Steven Gerrard

[R.Bear]

22 minutes ago, hippo said:

I know you're a big SG fan.

But why do we' have to stay with him'  ? 

I don't know what or when the cut off point will be. But be in no doubt there is one. 

Your "cut off point" would have been before he managed a single game.

[hippo]

2 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I agree with this. But if we need to continue to rebuild the squad, why did we need Gerrard? 

A lot of the argument for removing Smith, was that this squad was capable of getting Europe or at least top half finish.

Why didn't we rebuild the squad with Smith? What's so special about Gerrard? He really hasn't done anything amazing since coming here. If it's just about spending more millions on top players then what does Gerrard bring to the table as a manager? 

 

Because Gerrard needs to prove himself to get the Liverpool job. Aston villa are just a pawn in this process.

[hippo]

1 minute ago, R.Bear said:

Your "cut off point" would have been before he managed a single game.

True guilty as charged.

But there was no big clamour from the villa fans for Stevie G.

 

[The_Steve]

6 hours ago, lexicon said:

- Disagree. We finished higher than that with a worse squad last season. Why have the goalposts been shifted for Gerrard?

He's not getting enough out of the players we have and in some cases they look to be regressing. 

Also, one of Gerrard's big criticisms was not developing young talent at Rangers. Why's that going to be different now? 

 

Player regression and injuries are unexpected - we had to integrate a whole new forward line with injuries to different players. We’ve seen the best and worst of certain players - Mings has had a far more solid season whilst Konsa stuttered. I think the most obvious problems are mental. Even in games we should do better in we’d give away cheap goals or switch off. I don’t think it’s correct to always compare to the previous season. 

Smith ran out of ideas and confidence - he did 5 different formations and stuck with Axel when it wasn’t working. Has Gerrard stuck with certain players too? For sure; both have their flaws. 5-3-2 didn’t work for us either. 

A pre-season is needed to hit the reset and come up with a clear plan moving forward. We’ve had moments of real quality and none - ironing out those creases is a coaching issue certainly and I think it’s also a case of having the right players for the right positions. 

Gerrard has been wrong to drop Chambers and not rotating JJ out enough. 

[villan501]

Gerrard needs to show he has a backbone and drop out of form players.

mcginn needs dropping majority have said this time to see what we see Stevie and give the guy a seat on the bench, persisting with him is beyond a joke now cant pass at all gives ball away far too often. 

 

 

[TRO]

9 minutes ago, hippo said:

That's all well and good.

But after what now looks like being a less ruthless summer transfer window. If he isn't doing it he will get the sack.

All the excuses in the world won't save him.

The sack Hippo, is far too soon the be clamouring for.

None of us was expecting this, but maybe, we didn't appreciate the extent of the problem......I am not condemning him or giving him a free pass, but when you declare a dislike for him, from day one, forgive me for not taking your pokes at him seriously.

In that first half yesterday, just like the Southampton game, I saw a mood (after the conceding of another soft, but well executed goal) that I have been looking for, so has the manager, that could so easily have turmed out different.

When you have players who fail to cut out the simplest of long balls in the manner we did, no manager can mask over that.

2 passive players yesterday, signed by the previous manager, is hardly a stick to hit the present manager over the head with....their lack of aggression did not match the rest of the team and was instrumental in contributing to the defeat.

I am not blaming Dean directly, that would be foolish, but they was his players.....but they wasn't SG purchases, and right now, I accept, he can't get much out of them.

[duke313]

2 minutes ago, TRO said:

The sack Hippo, is far too soon the be clamouring for.

None of us was expecting this, but maybe, we didn't appreciate the extent of the problem......I am not condemning him or giving him a free pass, but when you declare a dislike for him, from day one, forgive me for not taking your pokes at him seriously.

In that first half yesterday, just like the Southampton game, I saw a mood (after the conceding of another soft, but well executed goal) that I have been looking for, so has the manager, that could so easily have turmed out different.

When you have players who fail to cut out the simplest of long balls in the manner we did, no manager can mask over that.

2 passive players yesterday, signed by the previous manager, is hardly a stick to hit the present manager over the head with....their lack of aggression did not match the rest of the team and was instrumental in contributing to the defeat.

I am not blaming Dean directly, that would be foolish, but they was his players.....but they wasn't SG purchases, and right now, I accept, he can't get much out of them.

We also can’t blame SG for the chances that should have been put away. We created loads in first half, the most I’ve seen from us in a single half in a long time.

[sne]

Want's to play with high press and attacking full backs but doesn't have the midfield to do either.

Do you persist with it anyway or do you adjust the tactic to suit the players you actually have? Most managers would likely adjust the way you play until you have the right players. Not so Gerrard apparently.

[IrishVilla10]

26 minutes ago, hippo said:

That's all well and good.

But after what now looks like being a less ruthless summer transfer window. If he isn't doing it he will get the sack.

All the excuses in the world won't save him.

What’s made you say that? Genuine question 

[PussEKatt]

Dont forget he has only bought in 3 players so far and two of them are class,so give him at least another full season.

[tinker]

Stronger squad than last year and the results are shocking , if we can't beat Norwich at home then it's a clear sign Gerrard isn't going to cut it , it's that simple.

I think sacking Smith, after season on season improvents, showed the owners intentions and I can't see Purslow or Gerrard surviving another 2 losses in the next 2 games. It's the same brush that swept Smith away that will sweep Purslow and his mate away. 

The fans will turn , they already are with tickets going on general sale. The atmosphere is completely different , even when Smith was losing games there was hope, that's disappeared.

Smith's time was up, Gerrard wasn't ready, Purslow fucxed up. Next. 

[tinker]

4 minutes ago, TRO said:

Hippo, when we retreat, there are no lines on many occasions, just a gaggle of geeses, ball watching......The defence show little signs of positional discipline, we are so easy to pull around and disrupt....subsequently penetrate.

even players going to  the help another and not helping, but leaving gaps......its disorganisation.

So why isn't Gerrard addressing it, been happening time and time again. This team can't remain solid while full backs are being told to attack. Even if he gets a DM teams will counter the system and Gerrard hasnt got a plan b when plan a fails. 

[lexicon]

7 minutes ago, TRO said:

Hippo, when we retreat, there are no lines on many occasions, just a gaggle of geeses, ball watching......The defence show little signs of positional discipline, we are so easy to pull around and disrupt....subsequently penetrate.

even players going to  the help another and not helping, but leaving gaps......its disorganisation.

And whose job is to organise the defence and fix it? 

[TRO]

3 minutes ago, tinker said:

So why isn't Gerrard addressing it, been happening time and time again. This team can't remain solid while full backs are being told to attack. Even if he gets a DM teams will counter the system and Gerrard hasnt got a plan b when plan a fails. 

I think that bit is fair comment.

I still think the midfield incompetencies, impact on the defence....but Konsa was woeful yestereday.

[Jas10]

4 minutes ago, tinker said:

So why isn't Gerrard addressing it, been happening time and time again. This team can't remain solid while full backs are being told to attack. Even if he gets a DM teams will counter the system and Gerrard hasnt got a plan b when plan a fails. 

 

2 minutes ago, lexicon said:

And whose job is to organise the defence and fix it? 

Exactly, it’s the managers job to address any issues and deficiencies. Not deflect blame onto the players and deflate or demotivate them by essentially calling them crap. You can’t just keep spending money til you “get it right”, that never works anyway, there’s a lot more to the “job role” than that. 

Again, teams with smaller budgets and even managers who’ve inherited players who “aren’t their own” (FFS) are out outperforming and embarrassing us.

We just splash the cash and are going nowhere…

SG is essentially been given an easy ride because of his name and reputation as a player….

Needs to do more, needs to do better.

As far as I see it, he’s all talk…

Hope that changes asap but I see no signs as of yet.

Again, all I have is hope - doesn’t feel great.

[og1874]

Here's my 2c if anyone cares, which I'm sure they don't...

Gerrard has come in and inherited a squad with major balance issues - issues that, as we all know, have existed for a while. It's also a squad that lost its main focal point last summer, and replaced it with players who further unbalanced the squad (made worse by injuries to said players prior to Gerrard's tenure, affecting season prep). Before Gerrard, it was abundantly clear that there were major, major issues in the squad, despite it being, man for man, our best squad in over a decade (at least).

More than the balance issues, we also have a squad that is far too capable of individual errors costing goals at literally any point in the game. We have very few players who can be relied upon NOT to make a mistake in the 90 minutes. This is why those players are at Aston Villa and not Man City. It's fine margins at the top of any sport, and a player who is reliable 95% of the time, still has that 5% in him to give away a goal at any point. Worse than that, errors breed errors. Players get in their own heads when they're the ones making errors, and they also start to anticipate their teammates making errors, learning to them not being able to completely focus on their game, leading to them making mistakes, leading to them getting into their own heads, leading to their teammates worrying about them making mistakes. It's an insipid cycle, and difficult to break without a complete overhaul. This too was present before Gerrard.

None of these are excuses, they are all facts which I'm sure very few people on here will disagree with.

So enter Gerrard.

He's inherited the same unbalanced, error-prone set of players we had before him, and added Coutinho, Digne, Chambers, and Olsen. Digne has clearly divided people, that's fine (however I do wonder of the logic of the whole "oh typical, we get rid of Targett for Digne and then Digne gets injured and we have no cover... we have the exact same cover we would've had for the position if we hadn't brought Digne in and kept Targett - that particular stick used to beat Gerrard makes no sense). Coutinho, I'm sure we'll all agree is a talent none of us would have passed up. Chambers was a bargain, and has been reasonably successful, and Olsen is a sub keeper we hope never has to play. All in all, not really a squad changing improvement in terms of personnel brought in, but hard to argue that there wasn't an improvement through Coutinho alone.

The main issue is that the manager has a style he wants to play, and we don't have the personnel to play it. So there are two options - you implement the style for the benefit of those who will be staying and playing it next year, or you put that implementation off and just figure out what works with the players available. Given that the team is highly unlikely to get relegated (despite what some seem to think), there are pros for the first approach. I would personally have preferred a hybrid if I'm being honest, where the approach is "start with what we have the personnel for on day one, and gradually shift things towards what the desired long-term style", for me that makes more sense, and is more likely to keep players confident rather than amplify the individual errors (which we're seeing).

I question the logic of not looking back to what worked last season (with basically the same set of players, but Coutinho instead of Grealish, and some major upgrades on fringe players). Why was it not a case of playing the same system with Coutinho stepping in for Grealish, and using the abundance of wingers at the club, rather than wasting their abilities? For me, that should've been the base to build from, and that is the major criticism I have of Gerrard - BUT like I said above, I can understand why the idea of implementing the long-term desired style at the potential risk of short-term under-performance was chosen.

I don't believe Gerrard has done anything to show that he can't be trusted with money. I also don't think he's done anything to show that his system won't work with the right players. Everyone can see central midfield is killing us at the moment, and we basically need 2 new starters there in the summer. If we get the right players there, or close to the right players, we will be a completely different team - just with those players alone. There'll be less mistakes, people will have more clarity of their roles, and things should, in generally, see a massive upturn.

That is true whether Gerrard is the manager or not. If we sack him, we still need the same 2 central midfielders we need if we don't sack him - the only real difference would be whether we sell or keep the wingers we have (as another guy may not opt for same approach as Gerrard - or, I should say, almost definitely won't). I would also imagine that the players brought in, or attainable to be brought in, wouldn't vary too much regardless of whether it's Gerrard or another manager bringing them in.

Ultimately, for me, I'm still of the opinion to let the current manager get those players, and see if the improvement comes (which I'm pretty sure it would). Bottom line is that, like I said above, I'm pretty sure any replacement manager would be shopping from the exact same pool of players, with the exact same resources, and would likely bring in the same guys, so either way I think the personnel we have in September would be pretty similar with or without Gerrard, and I don't think there would be another mass rebuild or exodus if Gerrard was moved on at any point next season. The issues are so glaring, and the pool of players realistically attainable by us so similar regardless of the manager in charge, that you have to imagine most managers would be addressing the same things in much the same way. For that reason, let's just see how August-October fares on the pitch.

[hippo]

12 minutes ago, og1874 said:

Here's my 2c if anyone cares, which I'm sure they don't...

Gerrard has come in and inherited a squad with major balance issues - issues that, as we all know, have existed for a while. It's also a squad that lost its main focal point last summer, and replaced it with players who further unbalanced the squad (made worse by injuries to said players prior to Gerrard's tenure, affecting season prep). Before Gerrard, it was abundantly clear that there were major, major issues in the squad, despite it being, man for man, our best squad in over a decade (at least).

More than the balance issues, we also have a squad that is far too capable of individual errors costing goals at literally any point in the game. We have very few players who can be relied upon NOT to make a mistake in the 90 minutes. This is why those players are at Aston Villa and not Man City. It's fine margins at the top of any sport, and a player who is reliable 95% of the time, still has that 5% in him to give away a goal at any point. Worse than that, errors breed errors. Players get in their own heads when they're the ones making errors, and they also start to anticipate their teammates making errors, learning to them not being able to completely focus on their game, leading to them making mistakes, leading to them getting into their own heads, leading to their teammates worrying about them making mistakes. It's an insipid cycle, and difficult to break without a complete overhaul. This too was present before Gerrard.

None of these are excuses, they are all facts which I'm sure very few people on here will disagree with.

So enter Gerrard.

He's inherited the same unbalanced, error-prone set of players we had before him, and added Coutinho, Digne, Chambers, and Olsen. Digne has clearly divided people, that's fine (however I do wonder of the logic of the whole "oh typical, we get rid of Targett for Digne and then Digne gets injured and we have no cover... we have the exact same cover we would've had for the position if we hadn't brought Digne in and kept Targett - that particular stick used to beat Gerrard makes no sense). Coutinho, I'm sure we'll all agree is a talent none of us would have passed up. Chambers was a bargain, and has been reasonably successful, and Olsen is a sub keeper we hope never has to play. All in all, not really a squad changing improvement in terms of personnel brought in, but hard to argue that there wasn't an improvement through Coutinho alone.

