Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: dave.woodhall on November 28, 2011, 01:50:24 PM
-
http://www.thebirminghampress.com/2011/11/28/it%e2%80%99s-not-that-important/
-
Sums up pretty much how I feel about the events of the weekend.
-
Another good article Dave.
Although i thought we should have won yesterday and i wished we had, a draw felt right in the circumstances.
-
Pretty much on the money. It seems harsh to judge the players' performance, given the sombre circumstances, but it's McLeish's weird decisions that are hampering them more than anything.
-
I agree with you Dave good article.
-
Dave - forgive me but is this only circulated on line or on here?
Great piece and summed up in a respectful manner "We are not Birmingham city" we have better players than that
-
With regards to 'should the game have been played', to postpone the game would have been too drastic a gesture too soon. Everyone says their thoughts are with the family, it felt as if postponement would have intruded upon what was first and foremost their grief.
What happened was far better - an opportunity for football to pay its immediate respects, with a more considered tributeto be paid in accordance with the wishes of his family at a later time.
-
Brilliant article Dave, sums up everything I felt about this recent events
-
Dave - forgive me but is this only circulated on line or on here?
Great piece and summed up in a respectful manner "We are not Birmingham city" we have better players than that
It's online.
-
Wise words. You should take up a career in journalism.
-
Very aptly put Dave, especially "fame and fortune can no more insulate against mental illness than it can against being run over crossing the road." Speaking from my own experiences that social aspect of shame is one of the biggest barriers against helping people with the illness, and it's about time everyone understood that it is an illness as much as asthma, cancer or the 'flu.
-
Good article, Dave.
Particularly this paragraph:
Villa’s performance was better than the Surrender on White Hart Lane, which is just as well, but the problems are still there. I honestly don’t know why Alex McLeish is doing what he does – we’re not Birmingham City, we have quality players and it’s about time they were used properly. Alex isn’t daft, he knew when he arrived that he wasn’t the popular choice. The first few games could be excused as in the circumstances he didn’t dare lose but he now seems determined to alienate even those of us who weren’t manning the barricades in an attempt to prevent his arrival at Villa Park.
-
It can be Monts, in the sense that certain people are susceptible to it and external factors have little/ no bearing on when it hits.
For others, there are 'triggers,' or lifestyle events that bring it about. It's such a broad church that it truly is hard to define. But the symptoms and behaviours -when it bites- do seem to have a degree of consistency.
I was pretty much as ignorant as Dave and JG on the subject in 1998. But having a family member affected by it opened my eyes to the condition. Funny, that. Well no, actually. Not funny at all. Depression does not respect your status in life, your salary or your family environment. It makes no distinction.
The only thing I will say with regard to Stan that doesn't sit well with me, is that it his book gave the impression that moving to Villa was at least in part responsible for his declining mood- as was the fallout post Ulrika. He genuinely seems to regret moving to the club, as -effectively- it meant his career was on the slide (he has a whole chapter devoted to the period Villa- Going Nowhere) and he wishes he'd stuck it out at Liverpool. That's not consistent with my memories of the period (though it sounds an apt description for our current status). Before and indeed soon after he was signed we were seen as an upwardly mobile side, outsiders for the title in some quarters. But trying to accommodate a Stan Collymore not firing on all cylinders disrupted the team dynamic.
If I've misinterpreted what he said I apologise, as I do have sympathy for him -and indeed anyone- who has to battle the Black Dog.
That may or may not include the late Gary Speed, as it's still too early to conclude that depression had any part to play in his tragic demise.
-
Like I say, I can only speak from my own experiences, which tend to suggest that these triggers are almost universal, but have to or can be spotted earlier or later before it's too late and the mood descends. Anyway, the details are probably a discussion for another thread.
As you say, we cannot speculate on the reasons for Gary Speed's drastic and tragic action. The only thing that can be said is that, on the face of it at least, a man, by all accounts a good man, with a wife and children, is unlikely to have been in a rational state of mind to have done what he's done, which would suggest depression or some other mental illness. We may never know - and if the family don't wish us to, we shouldn't - but that would seem the most likely reasoning at this stage. Certainly put the game in perspective.
-
Good article, David. I think a lot of people have been on the same journey as you regards mental health and the fact that wealth and status don't make you immune. I know have. Not the I have any excuses. My dad was a big fan of Tony Hancock and when I was growing up regularly cited him as an example of the irrelevance of fame and fortune when it came to the well being of the mind.
-
yep, said much the same after the Spurs game. I didn't want to stick his head on a pitch fork when he came. I was and still am more than willing to give him time to build something and appreciate that he is having to do so with restricted means. But that doesn't excuse the type of tactics he's recently employed or his insistence on playing a certain style despite the numerous more talented players he has at his disposal. Right now Hutton is an utter liability and Heskey simply isn't in the least bit effective where he is. I'd sooner we opened up, played 4-4-2 or any other formation that allows our creativity to come to the fore. This season, I care more about the future than the present and allowing us to become an attacking outfit that has some defensive discipline. It makes us so much easier to watch. McLeish needs to be more interested about winning than scared of losing. Only then will our play improve.
-
yep, said much the same after the Spurs game. I didn't want to stick his head on a pitch fork when he came. I was and still am more than willing to give him time to build something and appreciate that he is having to do so with restricted means. But that doesn't excuse the type of tactics he's recently employed or his insistence on playing a certain style despite the numerous more talented players he has at his disposal. Right now Hutton is an utter liability and Heskey simply isn't in the least bit effective where he is. I'd sooner we opened up, played 4-4-2 or any other formation that allows our creativity to come to the fore. This season, I care more about the future than the present and allowing us to become an attacking outfit that has some defensive discipline. It makes us so much easier to watch. McLeish needs to be more interested about winning than scared of losing. Only then will our play improve.
Last year, under Houllier, we put in some stinking performances, but at least we knew what he was trying to do - even if he was failing to do it for most of the season.
The problem with AM is that this is what he does - this is the way he has always got his teams to play. We moan about Heskey ahead of Bannan, but this is far from a new thing for McLeish, he has always operated this way.
My dad is a nose, and listening to people talk about the way we play this season is *exactly* the way he would moan about Blues when AM was there.
It is a truly mind boggling appointment, it makes zero sense. Even if you're prepared to overlook the Small Heath connection (and I am, even if many aren't), there was the fact that he'd got them relegated twice. Not only had he done this, but he'd done it playing a terrible brand of football (their "performance" at Spurs on the last day of last season said it all).
Oh, and then there's a fact that we'd set our sights pretty low on Martinez, but at least saw him as someone who tried to - even if he failed - get his teams playing football, only to be told he wasn't interested, and then turn to McLeish, whose footballing style is not going to get anyone buying tickets - even if they were prepared to overlook his last employer. So, after going through pain with Houllier but showing signs of modernising the club, we go way back and appoint an old fashioned, traditional British manager, a relic of times gone by.
Although the other question is why we were so bothered with two managers who had a record of poking around the relegation zone in the first place.
It really is utterly, utterly dreadful management by Randy. What on earth was he thinking?
We seem to be run by well intentioned buffoons who are well intentioned but don't know their arses from their elbows. Even his interview last week managed to make the appointment look even more half witted with his soppy eyed nonsense about a letter from Sir Alex.
I was one of his staunchest supporters for a long time, but I now have absolutely zero confidence in Lerner, or the people he surrounds himself with.
-
yep, said much the same after the Spurs game. I didn't want to stick his head on a pitch fork when he came. I was and still am more than willing to give him time to build something and appreciate that he is having to do so with restricted means. But that doesn't excuse the type of tactics he's recently employed or his insistence on playing a certain style despite the numerous more talented players he has at his disposal. Right now Hutton is an utter liability and Heskey simply isn't in the least bit effective where he is. I'd sooner we opened up, played 4-4-2 or any other formation that allows our creativity to come to the fore. This season, I care more about the future than the present and allowing us to become an attacking outfit that has some defensive discipline. It makes us so much easier to watch. McLeish needs to be more interested about winning than scared of losing. Only then will our play improve.
Last year, under Houllier, we put in some stinking performances, but at least we knew what he was trying to do - even if he was failing to do it for most of the season.
The problem with AM is that this is what he does - this is the way he has always got his teams to play. We moan about Heskey ahead of Bannan, but this is far from a new thing for McLeish, he has always operated this way.
My dad is a nose, and listening to people talk about the way we play this season is *exactly* the way he would moan about Blues when AM was there.
It is a truly mind boggling appointment, it makes zero sense. Even if you're prepared to overlook the Small Heath connection (and I am, even if many aren't), there was the fact that he'd got them relegated twice. Not only had he done this, but he'd done it playing a terrible brand of football (their "performance" at Spurs on the last day of last season said it all).
Oh, and then there's a fact that we'd set our sights pretty low on Martinez, but at least saw him as someone who tried to - even if he failed - get his teams playing football, only to be told he wasn't interested, and then turn to McLeish, whose footballing style is not going to get anyone buying tickets - even if they were prepared to overlook his last employer. So, after going through pain with Houllier but showing signs of modernising the club, we go way back and appoint an old fashioned, traditional British manager, a relic of times gone by.
Although the other question is why we were so bothered with two managers who had a record of poking around the relegation zone in the first place.
It really is utterly, utterly dreadful management by Randy. What on earth was he thinking?
We seem to be run by well intentioned buffoons who are well intentioned but don't know their arses from their elbows. Even his interview last week managed to make the appointment look even more half witted with his soppy eyed nonsense about a letter from Sir Alex.
I was one of his staunchest supporters for a long time, but I now have absolutely zero confidence in Lerner, or the people he surrounds himself with.
Like a couple of other posts today, this pretty much sums up how I feel on the situation.
-
I don't mind so much boring myself to victory. I just hate it when I'm bored to draws and defeats.
I read some of AM's comments regarding Jenas and Bannan from this weekend. I don't care about words. I want to see it in the team selections going forward.
-
The owner has made decisions regarding the financial side of the club and as such made 90% of the names suggested at the time complete non-starters. Houllier was close to making a complete pig's ear of it with a team that had Downing and Young in it, imagine what he'd be like without them?
McLeish strikes me as a pragmatist and he was appointed at a time when pragmatism is what is needed. If, as some suspect, there is some wriggle room next summer then we'll see how he fares when given the opportunity to shape the squad. Until then I expect more of the same up and down performances and (much) more of the shrill voices picking holes in everything he does. I think Randy is strong enough to resist them.
-
We seem to be run by well intentioned buffoons who are well intentioned but don't know their arses from their elbows.
I think this is a pretty apt appraisal of where we are at at the moment.
-
The owner has made decisions regarding the financial side of the club and as such made 90% of the names suggested at the time complete non-starters. Houllier was close to making a complete pig's ear of it with a team that had Downing and Young in it, imagine what he'd be like without them?
McLeish strikes me as a pragmatist and he was appointed at a time when pragmatism is what is needed. If, as some suspect, there is some wriggle room next summer then we'll see how he fares when given the opportunity to shape the squad. Until then I expect more of the same up and down performances and (much) more of the shrill voices picking holes in everything he does. I think Randy is strong enough to resist them.
He's got some decent footballing players, but he chooses not to use them.
I can't believe anyone really thinks there's a good reason to play Emile Heskey in midfield. Right now, McLeish is doing the absolute worst thing he could do - setting us up in the image of his Blues team. That's the one thing that is going to convert all those prepared to give him a chance to the "want him out" camp.
As for the implied suggestion that McLeish was the best we could get (the 90% non starters thing), well, clearly you've a dim view of the club and the progress of the last few years to even start to believe that. Why weren't you championing his cause before he was appointed? In fact, why was nobody?
-
Last year, under Houllier, we put in some stinking performances, but at least we knew what he was trying to do - even if he was failing to do it for most of the season.
The problem with AM is that this is what he does - this is the way he has always got his teams to play. We moan about Heskey ahead of Bannan, but this is far from a new thing for McLeish, he has always operated this way.
My dad is a nose, and listening to people talk about the way we play this season is *exactly* the way he would moan about Blues when AM was there.
It is a truly mind boggling appointment, it makes zero sense. Even if you're prepared to overlook the Small Heath connection (and I am, even if many aren't), there was the fact that he'd got them relegated twice. Not only had he done this, but he'd done it playing a terrible brand of football (their "performance" at Spurs on the last day of last season said it all).
Oh, and then there's a fact that we'd set our sights pretty low on Martinez, but at least saw him as someone who tried to - even if he failed - get his teams playing football, only to be told he wasn't interested, and then turn to McLeish, whose footballing style is not going to get anyone buying tickets - even if they were prepared to overlook his last employer. So, after going through pain with Houllier but showing signs of modernising the club, we go way back and appoint an old fashioned, traditional British manager, a relic of times gone by.
Although the other question is why we were so bothered with two managers who had a record of poking around the relegation zone in the first place.
It really is utterly, utterly dreadful management by Randy. What on earth was he thinking?
We seem to be run by well intentioned buffoons who are well intentioned but don't know their arses from their elbows. Even his interview last week managed to make the appointment look even more half witted with his soppy eyed nonsense about a letter from Sir Alex.
I was one of his staunchest supporters for a long time, but I now have absolutely zero confidence in Lerner, or the people he surrounds himself with.
Agree wholeheartedly with all of this.
-
Hard to disagree with most of that Paulie.
I too was prepared (still am, in fact) to cut him some slack, and hope that better natural resources = better end product compared to his B-lose output.
But fcuk me he doesn't half make it difficult.
I mentioned on another board, that part of RL's biggest consideration -as he flagged himself with the statement last week- was to set aside short term gain with the focus on long term development. Or to balance 'the hysterical need to win urgently' with not wasting the good work and progress of the Acadamy.
Which is fine, but I don't see how the style of football McLeish sides are renowned for is consistent with our long term aims in that regard. I fact, if I could devise a system that would virtually ensure we don't maximise the ability of the likes of Gardner, Bannan, Albrighton and co it wouldn't be a million miles the current hit and not much hope scuffling murderball.
-
I too was prepared (still am, in fact) to cut him some slack, and hope that better natural resources = better end product compared to his B-lose output.
But fcuk me he doesn't half make it difficult.
I mentioned on another board, that part of RL's biggest consideration -as he flagged himself with the statement last week- was to set aside short term gain with the focus on long term development. Or to balance 'the hysterical need to win urgently' with not wasting the good work and progress of the Acadamy.
Which is fine, but I don't see how the style of football McLeish sides are renowned for is consistent with our long term aims in that regard. I fact, if I could devise a system that would virtually ensure we don't maximise the ability of the likes of Gardner, Bannan, Albrighton and co it wouldn't be a million miles the current hit and not much hope scuffling murderball.
re the bolded bit, I wrote a piece in the first fanzine of the season about precisely that - to precis, we're a fair minded lot, but the worst thing to do would be to revert to playing the sort of football he played there, as that would lose him the support he did have, really quickly.
I like the bloke, he seems dignified and highly likeable, but he makes it so hard. It's really hard to respect a manager who sends an Aston Villa side out to play like we did at Spurs on Monday. And that's not misguidedly thinking we're Barcelona, it is about thinking we should show a bit of pride.
if there is a reason McLeish is the man for the job, it is entirely about him bringing down expectations. Unfortunately, it'll be done in a way which makes him look like the fall guy.
If I'd set out as a malignant, omnipotent force in the summer, with the ability to control Randy's mind, and wanted to do the most damage to the club I could, then I genuinely struggle to think of a more damaging path than the flogging off and non-replacement of two of our best players and the appointment of McLeish. I can't think of anything that would be more divisive and damaging.
Like your last paragraph, I find the whole thing mind boggling. Talking about the youth in one breath then playing the kind of predictable, unadventurous guff we play. It makes zero sense. Talking about taking the Ajax route with youth (although there are some serious issues with that idea to start with) then failing to do anything to indicate you mean it is pointless.
The whole thing is going to end in tears, and the thought of the inevitable panning out while we sit back and watch is just too depressing for words.
There are limits to how much money Randy can spend, we all understand that, but this state of affairs right now is not primarily about money. It is about incompetence.
I can't decide if it is also about pig headedness or lack of interest, but it is without a doubt insane, and I can not believe anyone, deep down, thinks this is going to end up in a good place.
-
Incidentally, for a good example of the total lack of continuity in managerial appointments, witness club record signing Darren Bent forlornly chasing after hopeless 60 yard balls pumped up field by the centre halves on Sunday.
I wouldn't blame him for a second if he demanded to leave in January.
A record signing reduced to that.
-
Incidentally, for a good example of the total lack of continuity in managerial appointments, witness club record signing Darren Bent forlornly chasing after hopeless 60 yard balls pumped up field by the centre halves on Sunday.
I wouldn't blame him for a second if he demanded to leave in January.
A record signing reduced to that.
I remember posting that he had reverted to his English record on attacking. I pointed out that in the seasons in the top flight they barely made a goal a game and even when they finished second in the Championship, a division where the top teams usually get 70-80 goals, they got 52. The response was he had Jerome then but has Bent now so we will be better. To me he has successfully turned a 20 goal a season striker into Cameron Jerome with his current tactics.
-
Incidentally, for a good example of the total lack of continuity in managerial appointments, witness club record signing Darren Bent forlornly chasing after hopeless 60 yard balls pumped up field by the centre halves on Sunday.
I wouldn't blame him for a second if he demanded to leave in January.
A record signing reduced to that.
I remember posting that he had reverted to his English record on attacking. I pointed out that in the seasons in the top flight they barely made a goal a game and even when they finished second in the Championship, a division where the top teams usually get 70-80 goals, they got 52. The response was he had Jerome then but has Bent now so we will be better. To me he has successfully turned a 20 goal a season striker into Cameron Jerome with his current tactics.
That's the thing.
It might as well be Cameron Jerome lumbering about there in a different post code to the rest of the team.
It is just miserable to watch.
-
There are limits to how much money Randy can spend, we all understand that, but this state of affairs right now is not primarily about money. It is about incompetence.
It increasingly feels that way, doesn't it?
I'm reluctant to kick a man when he's down- particularly a man who for four years delivered way more than most of us could realistically expect.
But it his success ratio (or lack of) at the Browns was always in the back of my mind. More like a nagging whisper, rather than a booming Brian Blessed shouting that it was all doomed, doomed!
I reasoned that the Browns was an obligation whereas the Villa was a choice and what constitutes success here (CL qualification/ trophies) might be somewhat easier to attain than a Superbowl win against sides with infinitely more resources.
But no getting away from it, the 'big' decisions affecting the club recently have been about as convincing as Terry Wigon's hair-don't.
-
I think it was the signing of Harewood that first put the doubts in my mind that Lerner and O'Neill were going to be the dream ticket we thought they'd be. The signing of Heskey was the final nail in the coffin for any hope I had that we could join the elite. Now we're just biding time until Lerner can find a buyer.
-
There are limits to how much money Randy can spend, we all understand that, but this state of affairs right now is not primarily about money. It is about incompetence.
It increasingly feels that way, doesn't it?
I'm reluctant to kick a man when he's down- particularly a man who for four years delivered way more than most of us could realistically expect.
But it his success ratio (or lack of) at the Browns was always in the back of my mind. More like a nagging whisper, rather than a booming Brian Blessed shouting that it was all doomed, doomed!
I reasoned that the Browns was an obligation whereas the Villa was a choice and what constitutes success here (CL qualification/ trophies) might be somewhat easier to attain than a Superbowl win against sides with infinitely more resources.
But no getting away from it, the 'big' decisions affecting the club recently have been about as convincing as Terry Wigon's hair-don't.
For all that I disliked MON's way of doing things, there is no doubt that Lerner got very lucky when he bought the club.
There was already a manager-in-waiting who wanted to take control of all footballing matters, who was coveted by our support, loved by the media thus insuring good PR, and was hands-on enough to deal with the stuff that Randy didn't know about.
What happened when MON walked out would have been stressful enough for any club, but I honestly think it revealed, very abruptly, just how short of football nous the leadership of the club really was.
Why on earth didn't they make hay while the sun shined under O'Neill and make sure they built on what they had? These days, we don't even seem able to write a PR letter to season ticket holders, or to give a rare press interview, without dropping at least one gigantic sign that we don't know what we're doing.
-
It increasingly feels that way, doesn't it?
I'm reluctant to kick a man when he's down- particularly a man who for four years delivered way more than most of us could realistically expect.
But it his success ratio (or lack of) at the Browns was always in the back of my mind. More like a nagging whisper, rather than a booming Brian Blessed shouting that it was all doomed, doomed!
I reasoned that the Browns was an obligation whereas the Villa was a choice and what constitutes success here (CL qualification/ trophies) might be somewhat easier to attain than a Superbowl win against sides with infinitely more resources.
But no getting away from it, the 'big' decisions affecting the club recently have been about as convincing as Terry Wigon's hair-don't.
The thing with the Browns and the NFL in general is it is geared to ensure crapper clubs get stronger and stronger clubs get weaker. Teams with poor records get first dabs on the up and coming stars and there are salary caps. Yes, some teams might be richer, but no team dominates for more then a few years at a time unless they have a tremendous coach. IIRC the Browns have had one season in the last 10 where they have won more then they have lost.
-
The Browns record over the last 10 years has been truly appalling. They are a very poor team. The Browns fans have pretty much always disliked Randy, and as you can see by looking at their boards, they are somewhat perplexed as to the high regard he is held by us Villa fans.