Steve Bruce

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, ciggiesnbeer said:

So, what do we think to Bruce changing it up to 4-4-2? Sign he is going for the automatics?

He was always going for the automatics. 

Were better when we don’t play 4-4-2, but current injuries mean it may be a better option. 

[sheepyvillian]

2 hours ago, ciggiesnbeer said:

So, what do we think to Bruce changing it up to 4-4-2? Sign he is going for the automatics?

 I'd hate to think he'd settled for the play - off's.

[Stevo985]

9 hours ago, srsmithusa said:

Really don’t want on your bad side.  But can you document when Ross was given a clean slate?  Was it done publicly as it was for Gaby (and Richards)?   If not, how do you know it was done.  You assert it as if it’s irrefutable fact, but I must have missed it.   Thanks in advance for educating me.  

Click Me

Quote

 

“I was disappointed with how the Ross McCormack situation transpired
 

Even in the summer, I shook hands with him and said let’s try and make a fist of it if we can.

“Unfortunately it didn’t happen.”

 

 

And Me

Quote

 

“McCormack looks as if he’s come to an end at Melbourne,” Bruce said. “I’ve given him a couple of weeks off. He can’t go anywhere else because he’s played for two other clubs.

“When he comes back after having a couple of weeks off I’ll have a chat with him, see where he’s up to and we’ll go from there.

 

 

[Vive_La_Villa]

On 26/02/2018 at 22:35, VillanousOne said:

It is hard re McCormack as we spanked 12 mil or whatever on him and we will end up losing all that money including a fortune on wages, we already have Micah and Gabby on ridiculous wages gathering dust on the sidelines and probably to a lesser degree Samba as well. I am sure we are still subsiding Gil, Gollini and Tishbola's wages and they will walk away from the club for a fraction (if anything) of what they cost.

I think Bruce has probably acted with good reason with Ross but there is also part of me that thinks it is a manager's job to put differences and ego aside for the good of the club and respect the wages and fees involved enough to make something work, for all i know he did just that with Ross, like any fan i just want the era of always having some kind of bomb squad or high cost, high wage dead wood players sucking the life blood from the club but contributing nothing.

Do all clubs have this issue? Maybe, but in my lifetime since the signing of Bosko Balaban we have made wasting money a central motif of this great club with O'Neill the undisputed king of this.

 

This is a good post. I read somewhere that Southampton have a model for signing players where it's not just ability. They also have to have right character that fits the team but many other factors are considered. Their track record on transfers can't be disputed over the years. 

With Villa it's always seemed we've signed players on ability and track record only. 

With MON they mainly had to be British based and cost a bomb. 

[Rob182]

2 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

This is a good post. I read somewhere that Southampton have a model for signing players where it's not just ability. They also have to have right character that fits the team but many other factors are considered. Their track record on transfers can't be disputed over the years. 

With Villa it's always seemed we've signed players on ability and track record only. 

With MON they mainly had to be British based and cost a bomb. 

MON revolutionized the transfer market, by showing how you can immediately increase a players value.

 

Coach: "We need an £8m midfielder and a £4m striker"

MON: "No problem, I've spotted two great players. Nigel Reo Coker and Marlon Harewood. The only problem is that they're worth £4m and £2m respectively, so just offer their clubs double what they're worth."

Coach: "Erm, Marti-"

MON (on his way out the door): "Bish, bash, bosh, £8m and £4m players in the bag. I'll be home in time for a spot of contretemps"

[tomav84]

1 hour ago, Rob182 said:

MON revolutionized the transfer market, by showing how you can immediately increase a players value.

 

Coach: "We need an £8m midfielder and a £4m striker"

MON: "No problem, I've spotted two great players. Nigel Reo Coker and Marlon Harewood. The only problem is that they're worth £4m and £2m respectively, so just offer their clubs double what they're worth."

Coach: "Erm, Marti-"

MON (on his way out the door): "Bish, bash, bosh, £8m and £4m players in the bag. I'll be home in time for a spot of contretemps"

in MON's defense, real life isnt football manager - managers don't make the bids, it's the DOF/MD/Chief exec/owner

going back to Bruce vs RMc i would be amazed if any manager doesn't do due diligence on any player that the club is about to shell out multi-millions on. RDM probably just thought he could handle him. or maybe RDM isn't as well connected as bruce, and bruce might have been told when he arrived by one of his chums elsewhere "get rid, the lad's poison"

Edited February 28, 2018 by tomav84

[A'Villan]

Regarding McCormack, I think VillanousOne said it well when he mentions ego. That's not to say it's a bad thing, but it's certainly a clash of the ego.

Bruce has drawn a line and McCormack is not towing it. That doesn't mean McCormack is trash or unprofessional, it just means Bruce is displeased.

