Steve Bruce

[Villan_of_oz]

41 minutes ago, Lerner's Driver said:

All of my posts are football based, old chap, I never get emotional and bring my hobbies, work and girlfriend into the conversation.

Granted, some of what I post is tangential at times, but in this thread at least, it is always done to express my opinion that some, with yourself as the main culprit, need to give the incessant whingeing a rest and just see what unfolds.

It has always been my football based opinion that Steven Bruce is far from perfect in executing his managerial duties at this club and probaby most of the others he's been at too.

But... as I said a few million pages back, that's what you get with him. His journey is often slow, a bit cumbersome, often inclusive of hiccups and frequently successful in the end.

I don't like what sounds like his excuse making either, but it doesn't make me hate him. I don't like the fact he plays Hutton or Thor when both can be liabilities, but I've certainly been wrong about the former in recent weeks.

And yes, I didn't like the negative, shapeless, 'don't lose' football we've seen for too long, but nobody on here did. At the same time, I didn't analyse every substitution in order to prove Bruce's incompetence, partly because it would be pointless to do so and party because nobody wants to read it when it comes across as an endless rant.

I don't love Bruce or even particularly defend him, other than to say, things are rarely as crystal clear as we believe them to be. Instead, we draw on certain facts including the things we see to construct the theories which suit our vision of the world... But that doesn't mean we are right.

Trump happens, Corbyn happens, Hutton happens, Villa playing well and winning under Bruce and his awkward lumpy leadership happens. 

 

Oooo, good post. I'll pay this. Still dont like. Bruce 

[Lerner's Driver]

14 minutes ago, Villan_of_oz said:

Oooo, good post. I'll pay this. Still dont like. Bruce 

As is your wont, Sir. Thank you for your brevity.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Lerner's Driver

[TrentVilla]

9 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

I think you have misunderstood my post tonally. I was careful not to make out like I believe Dr Tony is sitting in his lair like a bond style villain ready to launch a nuke towards Aston at the first sign of trouble. I am however expressing caution of my own, because if the club were in a position where they needed to make a profit this summer of £15-22m (depending how you count the Amavi fee) then somebody has been doing a poor job controlling the purse strings.

I didn't say FFP didn't restrict our spending because I am aware of the restrictions and potential penalties. I asserted that I wasn't convinced it restricted our spending as much as is being suggested. If we HAD to sell Nathan Baker in order to keep our head above water then that is truly worrying indeed. Is that what you are suggesting? In layman's terms, is it the case that Wyness spunked the lot on RDM and then we sacked him within 11 games? Bruce then had approximately £5m net to play with in January, minus the huge profit made this summer.

Wages are of course an unknown factor. In fact, all of this is speculation. You happen to fall completely on the side of the club which is your choice, I am somewhere in the middle I think.

If it is wholly correct that we are right on the line, I'm glad he is highlighting the issue and hope that we learn from it. Besides which, his words are hardly scathing...

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/881619/Aston-Villa-News-Steve-Bruce-Tony-Xia-Transfer-Budget-January-EFL-Championship

The headline is extremely misleading. He is answering a question regarding the January budget. 

Sorry to keep on with this but I think it’s important to the wider topic of Bruce.

You said the club had been too cautious and pulled the plug in the summer. That was the point I challenged and I think the quotes from Wyness show that wasn’t the case unless we opt to disbelieve Wyness but even Bruce’s own words seem to support what he was.

It seems fairly clear to me that they spent as much as possible in the summer just as they did in January. So I think the suggestion they pulled the plug is just wrong.

It is obvious an element of balancing the books was at play in the summer and player recruitment and sale decisions were made with this in mind including but not limited to Baker. I don’t though believe Bruce was forced into his sale but obviously that £4m income will have been spent given the red line comment.

I don’t think anyone disputes the errors of the past and that includes the appointment of RDM. The club quite clearly threw the financial kitchen sink at his rebuild which some of us highlighted at the time. It was a gamble that didn’t pay off.

You seem to be critical of that yet then at the same time appear to be advocating the line that the club should have done the same this summer all be it with a smaller budget.

If they were at the red line re FFP then they needed to stop spending not twist again like they did last summer to quote Vive Bunny! Oddly at the end of your post you seem to be agreeing the club need to learn from the past and live within the lines of FFP which contradicts the earlier view they “pulled the plug” and should have carried in spending.

We will have a big issue next summer with FFP if we are in this league. I don’t think going over the line this summer would have been wise.

I’m as big a critic of Wyness as you will likely find but I don’t think a lack of financial support for Bruce should be one of the charges levelled against him.

Bruce spent a fortune in January in a bid to go up, quite a bit of that money was badly spent. Granted he recouped much of that in the summer but he has hardly lacked backing.

In regards the article you Quite I agree it’s not too bad but the tone was very different when the results weren’t good and I suspect the same would happen again if the results went South.

It is more the frequency with which he raises it, sometimes prompted sometimes not, often not in fact during our poor start.

I’m tired of hearing it, I don’t think it helps the club, the players or indeed Bruce himself. I think it’s self serving as I’ve always said and it’s negative. I think it’s an almighty stretch to suggest he could be doing it to enlighten the fans or those running the club about the importance of FFP and financial management.

He should just get on with the job at hand. The results and performances are decent at the moment, it would be nice to have some positivity from Bruce, we’ve heard very very little of it from him this season.

If asked it’s not hard to say “The owner backs me as much as possible with the FFP restrictions, past spending limits what we can spend in January but we will be looking to strengthen where we can”.

It isn’t hard to answer the questions without sounding like you are laying the foundations of an excuse.

[villa89]

8 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

It isn’t hard to answer the questions without sounding like you are laying the foundations of an excuse.

That's how Bruce seems to answer every question.

[hippo]

13 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

To be honest I don't really blame him. I found the club pulling the FFP rug this summer a little bit uncomfortable. I get it, but I think they are being overly cautious and the lack of ambition shown was a bit disappointing. I am hopeful of the longer term plan, but I absolutely see his point.

As far as I am aware we have made a profit on transfer deals under him. Quite a large one actually?

I know what you mean. After all the false dawns, broken promises there being no cash to spend just has you thinking 'here we go again'. 

 

[TRO]

13 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

It’s Bruce that keeps making it a talking point. I think it would be better for all concerned if he stoppped, I agree it’s not helpful and it’s hard to see it as being anything other than self serving.

Yesterday was an impressive and important win, the talk from Bruce should be about that, the next game and possibly January. It shouldn’t be retrospective about net spend or the summer, he has forgotten all about January last year so I wish his amnesia could now extend to the summer.

Big big game on Tuesday especially with Coleman now confirmed.

Yeah, good point.

.....but he still reserves the right to defend himself from insinuation or innuendo.....perhaps he is just getting in first?

maybe he should just cut them short and revert back to the games as you said.

Edited November 20, 2017 by TRO

[Taxahunter]

On 19/11/2017 at 10:20, Lerner's Driver said:

If I could ask Steven Bruce one question, it would be this...

Everyone knows being a football manager is tough. You carry the hopes, dreams and expectations of many thousands of people on your back every day you're in the job. 

This weight then, must feel unbearable on the occasions when the players are not responding to your ideas and you're in a bad run of form.

So... thinking back on your career, can you recall any specific examples of what you did to change things to improve results, or more often than not, did you just stick to your first principles knowing things would work themselves out given time?

For the record, I'm not suggesting there is a straightforward, binary, right or wrong answer to the question - the truth probaby lies somewhere between the two (with quite a big dollop of luck also thrown in for good measure) - but, I do think how he responded would be interesting. 

More of one element than the other, would potentially offer some clues to his 'dinosaur or not' status.

If I could ask him one question, it would be "What were your reasons behind the substitutions you made?". He got the result today and Im happy about it and we played a lot better and created more chances than i have seen before this season. But the substitutions baffles me. What do Whelan have to do to get substituted? Again he just wasnt very good. Why put De Laet on the right wing? and Bjarnarson on the left, when he clearly isnt doing anything for the team at all. In my view the substitutions just made us much more defensive and aloved QPR back in the game with 15 minutes to go.

Even if we won today , im still not convinced about Bruce and still want him leave our club.

[bannedfromHandV]

1 hour ago, TrentVilla said:

Sorry to keep on with this but I think it’s important to the wider topic of Bruce.

You said the club had been too cautious and pulled the plug in the summer. That was the point I challenged and I think the quotes from Wyness show that wasn’t the case unless we opt to disbelieve Wyness but even Bruce’s own words seem to support what he was.

It seems fairly clear to me that they spent as much as possible in the summer just as they did in January. So I think the suggestion they pulled the plug is just wrong.

It is obvious an element of balancing the books was at play in the summer and player recruitment and sale decisions were made with this in mind including but not limited to Baker. I don’t though believe Bruce was forced into his sale but obviously that £4m income will have been spent given the red line comment.

I don’t think anyone disputes the errors of the past and that includes the appointment of RDM. The club quite clearly threw the financial kitchen sink at his rebuild which some of us highlighted at the time. It was a gamble that didn’t pay off.

You seem to be critical of that yet then at the same time appear to be advocating the line that the club should have done the same this summer all be it with a smaller budget.

If they were at the red line re FFP then they needed to stop spending not twist again like they did last summer to quote Vive Bunny! Oddly at the end of your post you seem to be agreeing the club need to learn from the past and live within the lines of FFP which contradicts the earlier view they “pulled the plug” and should have carried in spending.

We will have a big issue next summer with FFP if we are in this league. I don’t think going over the line this summer would have been wise.

I’m as big a critic of Wyness as you will likely find but I don’t think a lack of financial support for Bruce should be one of the charges levelled against him.

Bruce spent a fortune in January in a bid to go up, quite a bit of that money was badly spent. Granted he recouped much of that in the summer but he has hardly lacked backing.

In regards the article you Quite I agree it’s not too bad but the tone was very different when the results weren’t good and I suspect the same would happen again if the results went South.

It is more the frequency with which he raises it, sometimes prompted sometimes not, often not in fact during our poor start.

I’m tired of hearing it, I don’t think it helps the club, the players or indeed Bruce himself. I think it’s self serving as I’ve always said and it’s negative. I think it’s an almighty stretch to suggest he could be doing it to enlighten the fans or those running the club about the importance of FFP and financial management.

He should just get on with the job at hand. The results and performances are decent at the moment, it would be nice to have some positivity from Bruce, we’ve heard very very little of it from him this season.

If asked it’s not hard to say “The owner backs me as much as possible with the FFP restrictions, past spending limits what we can spend in January but we will be looking to strengthen where we can”.

It isn’t hard to answer the questions without sounding like you are laying the foundations of an excuse.

 

All you can do in January is 'spend a fortune', it's why clubs are reluctant to do business then, it was however Bruce's first transfer window and the club are hardly not going to back him with funds are they?

 

Yes, we paid over the odds for Hogan, Lansbury etc and yes, in the main (Hourihane aside) those January signings have proved to be poor selections but who was saying that at the time? I don't recall many, Hogan was tearing it up, Lansbury and Hourihane were statistically two of the most influential midfielders in the division and Bree was apparently the next best thing, Managers make signings, some times they don't work out, shit happens.

 

What did he then spend in the summer? Terry - free, Samba - free, Elmohamady - free (I think), Whelan - £1M, Johnstone - loan (free)

 

Re your last line - it's not hard to hear an excuse if you're looking for one.

[bannedfromHandV]

10 minutes ago, Taxahunter said:

If I could ask him one question, it would be "What were your reasons behind the substitutions you made?". He got the result today and Im happy about it and we played a lot better and created more chances than i have seen before this season. But the substitutions baffles me. What do Whelan have to do to get substituted? Again he just wasnt very good. Why put De Laet on the right wing? and Bjarnarson on the left, when he clearly isnt doing anything for the team at all. In my view the substitutions just made us much more defensive and aloved QPR back in the game with 15 minutes to go.

Even if we won today , im still not convinced about Bruce and still want him leave our club.

WTF?

We had a one goal lead away from home going into the last 10-15 minutes and you can't understand why he would bring on defensive players??

[Jareth]

I think I know why bruce is always so defensive in his interviews - the unrelenting hysterical calls for his head after a few games into the season. I imagine it has shaped him somewhat. 