The main issue is that the manager has a style he wants to play, and we don't have the personnel to play it. So there are two options - you implement the style for the benefit of those who will be staying and playing it next year, or you put that implementation off and just figure out what works with the players available. Given that the team is highly unlikely to get relegated (despite what some seem to think), there are pros for the first approach. I would personally have preferred a hybrid if I'm being honest, where the approach is "start with what we have the personnel for on day one, and gradually shift things towards what the desired long-term style", for me that makes more sense, and is more likely to keep players confident rather than amplify the individual errors (which we're seeing).

I question the logic of not looking back to what worked last season (with basically the same set of players, but Coutinho instead of Grealish, and some major upgrades on fringe players). Why was it not a case of playing the same system with Coutinho stepping in for Grealish, and using the abundance of wingers at the club, rather than wasting their abilities? For me, that should've been the base to build from, and that is the major criticism I have of Gerrard - BUT like I said above, I can understand why the idea of implementing the long-term desired style at the potential risk of short-term under-performance was chosen.

I don't believe Gerrard has done anything to show that he can't be trusted with money. I also don't think he's done anything to show that his system won't work with the right players. Everyone can see central midfield is killing us at the moment, and we basically need 2 new starters there in the summer. If we get the right players there, or close to the right players, we will be a completely different team - just with those players alone. There'll be less mistakes, people will have more clarity of their roles, and things should, in generally, see a massive upturn.

That is true whether Gerrard is the manager or not. If we sack him, we still need the same 2 central midfielders we need if we don't sack him - the only real difference would be whether we sell or keep the wingers we have (as another guy may not opt for same approach as Gerrard - or, I should say, almost definitely won't). I would also imagine that the players brought in, or attainable to be brought in, wouldn't vary too much regardless of whether it's Gerrard or another manager bringing them in.

Ultimately, for me, I'm still of the opinion to let the current manager get those players, and see if the improvement comes (which I'm pretty sure it would). Bottom line is that, like I said above, I'm pretty sure any replacement manager would be shopping from the exact same pool of players, with the exact same resources, and would likely bring in the same guys, so either way I think the personnel we have in September would be pretty similar with or without Gerrard, and I don't think there would be another mass rebuild or exodus if Gerrard was moved on at any point next season. The issues are so glaring, and the pool of players realistically attainable by us so similar regardless of the manager in charge, that you have to imagine most managers would be addressing the same things in much the same way. For that reason, let's just see how August-October fares on the pitch.

Fair enough.

Couple of thoughts.

Gerrard wants the full backs to provide the attacking width. My betting is the next villa coach will dispense with this idea.

All agreed we need a DM.

The problem for me is that so many of our players have regressed - what's to say Stevie's recruits will thrive ? 

Gerrard said on appointment he knows he isn't liked at Villa Park - which is never a good start.

So yeah - let Stevie G bring in a CB, DCM and Striker - I really don't see that saving Stevie G.

 

[hippo]

1 minute ago, VillanousOne said:

As many have suggested Gerrard is playing a system that doesn't suit the players he wants to play.

So either he ditches that and plays to the strengths or he brings in players who can do the roles better either from the squad (fringe/youngsters) or in the summer.

People are saying his signings are decent, but the truth for me he brought in players we didn't need.

Coutinho is awesome at times but he is a luxury player who needs players around him who can convert the chances he makes and for some reason that has stopped happening.

I don't understand why Buendia and Sanson are on the bench, they have far more tenacity and a higher work rate than McGinn, JJ, Coutinho and Luiz yet they are dumped on the bench.

Maybe Nakamba being back will allow him to change things around a bit, but he could have tried that with Tim.

Having Young as a replacement left back is also an awful situation to be in.

 

All good points.

[Tommo_b]

4 hours ago, Zatman said:

I know he wont thats the problem

I thought Purslow was a proactive leader but not when it comes to his mates 

Think the notion that purslow hired his mate is bloody stupid. 

Why would anyone hire their mate just to have to sack them if it goes wrong. 

This thread makes me want to pull my hair out. 

We need two manager threads, one for all the negative posters and one for the rest. 

[Dale]

1 minute ago, Tommo_b said:

Think the notion that purslow hired his mate is bloody stupid. 

I think he hired him based on been a fan of him and his character at Liverpool, thinking it would carry through to being a top coach. More based on personal admiration than friendship.