Steve Bruce

[bobzy]

Just now, TheStagMan said:

Really? (where is that laughing smiley?) The result says otherwise, the radio commentary says otherwise, the reports say otherwise. People who were at the match say otherwise, so - please tell - how EXACTLY did we compete in this game?

Remember - we played against a League one team who had more shots at goal, more shots on target and ultimately won 3-1.

 

The defence of Bruce is **** ludicrous at times. 

Yes, they had more shots and scored more. As I said, they were the better side and won.

We weren’t COMPLETELY OUTPLAYED. It wasn’t 7-0 to Peterborough. Their third goal was scored on a counter attack as we shoved everything forward. 

Fair play to them, they played well and deserved their win. But we weren’t COMPLETELY OUTPLAYED, we just lost 

 

“Defence of Bruce”!?!? Hahahaha  **** me, some people

[AvfcRigo82]

13 minutes ago, bobzy said:

The drama in here is **** ludicrous at times. 

You love it really..  

[Rob182]

9 hours ago, vreitti said:

Okay, English isn't my first language. Obviously I wasn't in any way suggesting we were lucky to win that game. We played superbly and fully deserved the comfortable victory. 

My post wasn’t a difficult one to translate. It was two words, a scoreline and an emoji. Maybe look up the word I’m laughing at before you start to despair?

 

As Vive-la-villa said, ‘anomaly’ would have been a perfectly reasonable word to use for that win. But ‘fluke’, no effing way.

 

[TheStagMan]

7 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Yes, they had more shots and scored more. As I said, they were the better side and won.

We weren’t COMPLETELY OUTPLAYED. It wasn’t 7-0 to Peterborough. Their third goal was scored on a counter attack as we shoved everything forward. 

Fair play to them, they played well and deserved their win. But we weren’t COMPLETELY OUTPLAYED, we just lost 

 

“Defence of Bruce”!?!? Hahahaha  **** me, some people

 Thank you for finding that smiley for me. It sums up my reaction to your comments perfectly. 

 

Still waiting for your explanation of how we "competed" in that game? Perhaps you could try answering the question rather than insulting people?

No, it wasn't 7-0 to Peterborough, partly down to Steer making a string of excellent saves (perhaps you missed that?). When your goalkeeper is MOTM you have not competed.

I'm sorry - if you find this kind of result acceptable or think that we competed in this match you need to have a good long look at yourself. You think this was a reasonable performance?

"We just lost" - oh, (Against Peterborough United) OK then, that's OK. 

 

**** me, me some people? is that the best argument you have?? I suppose you think it will be an unreasonable reaction if we get to the playoffs and then don't go up? cos, you know, we got there and competed. 

Edited January 7, 2018 by TheStagMan

[bobzy]

Just now, TheStagMan said:

 Thank you for finding that smiley for me. It sums up my reaction to your comments perfectly. 

No, it wasn't 7-0 to Peterborough, partly down to Steer making a string of excellent saves (perhaps you missed that).

I'm sorry - if you find this kind of result acceptable or think that we competed in this match you need to have a good long look at yourself. You think this was a reasonable performance? 

"We just lost" - oh, (Against Peterborough United) OK then, that's OK. 

 

**** me, me some people? is that the best argument you have?? I suppose you think it will be an unreasonable reaction if we get to the playoffs and then don't go up? cos, you know, we got there and competed. 

Where have I said the result was “acceptable”?

Where have I said it was a “reasonable performance”?

Where have I given any “defence of Bruce”?

 

”**** me some people” isn’t an argument - it’s a statement. Every single game we don’t win just leads to a barrage of “Bruce out”/“Bruce defence” nonsense.

Like we have some divine right to win absolutely every game in this division. Like we have some divine right to just win the league.

We got knocked out of a cup in a game where we started some players recovering from injury, some squad players and some youngsters. It just isn’t a big deal.

[TheStagMan]

7 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

My post wasn’t a difficult one to translate. It was two words, a scoreline and an emoji. Maybe look up the word I’m laughing at before you start to despair?

 

As Vive-la-villa said, ‘anomaly’ would have been a perfectly reasonable word to use for that win. But ‘fluke’, no effing way.

 

Why get hung up on semantics of the word used? You knew exactly what he meant and you clearly agree with that analysis. Yes, fluke can be taken to mean we didn't deserve the 5-0, which is not true as we were excellent, but it was definitely an outlying result, an anomaly,  unusual and not in keeping with our results to date and that's how most people would have read it.

[dn1982]

24 minutes ago, Eastie said:

We can not afford anymore badruns under Bruce that’s for sure - we need to be be bang on our game from here until may and with no cup distractions and injuries mostly cleared up we have to now kick on - there can be no excuses from here on in 

I think we need a long winning run to get some points in the bank for the tough end to season we have. 

[Rob182]

@TheStagMan You’re clearly missing the point of my post. My post wasn’t to argue that I think we can replicate the 5-0 win again and again, my post wasn’t simply to show my amusement at someone saying that the 5-0 win was a ‘fluke’. Why would I forgive the word used, when that’s the entire point that I’m laughing at/ disagreeing with.

 

The fact that some people are still trying to imply that the 5-0 win WAS a fluke is just hilarious.

 

A lucky, deflected shot that results in a goal, giving you a 1-0 win could be considered a fluke. Darren Bent’s beachball goal against Liverpool could be considered a fluke. A snooker shot being ricocheted randomly around the table and potting a ball could be considered a fluke.

 

A 5-0 ‘fluke’ would need all 5 of those goals, and all defending of the oppositions attacks, to have some element of fortune and luck.

 

The win was an anomaly. It’s probably going to be looked back on in the same way that we view the 4-0 win against Burton. But don’t take anything away from the players who got those goals, by calling it a ‘fluke’.

[TheStagMan]

1 minute ago, bobzy said:

Where have I said the result was “acceptable”?

Where have I said it was a “reasonable performance”?

Where have I given any “defence of Bruce”?

 

”**** me some people” isn’t an argument - it’s a statement. Every single game we don’t win just leads to a barrage of “Bruce out”/“Bruce defence” nonsense.

Like we have some divine right to win absolutely every game in this division. Like we have some divine right to just win the league.

We got knocked out of a cup in a game where we started some players recovering from injury, some squad players and some youngsters. It just isn’t a big deal.

You said:

"We did compete"

That typically means that we played well, and did not deserve to lose. It is also the terminology used to describe a "lesser" team playing against a higher league team, when they expect to lose - which is the wrong way round.

To say that you felt we competed must mean that you felt the performance was in some way acceptable.  

You could have then decided to show some examples of how we were not completely outplayed. Instead you decided to throw sarcastic comments (lets accept your position that they were not insults), what reaction did you expect?

 

As for the comments about some devine right.... Well......

Yes, we SHOULD expect to be able to beat a team from the league below us. We should not expect to get tonked 3-1 (at home). This kind of acceptance of mediocrity is why we are in the position we are in.

If it was a one off performance, then most would agree that it doesn't matter - however the concern is that it is so in tune with everything we have seen in the last 12 months, that it is not an outlying performance. To use the terminology everyone seems to be getting so heated about, this game was not a fluke......

Losing to a team below us should NEVER be acceptable, even if it has become expected.

People seem to miss the fact that individual results are not the thing people are complaining about, it is the perceived lack of progress, we have a good result and think - "yes, maybe we are moving forward", then this kind of s**t happens, almost immediately. 

 

And by the way, yes, a team aiming for promotion and outspending every other team should EXPECT to beat pretty much everyone they play. 

 

[Jareth]

Cripes, our second 11 get beat in the cup by a motivated team a league below us and suddenly Bruce has to leave immediately. This feels a bit..... hysterical?

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

It was an anomaly, 5-0 results usually are, but  it was also another win, something which isn’t so much of an anomaly under Steve Bruce. 

[TheStagMan]

5 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

@TheStagMan You’re clearly missing the point of my post. My post wasn’t to argue that I think we can replicate the 5-0 win again and again, my post wasn’t simply to show my amusement at someone saying that the 5-0 win was a ‘fluke’. Why would I forgive the word used, when that’s the entire point that I’m laughing at/ disagreeing with.

 

The fact that some people are still trying to imply that the 5-0 win WAS a fluke is just hilarious.

 

A lucky, deflected shot that results in a goal, giving you a 1-0 win could be considered a fluke. Darren Bent’s beachball goal against Liverpool could be considered a fluke. A snooker shot being ricocheted randomly around the table and potting a ball could be considered a fluke.

 

A 5-0 ‘fluke’ would need all 5 of those goals, and all defending of the oppositions attacks, to have some element of fortune and luck.

 

The win was an anomaly. It’s probably going to be looked back on in the same way that we view the 4-0 win against Burton. But don’t take anything away from the players who got those goals, by calling it a ‘fluke’.

I get exactly the point of your post. You object to the use of a particular word and you are clearly ignoring the point the poster was trying to make in your eagerness to criticise the use of a particular word to mean something that the poster did not intend. 

 

I get what you are saying. You are objecting to a particular word being used. Accepted. FLUKE is the wrong word, the performance was excellent and a deserved win. Can I make it any clearer that the point you are trying to make (in order to argue against something that was not actually meant by the poster) is accepted. 

 

Now, perhaps you would like to comment on the original intent of the post that was the concern that that type of performance seen in the Bristol game is unusual, against the norm, an outlying result in a season where such results are not commonplace, and certainly both the result and the performance were unexpected, and therefore despite the delight and happiness about said result, there is a concern that we are unlikely to repeat said result, as the game against Peterborough (which would have been a great opportunity to solidify the confidence and positive vibe) has demonstrated.

[fightoffyour]

12 hours ago, VillanousOne said:

I mean Bruce has admitted he played too many youngsters and players coming back from injury today, without addressing the part about them playing out of position.

Will this kill our season, no, does this mean our best eleven can't go onto to win the next match and matches after, no probably not (although doubt it did confidence any good amongst the regulars who were involved or will be involved soon).

The issue is we have made losing to lower league clubs in cup competitions a now yearly occurrence, i get why some people are almost numb to this and why the league is always more important, but as fans if we don't feel embarrassed about losing to any club in the cups let alone clubs leagues below us, then we are pretty damaged (not blaming the fans for that as i experience the same apathy) plus usually we lose in the most abject and pathetic of circumstances, like today. 

Plus people like that fat pie faced small heath loving scumbag Barry Fry get to laugh at us, and that is hard to stomach.

The problem wasn't playing too many youngsters though. In fact, he hardly played any. The only youngster for me, in the context, was O'Hare. You also have RHM's 10 minutes if you want to be picky.

Davis, Green and Onomah are young yes, but they have been first team regulars. Bree hasn't played much for us but was a first team player for Barnsley. Steer is young for a GK but is older, and possibly even better than SJ.

Playing youngsters would have meant Suliman or Clark at CB instead of Taylor, with Bree in his correct position at RB and RDL at LB, JDH in midfield instead of Bjarnasson and a start for RHM. I have no doubt that that team would have performed better than the one Bruce picked.

Edited January 7, 2018 by fightoffyour

[AvfcRigo82]

31 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Cripes, our second 11 get beat in the cup by a motivated team a league below us and suddenly Bruce has to leave immediately. This feels a bit..... hysterical?

To be fair there where a few first teamers in there and they should still have been able to see off Peterborough United on home soil imo.

But reading many comments from folk that again his setup was wrong, players again played in unatural positions etc. When will he ever learn?

Sorry but Bruce deserves some of the stick he gets as he is the one causing the negative in the first place with his ineptness of modern day football.

 

Edited January 7, 2018 by AvfcRigo82

[Jareth]

5 minutes ago, AvfcRigo82 said:

To be fair there where a few first teamers in there and they should still have been able to see off Peterborough United on home soil imo.

But reading many comments from folk that again his setup was wrong, players again played in unatural positions etc. When will he ever learn?

Sorry but Bruce deserves some of the stick he gets as he is the one causing the negative in the first place with his ineptness of modern day football.

 

I don't think for a second he took that match seriously, but used it to give fringe players a chance to shine and to give Terry minutes. That team, in those positions was an experiment which clearly did not work. If the manager was trying to win that game and progress to the next round he would have played a very different team. So we lose and he gets a load of stick - predictable as day follows night. I could not care less about the cup this season, it is entirely about the league and a confident team who blitzed Bristol have had a well deserved rest after a shed load of gruelling games in December. The manager made the right call in my opinion. 

[Rob182]

27 minutes ago, TheStagMan said:

Now, perhaps you would like to comment on the original intent of the post that was the concern that that type of performance seen in the Bristol game is unusual, against the norm, an outlying result in a season where such results are not commonplace, and certainly both the result and the performance were unexpected, and therefore despite the delight and happiness about said result, there is a concern that we are unlikely to repeat said result, as the game against Peterborough (which would have been a great opportunity to solidify the confidence and positive vibe) has demonstrated.

Firstly; I’m glad you agree that ‘fluke’ was the wrong word, and therefore accept and agree with my post.

 

Secondly; perhaps you would like to go back and re-read the original post that referred to a 5-0 fluke. ‘A fluke 5-0’ was the only mention of the Bristol game. The rest of the post was addressing Bruce ‘throwing’ the cup game, ‘disrespecting the club and fans’, ‘a disgrace’ and that Bruce is damaging the club.

 

I can’t see any, reasoned mention of the 5-0 being unusual or against the norm. It just seemed to be referenced as a way of having a further dig at Bruce and trying to take credit away from him for the good win. The poster said that Bruce’s true colours had reappeared in the cup, but a game with so many changes & players returning from injury is hardly a fair reflection of what is a ‘regular’ Aston Villa under Bruce.

 

If you’d like my opinion on the cup loss, then scroll back about 7 pages and you’ll see what I said after the game. Though it’s nothing to write home about, as I didn’t watch the game.

[OutByEaster?]

So here we are on January the 7th with what almost feels like a new start. There are no more distractions, there's nothing confusing, nothing that isn't clear.

Steve Bruce has taken on a job with a clear aim and he has made sacrifices in his plan to achieve that aim. I may not like being knocked out of the cup in the fashion we were yesterday, and I might hanker for a more progressive style of football, but what I really want, and what Steve Bruce really wants and what the owner really wants and what I reckon all of us really want is now as clear as day.

Promotion is the job.

Not style, not cup runs, not making me smile every day of the season, not the beautiful game; just making all of us incredibly happy in May.

Now, given all of that, and given that I thought we'd struggle to make the playoffs this season, I think it's more than possible to suggest the manager is doing okay - don't get me wrong, the floor around my pram is littered with the toys of this season - I've been a critic and I've been more than that at times. I've also given credit to a manager who is soldiering on through a season that's at times been painful and ugly. Maybe I should have been watching the table, not the pitch. We're 5th, and 5th is okay.

We're in a position where we're 2 points clear of dropping out of the playoffs, and we're 5 points from second place - for me Wolves have one of the automatic places sewn up and with twenty games left I think there are still a dozen teams involved in the chase for the other spots that give you promotion or a shot at it.

Twenty games will tell us whether Steve Bruce is right.

Twenty games will tell us if the pragmatism and experience of the manager wins out over the occasional terrace dreamer carrying the lost ambitions of a very wounded Lion - whether results trump enjoyment.

We have a foundation, we're in the conversation. So for me, I'm giving Steve Bruce a fresh start, a clean sheet, shelving my reservations and starting today. I'm sure a number of you will find that impossible, that's your right, it hasn't been an easy tenure to enjoy and sometimes it's been difficult to endure - but it may still be one that ends where we want it to.

Twenty to Twenty=two games to play gaffer. 

Be right.

 

[TRO]

16 hours ago, vreitti said:

You can't be serious? Surely we have the players to beat a midtable league one side? We played 5 regular first team players ffs.

This simply highlights what's been evident for the last 15 months. Bruce doesn't know what he's doing. He keeps needlessly playing players out if position. Furthermore he just isn't able to get the best out of the players at his disposal, be that the first team or the reserves. He can't be arsed to create any sort of clearcut gameplan, and that's why the inconsistencies don't go away.

Bristol was a fluke. I'm fairly certain we will struggle badly against Nottingham too.

Its was a question, not a claim.

Ok not arguing, but.

why did the revered Dean Smith fail against lowly Notts county.....does he not know what he's doing, because he can beat aston villa anytime he likes, but not Notts county.

Edited January 7, 2018 by TRO

[foreveryoung]

They had the passion and wanted to win, we didn't have either, period. If I was any of the players pals out of the team, I would be asking the likes of Davis what went wrong and expect him to be embarrassed.

Outplayed, yes definately, it was 3-1 they could have scored more. 

Did we have a better team, god yes, that's why they are a bunch of mugs who couldn't beat a league 1 team, who have lost 9 in the league and are by no means a great team in League 1.

Ohh, an before I forget, Bruce is a mug for letting them play that way for 70 minutes. There's not many teams where the second tier squad do not at least try and win the game. usually they are just not good enough, but its obvious the team played yesterday was better than Peterborough's, they just couldn't be arsed.

Edited January 7, 2018 by foreveryoung

[Dr_Pangloss]

The enduring theme seems to be that this doesn't matter. Well, whilst I'm not as upset over this as I would be a league defeat, given the priorities, it was nevertheless an abysmal display and not something I'm prepared to just shrug my shoulders at. We had enough quality on the pitch to at least not lose that game. We were outplayed, they ripped us apart multiple times, and without Steer making several saves could well have turned us over by more goals. 

There was a lack of passion and drive, which was inkeeping with Bruce's approach to the match. Very poor stuff.

Edited January 7, 2018 by Dr_Pangloss