Steve Bruce

[Lerner's Driver]

2 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Sounds like a kids playground "he started it"

I think there's been times and there's been people on both sides, who have been reluctant to accept the opinion from the other. 

It always happens on subjects people feel passionately about.

 

See, I think the issues, differences of opinion, or whatever you wish to call them, are not usefully understood in terms of pro and anti Bruce.

Instead, I think it's a lot more about attitudes to progress, so... 'wait and see, there's good and bad' vs. 'he's totally incompetent, we must get rid now'. Looked at this way, there's only one intransigent view point, the other is open minded by definition.

For me, it's always been about the tone of the debate because a massive fan uprising, if it is allowed to catch hold, can have a further negative impact on the team's fortunes, even whilst it is obviously accepted that their shit play and/or the manager's input to that shit play are also contributory factors.

So, Bruce hasn't totally convinced anybody yet, but it does finally look like something useful is taking shape and in my footballing opinion, that alone presents a decent argument for checking the tone occasionally.

[omariqy]

This thread his hurting my head.

Anyways - I don't think it is a coincidence that our best performances this year have been in two away games where we have pressed well and counter attacked with intent. We have seemed to find the formula to win away. I do worry at home that we do not have the pattern of play under Bruce to hurt teams. We have only scored 11 goals in 8 home games. Hopefully the likes of Grealish and O'Hare can help us to open teams up. 

[Taxahunter]

21 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

no one should be ridiculed for your opinion, however i think the responses to your points were mainly because if i remember rightly, you worded them along the lines of 'learning from mistakes that were made in the QPR game', for which most folks believe there were none as at no point did we look like not winning the game. it doesnt deserve ridicule, but it definitely left a number of folks scratching their heads...

If it has been interpreted that way I understand, but I dont recall to have said that we should learn from our mistakes, what I did say, was that I didnt agree with the substitutions that was made, in my opinion they made us more vulnerable and I said that we should reflect on the decisions we made in order to improve.

[Demitri_C]

14 hours ago, Grasshopper said:

In a nutshell

If DrT continues to periodically give motivational speeches that the players respond to and win us our way to promotion, then Bruce can add 1 more promotion to his previous 4 (with the subtitle - AV promoted despite me)

Then he can happily pack his bags full of kebabs to the MLS with the Beckhams.

If he needs a challenge after a while he can always go to Sunderland, get them back into the PL and show that hyserical Guardian Journalist that she was wrong all along

I am not sure if your seriously implying Dr Tonys talk won us the 3 points on Saturday? please tell me you are not actually serious? 

[bannedfromHandV]

2 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Sounds like a kids playground "he started it"

I think there's been times and there's been people on both sides, who have been reluctant to accept the opinion from the other. 

It always happens on subjects people feel passionately about.

 

Wow, that's rich.

 

This thread has been Donald Trump's wet dream for the past 6 months but yeah sure, only now is it like 'a kids playground'

Edited November 21, 2017 by bannedfromHandV

[bannedfromHandV]

13 minutes ago, Taxahunter said:

If it has been interpreted that way I understand, but I dont recall to have said that we should learn from our mistakes, what I did say, was that I didnt agree with the substitutions that was made, in my opinion they made us more vulnerable and I said that we should reflect on the decisions we made in order to improve.

I'm sorry, this is my last reply and I'm not doing it to pick on you but how can you say bringing on De Laet, Jedinak and Thor made us more vulnerable?

De Laet is a defender, Jedinak is a defensive midfielder and strong aerial presence, Thor only came on for a few mins but is neither here nor there in terms of attacking vs defending, IMO.

 

How then did that make us more vulnerable?

 

Bear in mind that you wanted Grealish to come on.

[Taxahunter]

35 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I'm sorry, this is my last reply and I'm not doing it to pick on you but how can you say bringing on De Laet, Jedinak and Thor made us more vulnerable?

