Our unluckiest season?

[Silent Blade]

I haven’t just decided we had injuries because of the large number of players. I said we had injuries because I was there and I remembered.

your analysis is partly useful but in confining yourself to checking against the starting lineup you are wilfully ignoring other injuries. Sone of your data is also incomplete. To use 1997-8 as an example, in addition to the players you mentioned (Borbokis, McGrath, Whitehouse):

• Chris Short was injured most of the season
• John Ebbrell didn’t play at all and had to retire
• David White, a regular the season before, played once and had to retire
• Michael Vonk was only fit enough to play 3 times (he likely would have stayed in the team as Tilers replacement but he got injured again)
• Fjortoft missed 8 of the 25 games played before he was sold, mainly with minor niggles
• Nick Henry was injured virtually all season and played only once
• Roger Nilsen had 2 spells on the sidelines with injuries
• Wayne Quinn didn’t play for 3 months - I vaguely recall he was injured
• Lee Sandford got injured on loan at Reading in October and couldn’t play until February

And that’s just the big ones. There were loads of little niggles as well. We were far worse off that season than you say. You can do the same exercise for the other seasons I mentioned.

Good argument but you have to remember that 7 of the 9 you have listed were Kendall signings. I doubt if all were fit then they would be in our strongest X1 during the 1997-98 season. Short ahead of Borbokis? Dont think so. Ebbrell and White maybe. Vonk was sent off at Norwich and was he really injured after serving his suspension? Henry, dont think so as he was sent off 3 times. Fair enough about Quinn. Didnt realise Sandford got injured when on loan at Reading, I assumed Spackman didnt fancy him. Thought Fjortoft got dropped by Spackman a few times and Fjortoft was keen to push his move to Barnsley? I had forgotten that Nilsen was injured before the start of the season so Spackman was bold enough to give Quinn his chance.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

I think you are making a few too many assumptions. Regardless of the ownership wrangles, the fact is that SU spent in excess of 100m on players since promotion. On top of this spend is wages. SU made a decision on how to spend the money that was made available. Purchasing players with little or no PL experience and or young players with potential was due to the SU decision making on how the money was spent and was not anything to do with affordability. The money was there to buy experienced players and pay PL wages but SU did not want to take this route. Yes, there are lots of sensible reasons for electing to follow this strategy but they tend to be for the mid to longer term. They do not address the immediate needs. Not addressing the immediate needs is a very significant factor contributing to why SU is in 20th position.

The bit I've highlighted in bold is just nonsense. A club with finite and limited resources faced with improving a squad that is generally regarded as Championship quality makes decisions on which players to buy based on what it can afford. Wages are a part of that affordability. PL experience is a part of that affordability. The money was there to buy experienced players and pay PL wages if the decision had been to buy just a couple of players, at the risk of having a disgruntled squad, requests to leave and wage demands. We have quite a few fans who are good at "spending other people's money", you're a Villa fan, right? I think you've forgotten what it is to support a club with no money.

 

[Begley]

The bit I've highlighted in bold is just nonsense. A club with finite and limited resources faced with improving a squad that is generally regarded as Championship quality makes decisions on which players to buy based on what it can afford. Wages are a part of that affordability. PL experience is a part of that affordability. The money was there to buy experienced players and pay PL wages if the decision had been to buy just a couple of players, at the risk of having a disgruntled squad, requests to leave and wage demands. We have quite a few fans who are good at "spending other people's money", you're a Villa fan, right? I think you've forgotten what it is to support a club with no money.

I haven't forgotten what it is like to support a club with no money. It is only two and a half years ago we came within days of administration due to not having the cash to pay a 5m tax bill. I do not forget those times.
I disagree that you could not have bought more experience within the spending budget that you had. The idea that "at the risk of having a disgruntled squad, requests to leave and wage demands" is a bit weak imo. If that is the attitude then it suggests that SU will never be able to move up to PL level and sustain it as you will continually be faced with this challenge and backing away from it will not solve it. Brewster is a prime example of the wrong decision. Yes, he is a player for the future but he is not the player to lead the line for a PL team this season and score double figures. This is not hindsight, this was blatantly obvious when he was purchased. I find it difficult to understand how anyone can think buying Brewster was the correct decision if SU wanted to retain its PL status this year. The money spent on Brewster could have easily been used to get older more experienced players. Just look at what Fulham did with the loan market and what Big Sam did in Jan. All at a fraction of the money spent by SU.
SU collected 136.2m for last season and having retained PL status will be guaranteed another bumper payment this season. That is circa 250m. Further, SU is guaranteed about 90m in parachute payments (if not promoted) over the following 3 years. That is close to 350m. with the lowest wage bill in the PL that leave lots of room for transfers, hence SU spent >100m on players. I really fail to see any argument that supports that SU could not afford PL wages for a squad that would have been better placed to survive the PL this season. IMO it was decision making and not budget that was the problem.

