Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: VillaAlways on October 15, 2010, 11:40:46 AM
-
On loan for one month to Leicester according to SSN
-
Pub player.
-
MON's biggest transfer error.
-
Confirmed by WM!
James Collins jr gone to Burton on loan also.
-
What a tumble, from being mooted for England to that circus at Leicester.
-
Not surprised in the least about this news - we have a wealth of talent in
Curtis' position and all bar none are better players in my humble opinion,
and that includes Shane Lowry and Derek Williams who played for the
reserves yesterday against Blackburn -
Hope it works out for Curtis where ever he ends up - nice enough bloke
to talk to when we met him @ Bohemians pre-season
-
its shame that the injury he played with has caused his confidence and his reputation to drop so low...
i can only respect a player when they play injured for our cause, and its a shame when they then get slated for making inevitable mistakes...
since he has been back fit, his confidence has looked shattered...
i hope the time at leicester, can bring him back to the form he displayed before his shoulder injury...
-
Confirmed by WM!
James Collins jr gone to Burton on loan also.
That's why Karen (name removed) Brady's husband was @ Bodymoor yesterday-
James Collins gave away a silly penalty with a handball but redeemed himself
by getting us back on terms against Blackburn, also with a pen
JC (junior) is a handful to mark, decent goal scorer when opportunities arise
but can't see the lad making it big time
-
Clark > Davies
-
There is a good player in there somewhere - just hope he can go and find it out on loan
-
Call it faith or stupidity, but I still think Curtis could be a great player for us. Lacking in confidence (which he may get at Leicester) and needs to learn alongside quality (which he won't get at Leicester). Best of luck to him.
-
I still think Davies is a very, very decent player. Injury seems to have ruined him though, let's hope he can get a few games under his belt and improve his confidence and match fitness. As other have said, there's a player in there somewere.
-
Decent enough player but we have better than him in that position and this move makes sense all round.
-
He's got the ability to be a very good premiership centre half. He's down in the pecking order at the moment though and he needs game time, so this makes sense for now.
-
I have allways liked curtis davies thought he was a decent player but he needs games under his belt to gain is confidence back.
-
That hoof over Guzan's crossbar from the touchline against Rapid summed up just how far his confidence has slipped since the injury. Hopefully he can recover his game or he will be an expensive loss to us.
Edit - Guzan not Friedel
-
There is a very good player in there somewhere and I think he will eventually prove the doubters wrong.
-
Disappointed it's not for good.
-
There is a very good player in there somewhere and I think he will eventually prove the doubters wrong.
There's a very good player in me somewhere.
Not good enough I'm afraid. Six months of decent form alongside the best centre half we've had since God, and those good times have been heavily outweighed by some of the most hapless performances I've seen from a centre half down the Villa, let alone one who cost the best part of £10m
-
No doubt its a good move for us.
Hopefully he can regain some form/confidence, if nothing else he'll be worth more if we sell him.
An indirect pat on the back to Clark as well.
-
Ciaran Clark.
-
I'm just not convinced by him anymore. He talks a brilliant game, but he isn't that good a player in my opinion. I agree that Laursen made him look very good, but he has to be good of his own accord. I just don't think that given the responsibility he can be a top PL central defender. Maybe I'm wrong and he can bounce back by playing at a lower level for a while. Or we'll just confirm that the Championship actually is his level.
-
I think he'd do well for us partnered with Dunne, but he's now so far down the pecking order I'm not convinced we'll ever see him get a decent run again. So probably best he goes and we get a few million back on him.
-
Not good enough.
This season he'll be remembered for booting the ball out for a corner when it would've been easier to take a shot at their goal.
-
There's little doubt that there is a good player in him, whether we will ever see it on a regular basis is another matter. Same applies to Sidwell.
-
I have a feeling his contract is up next summer so we sell him in January when we'll do well to get £3m I reckon or he goes for free at the end of the season. I could be wrong, maybe he signed a four year deal in 2008 when he joined permanently.
-
Shame.. that is the first step into the abyss for Curtis
-
There's little doubt that there is a good player in him, whether we will ever see it on a regular basis is another matter. Same applies to Sidwell.
At least Sidwell is nearly out of contract! To be honest I'd like him sold now so we can at least try and re-coup some of the money wasted on him. My mate's an Albion fan and he said he was shit.
They thought they had a good deal till we forced Moore on them for £3m
-
I thought Leicester had loads of money now.... they should be giving us some of it ....
-
They probably are to some degree, either paying Davies' wages and maybe a loan fee.
They've also taken NcNaughton from spurs so they've splashed a bit of cash on loan deals in the past week.
-
They probably are to some degree, either paying Davies' wages and maybe a loan fee.
They've also taken NcNaughton from spurs so they've splashed a bit of cash on loan deals in the past week.
They will almost certainly be doing both.
-
Not good enough.
This season he'll be remembered for booting the ball out for a corner when it would've been easier to take a shot at their goal.
Yes. Not good enough.
-
I really like Davies as a bloke - straight shooter, seems to have his head screwed on - but I'd be very surprised to see him start for Villa again. I wanted it to work for him here but sadly I don't think it's going to.
-
There's little doubt that there is a good player in him, whether we will ever see it on a regular basis is another matter. Same applies to Sidwell.
At least Sidwell is nearly out of contract! To be honest I'd like him sold now so we can at least try and re-coup some of the money wasted on him. My mate's an Albion fan and he said he was shit.
They thought they had a good deal till we forced Moore on them for £3m
My baggies mate was gutted when they sold him to us. He raved about his performances. And said when he was out injured they struggled without him, including his leadership (I'm sure he said Davies was captain at the time).
Maybe we'll flog him back to them, as long as Luke Moore isn't part of any deal!
I'm really disappointed in Sidwell, he doesn't even have the excuse of playing with an injury like Curtis does. How does a player decline so quickly?
-
The most expensive defender in our history on loan at Leicester.
-
He's shown he can be good even when not playing alongside Laursen, although admitedly only rarely. Remember Anfield last season where he was superb, alongside Carlos I think? I think O'Neill made him change his natural game (told him to hoof it more) played him with an injury (because he'd failed to sign enough cover) and shattered his confidence. Once he gets a manager who believes in him and allows him to play his natural game, I think he will get his mojo back and prove the doubters very wrong.
-
It's a good move for Villa, getting Curtis regular first team football may bring his form and confidence on, as he may be required to play a part for us this season if we get a few injuries and suspensions.
He needs to pull his finger out though.
-
Ship him out permanently in January, Clarke is way better (future Villa captain).
-
There is no doubt that he has the talent, it's all in the head, a touch of the Luke Moore's here, too much, too young.
Perhaps the determination, commitment and dedication which Gareth Barry and James Milner gave their careers may be better appreciated now.
-
Played 90 minutes in a 1-1 draw at home to Hull today.
-
Played very well by all accounts.
That shit football league thing is on BBC1 now, they just trailed the Leicester game.
-
its shame that the injury he played with has caused his confidence and his reputation to drop so low...
i can only respect a player when they play injured for our cause, and its a shame when they then get slated for making inevitable mistakes...
since he has been back fit, his confidence has looked shattered...
i hope the time at leicester, can bring him back to the form he displayed before his shoulder injury...
Spot on.
He was a big player for us up until Feb 09 when he injured his shoulder v Everton.
Other factors played a part in our collapse that season of course. But we were never really the same after that match - and neither was Curtis.
A combination of the injury sustained then and not playing alongside Laursen made him look ropey in the latter part of that campaign.
He was iffy again on the opening day v Wigan in 09/10 but looked like he'd returned to something approximating form in the next match v the Redscouse. It was reported at the time that he'd been encouraged to hold off from surgery until we got a new CB on board. In the end we got two and it was always going to be difficult for him to get back in, particularly with the form of Collins and Dunne last year.
It has to be said that three managers in just over 12 months haven't had much call to use him. Whether it's because they all flat out just didn't rate him or whether it's to do with his new contract clause once he reaches x amount of games I'm not sure.
-
It's a reasonable point about the contract Mr Gage - I hope he isnt being blocked from playing over that clause that says he can renegotiate his contract once he hits 60 league appearances or whatever it was. It would be a bit cheap of Randy and co. if that were a factor.
-
I doubt three managers would all agree to a player not being picked just because of a clause in his contract.
-
It might not be a Herbert-style 'don't play him' request as per Hadji in 2004.
But MON and GH might have been advised that any pay increase would eat into their wage budget allowance and if they don't think he's a long term option there would be no point in having him sit on a fat new contract for the sake of a few games.
Kevin Mac might simply have been told to hold off until the manager situation was sorted out.
I dunno, I just find it odd that a player who was getting into England squads two years ago and was a big player for us is nowhere near the first team and has been farmed out to Leicester. Form could be partly that (or all of it, in fact) or there might be conversations going on that we aren't privy to.
-
Maybe it's just that he isn't that good.
I can hardly imagine the sort of conversation whereby before accepting the job Gez asks how much he's got to spend and Randy says "Loads. But, er, if you don't mind holding back on that player there. He'll cost us another few grand a week if you pick him."
-
I know what you're saying.
But conversations about available transfer fees and wage allocation would take place early enough into any new job and form part of the overall plan. Giving a bit part player like Davies 15/20k extra could be the difference between GH bringing in his first choice signing on a decent wage in Jan or missing out altogether.
Not offering the above as fact by any means but with the wage bill being focussed on this year it's not entirely out of the question.
-
I doubt three managers would all agree to a player not being picked just because of a clause in his contract.
It does seem strange to me though that he came back against Brighton last season in the cup and we then didn't even see him on the bench for the rest of the season.
Again he played twice against Vienna (abysmally) and then didn't even make the bench for either Everton or Stoke.
Came on in the Blackburn cup game and then didn't make the bench for the next game.
So there does appear to be an issue with him appearing in the league.
-
Curtis isnt a leader. At the end of the day a manager needs to see his centre half in charge of any situation. Curtis always looked good when he had a leader like Laursen next to him. After Martins injury he looked like a rudderless ship.
-
As I understnad it the contract thing hinges around league appearances. As other have said he's appeared in cup games and then been overlooked in the League. The high wage bill is a known issue. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that these things are connected.
-
I remember this kind of debate with Gary Cahill. People are so quick to write players off. At Davis' age and being a centre half, he's got plenty of time to get his career back on track. It might not happen, but I remember a decent and developing player
-
Curtis isnt a leader. At the end of the day a manager needs to see his centre half in charge of any situation. Curtis always looked good when he had a leader like Laursen next to him. After Martins injury he looked like a rudderless ship.
To be fair that wasn't just him - the whole defence fell apart!
-
In fairness to Curtis I still think he is a potentially very good player. Hopefully he'll rediscover his confidence at Leicester and can come back and fight for his place in the side.
-
In fairness to Curtis I still think he is a potentially very good player. Hopefully he'll rediscover his confidence at Leicester and can come back and fight for his place in the side.
I agree with the 1st part, but not the 2nd.
Decent enough player, but it hasn't worked out for him at Villa. I'd say Leicester is him being in the shop window and we get a few million back on him, save his wages and then reinvest that money elsewhere. Maybe give Clark a payrise and but the rest towards a new striker.
-
Hmmm, Curtis Davies. Had high hopes for him but I just think now it's not going to work out for him at Villa.
I'm not sure the non-appearances in the league have anything other to do with how he's looked in the cup games - I was pretty disappointed with what I saw against Rapid; he looked shaky, hacking away clearances under little or no pressure.
The thing to remember about Curtis is that he was a promising kid at Luton, then a promising kid at West Brom, who missed an entire season - the season he was in the Prem with West Brom - through injury. So actually, we bought him on the basis of promise and potential alone, rather than a track record of proven performances in the top flight. He had some good games for us, but also some bad - and I think the Achilles tendon he ruptured at Arsenal has perhaps done more damage to him than many realise. It's the kind of injury which really can change a player - see Yakubu at Everton as a good example.
I guess he needs games now and he'll get those at Leicester. Loathe to completely write him off, but he's got loads of work to do and there's no point him being 5th choice CB at Villa.
-
Just had a chat with my ITK contact regarding Curtis. Not much we hadn't already surmised. He didn't respond to the question as to whether the contract clause was an issue.
Basically said Curtis felt he needed games after a certain person had sidelined and almost "destroyed" him. Then MacDonald understandably wanted to push the claims of his protege Clark, leaving Curtis fighting for 4th/5th choice and not much chance of games on the horizon. Sven called and asked for him and he decided to go as he wanted games and he respects Sven as a manager. Apparently he got very good reviews and some MOM ratings on his first appearance. He is pretty much in the shop window and wouldn't be surprised if he moves on in January.
No mention of Houllier's view of him.
-
In fairness to Curtis I still think he is a potentially very good player. Hopefully he'll rediscover his confidence at Leicester and can come back and fight for his place in the side.
I agree with the 1st part, but not the 2nd.
Decent enough player, but it hasn't worked out for him at Villa. I'd say Leicester is him being in the shop window and we get a few million back on him, save his wages and then reinvest that money elsewhere. Maybe give Clark a payrise and but the rest towards a new striker.
What length of contract did he sign in 2007?
If it's the standard 4 year effort he'll be out of contract next summer.
If it's 5 years he'll have a year left and we won't be getting a Kings ransom either way.
-
As I recall, he was on loan initially in 07/08 and then signed in summer 08. So his contract should be just over two years old?
-
Of the 5 centre backs on our books Curtis is the one I'd be least bothered about losing. I think he's been a little unlucky but others have come in and done a better job.
-
Possibly, could be right there.
-
A bloke who regularly pops into my work is a Leicester season ticket holder. He was there last Saturday and said that Davies was head and shoulders above anyone on the park. I know it was only Leicester, Hull, but he said he was absolute class and was clearly of premier league standard. He also apparantly was interviewed after the game by their local radio and he again repeated about MON blanking him basically and his confidence going, but also that he hoped he still had a future at Villa. Maybe a good run of games down there and we'll see a different Curtis Davies come back, maybe.
-
We should let him to get game under belts then in January he will be much sharper and better player and we can use him to trade in towards to a new striker / defensive midfielder assuming Gerard is trading in premier league or Curtis is interested in moving to an European club.
-
I doubt three managers would all agree to a player not being picked just because of a clause in his contract.
It does seem strange to me though that he came back against Brighton last season in the cup and we then didn't even see him on the bench for the rest of the season.
Again he played twice against Vienna (abysmally) and then didn't even make the bench for either Everton or Stoke.
Came on in the Blackburn cup game and then didn't make the bench for the next game.
So there does appear to be an issue with him appearing in the league.
Is it because he wasn't named in the 25 man squad? Does that mean you can appear in cup games but not in the league ?
-
As I recall he was named in our squad which only numbered 22 anyway. It would have explained a lot if he had been left out of the squad as he wouldn't have been able to play for us, but that's not the case.
-
As I recall he was named in our squad which only numbered 22 anyway. It would have explained a lot if he had been left out of the squad as he wouldn't have been able to play for us, but that's not the case.
Yes just double checked.Was going from squad on OS but that's been updated since going out on loan.He is indeed listed in the original list
-
I still think he has a future at Villa, he is probably our most cultured defender although u would not think it lately. Houlier likes defenders who are comfortable on the ball, so maybe Carlos could be the guy who goes?
-
One reason I like him and would like to see him stay is that I think in his early days (before O'Neill told him to hoof it more) he showed is a reasonable footballer rather than just a "stopper". I think in modern football it's better to have players who are comfortable on the ball in all positions. You don't see too many old fashioned stopper types in the top teams these days. That's why I would prefer him ahead of someone like Carlos.
-
Can we put this appearance bollocks to bed?
See Here (http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Curtis-Davies-considering-leaving-Aston-Villa-in-January-over-contract-row-article176289.html)
Now as he has made just 37 league appearances he can't be close to a new contract on that measure. It must mean in all competitions and he has now actually achieved over that number. So either he is due another contract (thoroughly undeserved) or it was all bollocks in the first place.
-
It may well apply to all first team games. According to Soccerbase he's played 45 league games. 5 FA Cup, 1 League Cup and 8 Other first team games for Villa. That comes to 59, one short of the 60 he needs for the clause to kick in.
-
Can't remember where I worked it out but I got 65.
Also another Mirror article from Feb states that he's stuck on 59. He's played a few times in the FA cup and Europe since then.
-
My leicester mates said CD has been MOM both times, he has been brilliant..... but it is a different league..
-
Can't remember where I worked it out but I got 65.
Also another Mirror article from Feb states that he's stuck on 59. He's played a few times in the FA cup and Europe since then.
You're counting from when he originally joined on-loan for the 2007/08 season, the clause probably only refers to games from 2008/09 onwards when he officially signed for us.
-
Probably a good move for Curtis, getting some much needed competitive football after not really playing much for a long while. He's been poor in the couple of games I've seen him play for Villa this season, so hopefully he can regain some confidence.
When questioned a couple of months ago, The General said it was nonsense that Curtis Davies was being kept out the team due to contract stipulations, which presumably means that there are no stipulations or that management is not bothered about such stipulations. Either way, it is form that has kept him out of the team.
-
It's interesting that GH has sent him out on loan for a month, though.
At the very least it has to be worth trying as a way of rebuilding his confidence.
I don't think he was one of MON's best signings, and he has looked poor for us in recent appearances, but MON was quite happy to blank him and let him sit on his arse in the reserves doing feck all.
If he's going to be away from the first team, then fair enough, that is the situation he's in, but to try to get something from him by sending him out on loan for a while seems a good move, and not the sort of thing MON would have done.
-
Can't remember where I worked it out but I got 65.
Also another Mirror article from Feb states that he's stuck on 59. He's played a few times in the FA cup and Europe since then.
You're counting from when he originally joined on-loan for the 2007/08 season, the clause probably only refers to games from 2008/09 onwards when he officially signed for us.
The soccerbase figures include the loan season - 9 league and 2 cup appearances. If those aren't included in the clause, then he could be quite a few games off the 60 mark, even allowing for his Europa Cup and any other appearances since the end of last season.
-
Loan period extended til January at Leicester