De Laet is a defender, Jedinak is a defensive midfielder and strong aerial presence, Thor only came on for a few mins but is neither here nor there in terms of attacking vs defending, IMO.

How then did that make us more vulnerable?

Bear in mind that you wanted Grealish to come on.

Its ok.

This is of course only my opinion. I dont think Whelan had a good game, and I just watched the highlights again and its still my opinion. It would have been more sensitive to replace him for Jedinak. I dont think Jedinak is mobile enough to be playing as a CM, but great at covering the defence and helping the 2 CM's. I think he is better at holding up the ball playing it around to keep possesion, I havent seen that from Whelan yet.

Later I would probably have brought on Lansbury instead of Onomah or Snodgrass and switched Onomah to right mid. Bringing on a right back for right mid just concerns me in so many aspects, because playing right back or right wing/- mid is just so different and not easy to change between the positions. For example, how is his positional sense, does he press or wait, does close down on the outside or the inside.

Bjarnarson, I just dont understand. He has been non-existent every time he has played and gives the ball away to the opposition far to often and far to easy.

Vulnerable is probably the wrong word to use, but mainly to do with english not being my first language.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Taxahunter

[lexicon]

Had we done that, we might have seen the game out and won instead of.... oh, right. Shit. 

[bannedfromHandV]

15 minutes ago, Taxahunter said:

Its ok.

This is of course only my opinion. I dont think Whelan had a good game, and I just watched the highlights again and its still my opinion. It would have been more sensitive to replace him for Jedinak. I dont think Jedinak is mobile enough to be playing as a CM, but great at covering the defence and helping the 2 CM's. I think he is better at holding up the ball playing it around to keep possesion, I havent seen that from Whelan yet.

Later I would probably have brought on Lansbury instead of Onomah or Snodgrass and switched Onomah to right mid. Bringing on a right back for right mid just concerns me in so many aspects, because playing right back or right wing/- mid is just so different and not easy to change between the positions. For example, how is his positional sense, does he press or wait, does close down on the outside or the inside.

Bjarnarson, I just dont understand. He has been non-existent every time he has played and gives the ball away to the opposition far to often and far to easy.

Vulnerable is probably the wrong word to use, but mainly to do with english not being my first language.

Okay, it's an opinion and no more or no less valid than mind or anyone else's however, if I can counter:

 

I do not agree that Jedinak can keep possession and play the ball around, in fact I'd say that's his weakest attribute (after pace), his passing can be pretty woeful at times in fact. Now Whelan is no Pirlo, think we can all agree on that but he has appeared to be a little more cultured on the ball than Jedinak, in my view, agree that he's great at covering the defence.

 

Onomah looked tired to me and probably needed to come off, I have no issue with using De Laet at RW for 10-15 minutes to close a game out, I disagree that it's difficult to come in at RM as a RB, particularly when you're coming on for 15 minutes and to help close a game out, it would naturally affect our attacking play but it should only serve to strengthen in defensive phases (although to be fair to him, on the few occasions this has happened he hasn't looked completely out of his depth going forward, he almost scored a few weeks back, may have been against Bolton?).

 

The Thor substitution is neither here nor there, only came on for the final few minutes I think and with a view to running down the clock / having some fresh legs, I don't think he even touched the ball did he?

 

I can assure you your English is infinitely better than my or most anyone's Danish so don't worry about that.

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 hour ago, omariqy said:

This thread his hurting my head.

Anyways - I don't think it is a coincidence that our best performances this year have been in two away games where we have pressed well and counter attacked with intent. We have seemed to find the formula to win away. I do worry at home that we do not have the pattern of play under Bruce to hurt teams. We have only scored 11 goals in 8 home games. Hopefully the likes of Grealish and O'Hare can help us to open teams up. 

Posts like this get lost in all the Groundhog Day debating which is a shame. 

I agree my concern is we will still struggle to break down teams. Tonight will be a another test because Sunderland will most likely park the bus. 

