Ireland: GH will get the best out of me.

[ktvillan]

In selling Milner we effectively lost two players such was his influence on the side. Doing it without replacing him was a major mistake.
.

I agree Chris that losing Milner is a massive loss, but how could we replace him with no Manager?

I think MacDonald could have been trusted to buy a player or if not then don't sell him. It was nearly 2 weeks after MON left that he moved, if we'd really wanted to we could have held onto him.

There has to be some doubt that Milner would have continued busting a gut for us had he been forced to stay against his wishes.  Unfortunately it's a fact of modern footballing life that once a player's head has been turned few clubs see much  point in trying to keep them.  That said, Barry gave us a decent season after he was forced to stay.

It doesn't make sense to allow the caretaker manager to make big signings unless he is going to get the job full time. 

[Concrete John]

In order to get the best out of Ireland we need to play him with a specialist defensive midfielder if we're playing a 4 across the middle, which we don't really have.  I'd try an Ireland/NRC combo to see how it goes, but a Petrov upgrade is needed longterm.

[kippaxvilla2]

There is no evidence to suggest Milner would have done anything other than play his heart out had he been denied a move to Citeh.  As was evidenced in his one game this season against Wet Spam.  A game that remains our one and only decent performance so far.

[Chris Smith]

In selling Milner we effectively lost two players such was his influence on the side. Doing it without replacing him was a major mistake.
.

I agree Chris that losing Milner is a massive loss, but how could we replace him with no Manager?

I think MacDonald could have been trusted to buy a player or if not then don't sell him. It was nearly 2 weeks after MON left that he moved, if we'd really wanted to we could have held onto him.

Come off it Nick Clegg, er..,. I mean Chris.
You're not going to allow a temporary manager to spend decent money on a player that the next manager may not want.
As for Milner, he surely wanted to go due to the riches on offer to him.

Of course he did but surely we do what is best for Aston Villa not James Milner?

As I said we might be able to muddle through until we either buy a replacement or Delph is available but it means we have to show a bit better organisation than we have so far.

[Chris Smith]

There is no evidence to suggest Milner would have done anything other than play his heart out had he been denied a move to Citeh.  As was evidenced in his one game this season against Wet Spam.  A game that remains our one and only decent performance so far.

Quite, I couldn't see him pissing about and risk losing his England place.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

In selling Milner we effectively lost two players such was his influence on the side. Doing it without replacing him was a major mistake.
.

I agree Chris that losing Milner is a massive loss, but how could we replace him with no Manager?

I think MacDonald could have been trusted to buy a player or if not then don't sell him. It was nearly 2 weeks after MON left that he moved, if we'd really wanted to we could have held onto him.

Come off it Nick Clegg, er..,. I mean Chris.
You're not going to allow a temporary manager to spend decent money on a player that the next manager may not want.
As for Milner, he surely wanted to go due to the riches on offer to him.

Of course he did but surely we do what is best for Aston Villa not James Milner?

We have done what is best for Aston Villa, the new manager will have £18m to spend in January, or The Summer.
The £26m offer was to good for the club or player to turn down.

[Chris Smith]

In selling Milner we effectively lost two players such was his influence on the side. Doing it without replacing him was a major mistake.
.

I agree Chris that losing Milner is a massive loss, but how could we replace him with no Manager?

I think MacDonald could have been trusted to buy a player or if not then don't sell him. It was nearly 2 weeks after MON left that he moved, if we'd really wanted to we could have held onto him.

Come off it Nick Clegg, er..,. I mean Chris.
You're not going to allow a temporary manager to spend decent money on a player that the next manager may not want.
As for Milner, he surely wanted to go due to the riches on offer to him.

Of course he did but surely we do what is best for Aston Villa not James Milner?

We have done what is best for Aston Villa, the new manager will have £18m to spend in January, or The Summer.
The £26m offer was to good for the club or player to turn down.

That's a matter of opinion, it doesn't look like great business at the moment.

[Concrete John]

In selling Milner we effectively lost two players such was his influence on the side. Doing it without replacing him was a major mistake.
.

I agree Chris that losing Milner is a massive loss, but how could we replace him with no Manager?

I think MacDonald could have been trusted to buy a player or if not then don't sell him. It was nearly 2 weeks after MON left that he moved, if we'd really wanted to we could have held onto him.

Come off it Nick Clegg, er..,. I mean Chris.
You're not going to allow a temporary manager to spend decent money on a player that the next manager may not want.
As for Milner, he surely wanted to go due to the riches on offer to him.

Of course he did but surely we do what is best for Aston Villa not James Milner?

We have done what is best for Aston Villa, the new manager will have £18m to spend in January, or The Summer.
The £26m offer was to good for the club or player to turn down.

That's a matter of opinion, it doesn't look like great business at the moment.

The 'great business' thing presumes we'll get Ireland and the £18m gets spent on the side, which hasn't happened yet. 

[Rip Van We Go Again]

The General said on his thread
 'I can tell you that Randy is behind him and will be behind him come the next window.'

I see that as a willingness to give funds to Houllier and The General is a man of his word.

[pauliewalnuts]

In selling Milner we effectively lost two players such was his influence on the side. Doing it without replacing him was a major mistake.
.

I agree Chris that losing Milner is a massive loss, but how could we replace him with no Manager?

I think MacDonald could have been trusted to buy a player or if not then don't sell him. It was nearly 2 weeks after MON left that he moved, if we'd really wanted to we could have held onto him.

Come off it Nick Clegg, er..,. I mean Chris.
You're not going to allow a temporary manager to spend decent money on a player that the next manager may not want.
As for Milner, he surely wanted to go due to the riches on offer to him.

Of course he did but surely we do what is best for Aston Villa not James Milner?

We have done what is best for Aston Villa, the new manager will have £18m to spend in January, or The Summer.
The £26m offer was to good for the club or player to turn down.

That's a matter of opinion, it doesn't look like great business at the moment.

The 'great business' thing presumes we'll get Ireland and the £18m gets spent on the side, which hasn't happened yet. 

It can't happen yet - the window is closed.

Why not give them the benefit of the doubt on it? They haven't let us down so far.

[Concrete John]

It can't happen yet - the window is closed.

Why not give them the benefit of the doubt on it? They haven't let us down so far.

As I said on the other thread, I am giving them the benefit of the doubt.  What I was getting at here is that selling Milner is still a financially good decision, but not so much footballing wise as we were unable to spend the cash.

[Chris Smith]

The General said on his thread
 'I can tell you that Randy is behind him and will be behind him come the next window.'

I see that as a willingness to give funds to Houllier and The General is a man of his word.

There is no doubt that a dsecision was made at Villa Park after MON left that having the money was more important than having James Milner. I'm sure that funds will be made available for Gerry but it depends on what his remit is.

If we eventually replace him with an equally talented player then that's great, if we use it to buy a number of lesser players then, in my view, we're worse off. At the moment we're just guessing as to which way we'll go.

[pauliewalnuts]

There is no doubt that a dsecision was made at Villa Park after MON left that having the money was more important than having James Milner. I'm sure that funds will be made available for Gerry but it depends on what his remit is.

There certainly is doubt. Why put it in such stark terms? Maybe the transfer had gone so far down the line, it was beyond pulling? That might or might not be the case, but there's certainly a possibility that was the case - ie doubt.

I'm sure in the past, Chris, you've been firmly in the camp of "you can't keep an unhappy player" yet now you're of totally the opposite opinion.

Would you also agree that a decision was made that it was more important to have money plus a good player in return rather than just more money?

[curiousorange]

I have to say Ireland's form is a bit of a concern. Hopefully it's a settling in and just a symptom of the general listlessness that's surrounding B6 at the moment, but he hasn't shone like I expected him to. Still, it's nothing I wouldn't expect our new coaching staff to sort.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Houllier seems to prefer 4-3-3 and 4-5-1, so I can see in the short term NRC coming back into the side alongside Petrov with Ireland playing in a 3 or 5 man midfield in the same way Juninho played for him at Lyon. I wouldn't mind seeing Gabby going back out to the rightside, as he did during MON's first season in charge when probably we played our best football under him.

A strong defence and midfield doesn't have to be dull but Chris is right, we really do need to sort it out.