Jump to content

The RJW63 Official Jack Grealish Appreciation Thread


kevangrealish

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said:

Hi all, felt awful for Jack yday. Also he basically got the assist for the winner in the second to last kick of the 90, just Kane inexplicably fluffed it and the ball hit his heel. 

Oh wow, I thought the defender had gotten a piece of it but watching it back no, Kane just missed it. Should have at least been on target. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, R.Bear said:

The manager who handed him his debut? The manager who picked him despite not being fully fit and coming back from injury? That manager?

Yes, Gareth Southgate, that's the one.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, R.Bear said:

The manager who handed him his debut? The manager who picked him despite not being fully fit and coming back from injury? That manager?

the manager who when he needs someone puts him on instead of foden, rashford or sancho...moves englands best player to accomodate him too

southgate obviously likes him for the role that he he's giving him, its guff that theres an issue between them, the role is tactical too, you can take that apart and criticise it but the personal stuff is nonsense

Edited by villa4europe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like many I was shocked when he subbed Jack, but can sort of understand it now.

But what annoys me in every game that Jack has played in for England this tournament is that the rest of the England players either do not see him, or are not on his "wavelength" or select the more difficult option or the one option that the opposition can predict. It seems there is Jack waving his arms in space and gets totally ignored.

And as for Kane to get in Jacks way for that cross along the 18 yard line when he was in a better position was unforgivable greed by Kane

By the way did anyone notice the fact that when Kane dives the commentators called it "clever" (rather than cheating), but when Jack came on comments were "the most fouled player in the premier league - yes but he does fall over a lot".....this double standards is what bloody annoys me with the BBC, ITV and poxy sky

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, delboy54 said:

By the way did anyone notice the fact that when Kane dives the commentators called it "clever" (rather than cheating), but when Jack came on comments were "the most fouled player in the premier league - yes but he does fall over a lot".....this double standards is what bloody annoys me with the BBC, ITV and poxy sky

No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

I'm talking about the Samatta fans because it's the same situation in reverse, so perhaps it might illuminate how your views come across. As an England fan, it's people who aren't actually interested in the team you support calling your team / manager shit because that team isn't doing what they personally want ("I just want to see Samatta play FFS"), irrespective of whether it would actually benefit the team.

Is Aston Villa a shit club because we won't play Samatta when better options are available? Of course we're not. It's a stupid metric to assess the success of Villa or the competence of our management. Whether Southgate is playing the sort of football that entertains some random Finnish guy is a similarly stupid metric by which to assess his competence.

We are of course playing quite boring, defensive fooball. You're perfectly entitled to want it to be more attractive, and to want to see more Jack Grealish. But the fact you aren't getting that doesn't make him a bad manager.

Your example is monumentally dreadful. Samatta was a pretty dreadful player that didn’t just NOT improve the Villa team, he made it worse. Grealish has the backing of almost the entire nation, everyone calling his name in the stands. A player whose stats and performances in the premier league are up with the very best. It hasn’t just been Villa fans questioning how he’s been utilised, it’s been national. Tell me, what did Trippier do in that final 15mins? From what I watched he seemed to run unopposed into the danish corner with no intention other than to stop, hold the ball, play it back. Denmark were essentially down to 9 men. I’m quite certain that if I want someone to hold onto the ball in the opposition third, maybe get a free kick or two……well, I’d turn to Jack Grealish!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, OxfordVillan said:

Your example is monumentally dreadful. Samatta was a pretty dreadful player that didn’t just NOT improve the Villa team, he made it worse. Grealish has the backing of almost the entire nation, everyone calling his name in the stands. A player whose stats and performances in the premier league are up with the very best. It hasn’t just been Villa fans questioning how he’s been utilised, it’s been national. Tell me, what did Trippier do in that final 15mins? From what I watched he seemed to run unopposed into the danish corner with no intention other than to stop, hold the ball, play it back. Denmark were essentially down to 9 men. I’m quite certain that if I want someone to hold onto the ball in the opposition third, maybe get a free kick or two……well, I’d turn to Jack Grealish!

Previous poster said he's Finnish and he just wants to be entertained by England's football and doesn't care if we win or not. Why should any England fan care about his opinion? It's our team that goes home if that attacking football leaves us open at the back and we go out, not his. 

Edited by Panto_Villan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, delboy54 said:

By the way did anyone notice the fact that when Kane dives the commentators called it "clever" (rather than cheating), but when Jack came on comments were "the most fouled player in the premier league - yes but he does fall over a lot".....this double standards is what bloody annoys me with the BBC, ITV and poxy sky

Yes I did but I wouldn’t blame the whole tv networks for that. Dixon is just an idiot. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea that it was personal was squashed the minute he was selected for the team. The excuse of "he's not fit enough" was ready made, and if Southgate had a personal vendetta against him he'd have used it 

Its clearly a tactical decision based on his skillset and/or fitness levels. We can disagree with that decision all we want, but it's a tactical decision that's got us to our first major final since 1966 - 55 years! 

I've been as critical of Southgate as anyone, and love Jack of course, but his decisions have been entirely vindicated since he's been manager, and if we win on Sunday he'll go down as one of the greatest managers England have ever had, whether us Internet warriors agree with his decisions or not

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

It wasn't a personal choice against Jack Grealish at all. It was a tactical decision. 

Do you know how insane it sounds to claim that during the biggest moment in English football for nearly 80 years, and during the biggest moment of Southgates career, that he was thinking about personally going after Jack Grealish instead of what's best for the team?

Do you have any insight as to why (out of 4 attacking players) it happened to be Jack Grealish that was chosen to come off, 35mins after he was put on? It seemed to me that the idea was to hold onto the ball in the opposition corners (Trippier did this 3 or 4 times), with no thought of risking putting the ball into the opposition penalty area. Given that, it would be normal to take off your CF, as you’re not trying to score. 
So rather than call me insane, can you instead offer a reasonable explanation  why you think it was Grealish who was taken off? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Do you know how insane it sounds to claim that during the biggest moment in English football for nearly 80 years, and during the biggest moment of Southgates career, that he was thinking about personally going after Jack Grealish instead of what's best for the team?

It's genuinely terrifying that someone could actually think, let alone believe that theory.

Someone said it best when they talked about a Jack "cult" developing. Grealishtology has its followers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

The thread has been nuts during the Euros. 

I worry it'll be quiet at the start of the season when Jack misses games due to forcing himself back.

Hope this has scratched an itch for him because he's clearly barely fit and probably shouldn't he playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OxfordVillan said:

Do you have any insight as to why (out of 4 attacking players) it happened to be Jack Grealish that was chosen to come off, 35mins after he was put on? It seemed to me that the idea was to hold onto the ball in the opposition corners (Trippier did this 3 or 4 times), with no thought of risking putting the ball into the opposition penalty area. Given that, it would be normal to take off your CF, as you’re not trying to score. 
So rather than call me insane, can you instead offer a reasonable explanation  why you think it was Grealish who was taken off? 

Its quite obvious and I believe Southgate explained it. 

We wanted to go 3 at the back, Sterling's pace was important to counter and Foden had only just come on. 

You keep saying it's normal to take a cf off, but I've not seen that. Why would you take off Kane, who was playing well, holds the ball up well and is our best finisher? 

You can disagree with the tactical decision, which I did to some extent, but to claim it was a personal decision is absolutely crazy for the reasons I previously explained. You must think Southgate is some utter psychopath. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, AVFCforever1991 said:

The same Portugal side that Germany put 4 past? , Wait, England beat Germany.....

 

Just because one team beats another doesn't mean you'd beat the side that was beaten. 2nd they completely changed up their DM pairing after that game which made them way better.

I also said to a lesser extent. I mostly meant Spain, Italy and Belgium as the teams we'd get schooled by. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, OxfordVillan said:

Do you have any insight as to why (out of 4 attacking players) it happened to be Jack Grealish that was chosen to come off, 35mins after he was put on? It seemed to me that the idea was to hold onto the ball in the opposition corners (Trippier did this 3 or 4 times), with no thought of risking putting the ball into the opposition penalty area. Given that, it would be normal to take off your CF, as you’re not trying to score. 
So rather than call me insane, can you instead offer a reasonable explanation  why you think it was Grealish who was taken off? 

Because Grealish is a weak defensive player and doesnt press very well. He was brought on at 1-1 when England needed a goal, Southgate did not want to gamble on penalties. When England scored he wanted to run out the clock and not gamble on being caught out going for a 3rd. England passed the ball around effortlessly to see out the game. You get one chance and cant **** it up. Jack's feelings or the fact he had come on as a sub were irrelevant. He deduced that the best 11 to see out the game were the 11 who finished it.

End of story. There is nothing more too it than that other than some peoples warped minds.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â