[omariqy]

6 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Posts like this get lost in all the Groundhog Day debating which is a shame. 

I agree my concern is we will still struggle to break down teams. Tonight will be a another test because Sunderland will most likely park the bus. 

Coleman is already talking about battling and competing. They will try and make it tough for us.

[Grasshopper]

if ever there is a wrong time to play S‘land, it could well possibly be tonight

wrong thread

sorry

Edited November 21, 2017 by Grasshopper

[Grasshopper]

1 hour ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Wow, that's rich.

 

This thread has been Donald Trump's wet dream for the past 6 months but yeah sure, only now is it like 'a kids playground'

?

first you say

thats rich

then you agree

what are you trying to say?

[dont_do_it_doug.]

47 minutes ago, omariqy said:

Coleman is already talking about battling and competing. They will try and make it tough for us.

I mean, to be honest, so what. They're a terrible team. There won't be *that* many sides who come to VP this year to go all out ad the last manager they had tried to get them to 'battle and compete' for months to zero effect. 

If we don't beat them, it's on us and solely us in my opinion. We are much better than them, on paper and on the pitch. Time to show it. 

[omariqy]

5 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

I mean, to be honest, so what. They're a terrible team. There won't be *that* many sides who come to VP this year to go all out ad the last manager they had tried to get them to 'battle and compete' for months to zero effect. 

If we don't beat them, it's on us and solely us in my opinion. We are much better than them, on paper and on the pitch. Time to show it. 

Of course I am not disputing that. I thought the same would be true of Bolton but they made life difficult for us. 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

Just now, omariqy said:

Of course I am not disputing that. I thought the same would be true of Bolton but they made life difficult for us. 

I'm with you. To be fair though also, we were pretty below average that day against Bolton and we still won the game. 

I'm just saying that I don't think there are any excuses tonight. That said, in football anything can happen. 

[lexicon]

1 hour ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I do not agree that Jedinak can keep possession and play the ball around, in fact I'd say that's his weakest attribute (after pace), his passing can be pretty woeful at times in fact. Now Whelan is no Pirlo, think we can all agree on that but he has appeared to be a little more cultured on the ball than Jedinak, in my view, agree that he's great at covering the defence.

Just the 23% better pass completion rate to back that up with.... 

[Villan_of_oz]

6 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

But that works both ways, those of us who haven't been calling for his head (hourly) over the past 6 months have been subjected to a barrage of rants about why we should all want him out.

Anyone daring to think otherwise was branded a 'Bruce lover' or something equally as ridiculous.

 

As far as I'm concerned and as with anything in this world, you reap what you sow.

[TRO]

There are NO easy games in this league......some  just look easier on paper.

any team can find motivation for one game....thats what the term banana skins refer to.

this could be one.

I just want a win.

[Villan_of_oz]

1 hour ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Okay, it's an opinion and no more or no less valid than mind or anyone else's however, if I can counter:

 

I do not agree that Jedinak can keep possession and play the ball around, in fact I'd say that's his weakest attribute (after pace), his passing can be pretty woeful at times in fact. Now Whelan is no Pirlo, think we can all agree on that but he has appeared to be a little more cultured on the ball than Jedinak, in my view, agree that he's great at covering the defence.

 

Onomah looked tired to me and probably needed to come off, I have no issue with using De Laet at RW for 10-15 minutes to close a game out, I disagree that it's difficult to come in at RM as a RB, particularly when you're coming on for 15 minutes and to help close a game out, it would naturally affect our attacking play but it should only serve to strengthen in defensive phases (although to be fair to him, on the few occasions this has happened he hasn't looked completely out of his depth going forward, he almost scored a few weeks back, may have been against Bolton?).

 

The Thor substitution is neither here nor there, only came on for the final few minutes I think and with a view to running down the clock / having some fresh legs, I don't think he even touched the ball did he?

 

I can assure you your English is infinitely better than my or most anyone's Danish so don't worry about that.

That's one more reply than you said you were going to give