 

[Silent Blade]

I haven't forgotten what it is like to support a club with no money. It is only two and a half years ago we came within days of administration due to not having the cash to pay a 5m tax bill. I do not forget those times.
I disagree that you could not have bought more experience within the spending budget that you had. The idea that "at the risk of having a disgruntled squad, requests to leave and wage demands" is a bit weak imo. If that is the attitude then it suggests that SU will never be able to move up to PL level and sustain it as you will continually be faced with this challenge and backing away from it will not solve it. Brewster is a prime example of the wrong decision. Yes, he is a player for the future but he is not the player to lead the line for a PL team this season and score double figures. This is not hindsight, this was blatantly obvious when he was purchased. I find it difficult to understand how anyone can think buying Brewster was the correct decision if SU wanted to retain its PL status this year. The money spent on Brewster could have easily been used to get older more experienced players. Just look at what Fulham did with the loan market and what Big Sam did in Jan. All at a fraction of the money spent by SU.
SU collected 136.2m for last season and having retained PL status will be guaranteed another bumper payment this season. That is circa 250m. Further, SU is guaranteed about 90m in parachute payments (if not promoted) over the following 3 years. That is close to 350m. with the lowest wage bill in the PL that leave lots of room for transfers, hence SU spent >100m on players. I really fail to see any argument that supports that SU could not afford PL wages for a squad that would have been better placed to survive the PL this season. IMO it was decision making and not budget that was the problem.

Think the Prince will get £50M out of the £350M to pay off the mortgage from Emirates bank. I doubt if the 350M is tax free?

 

[pommpey]

It doesn't matter how we play really though does it? Bristol City game prime example. It's fine that's your thing. OTT criticism meant in a humorous way. Just found funny you calling someone else miserable and downbeat that's all.

So you didn't read the Man U write up.

Okay. You just read it when we lose, so you can double your tears. Team beaten, pommpey making humorous shit and poo jokes and ribbing the team. When they've played like bellends.

Tubby-boo-hoo.

Like I say, good job BDTBL isn't full and the fans are their characteristic forgiving selves. I fear you'd soil your bitches.

pommpey

 

[Hamburg Blade]

I haven't forgotten what it is like to support a club with no money. It is only two and a half years ago we came within days of administration due to not having the cash to pay a 5m tax bill. I do not forget those times.
I disagree that you could not have bought more experience within the spending budget that you had. The idea that "at the risk of having a disgruntled squad, requests to leave and wage demands" is a bit weak imo. If that is the attitude then it suggests that SU will never be able to move up to PL level and sustain it as you will continually be faced with this challenge and backing away from it will not solve it. Brewster is a prime example of the wrong decision. Yes, he is a player for the future but he is not the player to lead the line for a PL team this season and score double figures. This is not hindsight, this was blatantly obvious when he was purchased. I find it difficult to understand how anyone can think buying Brewster was the correct decision if SU wanted to retain its PL status this year. The money spent on Brewster could have easily been used to get older more experienced players. Just look at what Fulham did with the loan market and what Big Sam did in Jan. All at a fraction of the money spent by SU.
SU collected 136.2m for last season and having retained PL status will be guaranteed another bumper payment this season. That is circa 250m. Further, SU is guaranteed about 90m in parachute payments (if not promoted) over the following 3 years. That is close to 350m. with the lowest wage bill in the PL that leave lots of room for transfers, hence SU spent >100m on players. I really fail to see any argument that supports that SU could not afford PL wages for a squad that would have been better placed to survive the PL this season. IMO it was decision making and not budget that was the problem.

Sorry but this is just armchair fan nonsense. Your contention is that SUFC had the finances and the opportunity to bring in top players with PL experience who could have transformed the team into one that was pretty assured to survive its 2nd season - don't forget some of the aquisitions were made before there was any sign of the impending implosion of the team - but instead they chose to only buy players unproven at PL level for the same money, and not for financial considerations, but because they decided to stick within the wage structure for no reason whatsoever. And just look at the oodles of cash flowing into the club - it's a piece of piss to buy a PL team in 2 seasons. Just look at what Big Sam has done at West Brom since he's been there..... oh, actually, best not.
Of course we could have elected to go for older players with PL experience, pay them a small fortune in wages and give them a get-out clause if it all goes wrong so that they can walk away. Maybe it could have worked, it's easy to say that when the alternative hasn't, or maybe it wouldn't, because numerous examples of clubs trying to do just that on their arrival in the PL has shown it just isn't that easy, in which case we'd be back in the Championship having spent all our money, with an aging squad on huge wages, some of whom walk away for peanuts, others stay collecting their wages and we're stuck with them.
There's so much more to it, much of it things that only those at the heart of the club will ever know, and though obviously some decisions have been shown in hindsight to be wrong, the simple truth is that turning yourself into a PL regular after spending 6 of the previous 8 years in League 1 is several million miles away from your glib pocket manual on how to avoid relegation.

 

[Bashamed]

So you didn't read the Man U write up.

Okay. You just read it when we lose, so you can double your tears. Team beaten, pommpey making humorous shit and poo jokes and ribbing the team. When they've played like bellends.

Tubby-boo-hoo.

Like I say, good job BDTBL isn't full and the fans are their characteristic forgiving selves. I fear you'd soil your bitches.

pommpey

No I don't just read it when we lose. May have slipped your attention but we did actually beat Bristol City even though you were ashamed of us haha. All I'm saying is you come across as miserable and negative. Not a major insult

 

[Begley]

Think the Prince will get £50M out of the £350M to pay off the mortgage from Emirates bank. I doubt if the 350M is tax free?

Tax is only payable on profit, not turnover, so the majority of the 350m will be tax-free

 

[Silent Blade]

Tax is only payable on profit, not turnover, so the majority of the 350m will be tax-free

Cheers

 

[Begley]

Cheers

No problem, glad to be able to help

 

[Revolution]

Good argument but you have to remember that 7 of the 9 you have listed were Kendall signings. I doubt if all were fit then they would be in our strongest X1 during the 1997-98 season. Short ahead of Borbokis? Dont think so. Ebbrell and White maybe. Vonk was sent off at Norwich and was he really injured after serving his suspension? Henry, dont think so as he was sent off 3 times. Fair enough about Quinn. Didnt realise Sandford got injured when on loan at Reading, I assumed Spackman didnt fancy him. Thought Fjortoft got dropped by Spackman a few times and Fjortoft was keen to push his move to Barnsley? I had forgotten that Nilsen was injured before the start of the season so Spackman was bold enough to give Quinn his chance.

1. Strongest XI isn’t the point. If fit a lot of those players would have played (Vonk is the obvious one) or would have played instead of lesser players, such as loanees Earl Barrett and David Lee or new signings Ford, Hamilton and Wilder, who had to fill gaps when there were sales or injuries:

2. You need to check the records re Vonk and Henry. Henry was sent off twice the season before: he was injured all of 97-98. Vonk was sent off at Norwich but an injury ended his career. All this is documented in books about United and other places. You are speculating rather than looking at what actually happened to fit your argument.

It is very clear, objectively, that this season was worse for injuries than the present one. There was a period before Berge got injured where every first team squad player except O’Connell was fit. We always had at least 5 or 6 unfit players at all times in 1997-8 and it was often in double figures. The other seasons identified were also as bad or worse than this season.

As others have said above injuries are part of this seasons story but the position is not historically bad or worse than other seasons, and the situation has not become really serious until after Monday (assuming Egan and Fleck are long term absentees) and we are effectively relegated already. If anyone were to say “we were relegated just because of terrible injuries” that would not be true. To give just one example, the collapse in form of our first choice midfield and our two top scorers from last season - these players scored 23 goals last year and currently have one goal between them, when all except Mousset have played the majority of the games - is a much more important factor.

 

[Pedro Verde]

I think our experience of the PL this season will have taught us a thing or two

Last season we overperformed considering the quality of our squad
I think that blinded us somewhat into what we needed this season to continue and improve as a PL club
We have probably been naive with this thinking we didnt need to bring in that many quality players to add to the squad that did so well last season. The perfect storm of players form dropping off a cliff, the injuries to key players and no fans hasnt helped us. The transfer business we did has turned out to be nowhere near good enough

The lessons we must learn if we do become a PL club again in the not too distant future and want to become established in the top tier are that it can no longer be done on the cheap (unless you are very lucky with the players you bring in)
The wage structure of the club must change if we are to attract the quality players to keep us in the PL,
The scouting network has to include foreign players, this maybe more difficult in the future due to Brexit
This of course will stretch the Prince as he is not a billionaire, he will need help with this with either partner investors or selling us to another owner with the finances to compete at the top table
New owners will of course bring its own problems Im looking at Burnley and ALK the guys McCabe was talking to and of course the one over in South Barnsley
I just dont want the future of our club to be put at risk , I think the Prince is quite a level headed sort of guy
and will no doubt know all of the above

 

[Silent Blade]

1. Strongest XI isn’t the point. If fit a lot of those players would have played (Vonk is the obvious one) or would have played instead of lesser players, such as loanees Earl Barrett and David Lee or new signings Ford, Hamilton and Wilder, who had to fill gaps when there were sales or injuries:

2. You need to check the records re Vonk and Henry. Henry was sent off twice the season before: he was injured all of 97-98. Vonk was sent off at Norwich but an injury ended his career. All this is documented in books about United and other places. You are speculating rather than looking at what actually happened to fit your argument.

It is very clear, objectively, that this season was worse for injuries than the present one. There was a period before Berge got injured where every first team squad player except O’Connell was fit. We always had at least 5 or 6 unfit players at all times in 1997-8 and it was often in double figures. The other seasons identified were also as bad or worse than this season.

As others have said above injuries are part of this seasons story but the position is not historically bad or worse than other seasons, and the situation has not become really serious until after Monday (assuming Egan and Fleck are long term absentees) and we are effectively relegated already. If anyone were to say “we were relegated just because of terrible injuries” that would not be true. To give just one example, the collapse in form of our first choice midfield and our two top scorers from last season - these players scored 23 goals last year and currently have one goal between them, when all except Mousset have played the majority of the games - is a much more important factor.

Vonk played 47 games for MVV Maastricht after leaving us? You need to check the records! Henry was sent off at Huddersfield and at Ipswich in 1996-97 and at Bristol City in 1997-98. It had stuck in my mind in the last 20 years that he was sent off 3 times but I didnt really remember him playing for us during the 1997-98 season and I dont think Spackman rated him.

in 1997-98 season we were able to sign new players any time between the summer and March and we had many on loans unlike this season. It is my belief that we are more unlucky this season than in 1997-98

 

[Revolution]

Vonk played 47 games for MVV Maastricht after leaving us? You need to check the records! Henry was sent off at Huddersfield and at Ipswich in 1996-97 and at Bristol City in 1997-98. It had stuck in my mind in the last 20 years that he was sent off 3 times but I didnt really remember him playing for us during the 1997-98 season and I dont think Spackman rated him.

in 1997-98 season we were able to sign new players any time between the summer and March and we had many on loans unlike this season. It is my belief that we are more unlucky this season than in 1997-98

Henry played 1 game in 1997-8. He was not sent off. Bristol City did not play us as they were in the division below. You are simply wrong.

Vonk played 3 times in 1997-8. He was injured for the rest of the time. That finished his United career, irrespective of what happened next.

Your belief is not based on facts.

 

[Silent Blade]

Henry played 1 game in 1997-8. He was not sent off. Bristol City did not play us as they were in the division below. You are simply wrong.

Vonk played 3 times in 1997-8. He was injured for the rest of the time. That finished his United career, irrespective of what happened next.

Your belief is not based on facts.

I meant Henry was sent off at Bristol City in December 1998. You said "Vonk was sent off at Norwich but an injury ended his career", did you mean when he was with us?

 

[pommpey]

I meant Henry was sent off at Bristol City in December 1998. You said "Vonk was sent off at Norwich but an injury ended his career", did you mean when he was with us?

Y'mean ... you were wrong?

How can this be?

Incidentally, Henry was sent off in that match. I was there. We played like a sack of cunts then as well.

pommpey

 

[robbiez666]

It's worth remembering that there was a debate in pre-seaon about having the likes of Rodwell, Bryan and Jags as back-ups in the squad and most people were happy about it as they wouldn't ever need to play.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

I think our experience of the PL this season will have taught us a thing or two

Last season we overperformed considering the quality of our squad
I think that blinded us somewhat into what we needed this season to continue and improve as a PL club
We have probably been naive with this thinking we didnt need to bring in that many quality players to add to the squad that did so well last season. The perfect storm of players form dropping off a cliff, the injuries to key players and no fans hasnt helped us. The transfer business we did has turned out to be nowhere near good enough

The lessons we must learn if we do become a PL club again in the not too distant future and want to become established in the top tier are that it can no longer be done on the cheap (unless you are very lucky with the players you bring in)
The wage structure of the club must change if we are to attract the quality players to keep us in the PL,
The scouting network has to include foreign players, this maybe more difficult in the future due to Brexit
This of course will stretch the Prince as he is not a billionaire, he will need help with this with either partner investors or selling us to another owner with the finances to compete at the top table
New owners will of course bring its own problems Im looking at Burnley and ALK the guys McCabe was talking to and of course the one over in South Barnsley
I just dont want the future of our club to be put at risk , I think the Prince is quite a level headed sort of guy
and will no doubt know all of the above

I think the lesson is that there isn't an easy answer, which most people probably already knew. We had the recent cautionary lesson of Fulham who dismantled their team on promotion, spent a lot and still went straight back down. I've no doubt that influenced our thinking. After promotion this time one of their players said, "There were some clear errors made last time," ... "You can have as much talent as you want but, if you're not building your football club on concrete and you're building it on sand, then in the end it will be the rollercoaster ride. I hope we can grow gradually. It's going to be tough but, if we can't, we have core foundations that we always fall back on."
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/53659417
But they're still in the bottom 3 this time and their "mistakes" last time didn't stop them bouncing straight back, so which method is the mistake?
I doubt the approach next time will be the same and more consideration will be given to the approach to recruitment, wages and squad back up, like you say, but I think Wilder puts most of the blame on the current players not performing as he knows they can, so I'm not sure what the reaction is going to be.

 

[Silent Blade]

Y'mean ... you were wrong?


pommpey

 

[pommpey]

View attachment 105919

Like I say, you're not what you used to be.

Shame, that.

pommpey

 

[The Crab]

I haven't forgotten what it is like to support a club with no money. It is only two and a half years ago we came within days of administration due to not having the cash to pay a 5m tax bill. I do not forget those times.
I disagree that you could not have bought more experience within the spending budget that you had. The idea that "at the risk of having a disgruntled squad, requests to leave and wage demands" is a bit weak imo. If that is the attitude then it suggests that SU will never be able to move up to PL level and sustain it as you will continually be faced with this challenge and backing away from it will not solve it. Brewster is a prime example of the wrong decision. Yes, he is a player for the future but he is not the player to lead the line for a PL team this season and score double figures. This is not hindsight, this was blatantly obvious when he was purchased. I find it difficult to understand how anyone can think buying Brewster was the correct decision if SU wanted to retain its PL status this year. The money spent on Brewster could have easily been used to get older more experienced players. Just look at what Fulham did with the loan market and what Big Sam did in Jan. All at a fraction of the money spent by SU.
SU collected 136.2m for last season and having retained PL status will be guaranteed another bumper payment this season. That is circa 250m. Further, SU is guaranteed about 90m in parachute payments (if not promoted) over the following 3 years. That is close to 350m. with the lowest wage bill in the PL that leave lots of room for transfers, hence SU spent >100m on players. I really fail to see any argument that supports that SU could not afford PL wages for a squad that would have been better placed to survive the PL this season. IMO it was decision making and not budget that was the problem.

Fair comment regarding Fulham, but not sure Fat Sam is the best example. Have his signings made a tangible difference? seems to me they are still just as shit.

 

[Begley]

Fair comment regarding Fulham, but not sure Fat Sam is the best example. Have his signings made a tangible difference? seems to me they are still just as shit.

I am not a Sam fan btw, last year at Villa a lot of fans wanted Smith sacked and Sam brought in to save us and the thought of that made me feel ill. And yes, Sam has only just got players in and needs some time (which I don't believe Baggies have) but Diagne looks a real handful upfront. He was excellent against Man Utd and looks very capable of leading the line. He is no shrinking violet either and will not get pushed off the ball too easily. I also think Maitland Niles is a real quality player. Both Diagne and Maitland Niles look like they would get into most PL teams outside of the elite big boys who are just miles ahead of the rest of us. Both are loan players so no big fee. Transfermarkt say Diagne was a loan fee of 1.4m. I would be very happy to add him to the Villa team to compete with Watkins up front. We are very vulnerable up front and if Watkins gets injured you will see Villa plummet down the league.

 

[The Crab]

I am not a Sam fan btw, last year at Villa a lot of fans wanted Smith sacked and Sam brought in to save us and the thought of that made me feel ill. And yes, Sam has only just got players in and needs some time (which I don't believe Baggies have) but Diagne looks a real handful upfront. He was excellent against Man Utd and looks very capable of leading the line. He is no shrinking violet either and will not get pushed off the ball too easily. I also think Maitland Niles is a real quality player. Both Diagne and Maitland Niles look like they would get into most PL teams outside of the elite big boys who are just miles ahead of the rest of us. Both are loan players so no big fee. Transfermarkt say Diagne was a loan fee of 1.4m. I would be very happy to add him to the Villa team to compete with Watkins up front. We are very vulnerable up front and if Watkins gets injured you will see Villa plummet down the league.

Sounds like that was a bit of a sliding doors moment for you guys with the Smith / Allardyce thing!

I quite like Maitland Niles. Ironically on my current game of Football Manager I have him in my midfield!!!

 

[JJBlade]

Our players have not been a success though.
Mousett will be gone, for much less than the £10 million we paid for him.

Berge will be gone for less than the £22 million we paid for him.

McBurnie will probably stay but is worth considerably less than the £18 million paid for him

Brewster, it really wouldn't surprise me to see us get a £10 million offer for him and accept it, as bad as he's been I can see a promoted club, especially if it were Swansea taking a chance on him.
So that could be another massive loss.

Our other mid range signings Robinson and Freeman aren't here anymore and will be championship players again next season anyway, so worth considerably less than we paid.

The only others that would attract any possible attention have spent long periods of this season out injured, and that might be the only reason there still here next season.

So, it's not really been terribly successful not getting a few players in on Premier League wages with Premier League experience.

 

[Begley]

Sounds like that was a bit of a sliding doors moment for you guys with the Smith / Allardyce thing!

I quite like Maitland Niles. Ironically on my current game of Football Manager I have him in my midfield!!!

As we are still in the PL it appears we made the right decision in sticking with Smith which is what I hoped the club would do. I just couldn't see who we would be able to get in as the right manager last Jan if we sacked Smith. There were a lot of fans looking for a big name manager but failing to accept the fact that AV was a club on the brink of relegation and that very much limited the quality of manager we could attract. I see a lot of similarities between SU and AV in that respect. The reason I wanted to stick with Smith was that he appeared to be doing the right thing. It was his 1st year in the PL so he was inexperienced and the entire squad was new to the PL too. So it was tough for him. I also like that he is a Villa fan, so his heart is in it and it is not just about the money. I am currently more sceptical about Smith than I was last year. We are doing well but I suspect we are punching above our weight. Smith doesn't appear to have a Plan B and nor does he use substitutes or the squad well. Its the same 11 and on their day they can be very good. If it is not their day then we struggle. A better manager would be able to cope with that and I would like a better manager. I am really happy with Smith, but if you offered me Tuchel or Pochettino I would jump at the chance and say thank you but goodbye to Smith.

As regards Wilder, I think u must keep him to start the next season as SU manager. However, I think his weaknesses are being highlighted at the moment and he needs to fix that. Like Smith, he doesn't rotate enough and appears to select players that are completely out of form on an ongoing basis. He needs to show he can manage in the bad times and not just when things are going well. If I was the Price, I would be telling CW that his job is safe, prepare for the Championship next season, this is the transfer budget, you must get the transfers right and that u have 10 to 15 games next season to prove yourself. If SU is not at the top end of the table and more importantly, if SU is not playing the right type of football and adopting the right tactics then he would have to be replaced.

 

[The Crab]

As we are still in the PL it appears we made the right decision in sticking with Smith which is what I hoped the club would do. I just couldn't see who we would be able to get in as the right manager last Jan if we sacked Smith. There were a lot of fans looking for a big name manager but failing to accept the fact that AV was a club on the brink of relegation and that very much limited the quality of manager we could attract. I see a lot of similarities between SU and AV in that respect. The reason I wanted to stick with Smith was that he appeared to be doing the right thing. It was his 1st year in the PL so he was inexperienced and the entire squad was new to the PL too. So it was tough for him. I also like that he is a Villa fan, so his heart is in it and it is not just about the money. I am currently more sceptical about Smith than I was last year. We are doing well but I suspect we are punching above our weight. Smith doesn't appear to have a Plan B and nor does he use substitutes or the squad well. Its the same 11 and on their day they can be very good. If it is not their day then we struggle. A better manager would be able to cope with that and I would like a better manager. I am really happy with Smith, but if you offered me Tuchel or Pochettino I would jump at the chance and say thank you but goodbye to Smith.

As regards Wilder, I think u must keep him to start the next season as SU manager. However, I think his weaknesses are being highlighted at the moment and he needs to fix that. Like Smith, he doesn't rotate enough and appears to select players that are completely out of form on an ongoing basis. He needs to show he can manage in the bad times and not just when things are going well. If I was the Price, I would be telling CW that his job is safe, prepare for the Championship next season, this is the transfer budget, you must get the transfers right and that u have 10 to 15 games next season to prove yourself. If SU is not at the top end of the table and more importantly, if SU is not playing the right type of football and adopting the right tactics then he would have to be replaced.

With hindsight, it certainly looks like you did the right thing sticking with Smith. your recruitment seems a lot more on point than it did last year, where from the outside it looked like you were getting poor value for money. I did wonder when things went wrong for you guys, whether your board would go all in for a big name.

CW has for me built up enough credit to get a go next season, he "gets" the club like not many other people would. But the problem for me is his (IMHO) bloody intransigence. It's a quality when you are doing well, not so much when you are doing poorly. Obviously this season is night and day compared to last season, and is the perfect example of how a manager can, in a very short space of time, go from "flavour of the month" to "out of his depth". Which one of those is CW? Time will tell. But the club, and the team has been built in his image, as though his hand is on the tiller of every decision made, the players, largely, are players he brought in to play his system. I'm not sure it's quite as simple as just bringing another manager in, not at present anyway.

 

[Begley]

With hindsight, it certainly looks like you did the right thing sticking with Smith. your recruitment seems a lot more on point than it did last year, where from the outside it looked like you were getting poor value for money. I did wonder when things went wrong for you guys, whether your board would go all in for a big name.

CW has for me built up enough credit to get a go next season, he "gets" the club like not many other people would. But the problem for me is his (IMHO) bloody intransigence. It's a quality when you are doing well, not so much when you are doing poorly. Obviously this season is night and day compared to last season, and is the perfect example of how a manager can, in a very short space of time, go from "flavour of the month" to "out of his depth". Which one of those is CW? Time will tell. But the club, and the team has been built in his image, as though his hand is on the tiller of every decision made, the players, largely, are players he brought in to play his system. I'm not sure it's quite as simple as just bringing another manager in, not at present anyway.

Changing manager is always a difficult time for a club, it is so hard to get it right and so bloody easy to get it spectacularly wrong. Regarding our recruitment, I think one of the best things our owners did was to employ a director of football. We also changed the DOF last summer and replaced him with the DOF from FC Copenhagen, he has a good record of buying players and improving them and he doesn't buy superstars. Villa has said the strategy is to develop players so we can sell at a profit and to develop through the youth system. I can't see us buying established players but we are fortunate that the money is there to buy expensive unknown players. We bought Traore last summer and Sanson last month at about 18m each. I had never heard of either of them before joining us. The club has said that the DOF finds the players and Smith has the final say on whether to buy them or not. But the actual selection of players is out of Smith's remit. He can recommend a player to the DOF (Watkins & Konsa) but the DOF must agree they fit into the AV strategy. I like this approach. It also removes the constant blaming of the manager for players coming into the club that don't work out. In my opinion, you guys could do with a good DOF. CW is great at what he does but I think a broader scouting network and a strategy to make sure the player is the right player for SU would really help.

BTW, thank you for engaging in a polite manner. I love football, I love talking about it and I do so on a Villa blog. But with covid I do miss the football chat with fans of other clubs I used to have in the pub. I have popped into a few different forums to see what is happening and what opinions were like and it is quite amazing the amount of abuse people dish out from behind a keyboard. I appreciate that you have spoken to me as a football fan and not just gone down the line of 'Vile scum', 'u cheated with Hawkeye' etc. It gets tedious when all people want to do is hurl abuse.

 

[The Crab]

Changing manager is always a difficult time for a club, it is so hard to get it right and so bloody easy to get it spectacularly wrong. Regarding our recruitment, I think one of the best things our owners did was to employ a director of football. We also changed the DOF last summer and replaced him with the DOF from FC Copenhagen, he has a good record of buying players and improving them and he doesn't buy superstars. Villa has said the strategy is to develop players so we can sell at a profit and to develop through the youth system. I can't see us buying established players but we are fortunate that the money is there to buy expensive unknown players. We bought Traore last summer and Sanson last month at about 18m each. I had never heard of either of them before joining us. The club has said that the DOF finds the players and Smith has the final say on whether to buy them or not. But the actual selection of players is out of Smith's remit. He can recommend a player to the DOF (Watkins & Konsa) but the DOF must agree they fit into the AV strategy. I like this approach. It also removes the constant blaming of the manager for players coming into the club that don't work out. In my opinion, you guys could do with a good DOF. CW is great at what he does but I think a broader scouting network and a strategy to make sure the player is the right player for SU would really help.

BTW, thank you for engaging in a polite manner. I love football, I love talking about it and I do so on a Villa blog. But with covid I do miss the football chat with fans of other clubs I used to have in the pub. I have popped into a few different forums to see what is happening and what opinions were like and it is quite amazing the amount of abuse people dish out from behind a keyboard. I appreciate that you have spoken to me as a football fan and not just gone down the line of 'Vile scum', 'u cheated with Hawkeye' etc. It gets tedious when all people want to do is hurl abuse.

Mate, life is too short (a lesson I have learnt in the most painful of ways) to hate someone because of the team they support.

I might rip the piss, especially out of our noisy neighbours. But hate, pointless waste of energy.

 

[newforestblade]

You started that bit pretty much with your mind made up, to be honest.

The injuries are a significant factor but with every combination we've had, Wilder has decided to stick with the consistently beatable formation, playing the consistently defeatable Wilderball tactics. You think that would make much difference even if we have JOC and Berge in? You're the 'expert', eh? By how much, is my question?

We have lost a hell of a goalkeeper, one who gave us as many crucial points last season than sicknote and McPub. We were low scoring last season, be freakishly low conceding, because of the lightning-quick reflexes and athleticism of Henderson. This season we've got what looks like a novice in goal, for whom we mutedly cheer when he falls down over and pushes a shot clear of goal. In front of him we have two-and-a-half centrebacks, and yet whilst shipping goals aplenty we still expect them to rampage up the wing into the same shut-out tactics and recover when our dismally crap midfield surrender possession. And up front we have an array of non-scoring duds, relying now on ageing players we had playing in the same position when we challenged for promotion. Having signed fifty odd million quid of strikers who this season have yet to hit the back of the net with the proficiency their elderly statesmen have.

This isn't about luck and injuries. It's about mistakes in acquisition, mistakes in playing the same tired old system with the same tired old (and in some cases incapable) players. Evidence in kind in our last game.

pommpey

Very well put, good reasoning. The players brought in to strengthen the team have been inferior and those that were playing well last year have become inferior through their horrible lack of last seasons form. And playing in an empty stadium has made every game like a training game. No pressure on the away teams , especially the big ones.

 

[Silent Blade]

Your belief is not based on facts.

I think it's over 25 now:

Foderingham: hand injury (October)
Moore: hand injury (August)

Baldock: knock (January), hamstring (February)
Stevens: knee (November), calf (January)
Bryan: calf (November)
O'Connell: knee (September)
Basham: hamstring (February)
Egan: toe (February)
Lowe: concussion (October)
Jagielka: covid (January)
Robinson: foot (December)
Bogle: knee (Fulham)
Ampadu: knee (November)

Berge: hamstring (December)
Osborn: knock (January)
Fleck: back (October), illness (February)
Rodwell: knock (December)

McBurnie: shoulder (December)
Sharp: groin (March)
Mousset: life (all season)
Burke: back (December)

The only players who haven't missed any games though injury are Norwood, Lundstram, Ramsdale, Brewster & McGoldrick.