[Grasshopper]

2 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

 

All you can do in January is 'spend a fortune', it's why clubs are reluctant to do business then, it was however Bruce's first transfer window and the club are hardly not going to back him with funds are they?

 

Yes, we paid over the odds for Hogan, Lansbury etc and yes, in the main (Hourihane aside) those January signings have proved to be poor selections but who was saying that at the time? I don't recall many, Hogan was tearing it up, Lansbury and Hourihane were statistically two of the most influential midfielders in the division and Bree was apparently the next best thing, Managers make signings, some times they don't work out, shit happens.

 

What did he then spend in the summer? Terry - free, Samba - free, Elmohamady - free (I think), Whelan - £1M, Johnstone - loan (free)

 

Re your last line - it's not hard to hear an excuse if you're looking for one.

you answered your own question there.

3 players you mentioned who performed better in this league before they got „Bruced“ and 1 he hasnt given a chance because of Hutton & Elmo

[Grasshopper]

3 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

WTF?

We had a one goal lead away from home going into the last 10-15 minutes and you can't understand why he would bring on defensive players??

???????????WTF??????????

Because, for the first time we

1 - moved the ball through MF forwards and across the pitch

2 - some one touch stuff because there was some movement going on

3 - we actually looked good and in control of the game for much longer than 45mins

4 - There was pressing and an actual commitment to move or be/stay up the pitch

Remarkable really. I had to double-check that I wasn‘t watching Burnley

[Taxahunter]

1 minute ago, bannedfromHandV said:

WTF?

We had a one goal lead away from home going into the last 10-15 minutes and you can't understand why he would bring on defensive players??

No need to swear...

Whelan were being overun, didnt track back, at some point i thought Hourihane was the defensive midfielder of these two and some point in the last 15 minutes, i even saw him turn his back to a QPR player attacking up our right hand side and not even run after him. Why not take Whelan off and replace him with Jedinak, like for like? If you remove all our attacking possiblities, then in my opinion you are asking for it. De Laet isnt a natural right/midfielder, so putting him in a position where he isnt comfortable, isnt defensive minded, its just plain stupid, and bannedfromHandV, you probably doesn agree and you dont have to, from your post i can see that we just view football and how it should be played diffently. So you were happy with Bjarnarson coming on? I would have put Grealish, a player who can hold on to the ball, keep it calm and play it around. Not 2 players, De Laet and Bjarnarson, who lost the ball every time the touched it. 

[HeyAnty]

2 hours ago, villa89 said:

That's how Bruce seems to answer every question.

I wouldnt read to much into him saying that.  Its just his nature.  I've worked with a lot of people who were like this but still produced the goods everytime.  I could never understand why they lacked the confidence.  It finally dawned on me that it was there way of dealing with the pressure as so much was expected of them.

[Danishlad]

I'd love to see this at some stage this year.

------------------goalie------------------------------

hutton-----Chester ----Terry -----Taylor 

--------------Hourihane---Whelan -----------

--------------------o'hare-------------------------

green--------------------------------------Grealish 

----------------------Davis-----------------------------

 

I feel those four up front can do serious damage if given a few games together. 

I hope Bruce gives it a go.

[TRO]

11 hours ago, Grasshopper said:

another post that avoids committing yourself to an opinion and why.

Is it because you fear making a „football based“ comment would expose you knowledge of the game?

Intellectual wordings can only cover up so much when the substance is missing.

 

Sorry for interjecting.

Wow.....i didn't think our knowledge of the game was on trial.....i thought the opinions of our manager was.

The substance of those opinions will only be manifested to the recipient who agrees with them.....to those that disagree the substance could be transparent.

Just a general point..

in all these disagreements it would helpful, if folk had the ability to at least acknowledge the point being made, even though they disagree.I think that would make for a far more fulfilled debate.....to just launch in to an opposing opinion, smacks of intransigence to me.

 

[Grasshopper]

19 minutes ago, Taxahunter said:

No need to swear...

Whelan were being overun, didnt track back, at some point i thought Hourihane was the defensive midfielder of these two and some point in the last 15 minutes, i even saw him turn his back to a QPR player attacking up our right hand side and not even run after him. Why not take Whelan off and replace him with Jedinak, like for like? If you remove all our attacking possiblities, then in my opinion you are asking for it. De Laet isnt a natural right/midfielder, so putting him in a position where he isnt comfortable, isnt defensive minded, its just plain stupid, and bannedfromHandV, you probably doesn agree and you dont have to, from your post i can see that we just view football and how it should be played diffently. So you were happy with Bjarnarson coming on? I would have put Grealish, a player who can hold on to the ball, keep it calm and play it around. Not 2 players, De Laet and Bjarnarson, who lost the ball every time the touched it. 

out there in the realms of delusionism there‘s an alternative logic called Bruce-Ball.

It just happens - I don‘t quite know why

It‘s all a bit risky for my liking

[Grasshopper]

11 minutes ago, TRO said:

Sorry for interjecting.

Wow.....i didn't think our knowledge of the game was on trial.....i thought the opinions of our manager was.

On trail - guilty as charged

11 minutes ago, TRO said:

The substance of those opinions will only be manifested to the recipient who agrees with them.....to those that disagree the substance could be transparent. 

You‘re beginning to sound like LD

11 minutes ago, TRO said:

Just a general point..

in all these disagreements it would helpful, if folk had the ability to at least acknowledge the point being made, even though they disagree.I think that would make for a far more fulfilled debate.....

as Eric from Monty Python once famously said

“but, we don‘t want a debate about“

11 minutes ago, TRO said:

to just launch in to an opposing opinion, smacks of intransigence to me.

 

you old launcher you

Forgive for humouring

We won - I‘m in a good mood

Edited November 20, 2017 by Grasshopper

[TrentVilla]

42 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

 

All you can do in January is 'spend a fortune', it's why clubs are reluctant to do business then, it was however Bruce's first transfer window and the club are hardly not going to back him with funds are they?

Yes, we paid over the odds for Hogan, Lansbury etc and yes, in the main (Hourihane aside) those January signings have proved to be poor selections but who was saying that at the time? I don't recall many, Hogan was tearing it up, Lansbury and Hourihane were statistically two of the most influential midfielders in the division and Bree was apparently the next best thing, Managers make signings, some times they don't work out, shit happens.

What did he then spend in the summer? Terry - free, Samba - free, Elmohamady - free (I think), Whelan - £1M, Johnstone - loan (free)

Re your last line - it's not hard to hear an excuse if you're looking for one.

I wasn’t really being critical of Bruce’s signings, that wasn’t the point of my post so odd you picked that part to respond on.

I actually think he has done well in the transfer market on the whole with the players he has signed and sold. I’ve always credited him with that even though at times I’ve questioned his ability to get the most out of them.

Lansbury I said at the time wasn’t the player we needed or that people thought he was as I saw so much of him at Forest. I think had I seen more of Hogan before he arrived I’d have questioned if he was right for us and the way Bruce plays. It was obvious very early on that signing wouldn’t work.

My point though wasn’t really about the players he has signed. It was about the backing he has had and trying to counter this suggestion the “plug was pulled” needlessly in the summer.

 

[TRO]

26 minutes ago, Taxahunter said:

No need to swear...

Whelan were being overun, didnt track back, at some point i thought Hourihane was the defensive midfielder of these two and some point in the last 15 minutes, i even saw him turn his back to a QPR player attacking up our right hand side and not even run after him. Why not take Whelan off and replace him with Jedinak, like for like? If you remove all our attacking possiblities, then in my opinion you are asking for it. De Laet isnt a natural right/midfielder, so putting him in a position where he isnt comfortable, isnt defensive minded, its just plain stupid, and bannedfromHandV, you probably doesn agree and you dont have to, from your post i can see that we just view football and how it should be played diffently. So you were happy with Bjarnarson coming on? I would have put Grealish, a player who can hold on to the ball, keep it calm and play it around. Not 2 players, De Laet and Bjarnarson, who lost the ball every time the touched it. 

TH

I think had we been at home, it may have happened the way you describe.

we have to remind ourselves that here is a team that beat sheff utd and recently Wolves.

yes we was in the ascendency, but i guess 3 points was the prize.

football is always about opinions and when we win its the right decision....because its the only stat that matters.

UTV