I was hoping Bruce would find a reconcile here, but to be fair to him, if you're missing training then you can't be fully engaged in team strategy, unless you're playing in a division below your ability, and even then you're not necessarily engaged with those around you.

McCormack is not above the championship, I won't speculate on whether he thinks he is or not, but I would have to assume that Bruce is being reasonable.

Regarding due diligence, as mentioned above, sometimes the only prerequisite is the manager seeing you as someone who can provide victory for the football club, and you have to respect McCormack's record in the Championship and I will even mention Australia. Some managers are going to see him as a prospect without a doubt, and he is just that, but if he has issues others will experience that.

I'm glad we're in a position where we are not dependent on Ross, and can take a stance on any undesirable behaviour, most teams in the division can't afford that luxury I'm guessing.

[Lichfield Dean]

Anybody else annoyed at Bruce arguing we need to give Onomah 'time' because he is young and needs to develop, just like O'Hare and Davis? It's almost like Bruce has forgotten he isn't our player...

[Daweii]

I can accept not playing the youngsters at such an important time of the season, but that also means not playing Onomah.

The only times we should be reverting to youngsters right now is during an injury crisis, or as an impact sub and ideally we should be selecting our youngsters first over anyone on loan.

I understand that Bruce wants to play the players he brought in, but if they're not improving the team then they should always be left out. 

[briny_ear]

12 minutes ago, Lichfield Dean said:

Anybody else annoyed at Bruce arguing we need to give Onomah 'time' because he is young and needs to develop, just like O'Hare and Davis? It's almost like Bruce has forgotten he isn't our player...

You seem to be implying Bruce hasn't given Davis encouragement and time to develop.

I find that a very odd remark. Can you back it up with facts or evidence?

I also find it strange (but sadly not surprising) that Villa fans wouldn’t just get fully behind anyone who is in the squad trying to get us promotion. What does it matter whether they are on loan? If they can get us out of this crappy league, they are fine with me!

 

[Lichfield Dean]

4 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

You seem to be implying Bruce hasn't given Davis encouragement and time to develop.

I find that a very odd remark. Can you back it up with facts or evidence?

I also find it strange (but sadly not surprising) that Villa fans wouldn’t just get fully behind anyone who is in the squad trying to get us promotion. What does it matter whether they are on loan? If they can get us out of this crappy league, they are fine with me!

 

I didn't say Bruce hasn't encouraged Davis at all, it was just that Bruce referred to both Davis and O'Hare in the article as part of his statement that Onomah is the same age as Davis and O'Hare and is thus 'learning his trade'. You're correct of course that Davis has had encouragement, but he is also being treated as a younger player who is just breaking through, as he should be. Should we be treating a Spurs player who is here for one year the same way when we are pushing for promotion?

As for not getting behind Onomah - well of course all Villa fans would get behind him if he was helping us get promoted and/or was a future prospect for the club, the question here is that he doesn't seem to be performing AND Bruce is asking the fans to be patient whilst he develops. To me, we needed a loan player that was ready to play and push for promotion, not a player who might be ready at some unspecified point in the future.

[TRO]

2 hours ago, Lichfield Dean said:

I didn't say Bruce hasn't encouraged Davis at all, it was just that Bruce referred to both Davis and O'Hare in the article as part of his statement that Onomah is the same age as Davis and O'Hare and is thus 'learning his trade'. You're correct of course that Davis has had encouragement, but he is also being treated as a younger player who is just breaking through, as he should be. Should we be treating a Spurs player who is here for one year the same way when we are pushing for promotion?

As for not getting behind Onomah - well of course all Villa fans would get behind him if he was helping us get promoted and/or was a future prospect for the club, the question here is that he doesn't seem to be performing AND Bruce is asking the fans to be patient whilst he develops. To me, we needed a loan player that was ready to play and push for promotion, not a player who might be ready at some unspecified point in the future.

I think you make some arguable points.

I can only imagine that he has taken a young player from Spurs who has shown talent in his games albeit featuring in the youth World Cup ( whatever its called) so he has something. I guess he has said to himself we have many older heads that need some young legs, Josh would fit nicely and at the same time show the physical presence to withstand the inevitable bullying that refs seem to ignore.

I share your frustration with Callum O'Hare , he has all the attributes, but maybe, just maybe, Steve feels that Josh can cope with the rigours of this division more adequately than Callum ( now that is obviously subjective). I think Steve thinks that Callum is a tad behind Josh in the physical development dep't.

I am just speculating of course.

 

[Junxs]

2 hours ago, briny_ear said:

You seem to be implying Bruce hasn't given Davis encouragement and time to develop.

I find that a very odd remark. Can you back it up with facts or evidence?

I also find it strange (but sadly not surprising) that Villa fans wouldn’t just get fully behind anyone who is in the squad trying to get us promotion. What does it matter whether they are on loan? If they can get us out of this crappy league, they are fine with me!

 

Think you've missed the point here, Onomah is simply not performing yet constantly getting picked ahead of players who are doing better or can do better if given the chance (Lansbury, O'Hare). Yet Bruce is arguing he is young and we should be patient with him when theres only 11 games to go and we are at least 4 points off where we need to be. There's a time and place to be asking for patience for a player whos not performing and especially one who wont be here after those 11 games. Yet he talks about Onomah being the same age as O'Hare who he wont even put on the bench, yet looks to be a much better prospect with his cameos and u23s performances. 

[AntrimBlack]

3 hours ago, briny_ear said:

You seem to be implying Bruce hasn't given Davis encouragement and time to develop.

I find that a very odd remark. Can you back it up with facts or evidence?

I also find it strange (but sadly not surprising) that Villa fans wouldn’t just get fully behind anyone who is in the squad trying to get us promotion. What does it matter whether they are on loan? If they can get us out of this crappy league, they are fine with me!

 

I think Villa fans will get behind any player who is trying to get us promotion, and I don't see why you would think otherwise.

The problem with Onomah is that some of us think he does not try hard enough or perhaps is not good enough, and that we should be using one of our own youngsters rather than being asked to accept these performances from another club's player.

The main reason for having a loanee is that he should be good enough to improve the first team, not being someone we have to develop.

[Dr_Pangloss]

Onomah is a terrible player who should be no where near the first team.

[Vive_La_Villa]

Where has he said he needs time? He has just said we need to get behind him which I agree with it. Huge groans whenever he makes a mistake isn't going to help the players confidence or the team. 

I agree we look better without him. But if his picked there's no point getting on his back from the first whistle. Not going to help anyone. 

[TRO]

7 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Where has he said he needs time? He has just said we need to get behind him which I agree with it. Huge groans whenever he makes a mistake isn't going to help the players confidence or the team. 

I agree we look better without him. But if his picked there's no point getting on his back from the first whistle. Not going to help anyone. 

If he is picked, he is picked for a reason.

[briny_ear]

10 hours ago, Junxs said:

Think you've missed the point here, Onomah is simply not performing yet constantly getting picked ahead of players who are doing better or can do better if given the chance (Lansbury, O'Hare). Yet Bruce is arguing he is young and we should be patient with him when theres only 11 games to go and we are at least 4 points off where we need to be. There's a time and place to be asking for patience for a player whos not performing and especially one who wont be here after those 11 games. Yet he talks about Onomah being the same age as O'Hare who he wont even put on the bench, yet looks to be a much better prospect with his cameos and u23s performances. 

I think the only point is, please don’t let your opinion that Onomah is “simply not performing” and that O’Hare “looks a much better prospect”, override the fact that Onomah is getting picked regularly for a team that is striving to get promotion and - as part of that team - deserves our full support.

You can  moan as much as you like about Onomah once the season is over. Just now is not the time for fans to be developing a campaign against a particular player.

 

 

Edited March 5, 2018 by briny_ear

[terrytini]

Whilst I agree it helps nobody for fans during a game to jeer their own player ( its madness really !) it’s much, much harder to avoid making audible your unhappiness with repeated errors by a player.....which is what actually happened at Sheffield ( which is the game I think sparked Bruce speaking out ).

The harsh reality is he made error after error, appeared extremely uncommitted, made poor decisions and, what really topped it off, even had to be summoned to the touch line by Bruce - after not noticing two short corners in succession - who had to then move him to another position due to his poor display.

Given that, without any deliberate nastiness or pre meditated negativity, the frustration of the fans simply got more and more audible.

Its only natural. When someone plays a good ball, a few thousand fans say “ good ball”....when someone pulls out of a tackle, the same few thousand collectively sound their exasperation.

So for me, Bruce (etc) address the issue from the wrong perspective, he’s not ( or hasn’t been ) a target, the audible dissatisfaction stems from his performances - which ( obviously opinions differ) have in my view been poor. Myself, and I’m sure every fan, would love nothing more than to be able to applaud him for 90 minutes.

Now, ADDED to that is the issue that people simply don’t see why he has been persisted with when even at best he has offered - regardless of his potential ( which is largely irrelevant to us ) - nothing more than for example Lansbury AND when we lack creativity but are leaving a clearly creative guy of our own out the squad. Really, with the best will in the world, you put all that together and I struggle to see any other outcomes.....unless he puts in a performance that provokes a positive reaction.

 

Edited March 5, 2018 by terrytini

[terrytini]

I would add that IMO football really would be a pointless exercise if we all adopted the approach that any player the Manager picks must automatically make sense and people shouldn’t react to what they see.