Would you have agent Ridgewell back

[pooligan]

Just read that Liam Ridgewell has handed in a transfer request at the small heath. Would you have him back at Villa?

[TaxDodger]

No way. He simply isn't good enough. Not even as cover.

[The Left Side]

No thank you

[luke25]

Were currently desperate, however theres still a little part of me that thinks we have some standards, do not take this belief away from me Villa!

[KevinGage]

If I had the choice?  No.

But he was a big part of the defensive stability Big Eck oversaw at the Heathens, he weighs in with his fair share of goals and he knows the club. He might have also improved a wee bit in the years he's been away, as a regular starter for a (sometimes) Prem outfit. A limited team as poor as B-lose would have had more than their fair share of defending to do, so if nothing else he's got a fair bit of experience under his belt now.

I'd be disappointed If he re-signs, can't pretend otherwise. Letting all the players we have go and calling Agent Ridgewell back to base wouldn't be my definition of team strengthening. But a stretch of 10-15 games as part of a miserly defence and a few goals up the other end would probably be enough for me to revise that, fickle sugarbag that I am.

[PeterWithesShin]

If I had the choice?  No.

But he was a big part of the defensive stability Big Eck oversaw at the Heathens, he weighs in with his fair share of goals and he knows the club. He might have also improved a wee bit in the years he's been away, as a regular starter for a (sometimes) Prem outfit. A limited team as poor as B-lose would have had more than their fair share of defending to do, so if nothing else he's got a fair bit of experience under his belt now.

I'd be disappointed If he re-signs, can't pretend otherwise. Letting all the players we have go and calling Agent Ridgewell back to base wouldn't be my definition of team strengthening. But a stretch of 10-15 games as part of a miserly defence and a few goals up the other end would probably be enough for me to revise that, fickle sugarbag that I am.

Pretty much bang on how I feel.

[Hillbilly]

No...because he's done such a great job as a double agent.

[willywombat]

Me too. Wasn't  bothered when we sold him but according to the couple of noses I know he's improved a lot. So, while in some ways it seems like a backward step who knows? Cant really see it happening though

[russon]

Decent player and wouldn't mind having him back but Cuellar's a better option as cover

[Andy_Lochhead_in_the_air]

No. Because I never rated him.
I have never seen a defender at corners who seemed so wound up, his head spinning through 360 degrees hopping about as he tried to keep track of his opponent and spreading panic amongst his team mates.
Oh yes, he is also an own goal specialist.

 

&feature=related
[/youtube]

[Californian Villain]

No because he's an awful defender - in fact I'd rather have Liam Gallagher

[Villan For Life]

No, not because of his smallheathen habits but because he is simply not good enough even as cover.

It saddens me that our stock has fallen so low that a question like this is being asked.

[willywombat]

No because he's an awful defender - in fact I'd rather have Liam Gallagher

Nah, he's a ball watcher ( and a wanker )

[darren woolley]

No way from me would rather have Dann than Ridgewell.

[Archbishop Herbert Cockthrottle]

No because he's an awful defender - in fact I'd rather have Liam Gallagher

I'd rather have LeAnn Rimes.