Roberto Di Matteo

[Tommo_b]

1 minute ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

http://www.footballinsider247.com/promotion-expert-lined-up-to-replace-di-matteo-at-aston-villa-report/?

 

 

He might be a great manager but I've never wanted Bruce anywhere near this club, there must be better options out there if we are looking!?

[Jareth]

7 hours ago, Villaphan04 said:

i think his downfall has been caused by trying to play all of our new attacking signings plus Ayew at the same time, and that takes the midfield out of balance. 

I think you are right. 

[Demitri_C]

We just drew with probably the best team in the championship, in fact completely dominated them for nearly a whole half yet how can we sack him at this point? It would make us look ridiculous and like leeds. What quality manager is going to want to come to a team setup like that?

People say we are getting worse,  how? Bristol city and ipswich we were terrible today we were very good in parts. So thats not true to me. In addition we finally came back from a losing position to obtain something which hasnt happened this season.Rafa looked relived when he heard final whistle.

Am i happy with RDM performance so far? No of course not. We should have won more games. We are showing we are noy pushovers but we are just having trouble converting draws into wins.

I think he needs more time,give him another 4-5 games. If still in same position then he has to go definitely.

[Woodytom]

1 minute ago, Demitri_C said:

 in fact completely dominated them for nearly a whole half.

It was about 10-15 minutes. We didn't do anything until jedinak header. Then ayew hit the post. Then it was another 10 mins of dross then we battered them.

Depends on how you look at it tbh?

For me, I'm questioning for the billionth time this century, why it takes 75-80 minutes for us to look remotely interested.

[Woodytom]

5 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I think he needs more time,give him another 4-5 games. If still in same position then he has to go definitely.

4-5 games more of this and we don't get promoted. Simple as that.

[Villarocker]

6 minutes ago, Woodytom said:

It was about 10-15 minutes. We didn't do anything until jedinak header. Then ayew hit the post. Then it was another 10 mins of dross then we battered them.

Depends on how you look at it tbh?

For me, I'm questioning for the billionth time this century, why it takes 75-80 minutes for us to look remotely interested.

How can you say it takes 75-80 minutes before we look interested when we've conceded so many late goals?

[mattyvilla]

it's not just a simple as sacking the manager , it can lead to changing the whole backroom staff , players not wanting to play for the new manager ,the new manager not wanting the player that are here.The club needs to build stability even if it means a couple if seasons in this league.

[bobzy]

8 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Ah yes, the mighty Brentford who just got a spanking by Wolves and sit in the incredible position of 9th in the Championship. To think we shouldn't be dispatching of sides like this at home with the players we have and the money we have spent is utterly laughable and just goes to show how standards have slipped among some segments of our fan base. 

MK Dons beat Man Utd 4-0 the other season. Chelsea lost to Bradford 4-2. Welcome to the world of professional football where teams are good enough to beat other teams.

Sarcastic crap like "the mighty Brentford" "shite like Brentford" is garbage and why other fans are quite happy to see such a self-entitled group of fans (we won the European Cup once don't you know?) out of the top flight.

[bobzy]

35 minutes ago, Woodytom said:

It was about 10-15 minutes. We didn't do anything until jedinak header. Then ayew hit the post. Then it was another 10 mins of dross then we battered them.

Depends on how you look at it tbh?

For me, I'm questioning for the billionth time this century, why it takes 75-80 minutes for us to look remotely interested.

Newcastle did absolutely nothing for the last 30 minutes - it was entirely us. "Dross". Superb.

You're aware we normally start strongly then fade by the way, right? Your last bit is just wrong. 

Edited September 25, 2016 by bobzy

[Tomaszk]

Bruce won't have Phelen available you wouldn't think if he was to come in.

I think he'd keep Clarke to be honest.

[Mantis]

I'm sort in this position now where I won't defend him much but I don't feel like I can push for his sacking either. Because we've had so many managers who have failed over the years I just feel like the next one is going to fail too even if they look good on paper. We've tried so many different types of manager over the years and they've all failed more or less.

Houllier - experienced progressive manager with English and continental experience. Failed, although might have ended up good had he stayed healthy.

McLeish - Dour experienced manager. Failed to absolutely nobody's surprise

Lambert - Relatively young and up and coming British manager with a reputation for attacking football. Arguably achieved minor "success" in keeping us up for two seasons while spending peanuts and also found Benteke but still ultimately failed and ended up extremely negative.

Sherwood - Was up and coming and known for playing attacking football. Kept us up and got us to a cup final but then failed spectacularly. Totally out of his depth.

Garde - Up and coming progressive continental manager. Destined to fail as soon as it became clear that he wasn't going to be backed. Unsurprisingly failed.

Di Matteo - Quite experienced, has got a club promoted before and is high profile. Spent a lot of money on the squad but seems to be failing already.

 

Obviously you can have the right manager at the wrong time and under Lerner you could argue that Lambert and Garde for example were always going to end up failing due to the lack of backing but it just feels like whatever we do the manager fails. I guess it doesn't help that we've lurched between different types of manager so often.

Edited September 25, 2016 by Mantis

[andyh]

When you set the team up like he did last night with 7 defensive players starting then you deserve all the questions and criticism that comes your way, the set up was disgraceful.

The fact we were not 2 or 3 down by half time was purely down to Newcastles woeful finishing.

He needs 4 points from the next 2 games or he's toast I reckon.

Edited September 25, 2016 by andyh

[bobzy]

5 minutes ago, andyh said:

When you set the team up like he did last night with 7 defensive players starting then you deserve all the questions and criticism that comes your way, the set up was disgraceful.

The fact we were not 2 or 3 down by half time was purely down to Newcastles woeful finishing.

He needs 4 points from the next 2 games or he's toast I reckon.

7 defensive players?!?

[BigAl]

Got it wrong it with the 3 at the back but has to get credit for changing it around and the subs worked .Would like to see us be us be a bit more direct think we are trying to play a bit too much football at times and a lot of our players at the back and I'm the middle aren't exactly great passers we seem to play much better when we go direct .

[This Could Be Rotterdam]

The problem with three at the back and Jedinak is that we are effectively playing 4 at the back with two wb's. You don't need the third CB because Jedinak will drop back in and cover as the third should. For me, Jedinak should have been told his only job was to sit on shelvey and hammer him every time he got the ball. Take him out and you take half of newcastkes midfield intensity out of the game. 

Ywsterday was far too defensive, and I'm increasingly concerned about rdm's tactics and especially his substitutions but I also wonder where Clarke is in all of this. We looked great when we started attacking, and if we'd scored 5-10 minutes earlier I think we'd have won but if and buts.

one last thing, if I was a Newcastle fan (thank McGrath I'm not) I'd be absolutely fuming with Rafa for failing to respond to us growing into the game and not reacting. They looked stunned.

[bobzy]

r.e: the wingbacks, it's not necessarily right for us but, if we ARE going to use them then why not play Gestede?! Baffling.

I think we need to play Amavi and Bacuna as fullbacks with the ability to push forward if needed. 2 centre backs with Jedinak as a proper DM that can drop in if the fullbacks are high up the pitch. 2 central midfielders in front of him (probably Tshibola and Westwood, maybe Tshibola and Grealish?) then McCormack behind Kodjia and Ayew with Gestede as the option from the bench. 

[LakotaDakota]

There are only 2 teams in the league that have lost fewer games than us.

There are only 6 teams in the league that have conceded fewer goals than us.

The wins aren't coming which is obviously a massive concern but we are not losing either and despite some absolutely shambolic defending at times we still have one of the best defences.

Too early to get rid as pretty much the entire team has been assembled in the last 10 weeks and due to injuries we simply haven't been able to establish any sort of regular line-up.

 

Not so sure on the clamour for Gestede to start, He looks superb coming off the bench after an hour but doesn't seem to have quite the same impact when he is starting

[Woodytom]

46 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Newcastle did absolutely nothing for the last 30 minutes - it was entirely us. "Dross". Superb.

You're aware we normally start strongly then fade by the way, right? Your last bit is just wrong. 

Did I limit it to just the season? No.

Just now, LakotaDakota said:

There are only 2 teams in the league that have lost fewer games than us.

There are only 6 teams in the league that have conceded fewer goals than us.

There are only 16 teams in the league higher than us. That doesn't quite work that one...

[TheStagMan]

On 19/09/2016 at 05:32, Eastie said:

Fine lines between success and failure - pity games didn't last 80 minutes as we'd be right up there challenging - whether it's a fitness issue or just lack of concentration we must learn to see out games and with our personnel we have a better chance if we try to kill teams off with another goal rather than try and hang on and defend a one goal lead . 

Sounds good to me.

[Nicho]

35 minutes ago, Mantis said:

I'm sort in this position now where I won't defend him much but I don't feel like I can push for his sacking either. Because we've had so many managers who have failed over the years I just feel like the next one is going to fail too even if they look good on paper. We've tried so many different types of manager over the years and they've all failed more or less.

Houllier - experienced progressive manager with English and continental experience. Failed, although might have ended up good had he stayed healthy.

McLeish - Dour experienced manager. Failed to absolutely nobody's surprise

Lambert - Relatively young and up and coming British manager with a reputation for attacking football. Arguably achieved minor "success" in keeping us up for two seasons while spending peanuts and also found Benteke but still ultimately failed and ended up extremely negative.

Sherwood - Was up and coming and known for playing attacking football. Kept us up and got us to a cup final but then failed spectacularly. Totally out of his depth.

Garde - Up and coming progressive continental manager. Destined to fail as soon as it became clear that he wasn't going to be backed. Unsurprisingly failed.

Di Matteo - Quite experienced, has got a club promoted before and is high profile. Spent a lot of money on the squad but seems to be failing already.

 

Obviously you can have the right manager at the wrong time and under Lerner you could argue that Lambert and Garde for example were always going to end up failing due to the lack of backing but it just feels like whatever we do the manager fails. I guess it doesn't help that we've lurched between different types of manager so often.

We have swung from manager to manager which along with the funding is part of the reason for our failings. The most consistent clubs have a continuity, a strategic plan to there transfer policies, playing style and managerial appointments. Barcelona, Bayern, Ajax, Juve, Real have longevity due to sticking to a plan and importantly the money to back it up.

Soouthampton seem to be doing it now and you could argue Spurs have been doing it for a while. If RDM fits a strategic plan and fits a mission statement then I'm happy to continue with him until it really looks like we can't win games. We won't know if we have any sort of plan until he's gone and we appoint the next one. 

Hes taken on a massive task but if by the time we get to 20 league games and there hasn't been a drastic improvement on oir points to games ratio he will be gone.

for me he also needs to go 3 behind a striker or 1 up top and two high wingers to get the best out of our strikers. Give us a strong defensive unit and let the talent we have do its thing.