dudevillaisnice Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 My argument is there for everyone to see.. he isn't the best midfielder in the squad imo. Funny how you quote half of my post, anyway I've made my point and your just making a meal of nothing (not a surprise). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted August 23, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted August 23, 2011 I think he probably is still the best CM we have. Delph's proven nothing yet, but has the potential to be very good. Makoun has disappointed. Ireland, well... he's Ireland. Talent, mental, not going to get much playtime and doesn't deserve it either. Bannan, skillful but still quite unproven and not much cop without the ball at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 My argument is there for everyone to see.. he isn't the best midfielder in the squad imo. Your argument is that you just rate Delph higher and that you'd have to be insane or on drugs to think differently. I've seen stronger arguments put forward but good try I guess. :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I would love those that support Petrov as our supposed best midfielder, captain and all around good egg to explain why he is viewed in such a way with a convincing argument rather than trotting out the POTS from a few years back (when no-one else really stood out that season and fans were too p'd off with Barry to give it to him) and just dismissing anyone with a counterview as an idiot. Can't see this happening though. Stats, league finishes and results show that petrov has done well in this team. Comments from players including young players show his influence in the dressing room. I think it should be people like you who need to put forward this convincing argument to prove their point because the digs at petrov usually ignore most statistical evidence and are just based soley on the negative opinions of certain individuals. I would be interested to know why it is a negative opinion when it disagrees with yours but your thoughts on certain players that you don't fancy are not negative? Anyway, I'll give my rationale/view of Stan's Villa career. After a great debut against Wet Spam, Stan struggled for form and couldn't really establish himself in the team in his few first seasons (06/07 & 07/08) - at least not in CM - with MON playing NRC and Barry in 07/08. I believe, had we had a right side - FB and RW - that season we would have been challenging the CL spots. He came in next season (08/09) and we did well, but with our best results coming with a three man CM. Stan and Barry were the CM pairing that saw us record two wins in 15 from memory and the worst run of performances I have personally witnessed at the club. We invariably started well but got deeper and deeper as the games progressed and Barry had to drop back to support a tiring Stan. The loss of Laursen contributed to this but the biggest single factor, IMO, was the low energy of Stan in the key driving CM position. The next season (09/10) saw Barry move on and Milner come in. Milner's engine covered for the tiring Stan more often than not BUT even he could not always help Stan. I can recall several instances where Stan let attackers glide past him or gave them to much space in front of the CB's which led to important goals against us, including the second goal for Man U in the CC Final and SI's equaliser for Citeh at VP. The Stan/Delph midfield against Wigan in the season opener just exposed how immobile/lacking in energy he is. Last season, was generally mixed. I didn't think he offered a great deal but we were struggling without Milner. The NRC/Petrov combo was poor IMO as neither are capable of progressing in to the opposition territory particularly well but the whole balance of the team was poor. He is just too immobile to play the role that he is being asked to play IMO. It is his defensive capabilities that worry me as he is prone to letting midfield runners pass him and get at the two CB's often drawing them out. If he was stronger and more energetic in this area I think he could be a very good player. That is not going to change now at the age of 32 though. If his role does change under McLeish and we see a more progressive Stan deliver then that could be good BUT leaves us short in the DCM position but I am not sure he would be better than any of Delph, Makoun or Bannan in the playmaker role and I don't think he has the pace or speed of thought to play the ACM role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I would be interested to know why it is a negative opinion when it disagrees with yours but your thoughts on certain players that you don't fancy are not negative? If I'm saying a player is poor and focusing on all his faults then that would be negative. It's not a trick, I have negative opinions about players like albrighton and makoun like you do about petrov. You just seem to ignore everything else but your negative opinions and then ask others to put forward a compelling argument to counter it. The way you describe milner and Barry it's like petrov has one leg and can't move. Like I said you ignore everything but your negative opinion. 2008/09 season we challenge top 4, finish 6th. Petrov is voted player of the year by the fans AND the players. The year after petrov is again ever present and captain and we do even better, best points total in years and two good cup runs but predictably you claim milner had to do everything. You claim the stan/Delph pairing showed how immobile he is, I take it you didn't see the Blackburn game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Your argument is that you just rate Delph higher Yes and that he offers more currently than Petrov and that he will improve more than Petrov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 You claim the stan/Delph pairing showed how immobile he is, I take it you didn't see the Blackburn game? even Salifou can look iniesta against Blackburn.. so that really means nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 You claim the stan/Delph pairing showed how immobile he is, I take it you didn't see the Blackburn game? even Salifou can look iniesta against Blackburn.. so that really means nothing. So he plays a game with Delph which makes him look immobile and useless, that's ok to point out. Plays a game with Delph which makes him look good and that's not ok. Good to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 You claim the stan/Delph pairing showed how immobile he is, I take it you didn't see the Blackburn game? even Salifou can look iniesta against Blackburn.. so that really means nothing. So he plays a game with Delph which makes him look immobile and useless, that's ok to point out. Plays a game with Delph which makes him look good and that's not ok. Good to know. Except I've already pointed out I'm not judging Delph on the last 2 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I would love those that support Petrov as our supposed best midfielder, captain and all around good egg to explain why he is viewed in such a way with a convincing argument rather than trotting out the POTS from a few years back (when no-one else really stood out that season and fans were too p'd off with Barry to give it to him) and just dismissing anyone with a counterview as an idiot. Can't see this happening though. Stats, league finishes and results show that petrov has done well in this team. words removed from players including young players show his influence in the dressing room. I think it should be people like you who need to put forward this convincing argument to prove their point because the digs at petrov usually ignore most statistical evidence and are just based soley on the negative opinions of certain individuals. I would be interested to know why it is a negative opinion when it disagrees with yours but your thoughts on certain players that you don't fancy are not negative? Anyway, I'll give my rationale/view of Stan's Villa career. After a great debut against Wet Spam, Stan struggled for form and couldn't really establish himself in the team in his few first seasons (06/07 & 07/08) - at least not in CM - with MON playing NRC and Barry in 07/08. I believe, had we had a right side - FB and RW - that season we would have been challenging the CL spots. He came in next season (08/09) and we did well, but with our best results coming with a three man CM. Stan and Barry were the CM pairing that saw us record two wins in 15 from memory and the worst run of performances I have personally witnessed at the club. We invariably started well but got deeper and deeper as the games progressed and Barry had to drop back to support a tiring Stan. The loss of Laursen contributed to this but the biggest single factor, IMO, was the low energy of Stan in the key driving CM position. The next season (09/10) saw Barry move on and Milner come in. Milner's engine covered for the tiring Stan more often than not BUT even he could not always help Stan. I can recall several instances where Stan let attackers glide past him or gave them to much space in front of the CB's which led to important goals against us, including the second goal for Man U in the CC Final and SI's equaliser for Citeh at VP. The Stan/Delph midfield against Wigan in the season opener just exposed how immobile/lacking in energy he is. Last season, was generally mixed. I didn't think he offered a great deal but we were struggling without Milner. The NRC/Petrov combo was poor IMO as neither are capable of progressing in to the opposition territory particularly well but the whole balance of the team was poor. He is just too immobile to play the role that he is being asked to play IMO. It is his defensive capabilities that worry me as he is prone to letting midfield runners pass him and get at the two CB's often drawing them out. If he was stronger and more energetic in this area I think he could be a very good player. That is not going to change now at the age of 32 though. If his role does change under McLeish and we see a more progressive Stan deliver then that could be good BUT leaves us short in the DCM position but I am not sure he would be better than any of Delph, Makoun or Bannan in the playmaker role and I don't think he has the pace or speed of thought to play the ACM role. Agree.. I also agree on the NRC/Petrov combo.. that must've been the most uninspiring and dullest midfield I have seen.. no creativity at all .. though with our current manager I think creativity is a word he is unfamiliar with, so we may go back to something similiar (I know NRC isn't here) that's for another thread though. Why is Curre-nt a filtered word? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 though with our word removed manager I think creativity is a word he is unfamiliar with why is McLeish a word removed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 though with our word removed manager I think creativity is a word he is unfamiliar with why is McLeish a word removed? For some reason Curre-nt without the dash is a filtered word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 ah ok :D:D:D was confused Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I would be interested to know why it is a negative opinion when it disagrees with yours but your thoughts on certain players that you don't fancy are not negative? If I'm saying a player is poor and focusing on all his faults then that would be negative. It's not a trick, I have negative opinions about players like albrighton and makoun like you do about petrov. You just seem to ignore everything else but your negative opinions and then ask others to put forward a compelling argument to counter it. The way you describe milner and Barry it's like petrov has one leg and can't move. Like I said you ignore everything but your negative opinion. 2008/09 season we challenge top 4, finish 6th. Petrov is voted player of the year by the fans AND the players. The year after petrov is again ever present and captain and we do even better, best points total in years and two good cup runs but predictably you claim milner had to do everything. You claim the stan/Delph pairing showed how immobile he is, I take it you didn't see the Blackburn game? Pot-kettle-black mate. Why don't you respond to my points? Because you never do and are probably not capable? Its always the same two arguments with you - POTS and points total/6th spot. Everton finished higher than us in two of those seasons without a full time forward and with Hibbert at right back. Even the big 4 have their weaknesses, they are just less than ours. And I do think Barry and Milner are very good players, particularly the latter. That's probably why Citeh paid the money that they paid for him or do you think that they just went for him because they realised that they would not be able to prise Stan away from MON? Lets get this straight. Petrov has been a good footballer. The millions of pounds that he has earned and the awards as Bulgarian footballer of the year demonstrate that. In my view though, he doesn't now, and hasn't for a while, have the energy/stamina to play in a top half Premier League midfield as a first choice and if he does, he is a weak spot. If you think he does then please explain to me what he brings to the team, what he needs alongside him etc.. Discuss. That's what this forum is for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted August 23, 2011 Moderator Share Posted August 23, 2011 though with our word removed manager I think creativity is a word he is unfamiliar with why is McLeish a word removed? For some reason Curre-nt without the dash is a filtered word. Still trying to get to the bottom of that one, hmmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 POTS and points total/6th spot. Everton finished higher than us in two of those seasons without a full time forward and with Hibbert at right back. Even the big 4 have their weaknesses, they are just less than ours. Do those so called weak spots often win player of the year from fans and players? You say all I go on about is POTS and league position and results but that's factual evidence. Yours is just soley your opinion on a player you've bad mouthed for years. Like I said you make out he is a weakness when the fans voted him player of the season. Now you could say it's just a popularity contest but that same season the players voted him the player of the year. Ignoring that is just pathetic IMO. And I do think Barry and Milner are very good players, particularly the latter. That's probably why Citeh paid the money that they paid for him or do you think that they just went for him because they realised that they would not be able to prise Stan away from MON? Quite clearly Milner and Barry are top class but them performing well with petrov and us performing well as a team is not evidence that both those players had to carry him throughout the season. If you think he does then please explain to me what he brings to the team, what he needs alongside him etc.. Discuss Is there any point? You've made it perfectly clear how you feel about petrov and when you ignore actual facts and evidence nothing I'm going to say will make you think twice. I just thought it was a bit rich to come on here with nothing but your negative opinion of the player and then ask people who rate petrov to put forward a compelling argument to support him. But that's impossible because with petrov nothing but your opinion of him matters. Doesn't matter what he achieves, how the team perform with him playing, what the team achieves with him as a regular player and captain, all of that's ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 POTS and points total/6th spot. Everton finished higher than us in two of those seasons without a full time forward and with Hibbert at right back. Even the big 4 have their weaknesses, they are just less than ours. Do those so called weak spots often win player of the year from fans and players? You say all I go on about is POTS and league position and results but that's factual evidence. Yours is just soley your opinion on a player you've bad mouthed for years. Like I said you make out he is a weakness when the fans voted him player of the season. Now you could say it's just a popularity contest but that same season the players voted him the player of the year. Ignoring that is just pathetic IMO. And I do think Barry and Milner are very good players, particularly the latter. That's probably why Citeh paid the money that they paid for him or do you think that they just went for him because they realised that they would not be able to prise Stan away from MON? Quite clearly Milner and Barry are top class but them performing well with petrov and us performing well as a team is not evidence that both those players had to carry him throughout the season. If you think he does then please explain to me what he brings to the team, what he needs alongside him etc.. Discuss Is there any point? You've made it perfectly clear how you feel about petrov and when you ignore actual facts and evidence nothing I'm going to say will make you think twice. I just thought it was a bit rich to come on here with nothing but your negative opinion of the player and then ask people who rate petrov to put forward a compelling argument to support him. But that's impossible because with petrov nothing but your opinion of him matters. Doesn't matter what he achieves, how the team perform with him playing, what the team achieves with him as a regular player and captain, all of that's ignored. Yes. You're clearly right and I am just a person with a negative opinion. What about the other >50% that voted he shouldn't be captain any longer. Are they also negative? You keep quoting your two little "facts" - POTS and 6th spot - because it is seemingly impossible for you to respond to any other points/debate. For someone who goes to so many games I thought you might have a bit more insight to add to a discussion but I am clearly wrong. We'll just have to agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmygreaves Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 POTS and points total/6th spot. Everton finished higher than us in two of those seasons without a full time forward and with Hibbert at right back. Even the big 4 have their weaknesses, they are just less than ours. Do those so called weak spots often win player of the year from fans and players? You say all I go on about is POTS and league position and results but that's factual evidence. Yours is just soley your opinion on a player you've bad mouthed for years. Like I said you make out he is a weakness when the fans voted him player of the season. Now you could say it's just a popularity contest but that same season the players voted him the player of the year. Ignoring that is just pathetic IMO. And I do think Barry and Milner are very good players, particularly the latter. That's probably why Citeh paid the money that they paid for him or do you think that they just went for him because they realised that they would not be able to prise Stan away from MON? Quite clearly Milner and Barry are top class but them performing well with petrov and us performing well as a team is not evidence that both those players had to carry him throughout the season. If you think he does then please explain to me what he brings to the team, what he needs alongside him etc.. Discuss Is there any point? You've made it perfectly clear how you feel about petrov and when you ignore actual facts and evidence nothing I'm going to say will make you think twice. I just thought it was a bit rich to come on here with nothing but your negative opinion of the player and then ask people who rate petrov to put forward a compelling argument to support him. But that's impossible because with petrov nothing but your opinion of him matters. Doesn't matter what he achieves, how the team perform with him playing, what the team achieves with him as a regular player and captain, all of that's ignored. The simple fact he's consistantly been one of the first names on the teamsheet under all the coaches that have managed him at Villa and elsewhere surely is proof enough that he's a vital member of the team. I don't understand why any other "proof" of his abilities and capabilities where needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edinburgh-Villa Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 We're better off at the moment with Petrov in the team, end of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted August 23, 2011 Moderator Share Posted August 23, 2011 What about the other >50% that voted he shouldn't be captain any longer. What about the poll that given all the current options had Petrov the clear winner as to who should be captain with Shay Given as second choice? And thats almost 50% of the fanbase that want one particular player as captain, you'd find it hard to find a more popular choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts