?% Villa. Martinez, MON and the pie eaters

[Rudy Can't Fail]

When it came to orgainising a football side and getting them to win games then MON is right up there, but when it comes to balancing the budget and larger squads of modern football he was found wanting.         

If O'Neill had sorted out our home form we probably would have qualified for the CL three years on the trot. The fact that during his 4 years we were generally poor at Villa Park cost us and Randy dearly. Oh to have had a Plan B.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

I don't know but it could be masking a problem if we were "overplaying" our more expensive signings.

From the said report:

Clearly, for O’Neill, the key to outperforming £XI expectations was the consistency of the starting XI. [Although it can lead to fatigue later in the campaign – a regular criticism of the club's performance under the Ulsterman.]

It did appear to be a problem up until his final season (when we strengthened with the Dunne, Collins etc. influx), where we averaged 2 points a game in the league from the end of Dec to end of April along with the cup runs.

If that'as true then 4 months from 4 years hardly defends his record.

[Concrete John]

When it came to orgainising a football side and getting them to win games then MON is right up there, but when it comes to balancing the budget and larger squads of modern football he was found wanting.         

If O'Neill had sorted out our home form we probably would have qualified for the CL three years on the trot. The fact that during his 4 years we were generally poor at Villa Park cost us and Randy dearly. Oh to have had a Plan B.

Footballing wise, it was the major flaw we had under him.

The easy solution is to say 'creative midfielder' or 'better striker', but ultimately I think he and his staff needed to coach a more patient passing style to go along with the quick wing play we preferred.  The players were there to do it.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

When it came to orgainising a football side and getting them to win games then MON is right up there, but when it comes to balancing the budget and larger squads of modern football he was found wanting.         

If O'Neill had sorted out our home form we probably would have qualified for the CL three years on the trot. The fact that during his 4 years we were generally poor at Villa Park cost us and Randy dearly. Oh to have had a Plan B.

Footballing wise, it was the major flaw we had under him.

The easy solution is to say 'creative midfielder' or 'better striker', but ultimately I think he and his staff needed to coach a more patient passing style to go along with the quick wing play we preferred.  The players were there to do it.

That's why for me he was never "right up there". More John Gregory than Brian Clough. A lot more.

[Concrete John]

That's why for me he was never "right up there". More John Gregory than Brian Clough. A lot more.

I think he's a much better manager than Gregory, but then how many are truely in the Clough bracket?

For me he excelled in being the type of manager he was, but that type will always have limited dimensions to them. 

[Villa'Zawg]

That's right. I think the soccerbase stats, for example, break down Heskey's starts as 16 and subs appearances on at 15. So you get the idea of his true role too.

Funnily enough, I was pondering this the other day - the squad for O'Neill's last season. And the two X1s I came up with, based on his first choice and his reserves, were:

Friedel
Cuellar Dunne Collins Warnock

Downing Milner Petrov A Young

             Gabby Carew


Guzan
L Young Davies Clark Shorey

Albrighton NRC Sidwell Delph

            Heskey Delfouneso

And that doesn't feature senior professionals such as Harewood, Beye, Andy Marshall, Gardner, Salifou, Osbourne.

When I looked at it like that, I realised what a large squad O'Neill had built up. He signed 21 of those players himself.

It’s worth considering long term injuries/bereavements (L Young, Delph), youth players (Guzan, Clark, Albrighton and Delfouneso) who almost certainly weren't ready 2 years ago and ones that were loaned out or sold (Davies, Shorey, Gardner, Harewood).

[Merv]

Of course. Though Luke Young was actually fit/available for all but about the first six weeks of that season, Delph barely used anyway until his injury around Feb time, those last four senior players you mention loaned or sold from January 2010 onwards - and overlooked until then. But at the start of the season/close of the transfer window in Aug 2009, MON had a lot of players at his disposal.

Naturally, not everyone was available at all times, but he did have a tendency of stockpiling players, many of whom were quickly discarded and then classed as reserves. However, I'm going over old, painful ground here!

[KevinGage]

It was a deliberate ploy of his - based on the Cloughie doctrine that the first XI is the be all and end all, and if you didn't make that you effectively didn't exist.

Clough used it as a form of control/ manipulation -the ever present threat to players in the starting XI who questioned him in any way (or who he wanted to take down a peg or two) was an immediate loss of status. For those actually in the reserves, he barely spoke to them. Only when they were in the first team were they worth giving the time of day to.

Thing is, you could probably get away with it in Clough's era - the time of a starting XI and one sub.  But with several subs available now and the sheer volume of games played it has increasingly become a squad game, and it pays to keep the bulk of your squad interested.  A concept O'Neill never seemed to fully grasp.   

[Greg N'Ash]

MON made press comments about how milner was going to leave ages before he left upsetting milner in the process. Whether you believe that was intended to burn Milnerr's bridges so he could get the money or he was just resigned to him leaving is up to personal viewpoint, but i think its pretty clear MON was okay with him being sold.

In answer to my simple question, does that mean 'yes, I'm admitting MON didn't sell him'?

*sigh* please for love of god tell me what you want to hear. Do i think MON had agreed to sell Milner? Yes. Do i think it was all done by the time he left? no

That'll do. You used to say he sold him, now you've changed your mind. A simple 'Yes, I was wrong about him selling him', pages ago, would have done.

If what i typed above means "yes, i was wrong about him selling him" in your world Percy, then i'm happy for you. Obviously, Milner would still be here if MON had stayed because the nasty man Lerner would have backed down instead of sacking the poor cherub, which we all know is what happened really.



I love conspiracy theories me.....

Yes, we know greg. We remember your 'Ellis is still running the club' one, and your even more ridiculous 'MON is still selling our players even though he's left' one.

This reminds me of your ten-page argument about zonal marking, which only ended when it was finally established that you didn't actually know what zonal marking is. According to you, our problems at set-peices were caused by MON phoning Collins and Dunne befrore games and telling them to fuck it up on purpose. Comedy gold, if only you meant to be so laughable.

MON made press comments about how milner was going to leave ages before he left upsetting milner in the process. Whether you believe that was intended to burn Milnerr's bridges so he could get the money or he was just resigned to him leaving is up to personal viewpoint, but i think its pretty clear MON was okay with him being sold.

In answer to my simple question, does that mean 'yes, I'm admitting MON didn't sell him'?

*sigh* please for love of god tell me what you want to hear. Do i think MON had agreed to sell Milner? Yes. Do i think it was all done by the time he left? no

That'll do. You used to say he sold him, now you've changed your mind. A simple 'Yes, I was wrong about him selling him', pages ago, would have done.

If what i typed above means "yes, i was wrong about him selling him" in your world Percy, then i'm happy for you. Obviously, Milner would still be here if MON had stayed because the nasty man Lerner would have backed down instead of sacking the poor cherub, which we all know is what happened really.



I love conspiracy theories me.....

Yes, we know greg. We remember your 'Ellis is still running the club' one, and your even more ridiculous 'MON is still selling our players even though he's left' one.

This reminds me of your ten-page argument about zonal marking, which only ended when it was finally established that you didn't actually know what zonal marking is. According to you, our problems at set-peices were caused by MON phoning Collins and Dunne befrore games and telling them to fuck it up on purpose. Comedy gold, if only you meant to be so laughable.

And there you have it. Only took you about 15 hours and 6 pages to revert to type and start lying. Look if you're convinced MON left because he wouldn't sell milner

1)Yours is the only lie there mate, and you know it. Unless of course, you've forgotten what you said about Ellis, the Milner sale and MON contacting Dunne and Collins. In which case, you have my sympathy. The whole argument (this time) was re: you lying about MON's net spend because it suits your 5-years-and-counting obsession.

2) I don't think MON left because he wouldn't sell Milner. I don't know why he left, same as you.

Imagine! Called a liar by H&V's Walter Mitty! Larf!

Riiiiiiiight. So basically you've wasted hours of your life trying to point score against me on something as petty as whether you can include milner's sales in his net spending. I must apologise Percy, you're not obsessed with defending MON, you're just obsessed with me.  I'd call you a Troll but then a troll is supposed to wind his victim up, not himself!

[pauliewalnuts]

When it came to orgainising a football side and getting them to win games then MON is right up there, but when it comes to balancing the budget and larger squads of modern football he was found wanting.         

If O'Neill had sorted out our home form we probably would have qualified for the CL three years on the trot. The fact that during his 4 years we were generally poor at Villa Park cost us and Randy dearly. Oh to have had a Plan B.

Footballing wise, it was the major flaw we had under him.

The easy solution is to say 'creative midfielder' or 'better striker', but ultimately I think he and his staff needed to coach a more patient passing style to go along with the quick wing play we preferred.  The players were there to do it.

I don't think it was his major flaw.

I think the biggest flaw was his inability to vary tactics. We always seemed to do the same thing, regardless of whether or not it was working.

I struggle to think of many occasions where he'd change the flow of a game with a substitution, or a change of shape on the field.

[Dave Cooper please]

Percy, Gregnash, any chance you could sort out your bloody quoting if you're going to carry on this, err, really interesting debate?

[KevinGage]

When it came to orgainising a football side and getting them to win games then MON is right up there, but when it comes to balancing the budget and larger squads of modern football he was found wanting.         

If O'Neill had sorted out our home form we probably would have qualified for the CL three years on the trot. The fact that during his 4 years we were generally poor at Villa Park cost us and Randy dearly. Oh to have had a Plan B.

Footballing wise, it was the major flaw we had under him.

The easy solution is to say 'creative midfielder' or 'better striker', but ultimately I think he and his staff needed to coach a more patient passing style to go along with the quick wing play we preferred.  The players were there to do it.

I don't think it was his major flaw.

I think the biggest flaw was his inability to vary tactics. We always seemed to do the same thing, regardless of whether or not it was working.

I struggle to think of many occasions where he'd change the flow of a game with a substitution, or a change of shape on the field.

Except in his first season, weirdly enough.

Watford and Everton at home in particular stand out.

He was also flexible in his formations; starting the season with a 4-4-3 but 4-5-1, 4-4-1-1 and -of course- 4-4-2 were all tried at various stages.

[Eigentor]

I think MON would have probably been an excellent manager in the 1970s. In the 2000s he was merely decent.