Barry Bannan

[bannedfromHandV]

He says he played well against Reading and QPR... well if that is his standard of "playing well" then it is no wonder he has been dumped. He played well by his own standards, but it was still massively short of Premier League quality. He missed an open goal from 5 yards out FFS!

 

At least he didn't say he did well against Liverpool, so he does have some sort of standards however low they are.

 

I like the fact he said he went to the manager and told him that he wanted to leave... as if mate... I think Lambert is pulling all the strings here not you!!

 

You might not think Bannan played well, but he didn't play badly, other wise we would not have won so many games when he played. Given the number of times we lost last season, we could not afford any slackers, and the fact when Bannan played we were more likely to get a positive result shows he wasn't a slacker. He's not in the team because his style doesn't fit Lambert's system and that's that.

 

That "open goal" sounds like a description of Delph's miss against Fulham (?). Bannan did well here and don't forget we scored from it.

Balls to it, I'll bite.

This is ridiculous. You include the video as tho it substantiates your point when it does the exact opposite! It was a terrible miss and yes, 10x the miss versus delph's. Delph should have scored but it was nowhere near as glaring as this.

You live in lala land mate, really hope you follow bannan to wherever he goes

 

 

it's not a terrible miss. it was an instinctive shot with very little time to adjust position, hit the inside of the post and was clawed off the line by the keeper.

He's watched the ball travel all the way to his foot at not a great pace and from about what? 10+ yards away. Instinctive is not a word I would use

It wasn't on a plate I agree but my point is that he's using delph's miss as a yardstick and if so then banana was worse

[villa-revolution]

I've given Bannan a lot of stick on this thread when I've felt it merited it, but I can't fault his commitment after reading that article. Credit to him because he has trained hard & he does want to go & play football if the right offer comes along. Also, as he states, Blackburn are still in financial melt down & had things not been so desperate for them a deal would definitely have been cut under more healthier circumstances.

 

Fair play to him too because he says he wants to prove a lot of people wrong & is using that as a personal motivation.

 

At least a potential loan deal should materialise for him  if nothing else so at least we can get some if not all of his wages paid elsewhere.

 

I hope you go away now `Wee man` & slam my words firmly down my throat.

 

I raise a  toast to Con & Bannan.

 

Good Luck to all on VT

[AndyM3000]

Bannan is a silly little shit. I'd have booted him out the minute he decided to go drink driving.

 

In that article he talks about the Liverpool match and not playing after. Has he not watched back what he did in that game, some glorious 40 yard through balls he put through..... for Liverpool.

 

He's a rubbish footballer and his attitude is all that is wrong with modern footballers. Thinking he's Billy big-time and trying to act the kiddy.

 

Good riddance, hopefully he'll take that bald coot Ireland with him.

 

Would you boot Benteke out if he decided to go drink driving? Bollocks would you, so many people on this forum just dislike him from this one situation that happened.

 

He is hardly a rubbish footballer and Id love to know how you know about hs attitude, he has always given his best on the pitch even if that isn't good enough for us.

[vandaq]

I really fail to see what I get out off this thread, but I keep coming back. You never know when it will happen but I will clinch to the fact that somebody gotta be after him. Already had two dreams where he left but wake up to the disappointment.

[Ponky]

In gutted for wee Barry, personally. The poor little fellow only got a week in Vegas and 3 days in Marbella!

[Anything11]

Bannan is a silly little shit. I'd have booted him out the minute he decided to go drink driving.

 

In that article he talks about the Liverpool match and not playing after. Has he not watched back what he did in that game, some glorious 40 yard through balls he put through..... for Liverpool.

 

He's a rubbish footballer and his attitude is all that is wrong with modern footballers. Thinking he's Billy big-time and trying to act the kiddy.

 

Good riddance, hopefully he'll take that bald coot Ireland with him.

 

 

I am sick of reading this tripe on VT. Unless you have lived in a bubble your whole life i doubt you have avoided making some mistakes and questionable decisions and then to write off a kid for doing the same is just ridiculous. You or i (and most people on this site) have no idea whats its like to have too much money and too much free time to make these sorts of mistakes - and most of us probably know someone who has been done for drink driving before. Get over it.

 

Bannan is an alright player. He has showed flashes of potential and in almost every game he has given his all for the team. He has been frozen out and is just looking to further his career. I thank him for the energy he has put it while wearing a villa shirt and wish him all the best. We are not the shite - stop treating our own players with such disrespect.

[Big_John_10]

People keep saying Bannan isn't as bad as people make out.

Yet no club wants him and he's had to give a desperate "please anyone come and sign me" interview in the press.

Yeah that's what all decent players have to do.

It's quite clear Bannan is as shit as people make out on here and the majority of the professional football world agree.

Edited August 21, 2013 by Big_John_10

[TrentVilla]

He is 23, a full Scotland international with 12 caps and has made 81 appearances for a PL club including cup games.

 

He is available for something in the region of £750k-£1m and is in his own words prepared to take a drop on his 20k a week salary.

 

Yet only one club has tried to sign him and that was the car crash that is Blackburn.

 

Does that not tell people something?

 

There are only two possible reasons for this that I can see, one being that people just don't think he is any good or two, people don't rate his attitude. Or perhaps a bit of both.

 

What other reason can there be for the lack of interest?

 

How do those who rate him and defend him explain the almost complete lack of interest?

[ArteSuave]

You might not think Bannan played well, but he didn't play badly, other wise we would not have won so many games when he played.

 

Not to say the rest of your post isn't, but this bit is pure drivel. With a tiny sample size of games (n<30 for both with and without) you've been able to conclude that Bannan's performances must have been good due to a variation in winning percentage with and without him? Horse shart.

[Con]

 

You might not think Bannan played well, but he didn't play badly, other wise we would not have won so many games when he played.

 

Not to say the rest of your post isn't, but this bit is pure drivel. With a tiny sample size of games (n<30 for both with and without) you've been able to conclude that Bannan's performances must have been good due to a variation in winning percentage with and without him? Horse shart.

 

 

I agree it doesn't prove Bannan's performances were "good" but it does show his performances weren't, on average, bad. If his performances were bad that would mean the team's best form occurred whilst  playing with one bad player. That doesn't make sense. We can't prove from that record he performed "good" but it does show he wasn't bad.

[ArteSuave]

You might not think Bannan played well, but he didn't play badly, other wise we would not have won so many games when he played.

Not to say the rest of your post isn't, but this bit is pure drivel. With a tiny sample size of games (n<30 for both with and without) you've been able to conclude that Bannan's performances must have been good due to a variation in winning percentage with and without him? Horse shart.

I agree it doesn't prove Bannan's performances were "good" but it does show his performances weren't, on average, bad. If his performances were bad that would mean the team's best form occurred whilst playing with one bad player. That doesn't make sense. We can't prove from that record he performed "good" but it does show he wasn't bad.

No it **** doesn't. It shows diddly squat. It's statistically insignificant.

It doesn't take into account the strength of opposition, the form of the other players or even Bannan's tangible contributions to the games.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't our best form either.

[Nigel]

In gutted for wee Barry, personally. The poor little fellow only got a week in Vegas and 3 days in Marbella!

 

I was thinking that, as if he tried to use it as a story to get sympathy!

[TrentVilla]

This idea that the teams best form came with him in the side is utter rubbish.

[AstonMartin82]

 

 

You might not think Bannan played well, but he didn't play badly, other wise we would not have won so many games when he played.

 

Not to say the rest of your post isn't, but this bit is pure drivel. With a tiny sample size of games (n<30 for both with and without) you've been able to conclude that Bannan's performances must have been good due to a variation in winning percentage with and without him? Horse shart.

 

 

I agree it doesn't prove Bannan's performances were "good" but it does show his performances weren't, on average, bad. If his performances were bad that would mean the team's best form occurred whilst  playing with one bad player. That doesn't make sense. We can't prove from that record he performed "good" but it does show he wasn't bad.

 

 

Con, sometimes you write stuff which makes me think you have some intelligence. Like your statistical analysis of the Villa season thread for example. But then you keep referring to this stat as your main argument for Bannan and only someone with an IQ of less than 10 would say AND believe this.

 

You say it a lot, but I genuinely can't imagine for a moment you actually believe it.

 

Deep down you know Bannan is rubbish... you are just too stubborn to back down.

[Dodgyknees]

He is 23, a full Scotland international with 12 caps and has made 81 appearances for a PL club including cup games.

He is available for something in the region of £750k-£1m and is in his own words prepared to take a drop on his 20k a week salary.

Yet only one club has tried to sign him and that was the car crash that is Blackburn.

Does that not tell people something?

There are only two possible reasons for this that I can see, one being that people just don't think he is any good or two, people don't rate his attitude. Or perhaps a bit of both.

What other reason can there be for the lack of interest?

How do those who rate him and defend him explain the almost complete lack of interest?

This needs an answer.

[Con]

Why hasn't a club come in for Bannan yet? Perhaps they question his physicality for English football, in which case he would be better trying to get a loan somewhere abroad. Also, I can't imagine the stigma of the "bomb squad" helps. Other clubs must be thinking there is something wrong with him, he's a trouble-maker, something like that, when apparently it's nothing like that. 

 

 

 

Con, sometimes you write stuff which makes me think you have some intelligence. Like your statistical analysis of the Villa season thread for example. But then you keep referring to this stat as your main argument for Bannan and only someone with an IQ of less than 10 would say AND believe this.

 

You say it a lot, but I genuinely can't imagine for a moment you actually believe it.

 

Deep down you know Bannan is rubbish... you are just too stubborn to back down.

 

 

I like that big me up to knock me down rhetorical technique of yours.

 

I'm not the only person who says Bannan is not "bad" or "rubbish". His result when played record last season is just something for people to think about. You can dig into that stat and find he played all the big teams. You can argue he was "lucky" but you can't argue that it's a good result record.

[Dodgyknees]

Bomb Squad is a title mentioned in The Secret Footballer, for those out of favour with a manager. It's an 'in joke' for footballers (I don't get it either).

So try again Con, no stigma here - as Bent has shown.

Edited August 21, 2013 by dodgyknees

[AstonMartin82]

Why hasn't a club come in for Bannan yet? Perhaps they question his physicality for English football, in which case he would be better trying to get a loan somewhere abroad. Also, I can't imagine the stigma of the "bomb squad" helps. Other clubs must be thinking there is something wrong with him, he's a trouble-maker, something like that, when apparently it's nothing like that. 

 

 

 

Con, sometimes you write stuff which makes me think you have some intelligence. Like your statistical analysis of the Villa season thread for example. But then you keep referring to this stat as your main argument for Bannan and only someone with an IQ of less than 10 would say AND believe this.

 

You say it a lot, but I genuinely can't imagine for a moment you actually believe it.

 

Deep down you know Bannan is rubbish... you are just too stubborn to back down.

 

 

I like that big me up to knock me down rhetorical technique of yours.

 

I'm not the only person who says Bannan is not "bad" or "rubbish". His result when played record last season is just something for people to think about. You can dig into that stat and find he played all the big teams. You can argue he was "lucky" but you can't argue that it's a good result record.

 

But you are the only person who constantly quotes meaningless stats. You must know that win % is irrelevant... this is enforced by the simple fact that you were quoting how he had the best win % in the team, and then week after week it went from "the best", "one of the best" to "very good win %" and finally a "good win percentage".

 

The stats that are meaningful have been done to death on this thread and ones you just ignore.

 

Everything people have told you has come true about Bannan... not a single thing you said would come true has.

 

Stubbornness. Pure and simple.

[Con]

 

But you are the only person who constantly quotes meaningless stats. You must know that win % is irrelevant... this is enforced by the simple fact that you were quoting how he had the best win % in the team, and then week after week it went from "the best", "one of the best" to "very good win %" and finally a "good win percentage".

 

The stats that are meaningful have been done to death on this thread and ones you just ignore.

 

Everything people have told you has come true about Bannan... not a single thing you said would come true has.

 

Stubbornness. Pure and simple.

 

 

Win % is not irrelevant, and you wouldn't be claiming it was irrelevant if he had lost every game he started. 

 

I'm not being stubborn because nothing has changed since he last played against Liverpool, which followed two good results (and performances) against Reading and QPR. We know Bannan performed well against Reading and QPR because not only we won, he kept his place against Liverpool.

 

Nothing has changed since then. There is no new evidence.

[Dodgyknees]

Win % is relevant for a team but not for individuals in a team.

We could play poorly but Benteke rattles home 3 from 30 yards and we win.

Just like Benteke could play a blinder, hit the post twice, miss a pen, we lose 1-0. One players performance is not = to team consistency.