The, he's finally GONE! Tell us your thoughts Thread

[thetrees]

zigic and foster were 12 million and they came after they finished 9th and rumour is zigic wasnt Eck choice

The Zigic story is that the hierarchy asked McLeish to submit a list of players that he might be interested in. Zigic was on that list, albeit a long way down.

McLeish expected the board to further discuss and narrow down targets, but the next thing he knew the board had signed Zigic without any further discussion or input from McLeish.

[Big_John_10]

So the first time Mcleish had proper money to spend at blues he ended up taking them down.

And people want this guy in charge if Lerner ever decides to make us more than a nothing team?

The only real evidence supports the negative view of Mcleish at this level.

TBH I'd still have him over houllier any day of the week. It's just a shame we've had to have 2 terrible managers back to back. Well done Randy!

[Mantis]

TBH I'd still have him over houllier any day of the week.

Why?

[Houlston]

What team were you watching? We were totally shit except for the last two games. And who is GC??

?

well you couldnt have been watching the villa from the sounds of your recollection after we signed darren bent?

lets try the 1st game?

villa 1 man city 0

or maybe the 6 other wins in the league out of the last 16 games?

or the goals? 24 in 16 games

or the 26 points in those 16 games

the football was on the floor controlled and attacking

and we were still playing with players who had insulted gordon cowans and other villa backroom staff, players who were causing disruption as they didnt like the training methods and also no doubt through GH lack of tact when comunicating with the players.

the style of play was there for all to see, a game of keeping the ball, pressing the other side and trying to keep the pace at our level. it didnt work all the time but the method was used all the time becuase it is something GH believed in

What about the Wigan game? That came towards the end of the season when we were apparently seeing this improvement. The football in that game was equally as boring and terrible as any game we've seen this season with the exception of Spurs away, yes we followed it up with two excellent wins but please dont pretend everything was great after the signing of Bent.

Oh and that City game was about as back to the wall as it gets nothing to do with some great passing ethos.

? way to try and put words into my mouth which were not said

did i say everything was great? why no i didnt,

did i say he continued with the same style of play he had been using since coming to the club and once he had got some of his own players in, things got better and that it didnt work all the time ?

why yes i did

i guess that is the best you can come up with to defend your great leader?

hahahahaha

Hmmm I wasnt defending anyone and I'm not sure who you think I was defending as I dont have a great leader other than my wife.

I guess you are right though when you dont include specifics to your argument and say things like "the football was on the floor controlled and attacking" its my fault for not thinking that you meant except for.....

Or when you put "the method was used all the time" its again my fault for not thinking you meant except for.......

There is also a big difference between the method being used all the time but it not working all the time when really it just wasnt really being used, such as Wigan and Man City.

[Zatman]

So the first time Mcleish had proper money to spend at blues he ended up taking them down.

with the proper money he did buy their player of the season for last season in Foster and he got both Hleb and Bentley on loan who a lot of our fans were crying out for last year

[Mantis]

So the first time Mcleish had proper money to spend at blues he ended up taking them down.

with the proper money he did buy their player of the season for last season in Foster and he got both Hleb and Bentley on loan who a lot of our fans were crying out for last year

That's pretty irrelevant when you consider they got relegated.

[Big_John_10]

So the first time Mcleish had proper money to spend at blues he ended up taking them down.

with the proper money he did buy their player of the season for last season in Foster and he got both Hleb and Bentley on loan who a lot of our fans were crying out for last year

So further proof he is the wrong man. When he does sign quality he fails to get them to perform to the required level.

[Big_John_10]

TBH I'd still have him over houllier any day of the week.

Why?

I just couldn't stand the bloke.

He made me hate going to watch my team more than any other manager.

[briny_ear]

To be fair to McLeish, he had a big injury crisis after the January window had closed and there was nothing to do to rectify it.

Unlike our last season's manager who was lucky enough to be given £18m rising to £24m to buy a forward to save us from relegation.

[Mantis]

To be fair to McLeish, he had a big injury crisis after the January window had closed and there was nothing to do to rectify it.

Unlike our last season's manager who was lucky enough to be given £18m rising to £24m to buy a forward to save us from relegation.

They still shouldn't have gone down. And look how they went down as well. With a whimper.

Also, our manager last season had a ridiculously severe injury crisis, so it's not like he had much luck either.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

Houllier Vs McLeish. It's like trying to argue over who has the smaller cock.

Neither are for me. As long as we stay up, which we look likely to, then the board have achieved their goal.

Yes, points wise we are where I would expect most managers could achieve with this squad. But it's clearly not about results for many of us, it's how those results are achieved. I'm not going to be fickle, David O'Leary wouldn't like it, but things have improved. It's impossible not to notice. If we're still showing battle and a bit of nous in 4 or 5 games time I might consider going.

[scottie_villa]

The big problem for McLeish last year was Scott Dann getting injured, the previous season he was rock solid, they had to manage with Liam Ridgewell and Roger Johnson as their defensive partnership... Plus Craig Gardner was injured for 12 games... Big loses for a relatively weak Birmingham side.... But look, if you want to go on previous clubs you can make a heck of a case for Houllier being a good manager... But it was a complete mismatch at Villa, he completely underestimated the clubs ambition... We have to get out of the past and look at what he's doing now!

On the negative, we have played some very poor football at home and rolled over to most of the 'big' sides. On the plus we have a good away record and he has finally managed to get Stephen Ireland playing well. We are 11th in the league, I'd be disappointed if we finished there, we should be top half, so he has work to do. Let's stop going over his past and look at where we are now.

[Mantis]

TBH I'd still have him over houllier any day of the week.

Why?

I just couldn't stand the bloke.

He made me hate going to watch my team more than any other manager.

I don't think McLeish is much better in the personality department, not that it really matters at all.

Yeah, we weren't great to watch last season but we played better football than we are this season that's for sure.

[momo]

villa were 14th with 2 games left, they were NOT in the relegation zone, as i say, i dont know what team you may have been watching but it sure couldnt have been villa if the team you were watching was in the relegation zone then.

as i said, what would it take for a CG supporter to change THEIR opinion of him? i notice you didnt answer.

Hi again.

Currently Villa are positioned at 11th place. How is 14th place before the last to games last season better than that? And 14th was relegations zone with 2 games to go. Two losses and Villa would have ended up at 42 points, 3 more than Birmingham who went down. Villa were probably safe before the two games, so it didn't matter anyway.

My point is, that there is not so much difference in table positions between the two managers. Houllier didn't get the pre-season, McLeish inherited a team with less quality and experience.

McLeish gets the nod for me because he has not utilized the squad much better then Houllier. He has not publicly hanged out players. In both cases there were/are too much happening outside the managers control, so it is only marginally differences between them.

I was really anti-Mcleish, but the football is not so much different then MONs, or Houlliers. Tactically MON was annoying, Houlliers was annoying and McLeish is annoying. That is why I am less anti-McLeish. I don't see the difference between the managers as clearly as people want it to be.

[bickster]

TBH I'd still have him over houllier any day of the week.

Why?

I just couldn't stand the bloke.

He made me hate going to watch my team more than any other manager.

I don't think McLeish is much better in the personality department, not that it really matters at all.

Yeah, we weren't great to watch last season but we played better football than we are this season that's for sure.

Thats an opinion, its not one I share, watching Villa last season was one of the most painful seasons ever, its less so this season.

[brummybloke]

villa were 14th with 2 games left, they were NOT in the relegation zone, as i say, i dont know what team you may have been watching but it sure couldnt have been villa if the team you were watching was in the relegation zone then.

as i said, what would it take for a CG supporter to change THEIR opinion of him? i notice you didnt answer.

Hi again.

Currently Villa are positioned at 11th place. How is 14th place before the last to games last season better than that? And 14th was relegations zone with 2 games to go. Two losses and Villa would have ended up at 42 points, 3 more than Birmingham who went down. Villa were probably safe before the two games, so it didn't matter anyway.

My point is, that there is not so much difference in table positions between the two managers. Houllier didn't get the pre-season, McLeish inherited a team with less quality and experience.

McLeish gets the nod for me because he has not utilized the squad much better then Houllier. He has not publicly hanged out players. In both cases there were/are too much happening outside the managers control, so it is only marginally differences between them.

I was really anti-Mcleish, but the football is not so much different then MONs, or Houlliers. Tactically MON was annoying, Houlliers was annoying and McLeish is annoying. That is why I am less anti-McLeish. I don't see the difference between the managers as clearly as people want it to be.

so now you are changing what you stated, you said they were in the relegation zone which is the bottom 3 teams, we werent , then you say it doesnt matter anyway? so why say it in the first place?

GC got a squad he was more than happy to work with, knowing he had a whole preseason and also could make his own signings, which he did, it gave him time to set his team up how HE wants it, it gave him time to tell all the players how he wants it played, it gave him time to get the tactics, style of play , defending, passing, movement and everything else.

people also seem to claim the team was much stronger last season for GH? no it was not, we had heskey as our only striker for many games up till january, we had a midfield which regularly had to include clark, hogg, herd, bannan, at least one of them and more often than not 2 of them.

we had collins and dunne acting like babies because the training and fitness regime changed and they didnt like it, warnock was slagging off birmingham, ireland was sent out on laon because he was head ****, which to be fare doesnt take much doing but being booted out of his boyhood club to a team with no manager probably didnt help much.

GH couldnt make any signings till january, he then got walker in who was playing championship footy for qpr, he got makoun who the jury for me is still out although he apparently has said he only came to play for GH and now doesnt want to be here now GH has left, he signed bent.

so when he had the chance to buy he did and got 2 out of 3 signings bang on, the other not so.

the results improved as we now had some belief as we had got a top forward, we still have that forward, the fact GC decides to play shit hoof ball and not to our star forwards strengths is all down to GC.

everything you have been watching this season is GC having the best working conditions he has had since rangers had money to spend in a 2 horse race.

so the dull anti football which is on display for 90% of the time, guess what? its down to the manager

the tactics? guess what 90% down to the manager

i say 90% as you cant forsee certain things, although in theory the manager should have a plan b so it should be 100% but just to be generous i will account just 90% off the shit we have had to endure this season down to GC.

you think the football being played under MON, GH and GC is pretty much the same?

i suggest you have not been watching the games then and merely looking at the results becasue there could not be a more different way in which GH and GC have set the teams up and played.

and yet again you havent answered the question on what would change your mind, it is not a suprise you keep avoiding answering it, people with blind faith cant see any other options.

[CI]

Is anyone else starting to warm to McLeish ?

[flatty]

Is anyone else starting to warm to McLeish ?

erm, nope.

[TrentVilla]

Is anyone else starting to warm to McLeish ?

Not me.

[jim]

Is anyone else starting to warm to McLeish ?

No, in fact I cannot stand him.