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

[Denis_B]

We couldn't hit them on the break as we didn't have players on the pitch with the legs to have done it. We were choking them in our half which is why Bent was so isolated, we had two chances to have won the game as it was, it so nearly worked.

[Amo69]

We couldn't hit them on the break as we didn't have players on the pitch with the legs to have done it. We were choking them in our half which is why Bent was so isolated, we had two chances to have won the game as it was, it so nearly worked.

Had we tried to attack them from the start, fans would have got behind the team and the belief would have grown amongst villa players and pressure shown by City. The last 10 minutes when we looked like scoring is evidence of this. It was too little too late and overall result is we not only lost but we lost like losers.

[Denis_B]

IF my Aunt had a cock she would be my Uncle.

Same IF goes if we had taken them on surely?

[pacbuddies]

We couldn't hit them on the break as we didn't have players on the pitch with the legs to have done it. We were choking them in our half which is why Bent was so isolated, we had two chances to have won the game as it was, it so nearly worked.

Had we tried to attack them from the start, fans would have got behind the team and the belief would have grown amongst villa players and pressure shown by City. The last 10 minutes when we looked like scoring is evidence of this. It was too little too late and overall result is we not only lost but we lost like losers.

Spot on. And if the fool hadn't brought on a centre half instead of an attacking player to replace Dunne when we were 1-0 down with a few minutes to go there might have been the slightest chance that we would have scored (only slight though).

[steve-67]

As I posted yesterday, Manchester City, despite being top of the table, or second before the game, were actually in 17th place based on their away performances. One might argue that this is a false position, one might also argue that they were due and away win. BUT, McLeish got his tactics wrong because Villa lost. He got his tactics wrong because he tried to do it the Everton and Sunderland way, we did not press and harrass them anywhere near as much as Everton and Sunderland did. The tactics have been shit all season, but against Manchester City he finally got it right? Oh dear. Tactics, and getting them right, means that we have won the game, not lost it.

[pacbuddies]

Slightly off topic and on a lighter note the SHA fans have a thread on one of their forums discussing who will be their next manager if Hughton joins Wolves as is possible. The name McLeish has been mentioned more than once. If he has the slightest chance of going back there I will drive him for an interview myself!

[picicata]

If we had tried to go toe to toe on footballing grounds yesterday our goal difference would have been about 5 down on what it is today.

For that ONE game I believe he got his tactics spot on. IF Cuekllar had put the one away he should have and IF Hart hadn't made a worldy save we would have had 3 points.

I am not a fan of his but credit for once when I think it is due.

If City hadn't scored, we wouldn't have had those chances as we barely crossed the half way line until we had too.

We would have been exceedingly lucky to get anything out of that game. We got what we deserved, feck all.

[Denis_B]

Tactics, and getting them right, means that we have won the game, not lost it.

A little simplistic tbh........ so every time a manager wins it's his credit for tactics and therefore everytime a club loses it's down to tactics?

Blimey, needn't worry about which ref it is on the pitch ever again then and we can have any players on the pitch we want as it is never their fault

[Dale]

Slightly off topic and on a lighter note the SHA fans have a thread on one of their forums discussing who will be their next manager if Hughton joins Wolves as is possible. The name McLeish has been mentioned more than once. If he has the slightest chance of going back there I will drive him for an interview myself!

We should be so lucky.

[Risso]

If we had tried to go toe to toe on footballing grounds yesterday our goal difference would have been about 5 down on what it is today.

For that ONE game I believe he got his tactics spot on. IF Cuekllar had put the one away he should have and IF Hart hadn't made a worldy save we would have had 3 points.

I am not a fan of his but credit for once when I think it is due.

There is no credit due, none whatsoever. Firstly, trying to defend in our own half all game would be difficult enough even with a decent defence. Our defence is an absolute joke, so it's guaranteed at the moment that we'd make a mistake and concede.

I would say Arsenal, whilst not having as many world class players as City are still the best footballing side in the Premier League. We tried to take the game to them, played well and were unlucky to lose. More importantly, after the game, there was a buzz about the place that despite the result, showed that Villa fans appreciate an attempt at playing football.

Man City haven't been at their best recently, and in Keane, Bent, Ireland and even N'Zogbia, we have players who could have hurt them, if used properly. McLeish though, reverted to the tactics that failed so badly against Man U and Spurs, and so he deserves no credit at all, and instead deserves every last bit of criticism coming his way. The man is a woeful manager, who is performing exactly as most people predicted he would. In fact, just about everybody except that imbecile Randy Lerner.

[steve-67]

Tactics, and getting them right, means that we have won the game, not lost it.

A little simplistic tbh........ so every time a manager wins it's his credit for tactics and therefore everytime a club loses it's down to tactics?

Blimey, needn't worry about which ref it is on the pitch ever again then and we can have any players on the pitch we want as it is never their fault

These are professional footballers, their full time job is to play football. I get the team that I coach for around four hours a week!! McLeish sets them out to play the way he wants them to. Ok, an injury to Clark threw him yesterday and yes, I agree, the players HAVE to take their share of the blame for most of this season too. But the Manager is to blame too. The tactics are wrong when you lose, simplicity itself, given that the Managers work with these players all week.

The players are not good enough, that has to be said. The players of Sunderland and Everton are also not good enough when we are comparing Villa and those two with Manchester City. But for McLeish to come out and say that our game plan was to play like Evertona dn Sunderland did, and for him to say that his one skill is to motivate his players, who the hell is he kidding. He's shit. And yes, I agree with you that many of the players are also shit. Get rid of them all. Seriously.

[foreveryoung]

Fact: McLeish believed we could never win this game. McLeish lovers, is this how you want our manager to think, that we are just not good enough. I think the players think there good enough, this maybe there frustration. Its a **** crime we now have one of the best strikers in the premiership, only for McLeish not to use him to his strengths. I dont want him to spend our money cause he will never think were good enough and always play shite boring football. You simply cannot play boring football at home does he not understand what we all go to villa park for.

His post match comments where just awful???????????

[Denis_B]

fey....I trust the' McEck lover' title is not aimed at me?

[villianusa]

Yeah they scored and our heads dropped and we gave up

Straight out of the McLeish book of football.

If that's the case why have we won so many points from losing positions.

Seems just another chance to have a dig of the manager.

Perhaps, just perhaps, we shouldn't have been in those 'Losing' positions to start with.

Oh and I don't need to be given the chance to 'have another dig of the manager' as you put it as there are numerous reasons for this already and they are supplied direct from him.

Thanks for pointing out the typo.

But you never answered the fact that from results your statement was partially incorrect. If our heads went down so much we certainly have come back so many times.

I totally agree we shouldn't be going behind as often as we do and he sets us up in a negative fashion but I wasn't commenting on that.

I dunno, is it because once we go behind he makes substitutions or changes his game plan?

Because a draw is a win to him, we go behind so we chase the draw, we sometimes get lucky and get the win from it too, because his tactics are forced to be changed to something attacking.

0-0 Vrs QPR, we go 1-0 up, he panics and realises we came for a draw, so we sit back, they get a player sent off, we still sit back, they score = 1-1 and for him still a good result.

NO bollocks.

I think he is trying so hard to succeed that he is causing his own downfall. I understand that it's easier to win games if you don't concede any but the players are forgetting how to transistion from defense to attack. He is just too overly defensive.

The defense is too deep and he has even mentioned this himself when he said (paraphsing here) "that maybe you just can't teach some players new things." I think some of the issues lay with the players but his team selection certainly haven't helped him. Bent is isolated but when we do get some decent crosses in we do actually look like we can score. Sadly they don't get in there enough. I am thinking that Dunne's injury could be a blessing in disguise but sadly Clarke gets injured at the same time. Hopefully Cuellar can be more assertive and push the team up the park.

There are issues I see but I'll save them for another day.

[foreveryoung]

It was not that personal. But I have to say I cannot understand anyone who would defend him. I did"nt mind the appointment to be honest. But there is something seriously wrong, if after 19 games he still thinks heskey can do a job better than Ireland or nzog. He still don't seem to know his best team.

[Villarocker]

I am no fan of McLeish, but, I have recently been mulling over just what has changed since MON left. I believe that certain players are mainly to blame for our woes and that any manager would struggle to make a cohesive unit out of them. However, I cannot overlook the fact that McLeish never, not for one minute, looked like the right man to take over at Villa.

Today, I thought of this:

On April 20th 2008 (yes, it was less than 4 years ago!) we beat Birmingham City 5-1 in what proved to be, in my opinion, MON's finest hour. Alex McLeish was the Blues manager that day and just over 3 years and two relegations later, our owner decided - following illness to our previous manager - that we should part with serious money (£5m?) - to pinch our rivals' manager off them.

Yesterday, Wolves lost to their local rivals West Brom by 5 goals to 1. They have since sacked their manager following that defeat and a recent run of poor results. But, imagine that Wolves hadn't decided to sack McCarthy, kept faith with him and he went on to take them down at the end of this season. My question is this;

If Roy Hodgson left West Brom for some reason this summer - to manage England? another team? or ill health (hope not Roy!) - who thinks that Jeremy Peace would be approaching Wolves and offering to pay them £5m for Mick McCarthy to take over the reins at WBA?

That scenario would simply never happen - and it should NEVER have happened to us!!

[ermie123]

He picks Heskey enough said!!!!!

[Amo69]

If we had tried to go toe to toe on footballing grounds yesterday our goal difference would have been about 5 down on what it is today.

For that ONE game I believe he got his tactics spot on. IF Cuekllar had put the one away he should have and IF Hart hadn't made a worldy save we would have had 3 points.

I am not a fan of his but credit for once when I think it is due.

There is no credit due, none whatsoever. Firstly, trying to defend in our own half all game would be difficult enough even with a decent defence. Our defence is an absolute joke, so it's guaranteed at the moment that we'd make a mistake and concede.

I would say Arsenal, whilst not having as many world class players as City are still the best footballing side in the Premier League. We tried to take the game to them, played well and were unlucky to lose. More importantly, after the game, there was a buzz about the place that despite the result, showed that Villa fans appreciate an attempt at playing football.

Man City haven't been at their best recently, and in Keane, Bent, Ireland and even N'Zogbia, we have players who could have hurt them, if used properly. McLeish though, reverted to the tactics that failed so badly against Man U and Spurs, and so he deserves no credit at all, and instead deserves every last bit of criticism coming his way. The man is a woeful manager, who is performing exactly as most people predicted he would. In fact, just about everybody except that imbecile Randy Lerner.

When put like this is makes me even more miserable about the whole situation and that's saying something.

Randy accept you made a big mistake and try to put this right. For the sake of your 'business' if nothing else!

[TRO]

The problem with losing is.. it can almost become acceptable.

don't get sucked in...it ain't acceptable and never will be. and drawing with one point is a defeat in disguise.

Winning is the only mentality to fill your head with.... both players and fans.

[TRO]

I am no fan of McLeish, but, I have recently been mulling over just what has changed since MON left. I believe that certain players are mainly to blame for our woes and that any manager would struggle to make a cohesive unit out of them. However, I cannot overlook the fact that McLeish never, not for one minute, looked like the right man to take over at Villa.

Today, I thought of this:

On April 20th 2008 (yes, it was less than 4 years ago!) we beat Birmingham City 5-1 in what proved to be, in my opinion, MON's finest hour. Alex McLeish was the Blues manager that day and just over 3 years and two relegations later, our owner decided - following illness to our previous manager - that we should part with serious money (£5m?) - to pinch our rivals' manager off them.

Yesterday, Wolves lost to their local rivals West Brom by 5 goals to 1. They have since sacked their manager following that defeat and a recent run of poor results. But, imagine that Wolves hadn't decided to sack McCarthy, kept faith with him and he went on to take them down at the end of this season. My question is this;

If Roy Hodgson left West Brom for some reason this summer - to manage England? another team? or ill health (hope not Roy!) - who thinks that Jeremy Peace would be approaching Wolves and offering to pay them £5m for Mick McCarthy to take over the reins at WBA?

That scenario would simply never happen - and it should NEVER have happened to us!!

very interesting , also agree with the cohesive unit.