Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine

Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: FrankyH on April 20, 2014, 10:54:58 AM

Title: Spygate II
Post by: FrankyH on April 20, 2014, 10:54:58 AM
Strange one..

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/spygate-ii-how-crystal-palace-3434213 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/spygate-ii-how-crystal-palace-3434213)
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: richtheholtender on April 20, 2014, 11:01:15 AM
Does it matter? They did what they had to do to win. I wish Villa would wake up and start doing what they have to do to win.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Matt Collins on April 20, 2014, 11:03:03 AM
The player by player reports on baker, Lowton, KEA and holt aren't exactly complimentary (though pretty accurate).
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Chris Smith on April 20, 2014, 11:06:51 AM
Does it matter? They did what they had to do to win. I wish Villa would wake up and start doing what they have to do to win.

Of course it matters, if true it is cheating and points at some sort of corruption. It also raises the possibility that we have somebody at the club giving information to the opposition.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Clampy on April 20, 2014, 11:11:48 AM
Does it matter? They did what they had to do to win. I wish Villa would wake up and start doing what they have to do to win.

Yes it does matter, especially if like Chris said there is someone at the club who is giving out information.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Damo70 on April 20, 2014, 11:13:29 AM
The player by player reports on baker, Lowton, KEA and holt aren't exactly complimentary (though pretty accurate).

I couldn't quite read it and decided against making the text larger as I was convinced it would depress me.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on April 20, 2014, 11:18:44 AM
But everyone knew we were going to lose 1-0 to a late sucker Puncheon and so it proved.  So them knowing the team in advance wouldn't have altered that fact.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: richtheholtender on April 20, 2014, 11:21:25 AM
But everyone knew we were going to lose 1-0 to a late sucker Puncheon and so it proved.  So them knowing the team in advance wouldn't have altered that fact.


Agreed. As for someone leaking information, the club need to start taking a more detailed approach when hiring people then.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: ozzjim on April 20, 2014, 11:23:15 AM
The team amazed me when announced. To have that side a day or two in advance is a huge advantage. Something is very off about what Palace seem to be up to.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on April 20, 2014, 11:26:06 AM
If Palace got docked 6 points and we got awarded 3 and Cardiff 3 I still wouldn't back us to beat the drop.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: ozzjim on April 20, 2014, 11:27:51 AM
If Palace got docked 6 points and we got awarded 3 and Cardiff 3 I still wouldn't back us to beat the drop.

I would. Put us on 38 and albion norwich Sunderland Fulham and Cardiff wouodf struggle to catch us.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Monty on April 20, 2014, 11:30:29 AM
If Palace got docked 6 points and we got awarded 3 and Cardiff 3 I still wouldn't back us to beat the drop.

I would. Put us on 38 and albion norwich Sunderland Fulham and Cardiff wouodf struggle to catch us.

Oh of course. One further win for us would make catching us a tall order.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on April 20, 2014, 11:31:50 AM
I would really :-)
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: cdbearsfan on April 20, 2014, 11:33:04 AM
The reports on Vlaar and Clark are the same?

I think it's right that Villa and Cardiff be awarded three points each while Palace and Birmingham receive twenty point deductions. Only fair.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: richtheholtender on April 20, 2014, 11:33:43 AM
If Palace got docked 6 points and we got awarded 3 and Cardiff 3 I still wouldn't back us to beat the drop.


What about if the points were taken off Palace, the game replayed and we had their team sheet. Back us then?
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Goldie.7 on April 20, 2014, 11:35:52 AM
Palace getting docked points and other teams being awarded points will never happen, bets have already been won and lost.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Goldie.7 on April 20, 2014, 11:37:05 AM
If Palace got docked 6 points and we got awarded 3 and Cardiff 3 I still wouldn't back us to beat the drop.


What about if the points were taken off Palace, the game replayed and we had their team sheet. Back us then?

No, we have no goalscorers.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: supertom on April 20, 2014, 11:39:00 AM
Don't think it would have made much difference. Pulis could tactically outwit Lambert in his sleep. And if Palace are indeed doing this, and getting this sort of info, perhaps we should be to? I don't necessarily mean inserting spys into other clubs, but we always seem so hideously unprepared in games, like we've just sent out 11 strangers to play a game they've never played, with no knowledge of who they're playing.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Summers on April 20, 2014, 11:40:24 AM
Of course it makes a difference.

It's also cheating.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: SoccerHQ on April 20, 2014, 11:41:20 AM
I'm chuckling at people think Palace will be deducted points for this.

If West Ham weren't deducted points for fielding Tevez and Sunderland weren't for fielding that Korean bloke this season, why would Palace be?

And say they've been doing for everygame under Pulis...what about the games they've lost against Newcastle, Man. United and Southampton? Does it not matter as those teams just beat them anyway?

I would say though this one looks dodgy as Bacuna only pulled out late with injury didn't he and he was obviously going to play as RB so either someone at the club was telling Palace the team or they had someone watching us get off the coach.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Summers on April 20, 2014, 11:47:21 AM
Change in formation and changes in line up, and they get it spot on?

It's clearly dodgy.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: not3bad on April 20, 2014, 11:55:45 AM
First Cardiff, now Villa. Wonder if any more might come out.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: ozzjim on April 20, 2014, 11:56:49 AM
I'm chuckling at people think Palace will be deducted points for this.

If West Ham weren't deducted points for fielding Tevez and Sunderland weren't for fielding that Korean bloke this season, why would Palace be?

And say they've been doing for everygame under Pulis...what about the games they've lost against Newcastle, Man. United and Southampton? Does it not matter as those teams just beat them anyway?

I would say though this one looks dodgy as Bacuna only pulled out late with injury didn't he and he was obviously going to play as RB so either someone at the club was telling Palace the team or they had someone watching us get off the coach.

Hardly the point. In my opinion it's much more underhand than fielding an illegal player.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: silhillvilla on April 20, 2014, 12:01:30 PM
Is this somehow linked to the comings and goings at villa park this last week ?
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Clampy on April 20, 2014, 12:05:08 PM
Is this somehow linked to the comings and goings at villa park this last week ?

I thought that whilst reading it but Cardiff have made the same allegation so maybe not.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Des Little on April 20, 2014, 12:05:27 PM
I wish they'd have told me before I spunked over £100 on tickets, travel and beer to watch a game that was already decided!
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: SoccerHQ on April 20, 2014, 12:12:37 PM
I'm chuckling at people think Palace will be deducted points for this.

If West Ham weren't deducted points for fielding Tevez and Sunderland weren't for fielding that Korean bloke this season, why would Palace be?

And say they've been doing for everygame under Pulis...what about the games they've lost against Newcastle, Man. United and Southampton? Does it not matter as those teams just beat them anyway?

I would say though this one looks dodgy as Bacuna only pulled out late with injury didn't he and he was obviously going to play as RB so either someone at the club was telling Palace the team or they had someone watching us get off the coach.

Hardly the point. In my opinion it's much more underhand than fielding an illegal player.

You really think it's worse than say a team fielding a player who then fails a drugs test and is therefore ineligible?

As I've said Palace have lost to Man. United, Newcastle and Southampton since Feb 22nd in the league so I'd say just go out and beat them anyway whatever tricks they're up to.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Tugby Villain on April 20, 2014, 12:13:53 PM
It's all a bit dodgy
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Chris Smith on April 20, 2014, 12:16:38 PM
I'm chuckling at people think Palace will be deducted points for this.

If West Ham weren't deducted points for fielding Tevez and Sunderland weren't for fielding that Korean bloke this season, why would Palace be?

And say they've been doing for everygame under Pulis...what about the games they've lost against Newcastle, Man. United and Southampton? Does it not matter as those teams just beat them anyway?

I would say though this one looks dodgy as Bacuna only pulled out late with injury didn't he and he was obviously going to play as RB so either someone at the club was telling Palace the team or they had someone watching us get off the coach.

Hardly the point. In my opinion it's much more underhand than fielding an illegal player.

You really think it's worse than say a team fielding a player who then fails a drugs test and is therefore ineligible?

As I've said Palace have lost to Man. United, Newcastle and Southampton since Feb 22nd in the league so I'd say just go out and beat them anyway whatever tricks they're up to.

Yes. If the story is true then this is systematic cheating, involving a number of people. Whether or not it made any difference to the result cannot be proven but they clearly thought it would help otherwise they wouldn't have bothered.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: taylorsworkrate on April 20, 2014, 12:17:04 PM
I'm chuckling at people think Palace will be deducted points for this.

If West Ham weren't deducted points for fielding Tevez and Sunderland weren't for fielding that Korean bloke this season, why would Palace be?

And say they've been doing for everygame under Pulis...what about the games they've lost against Newcastle, Man. United and Southampton? Does it not matter as those teams just beat them anyway?

I would say though this one looks dodgy as Bacuna only pulled out late with injury didn't he and he was obviously going to play as RB so either someone at the club was telling Palace the team or they had someone watching us get off the coach.

Hardly the point. In my opinion it's much more underhand than fielding an illegal player.

You really think it's worse than say a team fielding a player who then fails a drugs test and is therefore ineligible?

As I've said Palace have lost to Man. United, Newcastle and Southampton since Feb 22nd in the league so I'd say just go out and beat them anyway whatever tricks they're up to.

I'm pretty sure Ozzjim was talking about the "balls up in registration ineligible player" rather than the "coked off his tits ineligible player"

In that instance yes, it is far far worse to go out of your way to obtain that info about your opponents. There's a reason why it's against the rules.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: rob_bridge on April 20, 2014, 12:21:44 PM
We can replay the game and Scudamore can have his 39th game wish. We'll still lose. Pullis is a footballing genius compared to Lambert and seemingly OGS for that matter
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: dicedlam on April 20, 2014, 12:27:43 PM
Who's to say that if these allegations have some substance, it is only clubs that are receiving inside knowledge?

I'm pretty sure a few Asian betting syndicates would pay handsomely for obtaining player and formations info a few days in advance of games coming up? 
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: eamonn on April 20, 2014, 12:38:55 PM
Can anyone make the text bigger on the comments on our players? Might be a giggle to see professional sawkerspies confirm how rubbish our lot are.

Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: supertom on April 20, 2014, 12:41:24 PM
In terms of knowing the starting 11 it's an unfair advantage. Many of us however, suspected Lambert would switch to 5-3-2 for this game. That's no surprise. The only real surprise was the inclusion of Lowton over Bacuna.
Palace would have been well prepped on just how good/bad (mostly bad) each of our players were.

It's underhanded the way in which they've got the exact starting 11, but as far as a distinct advantage? Not really. Any manager worth his salt will know that Lambert has two main systems he uses, and that it's pretty easy to nullify our threat. Palace did that. If they'd not known our starting 11 before hand the result would more than likely have stayed the same. The only name in the team that would have mattered for us was Benteke, but he was injured by this point. The rest, okay at best, but mostly mediocre.

No chance in hell will we get awarded points or a rematch (do we honestly want to be subjected to one more Villa match this season???). They may get a fine, that'll be that and they'll carry on doing it. I'd guess most clubs do similar. It's a scummy, underhanded, piece of shit business now. Do we think our shit doesn't stink?
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Clark W Griswold on April 20, 2014, 12:49:05 PM
Nostradamus is alive and well and living in sarf Landan.

Not sure he needed to put that much detail into Baker and Holt really. 'Shit' and 'Shitter' would have said it all really.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: john2710 on April 20, 2014, 12:59:46 PM
I find it hard to believe it's coincidental that two of our back room staff have been suspended following this match.

It doesn't surprise me at all that it involves a side managed by that odious gimp Pulis. Making the pitch size the minimum permissible or having towels inside shirts etc... is gaining an advantage but within the rules. Getting the opposing teams formation well in advance is cheating. That's why it's also against the rules. There's something decidedly dodgy here that could have wider implications for football in general. I'm just happy that we're not the ones accused but I would expect this to disappear quietly, replays, points docked are not likely outcomes.

Of course there may be no connection & the story could be complete bullshit.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: silhillvilla on April 20, 2014, 01:05:25 PM
I think we already know the game is corrupt.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: newtonsballs on April 20, 2014, 01:15:22 PM
What happened to announcing your squad before the game and announcing your players just before kick off?
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: OCD on April 20, 2014, 01:45:20 PM
I was pissed off with Lambert that we were under the cosh for 30 minutes in the second half and he didn't change anything. We went 1-0 down, he brought Albrighton and Weimann and changed tactics and we looked a lot more dangerous for the last few minutes. If he had done that when we were under pressure, it would have given them a problem to think about and it might have changed the sequence of events.

It pisses me off when a team is under pressure for such a long spell and the manager doesn't do anything about it. It just becomes a foregone conclusion.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: aj2k77 on April 20, 2014, 01:52:45 PM
I'd like to see there report on Lambert.

The Gabby one reads '' reluctant to work when not in possession'', works his socks off does he Paul? My arse.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: olaftab on April 20, 2014, 04:11:12 PM
Baker: Tall, left CB. Attacks the ball and does okay in the air. But is often on his heels and lacks pace to recover- struggles with any ball played in behind and against a powerful quick striker will be vulnerable. Comfortable to a point but can be prone to error under pressure.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: ciggiesnbeer on April 20, 2014, 04:55:01 PM
I would expect most professional teams have scouting reports often more detailed (see AVB's http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/8591763/How-Andre-Villas-Boas-scouting-reports-helped-Chelsea-to-a-3-0-win-over-Newcastle-in-November-2005.html ).

Calling the exact new formation and line up is very dodgy though.

Nothing will come of it. Not least because Pulis & Lambert are buddies off the pitch.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: supertom on April 20, 2014, 08:27:23 PM
Baker: Tall, left CB. Attacks the ball and does okay in the air. But is often on his heels and lacks pace to recover- struggles with any ball played in behind and against a powerful quick striker will be vulnerable. Comfortable to a point but can be prone to error under pressure.
And the "no shit Sherlock" award goes to...
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Matt C on April 20, 2014, 08:30:35 PM
Cheating is cheating.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: dcdavecollett on April 20, 2014, 08:49:33 PM
Is this tactical genius Pulis in any way related to the bloke who Lambert's team beat and outplayed on their own pitch last season?
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: andyaston on April 20, 2014, 09:15:19 PM
What Pullis has done with Palace is a minor miracle. Puncheon is the only player in that team line up who you would think of as any good enough for the Prem but, they are playing out of their skins getting results. They have been in European form post Holloway.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: London Villan on April 20, 2014, 10:17:25 PM
For all his faults, Pulis organises teams, gives everybody a clear role, plays to the players strengths and uses every possible means to get a result... I wish we had some of his ideas being put into action.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: rob_bridge on April 20, 2014, 10:51:43 PM
Is this tactical genius Pulis in any way related to the bloke who Lambert's team beat and outplayed on their own pitch last season?

Yep the one who plays dire, turgid football and has managed to keep clubs half the size of Villa in the Premiership more comfortably that our managers (including Lambert) in recent seasons even though we have managed to match his heights of uninspired football.

By your rationale Lambert is a genius as he has managed to beat Chelsea and Arsenal this season and their inept managers.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: ciggiesnbeer on April 20, 2014, 10:58:55 PM
To be fair, Stoke under Pulis spend 80M quid - Net spend. That is a big chunk of change.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: curiousorange on April 20, 2014, 11:12:09 PM
To be fair, Stoke under Pulis spend 80M quid - Net spend. That is a big chunk of change.

That's why he got the flick, IMO. He spent a lot of Coates's money and his team still relied on elbows, throw-ins and marginal refereeing decisions.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: ciggiesnbeer on April 20, 2014, 11:51:33 PM
To be fair, Stoke under Pulis spend 80M quid - Net spend. That is a big chunk of change.

That's why he got the flick, IMO. He spent a lot of Coates's money and his team still relied on elbows, throw-ins and marginal refereeing decisions.

Aye. Not sure how much he has spent at Palace so far. Will be interesting to see how he goes on.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Damo70 on April 21, 2014, 10:44:55 AM
For all his faults, Pulis organises teams, gives everybody a clear role, plays to the players strengths and uses every possible means to get a result... I wish we had some of his ideas being put into action.

The same as Allardyce. They are limited but get the organisation and basics right. Ideal managers to get you up and/or keep you up.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Mister E on April 21, 2014, 04:51:35 PM
The fact that the reports on Vlaar and Clark are exactly the same is bizarre.
The debate on here is not about who is more tactically astute between Pulis and Lambert: it is about the implied systematic cheating in a professional game that has many £££'s riding on it.

It's just plain wrong and - if found to be accurate - the perpetrators should be caned ... but won't be by a toothless FA.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Rudy Can't Fail on April 21, 2014, 05:15:49 PM
I wonder how much the bribe was to give the team sheet in advance and did it come with a player by player fact sheet?

The other question is who apart from Lambert knew the team selection in advance?
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Somniloquism on April 21, 2014, 05:17:53 PM
The fact that the reports on Vlaar and Clark are exactly the same is bizarre.
The debate on here is not about who is more tactically astute between Pulis and Lambert: it is about the implied systematic cheating in a professional game that has many £££'s riding on it.

It's just plain wrong and - if found to be accurate - the perpetrators should be caned ... but won't be by a toothless FA.

Those bits were added on by the Mirror to show what was on the actual sheets. They probably cocked that up themselves.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Somniloquism on April 21, 2014, 05:21:55 PM
I wonder how much the bribe was to give the team sheet in advance and did it come with a player by player fact sheet?

The other question is who apart from Lambert knew the team selection in advance?

I suppose it would depend on when he was going to decide to play that way. I did wonder if Barry Banana had something to do with this as I suppose he is still friends with people like Marc and Andi.

The fact sheet was their own scouts reports.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: dcdavecollett on April 21, 2014, 11:41:50 PM
I love the way that -for some people- Villa's shit performances (of which there have been far too many) are Lambert's responsibility but the very good ones aren't!!

No bias here, then...
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Louzie0 on April 21, 2014, 11:50:03 PM
The fact that the reports on Vlaar and Clark are exactly the same is bizarre.

Another 2 players were linked in the same way.
I'm wondering if someone at The Mirror decided to duplicate a couple because the comments otherwise would have been too negative to print. It would be nice if they were considering the impact on the players concerned but it may have had more to do with fear of litigation!
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Matt Collins on April 22, 2014, 01:30:02 PM
If it's the mirror id speculate cock up over conspiracy!
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: Matt Collins on April 22, 2014, 01:33:43 PM
Just reading the Lowton one again: "lightweight", "lacking confidence", "no trick", "struggles in tight spaces".

Ouch
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: ClaretAndBlueBlood on April 22, 2014, 01:36:14 PM
Just reading the Lowton one again: "lightweight", "lacking confidence", "no trick", "struggles in tight spaces".

Ouch

he'd be no good in a gang bang then!!!
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: ClaretAndBlueBlood on April 22, 2014, 01:38:38 PM
If Palace got docked 6 points and we got awarded 3 and Cardiff 3 I still wouldn't back us to beat the drop.


What about if the points were taken off Palace, the game replayed and we had their team sheet. Back us then?

please don't reply it, I couldn't sit thru that again
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: placeforparks on April 22, 2014, 01:38:50 PM
westwood: "gets frustrated with his team-mates in front of him when there isn't enough movement"

he should try being a supporter and paying £35 to watch the turgid shite!
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: paul_e on April 22, 2014, 01:41:00 PM
I love the way that -for some people- Villa's shit performances (of which there have been far too many) are Lambert's responsibility but the very good ones aren't!!

No bias here, then...

To offer some balance most of our really good performances have been at least kick-started by one player being absolutely 'on it' and the confidence has come from there (take Arsenal on the first day, Gabby had a superb game that day and the whole team gelled on the back of it, likewise Benteke has had 4-5 untouchable games where he's dragged us to a win).
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: IAmTheOneIanOlney on April 22, 2014, 04:17:15 PM
I like the fact that KEA and Lowton are "average height" at 5ft 11in, yet Gabby is "tall" at the same height.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: papa lazarou on April 22, 2014, 04:34:32 PM
According to the club stats, KEA is 6ft 1in and 12st 4lbs. At that size you'd expect him to win some of those 50/50s.
Title: Re: Spygate II
Post by: LeeB on April 22, 2014, 04:40:46 PM
According to the club stats, KEA is 6ft 1in and 12st 4lbs. At that size you'd expect him to win some of those 50/50s.

Hello Dave.
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal