NeilS Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 he did infuriate when he was buying the likes of Harewood and Knight in his first summer window Knight's tenure is persistently and erroneously viewed with malign when he was, in truth, pretty solid for us. We've had worse defenders. Oh yeah, don't get me wrong he did ok for us while he was here, and we did alright out of the transfer overall making back the fee at the end. It was just that I was hoping for some world/top class players during the first summer window with the Lerner funding, and we end up with Harewood and Knight who lets face it are average players at best. I especially remember the disappointment with the Harewood signing, and the will we unveil a secret signing at the kit launch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 he did infuriate when he was buying the likes of Harewood and Knight in his first summer window Knight's tenure is persistently and erroneously viewed with malign when he was, in truth, pretty solid for us. We've had worse defenders. I'd agree with this. Zat did pretty well for us, never gave less than his all and for 3.5 mill was a good buy. We also made half a mill profit when we sold him to Bolton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Oh yeah, don't get me wrong he did ok for us while he was here, and we did alright out of the transfer overall making back the fee at the end. It was just that I was hoping for some world/top class players during the first summer window with the Lerner funding, and we end up with Harewood and Knight who lets face it are average players at best. I especially remember the disappointment with the Harewood signing, and the will we unveil a secret signing at the kit launch. Granted, the acquisition of Knight (and especially Harewood, though God bless him for that goal against Liverpool) lacked a certain... prestige. Given our relative stature/status at the time though, I'd even go as far as to say it was one of O'Neill's canniest moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 ive got to be honest. im geeky enough to knock up a quick Excel Sheet about Prem Manager stats. I will try and update this after every game... (Memory permitting) So as we know: Mcleish has the worse win Ratio of the lot.... Mcleish 13 4 31% Houllier (Full Term - He did pick McAllister!) 39 14 36% Houllier (not counting illness) 34 12 35% O'Neill 190 80 42% O'Leary 131 47 36% Taylor 60 19 32% Gregory 190 82 43% Little 164 68 41% Atkinson 178 77 43% BUT points per game ratio all his boring Draws have helped him! Mcleish 1.38 Houllier (Full Term - He did pick McAllister!) 1.36 Houllier (not counting illness) 1.32 O'Neill 1.58 O'Leary 1.34 Taylor 1.18 Gregory 1.57 Little 1.52 Atkinson 1.55 So there we have it.... he's going to draw us to death! Geeky Doc Here The one thing we can all agree on from that second set of figures is surely that GT MkII was by far the WORST Villa manager of Premiership times. By the cringe - barely over 1 point per game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayarcee Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Oh yeah, don't get me wrong he did ok for us while he was here, and we did alright out of the transfer overall making back the fee at the end. It was just that I was hoping for some world/top class players during the first summer window with the Lerner funding, and we end up with Harewood and Knight who lets face it are average players at best. I especially remember the disappointment with the Harewood signing, and the will we unveil a secret signing at the kit launch. Granted, the acquisition of Knight (and especially Harewood, though God bless him for that goal against Liverpool) lacked a certain... prestige. Given our relative stature/status at the time though, I'd even go as far as to say it was one of O'Neill's canniest moves. The acquisition of Knight also had dire consequences as it pretty much sealed the departure of Gary Cahill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Oh yeah, don't get me wrong he did ok for us while he was here, and we did alright out of the transfer overall making back the fee at the end. It was just that I was hoping for some world/top class players during the first summer window with the Lerner funding, and we end up with Harewood and Knight who lets face it are average players at best. I especially remember the disappointment with the Harewood signing, and the will we unveil a secret signing at the kit launch. Granted, the acquisition of Knight (and especially Harewood, though God bless him for that goal against Liverpool) lacked a certain... prestige. Given our relative stature/status at the time though, I'd even go as far as to say it was one of O'Neill's canniest moves. The acquisition of Knight also had dire consequences as it pretty much sealed the departure of Gary Cahill. I think that was a good thing all round. Cahill went off to a lesser club where he could secure the regular first team football he craved, he stopped being a troublesome, disruptive influence at Villa, and we got a decent price for him. Cahill has now turned into a decent centre back but I doubt whether he would have been able to progress in that way if he had stayed at Villa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Dont think was Knight signing that got rid of Cahill it was signing Davies as both were of similar enough ages and MON chose him ahead of Cahill which in hindsight was a poor decision Cahill went off to a lesser club where he could secure the regular first team football he craved, he stopped being a troublesome, disruptive influence at Villa disruptive influence? think he just wanted to play football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Dont think was Knight signing that got rid of Cahill it was signing Davies as both were of similar enough ages and MON chose him ahead of Cahill which in hindsight was a poor decision Cahill went off to a lesser club where he could secure the regular first team football he craved, he stopped being a troublesome, disruptive influence at Villa disruptive influence? think he just wanted to play footballExactly. He wanted to play first team football week in, week out and that we couldn't guarantee him. We ran out of short term loan options for him and it got to the point where a parting of the ways was the only sensible course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 How was Cahill a troublesome influence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 We are also atm, playing (90% of the time) - abysmally with many players yet to hit any form. Loving the way that you managed to include this in an argument to support the manager! :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanisgod Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I honestly dont think it's fair to blame MoN for the Cahill thing. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but then again how long ago did he leave us and it's only in the last season or 2 Cahill has really started to attract an interest. At the time the manager wasn't prepared to pick him regularly, at the time our defence was solid and I dont recall seeing many people calling for his regular inclusion in the team either. That season the Davies we've grown to hate was being comapred favourably to Rio Ferdinand and all was good. Now a few years down the line Cahill improved and Davies never fully recovered from an injury (possibly because he played through it for so long) it has become yet another weapon for the I hate MoN brigade. It happens, I bet a fair few Barce fans were upset they let Fabregas leave theri youth academy to join Arsenal, it's just one of those things in football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I really dont get the whole Cahill love in, scores some nice goals but as an actually defender, really? I just dont see it, ive only seen him play well once against us, he plays for a Bolton team shipping goals for fun and he has made less tackles per game than any, yes any, defender in the premier league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I agree Houlston. I always thought that he would get turned far too easily when he played for us, and I dont think he's corrected this problem yet. I dont particularly rate him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulTheVillan Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 All of the 'top 6' have needed defenders over the past couple of years, yet Cahill is still at Bolton. Says it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Arsenal put a bid in though but it was rejected by Bolton over the summer. He will leave in Jan in my opinion, or else they risk losing him on a free I think in the summer.. I think he'll go Arsenal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Arsenal put a bid in though but it was rejected by Bolton over the summer. He will leave in Jan in my opinion, or else they risk losing him on a free I think in the summer.. I think he'll go Arsenal. And if theres one thing Arsene knows its how to spot a good defender Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingerlad Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Cahill hasnt improved since he left us. If he stayed then maybe he may would have, who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Arsenal put a bid in though but it was rejected by Bolton over the summer. He will leave in Jan in my opinion, or else they risk losing him on a free I think in the summer.. I think he'll go Arsenal. And if theres one thing Arsene knows its how to spot a good defender Arsenal dont need him they have Veramelen, Mertesacker, Koscielny, Djourou adn Aquillaci. they are well covered there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Now a few years down the line Cahill improved and Davies never fully recovered from an injury (possibly because he played through it for so long) it has become yet another weapon for the I hate MoN brigade. think its the price that people beat him with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Arsenal put a bid in though but it was rejected by Bolton over the summer. He will leave in Jan in my opinion, or else they risk losing him on a free I think in the summer.. I think he'll go Arsenal. And if theres one thing Arsene knows its how to spot a good defender Mertesacker isn't as bad as some people make out (yes he lacks pace) but he is in the germany squad and it isn't because they lack quality defenders or need to make up numbers, Vermaelen is quality and is easily better then what we have currently at this club imo.. he is very hit and miss when it comes to defenders but it's more how they defend as a unit that is just as bad as some of his purchases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts