Jump to content

Match Thread


andykeenan

Recommended Posts

The point was that someone made a strange comment that Sidwell was placed on the bench by MON when we needed him, implying that he should have started.

I thereafter inform that he played during the first third of the season, and he thereby has gotten a fair chance.

That he eventually went completely off form and was axed was his own fault, and his sub appearances during our slump were not showing any evidence that he was good enough for Aston Villa.

One good match against the U21 team of Feyenoord will not change that, and the idea of coming up with Bullshit which indicate that Sidwell has not been given a fair chance is as crazy as the though of Sidwell being able to turn Villa around in the poor form that lasted through the month of March.

I have bolded the part where you are making assumptions. He was needed for fresh legs to bring on in the second half when the likes Petrov fitness wasn't up to it. If you couldn't see we needed fresh legs in the second half then well...

And that's what he did in the 13 matches he was a substitute in the latter 2/3 of the season.

But very rarely came on.

13 matches on the pitch as a substitute with his fresh legs are not rarely, IMHO.

It almost looks like you think he did not play those 13 matches he was on the pitch as a sub. Hmm, after thinking, I tend to agree. He was quite invisible when his mission was to come on the pitch with fresh legs....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point was that someone made a strange comment that Sidwell was placed on the bench by MON when we needed him, implying that he should have started.

I thereafter inform that he played during the first third of the season, and he thereby has gotten a fair chance.

That he eventually went completely off form and was axed was his own fault, and his sub appearances during our slump were not showing any evidence that he was good enough for Aston Villa.

One good match against the U21 team of Feyenoord will not change that, and the idea of coming up with Bullshit which indicate that Sidwell has not been given a fair chance is as crazy as the though of Sidwell being able to turn Villa around in the poor form that lasted through the month of March.

I have bolded the part where you are making assumptions. He was needed for fresh legs to bring on in the second half when the likes Petrov fitness wasn't up to it. If you couldn't see we needed fresh legs in the second half then well...

And that's what he did in the 13 matches he was a substitute in the latter 2/3 of the season.

But very rarely came on.

13 matches on the pitch as a substitute with his fresh legs are not rarely, IMHO.

It almost looks like you think he did not play those 13 matches he was on the pitch as a sub. Hmm, after thinking, I tend to agree. He was quite invisible when his mission was to come on the pitch with fresh legs....

You obviously pick the game you want to mention him in. He played a part in around 6 of the last 12 games. 55 minutes as sub and 90 minutes in the ill-fated Chelsea game.

Fact is we did better in the first 13 games when he started than we did in the last 12 when he was sub. In those first 13 games when he played we beat Chelsea and Liverpool. When he was sub we couldn't beat the likes of Wolves and Stoke. Fact.

So who knows if we had won more in the last 12 games if had started but what we do know is what is stated above. And those facts are certainly in his favour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â