Cambridge-AVFC Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Because Delph is a better player and contributes more. Bannan is a very limited player who isn't good enough to play for us. Well Bannan is a better footballer than Delph, but Delph has better physical attributes, also Delph is more direct. For the system we play you're probably right Delph does contribute more than Bannan for his defensive work. However you ask a team like Swansea who they'd rather have, Bannan wins hands down. Very debatable that Bannan is a better footballer than Delph, i disagree if i'm honest. By footballer, I mean technical ability as oppose to effectiveness. I think Barry Bannan is a far superior player technically, however Delph is far for athletic. Still disagree....Delph is better technically. The only attribute bannan may have an edge over Delph is his long range passing. His 'hollywood' balls are a myth :-) Well I strongly disagree with that, Delph hasn't showcased much technica l ability throughout his time at Villa. He is very effective at what he does, but he doesn't touch Bannan when it comes to technical ability. Bannan has a better long pass, he's a better crosser, he's a better free kick taker, I'd say Bannan has a better shot, Bannan's passing is better and Bannan's ball control is better. I fail to see how Delph is better technically. Where is the evidence of these corners, crosses and free kicks? His corners and free kicks were consistently shyte...better than Delph tho....cause he didn't take any :-) Bannan can look ok in some games, generally against poorer teams. Did u see Delph against wigan? He was superb....and 'technically' superb. Never seen that level of performance from bannan He puts in a few good crosses in there. Thats a good free kick(even though it was pre season) Really? I thought Delph was our best player against Wigan, but not in terms of technical ability, but in terms of his defensive work and his directness. Did you see Bannan against Liverpool(away) when he absolutely ran the show in midfield and was technically superb? Bannan always has had more technical ability than delph, but thats because Bannan prides himself on his technical ability, whereas Delph doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstonMartin82 Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Then why does it look like lambert has no problems selling him? If he can have such an influence on a team winning why didn't he play more? Why aren't top teams coming in for him? He doesn't fit our style of play. We're a very dynamic team and Bannan isn't very dynamic. However, having said that Bannan did contribute to our victories, to say he didn't is harsh. He very much does fit our style of play. Lambert gave him his chance over and over and over again. It then became clear he just isn't good enough and he got dumped. I remember John Gregory telling Vassell when he first came through the ranks at Villa that he is going to play the next 10 games no matter how badly he plays. It's was an excellent piece of man-management because it takes the pressure totally off the player and lets them play with freedom and express themselves. It wouldn't surprise me if this is what Lambert did with Bannan... only during his run in the team he was get worse and worse and worse and it culminated in that appalling performance against Liverpool and he hasn't been seen again since. It became clear during that run that he wasn't good enough and the reason why Lambert is turning into a Villa favorite and an excellent manager is because he picks up on these things and acts on it. Although Bannan was poor against Liverpool, against Reading and QPR(i.e. the 2 games before) he played very well. Also Bannan had more good games than bad, but ultimately I think the reason Bannan was dropped was because of Delph's better form(at the time). He played no worse than Delph did over the course of the season. The reason why he's leaving is because he's not suited to our system, not because of his ability. He didn't play very well against QPR or Reading. This is a myth. I hate to do this but according to whoscored.com against Reading Bannan scored 6.9 - the 3rd worst player for us. One of the 2 he beat scored an own goal. Against Reading he was the 2nd worst player for us. Just because Con came on the site after these games crowing about how Bannan had been part of 2 wins in a row and just because he didn't do any back passes that put the opposition straight through on goal really doesn't mean he was excellent. Con's propaganda has caught you here... don't fall for it. I remember these two games very well as I was specifically looking out for Bannan due to Con's claims of his being world class and whilst I'll agree these were probably his best two games of the season but he was still very poor, incredibly ineffective and remember it was against the bottom 2 clubs in the league... who are now Championship standard. If you want I can go through every game he played last season and give his ranking against other players but it won't be good reading and will undoubtedly rebuff your "he had more good games than bad" because he really didn't. Could you please do go through every game? If you admit you have a weak mind and therefore been subject to brainwashing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstonMartin82 Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 (edited) Suffice to say he has been our worst player who has started regularly. Edited June 15, 2013 by AstonMartin82 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RimmyJimmer Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Bannan prides himself on his technical ability but delph doesn't??? What a ridiculous statement. Ok, who would ur midfield be then? How would u set us up?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambridge-AVFC Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Then why does it look like lambert has no problems selling him? If he can have such an influence on a team winning why didn't he play more? Why aren't top teams coming in for him? He doesn't fit our style of play. We're a very dynamic team and Bannan isn't very dynamic. However, having said that Bannan did contribute to our victories, to say he didn't is harsh. He very much does fit our style of play. Lambert gave him his chance over and over and over again. It then became clear he just isn't good enough and he got dumped. I remember John Gregory telling Vassell when he first came through the ranks at Villa that he is going to play the next 10 games no matter how badly he plays. It's was an excellent piece of man-management because it takes the pressure totally off the player and lets them play with freedom and express themselves. It wouldn't surprise me if this is what Lambert did with Bannan... only during his run in the team he was get worse and worse and worse and it culminated in that appalling performance against Liverpool and he hasn't been seen again since. It became clear during that run that he wasn't good enough and the reason why Lambert is turning into a Villa favorite and an excellent manager is because he picks up on these things and acts on it. Although Bannan was poor against Liverpool, against Reading and QPR(i.e. the 2 games before) he played very well. Also Bannan had more good games than bad, but ultimately I think the reason Bannan was dropped was because of Delph's better form(at the time). He played no worse than Delph did over the course of the season. The reason why he's leaving is because he's not suited to our system, not because of his ability. He didn't play very well against QPR or Reading. This is a myth. I hate to do this but according to whoscored.com against Reading Bannan scored 6.9 - the 3rd worst player for us. One of the 2 he beat scored an own goal. Against Reading he was the 2nd worst player for us. Just because Con came on the site after these games crowing about how Bannan had been part of 2 wins in a row and just because he didn't do any back passes that put the opposition straight through on goal really doesn't mean he was excellent. Con's propaganda has caught you here... don't fall for it. I remember these two games very well as I was specifically looking out for Bannan due to Con's claims of his being world class and whilst I'll agree these were probably his best two games of the season but he was still very poor, incredibly ineffective and remember it was against the bottom 2 clubs in the league... who are now Championship standard. If you want I can go through every game he played last season and give his ranking against other players but it won't be good reading and will undoubtedly rebuff your "he had more good games than bad" because he really didn't. Could you please do go through every game? If you admit you have a weak mind and therefore been subject to brainwashing? Yeah whatever you just said, now chop chop with the individual game ratings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RimmyJimmer Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 I must point out that I have defended bannan several times this season, because I do think he has had some unfair abuse....so I'm not a bannan hater, I just think having watched him over a few seasons, he just isn't good enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambridge-AVFC Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 (edited) Bannan prides himself on his technical ability but delph doesn't??? What a ridiculous statement. Ok, who would ur midfield be then? How would u set us up?? Well, I would imagine Delph works more on dribbling and defending than Bannan does. Of course every footballer has a degree of technique. Probably at the moment keep it the same Sylla - Westwood - Delph. As those players suite our system more than Bannan does. However that was never the debate, the debate was who has more technical ability. Not who was the most effective players for us. Edited June 15, 2013 by Cambridge-AVFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggy_333 Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Are Con and Cambridge-AVFC the same person? Can anybody check the IP address they're posting from lol? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RimmyJimmer Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 So ur arguing that bannan is a better footballer but he's not good enough to play? Surely he'd be in for westwood if u rate him that highly? Where do u think bannan should be (club wise, position wise) to show the world how good he is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RimmyJimmer Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Are you saying he's too good for our technically deficient style of play?? Come on Cambridge...I'm bored!! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambridge-AVFC Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 So ur arguing that bannan is a better footballer but he's not good enough to play? Surely he'd be in for westwood if u rate him that highly? Where do u think bannan should be (club wise, position wise) to show the world how good he is? I'm saying Bannan is a good footballer, but because he doesn't fit into our style of play because he's not dynamic enough. He doesn't get in ahead of Westwood because Westwood offers more defensive cover. it'll be interesting to see how Bannan does at Swansea, as they like technically gifted players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambridge-AVFC Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Are you saying he's too good for our technically deficient style of play?? Come on Cambridge...I'm bored!! :-) I'm saying he isn't dynamic or athletic enough for our style of play. My humblest apologies for boring you, I was in the shower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 So ur arguing that bannan is a better footballer but he's not good enough to play? Surely he'd be in for westwood if u rate him that highly? Where do u think bannan should be (club wise, position wise) to show the world how good he is? I'm saying Bannan is a good footballer, but because he doesn't fit into our style of play because he's not dynamic enough. He doesn't get in ahead of Westwood because Westwood offers more defensive cover. it'll be interesting to see how Bannan does at Swansea, as they like technically gifted players. And Villa don't? What an absolute crock of shite. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambridge-AVFC Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 So ur arguing that bannan is a better footballer but he's not good enough to play? Surely he'd be in for westwood if u rate him that highly? Where do u think bannan should be (club wise, position wise) to show the world how good he is? I'm saying Bannan is a good footballer, but because he doesn't fit into our style of play because he's not dynamic enough. He doesn't get in ahead of Westwood because Westwood offers more defensive cover. it'll be interesting to see how Bannan does at Swansea, as they like technically gifted players. And Villa don't? What an absolute crock of shite. No, by that I meant Swansea play more possession football and therefore players with good technical ability thrive there as they see the ball more. Whereas we are a lot more direct and up tempo, kinda like a worse Borussia Dortmund in a way, so players who are good athletes(like Sylla and Delph) thrive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Bannan prides himself on his technical ability but delph doesn't??? What a ridiculous statement. Ok, who would ur midfield be then? How would u set us up?? Well, I would imagine Delph works more on dribbling 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RimmyJimmer Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Are you saying he's too good for our technically deficient style of play?? Come on Cambridge...I'm bored!! :-) I'm saying he isn't dynamic or athletic enough for our style of play. My humblest apologies for boring you, I was in the shower. Haha, ur not boring me, I'm boring myself! So do u think he would thrive in swansea's side?? Thing is, there's loads of 'technically' gifted players who are not good enough. I'm one :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambridge-AVFC Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 (edited) Are you saying he's too good for our technically deficient style of play?? Come on Cambridge...I'm bored!! :-) I'm saying he isn't dynamic or athletic enough for our style of play. My humblest apologies for boring you, I was in the shower. Haha, ur not boring me, I'm boring myself! So do u think he would thrive in swansea's side?? Thing is, there's loads of 'technically' gifted players who are not good enough. I'm one :-) I think he will, if he doesn't make it at Swansea, I will hold my hands up and admit that he isn't good enough. I just think it'll be interesting to see him in a system which will probably suite his game. What do you think? :L Edited June 15, 2013 by Cambridge-AVFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 I think he's a clearing in the woods and I hope he flops at Swansea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RimmyJimmer Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 Are you saying he's too good for our technically deficient style of play?? Come on Cambridge...I'm bored!! :-) I'm saying he isn't dynamic or athletic enough for our style of play. My humblest apologies for boring you, I was in the shower. Haha, ur not boring me, I'm boring myself! So do u think he would thrive in swansea's side?? Thing is, there's loads of 'technically' gifted players who are not good enough. I'm one :-) I think he will, if he doesn't make it at Swansea, I will hold my hands up and admit that he isn't good enough. I just think it'll be interesting to see him in a system which will probably suite his game. What do you think? :L Even if he goes to swansea he will still have to have defend. I know what ur saying about him....a few times I've thought he looks like he's capable of something special. But ultimately he's frustrating and, imo not good enough. As I said earlier I think he'll find his level in the championship and probably look really good like thingy at cardiff...........what's his bloody name...left sided midfielder who scored a load one season...ahhh peter whittingham!!! That's him. He was also what u would say good technically but not good enough to play! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con Posted June 15, 2013 Share Posted June 15, 2013 He didn't play very well against QPR or Reading. This is a myth. I hate to do this but according to whoscored.com against Reading Bannan scored 6.9 - the 3rd worst player for us. One of the 2 he beat scored an own goal. Against Reading he was the 2nd worst player for us. It's a myth because of what whoscored.com? Who is being laughably statistic-centric now? The whoscored.com rating system is the most subjective statistic they have. One yellow card, issued at the whim of a referee, can drastically change the rating. Against Reading your info is wrong. Bannan (6.9) rated higher than three: Westwood (6.8), Lowtan (6.8), and Baker (6.4). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts