mark them out of the game.

Rubbish From Tim.. Rubbish from Garde. Lambert was good at the start of his rein then he started negative tactics as well.

Clearly we have a problem from top to bottom at this club.. but the useless managers we have brought in (thanks Randy) have not helped. I thought Garde was going to be a good manager for us.. but some of his team selections/tactics are baffling. Sinclair? Richardson uptop? Leaving Gestede.. even Gabby would offer more than these 2 muppets. (not by much)

I am sick and tired of managers picking Hutton and letting him roam like hes Ronaldo. Tell him to stay at the back and use proper attackers to attack the wings. He doesnt defend well as it is.. let alone when hes caught upfield.

Guess when you have an owner who cant afford or attract a decent manager. This is what happens. Relegation. Well played all round.

Edited December 29, 2015 by KSV

[Demitri_C]

its 60% lerner, 30% sherwood and 10% garde in my opinion who is at fault for this mess

garde might be failing but changing one turd player to an other makes no difference its still a turd

[Guest av1]

I think Remi will be retained as our Manager after relegation, and I think that will be the correct decision. 

[markavfc40]

3 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

 Its like Garde has thrown in the towel.

I am not sure Remi has ever believed he can keep us up or seemed to lack an awareness of the desperate need to get a quick win under him and get some positive forward momentum in to the club.

At the very least under him I expected a bounce. I expected the players to look more determined, play with a bit more passion, suddenly look half a yard quicker. The fabled new manager bounce much like we saw under Sherwood last season. To get that I always felt we needed to win with in the first 3 or 4 games or that time would pass and for me it did against Watford. Since then I think as a club from players, manager, supporters we put all our hope on this four game run starting at Newcastle. We went in to those four games with the manager saying we needed six points. I wanted to hear more positive vibes from the manager than that though. I wanted him to say we want 4 wins from these games. We are going all out for wins. Reach for the stars and we may just have got the moon if you like. As it was for the first 45 mins against Newcastle we created nothing and had little attacking intent. A good 45 mins in the second half and we kicked the can on to the West Ham game and as supporters at least made that the must win. Played well but for me failed to really grab the initiative when we made it 1-1 and make the positive changes to grab all 3 points and the game fizzled out. We then come to yesterday. A game we had to win and we started with Richardson and Sinclair as our wide forwards, 3 centre mids, and aside from Ayew our biggest attacking threats sat on the bench or at home. It wasn't good enough and was a cowardly approach to a must win game.

I had hope when Remi arrived. I was perhaps hoodwinked into believing this was a half decent squad that just needed a good manager to get them playing. I know he hasn't had long in the job but given our predicament if he was a manager that would need a pre season, would need a couple of transfer windows to get a positive reaction then he was the wrong appointment unfortunately.

I still think this squad is better than 8 points from 19 games. It is poor but it is not 21 points worse than Watford, 12 worse than Bournemouth and Norwich, 15 worse than West Brom. Successive managers have failed to get the best out of it and my biggest regret with Remi is that he hasn't even given us the best chance of winning games with the sides he has picked and the way he has us playing. There was a chance to turn this around but we didn't even give it a good go.
 

Edited December 29, 2015 by markavfc40

[Guest av1]

11 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

its 60% lerner, 30% sherwood and 10% garde in my opinion who is at fault for this mess

garde might be failing but changing one turd player to an other makes no difference its still a turd

Its 100% lerner IMO. Sherwood was indeed crap, as were the rubbish that preceded him. But those appointments, and our championship standard squad are all down to our Chairman. 

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

Adama did more in 30 mins than those selected ahead of him. He did more in 5 mins against arsenal than those selected ahead of him. He did more in 20 mins against palace than those selected ahead of him.

Second part, you've just defended Richardson as an attacking player in a game we lost 2-0 to a shit team. Amazing. 

Against west ham he started with 2 upfront and 4 central midfield players with little creativity or width behind them. We played well but one attacking change was forced on him and the other came with 5 mins to go. 

It's obvious he's setting us up to win and have a go at teams? In your head maybe. West ham is the only game we've had a go at a team from the very start. It's very Mcleish/Lambert like with a let's not try and lose first approach. It's resulted in pretty much the same points as we managed before he arrived. 

We're not going to survive because like you say we make too many defensive errors. So to me it makes sense to compensate that by putting out a team that has the best chance of scoring goals.

 

In what way did Adama do more?  Genuinely curious, I didn't pay enough attention to either Sinclair or Adama as they both did nothing at all.  I'm all for Adama starting games, but bringing him on for Sinclair changed precisely nothing - yet apparently Sinclair was terrible whilst Adama is the new hope?

Second part - no.  I've defended the selection of Richardson as a left winger because, surprise surprise, he can play as a left winger.  We didn't play Gestede (obvious crossing target) so I don't get why Richardson started persay, but I don't think it's a baffling decision that we started a left winger in the position of left winger.

Against West Ham, he setup with 2 up top, Veretout behind them and a midfield 3.  Yes, there was no width - but who the hell provides width in our team?  Our only natural winger is Kieran Richardson and apparently it would be ridiculous to start him in that position.  So do we play with width or narrow?  Which is correct?  You're just picking faults for the sake of it.  And, to be honest, for the most part we were decent against West Ham.

Yes, it's obvious he's setting us up to win games.  I'm not aware of Garde at any point picking 5 defenders (please name where he's done this since he's soooooo much like Lambert/McLeish) and he's been the first manager to bother with 2 up front for God knows how long.  You're mis-directing "not winning games" as "not being attacking".  We're doing the latter but obviously not the former.

You seem to have a lot of faith in our attacking players to score goals.  The fact remains that, even with substantial numbers behind them, they're not doing this.  Where's the logic that dictates once you remove our supposed creativity we suddenly score loads more goals?  I've said before I'd like to see us play Grealish/Gil/Traore as an attacking trio behind Ayew, but I don't think this necessarily garners loads more goals.  We still need to massively improve on **** basic defensive work.

[Dr_Pangloss]

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

Adama did more in 30 mins than those selected ahead of him. He did more in 5 mins against arsenal than those selected ahead of him. He did more in 20 mins against palace than those selected ahead of him.

Second part, you've just defended Richardson as an attacking player in a game we lost 2-0 to a shit team. Amazing. 

Against west ham he started with 2 upfront and 4 central midfield players with little creativity or width behind them. We played well but one attacking change was forced on him and the other came with 5 mins to go. 

It's obvious he's setting us up to win and have a go at teams? In your head maybe. West ham is the only game we've had a go at a team from the very start. It's very Mcleish/Lambert like with a let's not try and lose first approach. It's resulted in pretty much the same points as we managed before he arrived. 

We're not going to survive because like you say we make too many defensive errors. So to me it makes sense to compensate that by putting out a team that has the best chance of scoring goals.

 

I'm quite curious about this 'off the ball movement' that Sinclair apparently gives us, because it always seems to be the side Sinclair plays on that we get exploited the most. It's an absolute fallacy that Sinclair offers us anything defensively. 

Bottom line is that Traore was more positive than Sinclair yesterday, he at least tried to get the ball in the box and did on a few occasions, with one of his deliveries being half decent. 

If a player (Sinclair) offers nothing for consecutive games he shouldn't be in the bloody team, time to give Traore a run of games from the start. He deserves to be give at least the sort of chance Sinclair has been given.

[Demitri_C]

14 minutes ago, av1 said:

Its 100% lerner IMO. Sherwood was indeed crap, as were the rubbish that preceded him. But those appointments, and our championship standard squad are all down to our Chairman. 

Hmm you cant blame lerner for that ridiculous leicester defeat, that was sherwood 100% lerners a majority to blame but sherwood caused deep problems within the squad with all stupid public comments he made. 

[Dr_Pangloss]

3 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Hmm you cant blame lerner for that ridiculous leicester defeat, that was sherwood 100% lerners a majority to blame but sherwood caused deep problems within the squad with all stupid public comments he made. 

Just to play devils advocate though, cos I keep reading about Sherwood's damage and how he has destroyed various players (including Guzan). But these guys are men, and they are professional footballers, they should be able to get over what ever damage Sherwood has caused them mentally by now. What Sherwood did to them should hardly be causing post traumatic stress disorder among the ranks. 

[StefanAVFC]

2 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Just to play devils advocate though, cos I keep reading about Sherwood's damage and how he has destroyed various players (including Guzan). But these guys are men, and they are professional footballers, they should be able to get over what ever damage Sherwood has caused them mentally by now. What Sherwood did to them should hardly be causing post traumatic stress disorder among the ranks. 

Urgh, such a stone-age attitude towards mental state.

[Dr_Pangloss]

Just now, StefanAVFC said:

Urgh, such a stone-age attitude towards mental state.

LOL OK.

[StefanAVFC]

'They're men and they're professional footballers which means they can't be affected by things mentally' is an attitude that just shows why people don't talk about their mental state openly.

Especially the 'men' part. 

[Keyblade]

2 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Yeah because our goal scoring has been superb

It isnt and I would probably put it 4th in our list of major problems. Way to miss the point though.

[StefanAVFC]

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

I do find it odd, that the people defending team selections and liking posts defending team selections are mainly the people who wanted the last manager sacked for not picking their favourite player. 

And amazingly that was while we were winning games and on course to survive. 

I find it amazing that you're still talking about one post that about 8 people liked almost 9 months later. That's serious dedication, fair play. Most people would have stopped caring months ago.

Edited December 29, 2015 by StefanAVFC

[Guest av1]

13 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Hmm you cant blame lerner for that ridiculous leicester defeat, that was sherwood 100% lerners a majority to blame but sherwood caused deep problems within the squad with all stupid public comments he made. 

No you can't, but you can blame Lerner for employing him in the first place. After watching his short stint at spurs, 90% of us knew it would end in tears. 

Every problem at the club is a result of his poor running of the club.

IMO.