Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine

Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: richardhubbard on March 26, 2012, 12:44:13 PM

Title: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: richardhubbard on March 26, 2012, 12:44:13 PM
Have you noticed the theme of who helping city lose the title

Luke Moore, Gary Cahill, Peter Crouch the last 3 players to score against city. Next Manchester City v Sunderland,

Step up one Craig Gardner?

May be if we kept team of 2002 -05, we now be in top 3??
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: Rip Van We Go Again on March 26, 2012, 12:48:24 PM
O'Neill make um heap big mistake getting rid of Cahill.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: not3bad on March 26, 2012, 01:04:21 PM
Luke Moore was set up for his goal by another ex-Villa player.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: nigel on March 26, 2012, 01:22:46 PM
O'Neill make um heap big mistake getting rid of Cahill.
I said at the time MO'N f**ked up with that move.
I know many might disagree but he also f**ked up selling Ridgewell too.
I admit Ridgewell wasn't as accomplished as some, but, he and Cahill formed a great partnership, they understood each other brilliantly as they came though the ranks together.
They were a unit and should have been given the chance together at 1st team.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: N'ZMAV on March 26, 2012, 01:24:12 PM
Everyone in the world (apart from MON) knew he dropped a bollock with Cahill. Still, he'll always be remembered for it, oh, and replacing him with Knight.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: N'ZMAV on March 26, 2012, 01:24:23 PM
Not to mention Curtis Davies.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: darren woolley on March 26, 2012, 02:44:52 PM
Everyone in the world (apart from MON) knew he dropped a bollock with Cahill. Still, he'll always be remembered for it, oh, and replacing him with Knight.


I agree.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: Duncan Shaw on March 26, 2012, 03:35:25 PM
Everyone in the world (apart from MON) knew he dropped a bollock with Cahill. Still, he'll always be remembered for it, oh, and replacing him with Knight.
Only by us though, I don't see many of his mates in the press saying it!

I agree.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: DB on March 26, 2012, 03:39:15 PM
O'Neill make um heap big mistake getting rid of Cahill.

He did get on Curtis Davies though.....ahem.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: dcdavecollett on March 26, 2012, 11:11:30 PM
The alternative to letting Cahill go was to allow him to pick himself for the first-team. Not a position that many managers would accept.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: Bottom Right 89 on March 27, 2012, 12:17:35 AM
Have you noticed the theme of who helping city lose the title

Luke Moore, Gary Cahill, Peter Crouch the last 3 players to score against city. Next Manchester City v Sunderland,

Step up one Craig Gardner?

May be if we kept team of 2002 -05, we now be in top 3??
And to think when we were going for the premier league title, Keith Curle caught the ball to gift us a penalty when we were stuttering and they had good luck Villa banners in the away end. 
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: PeterWithesShin on March 27, 2012, 12:53:59 AM
Have you noticed the theme of who helping city lose the title

Luke Moore, Gary Cahill, Peter Crouch the last 3 players to score against city. Next Manchester City v Sunderland,

Step up one Craig Gardner?

May be if we kept team of 2002 -05, we now be in top 3??
And to think when we were going for the premier league title, Keith Curle caught the ball to gift us a penalty when we were stuttering and they had good luck Villa banners in the away end. 

That game was one of the few times I was a right sider. Didn't the banner say something like "Good luck Villa from the city of Manchester"?
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: Matt C on March 27, 2012, 03:16:39 AM
It did. They were winning 1-0 and we came back to win 3-1.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: Steve R on March 27, 2012, 07:12:23 PM
The alternative to letting Cahill go was to allow him to pick himself for the first-team. Not a position that many managers would accept.

There's a difference between wanting first team football and wanting to pick the team.

It's hard to criticise Cahill for not wanting to fall into the 20 - 22 age group abyss that has claimed so many of our promising youngsters for lack of first team opportunity.

It looked a bad decision by O'Neill then, and it certainly does now. Even worse than not offering Mellberg a new contract at the start of the season and then proceeding to play him at right back.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: LeeB on March 27, 2012, 10:35:19 PM
Have you noticed the theme of who helping city lose the title

Luke Moore, Gary Cahill, Peter Crouch the last 3 players to score against city. Next Manchester City v Sunderland,

Step up one Craig Gardner?

May be if we kept team of 2002 -05, we now be in top 3??
And to think when we were going for the premier league title, Keith Curle caught the ball to gift us a penalty when we were stuttering and they had good luck Villa banners in the away end. 

That game was one of the few times I was a right sider. Didn't the banner say something like "Good luck Villa from the city of Manchester"?

One of the few times we let you in.

The right side was for the righteous.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: Risso on March 27, 2012, 10:37:44 PM
Not to mention Curtis Davies.

Inherit Mellberg and Cahill.  Shift Mellberg to right back, drop Cahill then buy Zat Knight and Curtis Davis for £10m+.  Genius.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: PeterWithesShin on March 27, 2012, 10:46:37 PM
Have you noticed the theme of who helping city lose the title

Luke Moore, Gary Cahill, Peter Crouch the last 3 players to score against city. Next Manchester City v Sunderland,

Step up one Craig Gardner?

May be if we kept team of 2002 -05, we now be in top 3??
And to think when we were going for the premier league title, Keith Curle caught the ball to gift us a penalty when we were stuttering and they had good luck Villa banners in the away end. 

That game was one of the few times I was a right sider. Didn't the banner say something like "Good luck Villa from the city of Manchester"?

One of the few times we let you in.

The right side was for the righteous.

I had mixed results on the right side. The only times I remember being that side were the first Inter game, Oldham when we lost the league, the City game and the European game where that bloke kept playing a bugle over the tannoy.

The left side was definitely where it was at.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: robbo1874 on March 28, 2012, 08:59:29 AM
Much as I liked Cahill and ridgewell I don't think they were the answer for us at that time. Ridgewell was proper grafter, but positionally terrible and always prone to make a mistake. Though fair play to him, I did think he improved at the blues. Selling Cahill was an unbelievably poor bit of business. Anyone could see he would make it at prem level. Shocking decision by oneill.
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: pauliewalnuts on March 28, 2012, 10:44:11 AM
Not to mention Curtis Davies.

Inherit Mellberg and Cahill.  Shift Mellberg to right back, drop Cahill then buy Zat Knight and Curtis Davis for £10m+.  Genius.

Don't forget "total refusal to buy a proper right back for the best part of three years, then buy two of them, but never play one and play a centre half instead of the other one most of the time" too.

Although my favourite was "buy an entire defence one summer, then the next summer, buy another entire defence and just get Marlon or Emile in to fill gaping hole up front"
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: Simon Ward on March 28, 2012, 03:26:29 PM
Not to mention Curtis Davies.

Inherit Mellberg and Cahill.  Shift Mellberg to right back, drop Cahill then buy Zat Knight and Curtis Davis for £10m+.  Genius.

So brilliant that we stole a march on manure with those deals!
Title: Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
Post by: Dave on March 28, 2012, 09:19:11 PM
Not to mention Curtis Davies.

Inherit Mellberg and Cahill.  Shift Mellberg to right back, drop Cahill then buy Zat Knight and Curtis Davis for £10m+.  Genius.

Don't forget "total refusal to buy a proper right back for the best part of three years, then buy two of them, but never play one and play a centre half instead of the other one most of the time" too.
Not to mention letting one of those right-backs go to another club for £2m only to sign him for £6m the following summer.
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal