Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine

Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Legion on July 22, 2011, 08:42:14 PM

Title: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Legion on July 22, 2011, 08:42:14 PM
Victor Wanyama chose Celtic over Aston Villa (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/14255593.stm)

Quote
Victor Wanyama claims he knocked back the chance to play in the English Premier League with Aston Villa to win silverware at Celtic.

"Aston Villa were interested but I chose Celtic because I really wanted to win trophies," said the 20-year-old.

"Celtic are a great club, an historical club," added the Kenyan midfielder.

"European football was another reason. Aston Villa aren't playing in the Europa League and Celtic will be. It was an easy choice for me."

Wanyama, who is in Neil Lennon's squad for Sunday's Scottish Premier League opener against Hibernian at Easter Road, chose number 67 to show his appreciation for the Celtic which won the European Cup in 1967.

He revealed that he sought career advice from his brother, McDonald Mariga Wanyama - who plays for Inter Milan, the team Celtic beat on that occasion.

Wanyama said: "I spoke to my brother and he helped me to choose Celtic.

"He told me this was a great step for me and I would have the chance to win trophies.

"But he didn't know about 1967.

"I have been reading about Celtic's history and it was me who told him about it."
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Shaun Teales mom on July 22, 2011, 08:45:21 PM
good luck to him hope he enjoys playing rangers 20 times a season
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Big Dick Edwards on July 22, 2011, 08:53:20 PM
Can I be the first to say WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU VICTOR WAGAYAMA?!
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: PaulWinch again on July 22, 2011, 08:56:14 PM
Well yeah he'll win trophies, but it's pretty empty.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Greg N'Ash on July 22, 2011, 08:56:31 PM
subtext: "i was coming to Villa then GH got the push"
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: gervilla on July 22, 2011, 08:56:58 PM
His noodle bars are quite good though.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Andy_Lochhead_in_the_air on July 22, 2011, 09:01:44 PM
He could win trophies and play Champions league football at The New Saints or any number of  clubs I could mention from Iceland to Macedonia.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: TheSandman on July 22, 2011, 09:02:47 PM
(http://www.giveafuckometer.com/giveafuck.gif)
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: luke25 on July 22, 2011, 09:26:56 PM
Who?
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: curiousorange on July 22, 2011, 09:36:36 PM
Can I be the first to say WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU VICTOR WAGAYAMA?!

Exactly.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: noodles_ on July 22, 2011, 09:37:50 PM
Wankyamama as one person put it.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: A|C on July 22, 2011, 09:41:34 PM
Whatever!
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: N'ZMAV on July 22, 2011, 09:55:59 PM
piss off
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Lobsterboy on July 22, 2011, 10:02:06 PM
Never heard of him, not arsed, next...
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Nirog72 on July 22, 2011, 10:02:53 PM
In the same way that QPR are better than Villa because they won some silverware last season.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: The Man With A Stick on July 22, 2011, 10:22:44 PM
Oh well, I hope he cherishes his Scottish League Cup winners medal and brief run in Euro Vase.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Irish villain on July 22, 2011, 10:28:09 PM
Never heard of him, not arsed, next...

this
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Louzie0 on July 22, 2011, 10:31:33 PM
Victor Wanyama chose Celtic over Aston Villa (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/14255593.stm)

Quote
Victor Wanyama claims he knocked back the chance to play in the English Premier League with Aston Villa to win silverware at Celtic.

"Aston Villa were interested but I chose Celtic because I really wanted to win trophies," said the 20-year-old."Celtic are a great club, an historical club," added the Kenyan midfielder.
Quote



There you have it.  He's led a very sheltered and relatively short life, so far!

Thought I could do this quote stuff.  This one has me completely banjaxed.  One more go to get out of the blue box.

Right.  Well, at least it's a different blue box.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Phil from the upper holte on July 22, 2011, 10:34:15 PM
Never heard of him and anyone who chooses the Scottish prem over the English premier league is a loser
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: gervilla on July 22, 2011, 10:36:02 PM
FFS.We will never replace Osbourne at this rate.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: SX150 on July 22, 2011, 11:08:03 PM
Can I be the first to say WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU VICTOR WAGAYAMA?!
Can I be the first to say "Who the fuck are Celtic".
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: KevinGage on July 22, 2011, 11:10:15 PM
In short: "I didn't back my ability to stand out and make an impression in a strong league."
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Lambert and Payne on July 22, 2011, 11:16:23 PM
Completely clueless, enjoy your runner up medal
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: hawkeye on July 22, 2011, 11:37:36 PM
If you were a prospect with no affiliation to eiteher club you woul probably pick Celtic


Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Ross on July 22, 2011, 11:38:31 PM
Let's see how he feels if he is a moderate success.  He'll be giving his right arm to join a club like Wigan in a real league.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Risso on July 22, 2011, 11:44:27 PM
Must be one of those players that Houllier was lining up that was going to get us into the Champions League.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Greg N'Ash on July 22, 2011, 11:48:54 PM
Must be one of those players that Houllier was lining up that was going to get us into the Champions League.


aye. my thoughts too. think it was woodhall that said he'd lined up quite a few so i'm not surprised some of them are coming out now. Can't see Mcliesh being interested in him.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: D.boy on July 22, 2011, 11:55:52 PM
Meh, who is he anyway.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: darren woolley on July 23, 2011, 05:42:18 AM
Hope he enjoys is stay at Celtic playing against one other team to decide the title.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: eastie on July 23, 2011, 09:18:14 AM
celtic and rangers would both struggle to stay in our league- bigger than villa yes but better no way.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Fergal on July 23, 2011, 09:27:16 AM
Hope he enjoys is stay at Celtic playing against one other team to decide the title.
Of course he will, he is just a shallow money grabbing slime ball like the rest of them.  Football does not matter anymore.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: pablopicasso_10 on July 23, 2011, 10:54:55 AM
who?
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Concrete John on July 23, 2011, 11:07:56 AM
All I read was "Celtic are paying me more."
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: sonlyme on July 23, 2011, 04:37:27 PM
Strangely I read - 'Celtic were the only club to make me an offer'.  Funny old world.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: JUAN PABLO on July 23, 2011, 06:33:46 PM
trophies in Scotland have the same value as chocolate coins really ...
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: LeeS on July 23, 2011, 07:03:58 PM
trophies in Scotland have the same value as chocolate coins really ...

Nonsense. You cant eat the Scottish League Cup
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Mellin on July 24, 2011, 01:55:53 AM
You can if you deep fry it.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Jim Shoes on July 24, 2011, 02:29:34 AM
Haha, I had the pleasure ???? of watching Celtic against Perth Glory a few weeks back and I realise that it was a friendly game but the quality was absolute shite.

I really hoped to see a good game but neither team had any player who looked better than average and that included Shaun Maloney.

Yes of course Celtic will win trophies in a 2 team league and I mean them no disrespect but if that is the standard of their football then they wouldn't last 1 season in the EPL. 
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: lichfield lion on July 25, 2011, 12:22:42 PM
Feck me, applying that logic he'd choose Blues above Villa!!
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: lordmcgrath5 on July 25, 2011, 01:03:08 PM

Yes of course Celtic will win trophies in a 2 team league and I mean them no disrespect but if that is the standard of their football then they wouldn't last 1 season in the EPL. 

No, they probably wouldn't. But they'd immediately have an increase in revenues of 30 million plus per season given the differences in TV money north and south of the border. So, like Rangers, they would almost inevitably gradually narrow the gap after a few seasons. At the moment, the only way either of them can make any serious money is via a prolonged run in the Champions League.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: UsualSuspect on July 25, 2011, 01:59:13 PM
celtic and rangers would both struggle to stay in our league- bigger than villa yes but better no way.

Lets not forget how Celtic's crowds dropped by over 20K

Wankers
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: TaxDodger on July 25, 2011, 02:14:35 PM
I doubt Celtic are better than Pelsall Villa.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Salsa Party Animal on July 25, 2011, 02:18:23 PM
Look like he have not read Aston Villa history book.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: saunders_heroes on July 25, 2011, 02:25:00 PM
celtic and rangers would both struggle to stay in our league- bigger than villa yes but better no way.

Lets not forget how Celtic's crowds dropped by over 20K

Wankers

Once Celtic and Rangers started to receive Premier League cash they wouldn't struggle to stay in the PL at all.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: eastie on July 26, 2011, 07:53:34 AM
celtic and rangers would both struggle to stay in our league- bigger than villa yes but better no way.

Lets not forget how Celtic's crowds dropped by over 20K

Wankers

Once Celtic and Rangers started to receive Premier League cash they wouldn't struggle to stay in the PL at all.

im talking about here and now- the celtic and rangers teams would both be in the lower reaches of the premiership and struggle to avoid relegation.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: UsualSuspect on July 26, 2011, 09:31:36 AM
Case in point:

Chris Commons - mediocre fizzy pop player and now the Scottish equivalent of pele

kris Boyd - Broke all the SPL scoring records and shit in the fizzy pop
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: richard moore on July 26, 2011, 10:00:30 AM
Anyone see St Mirren vs Dunfermline last night?

It was like watching the Wimbledon of old versus Stoke

Well, maybe not quite that bad....
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: WarszaVillan on July 26, 2011, 10:09:30 AM
Scotland has a population of 5 million people. It manages to sustain 3 competitive leagues and has two internationally renowned clubs that attract huge gates. The problem for them is that the league will never be big enough to attract players of high quality and keep them there. Nevertheless in terms of the size of the population its pretty impressive
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: pmarachi on July 26, 2011, 11:22:51 AM
I have never heard of the guy, but what do you expect him to say? "I can't believe I am here with Celtic! This Sucks!! Who would want to play in the SPL?!?  Hopefully this is just a stepping stone!"

Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: DBTW on July 26, 2011, 12:15:12 PM
Anyone see St Mirren vs Dunfermline last night?

It was like watching the Wimbledon of old versus Stoke

Well, maybe not quite that bad....

I did, it was attrocious.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Dave on July 26, 2011, 09:44:02 PM
The problem for them is that the league will never be big enough to attract players of high quality and keep them there.
The likes of Gascoigne, both De Boers, Laudrup, Gattuso, Caniggia, Larsson and Van Bronkhorst have all played there so I don't think it's impossible for them to attract high-quality players.

Even lesser names like Petrov, Sutton, Arteta, Bellamy, Moravcik, Di Canio, Albertz and Lambert suggest that it's not impossible to attract good players there.

It's absolutely awful at the moment but there's nothing to say that the quality can't improve in the future if the money comes back.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Steve67 on July 26, 2011, 09:53:46 PM
I think Dave is right, it's all about money.  When Celtic and Rangers had it, it developed the rest of the division because the likes of the players now being signed by Rangers/Celtic, or chased, for example, Goodwillie, Stokes etc wouldn't have attracted their interest and stayed at the present clubs, improving the whole division. 

These days neither Celtic or Rangers would get into the Championship play off's. Therefore, they have no choice but to sweep up the only talent they have in the division because other clubs are desperate to sell to them in order to exist. As for being better than Villa, I think our reserves would give them a good game at the moment.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: dave.woodhall on July 26, 2011, 09:57:22 PM
I think Dave is right, it's all about money.  When Celtic and Rangers had it, it developed the rest of the division because the likes of the players now being signed by Rangers/Celtic, or chased, for example, Goodwillie, Stokes etc wouldn't have attracted their interest and stayed at the present clubs, improving the whole division. 

These days neither Celtic or Rangers would get into the Championship play off's. Therefore, they have no choice but to sweep up the only talent they have in the division because other clubs are desperate to sell to them in order to exist. As for being better than Villa, I think our reserves would give them a good game at the moment.

Unfortunately it also meant the other clubs spent money they couldn't afford and homegrown Scottish players didn't get a look in. Only Holland has produced more top quality players for the size of the country yet there hasn't been a great Scot for years. 
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: PeterWithesShin on July 26, 2011, 10:21:48 PM
I see Rangers lost 1-0 at home to Malmo in a CL game tonight. I'm guessing failure to qualify for the group stages would really fuck their finances.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: richard moore on July 27, 2011, 08:47:08 AM
I think Dave is right, it's all about money.  When Celtic and Rangers had it, it developed the rest of the division because the likes of the players now being signed by Rangers/Celtic, or chased, for example, Goodwillie, Stokes etc wouldn't have attracted their interest and stayed at the present clubs, improving the whole division. 

These days neither Celtic or Rangers would get into the Championship play off's. Therefore, they have no choice but to sweep up the only talent they have in the division because other clubs are desperate to sell to them in order to exist. As for being better than Villa, I think our reserves would give them a good game at the moment.

Unfortunately it also meant the other clubs spent money they couldn't afford and homegrown Scottish players didn't get a look in. Only Holland has produced more top quality players for the size of the country yet there hasn't been a great Scot for years. 

Amazing how it has all changed when you look back through one's memory - Wark, Hansen, Dalglish, Gemmell, Hartford, Archibold, Souness, Masson, Brazil...to name but a few!
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: WarszaVillan on July 27, 2011, 09:01:43 AM
I think Dave is right, it's all about money.  When Celtic and Rangers had it, it developed the rest of the division because the likes of the players now being signed by Rangers/Celtic, or chased, for example, Goodwillie, Stokes etc wouldn't have attracted their interest and stayed at the present clubs, improving the whole division. 

These days neither Celtic or Rangers would get into the Championship play off's. Therefore, they have no choice but to sweep up the only talent they have in the division because other clubs are desperate to sell to them in order to exist. As for being better than Villa, I think our reserves would give them a good game at the moment.

Unfortunately it also meant the other clubs spent money they couldn't afford and homegrown Scottish players didn't get a look in. Only Holland has produced more top quality players for the size of the country yet there hasn't been a great Scot for years. 

Amazing how it has all changed when you look back through one's memory - Wark, Hansen, Dalglish, Gemmell, Hartford, Archibold, Souness, Masson, Brazil...to name but a few!

Ask a Scot if he can name the three Scottish players in Villa's EC winning team. Even those who are old enough to remember it will not get it right. It's amazing that 3 Scots in a European cup winning team couldn't become regulars in the Scottish national team. And the reason they didn't was because there were better players ahead of them.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: pablopicasso_10 on July 30, 2011, 10:55:04 AM
No, they probably wouldn't. But they'd immediately have an increase in revenues of 30 million plus per season given the differences in TV money north and south of the border. So, like Rangers, they would almost inevitably gradually narrow the gap after a few seasons. At the moment, the only way either of them can make any serious money is via a prolonged run in the Champions League.
and when they struggled, and they would with their current team, they would get crowds like small heath...

personally, i believe that without winning every week like they do against teams that have the likes of david weir, shaun maloney, and a load of failed championship players being better than the rest, that the fans simply wouldnt turn up, and that negates the "they would make more money so would complete" side of the discussion... lots of english clubs have good fan numbers and premier league money, but they dont compete at the top (newcastle being one)...

its very easy to say that they would make more money in the premier league and close the gap, however, its just as easy to say what i have just said...

both points could be argued, however, its impossible to prove either way...

as it is, celtic and rangers have poor quality players, and would struggle in the championship...
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Gervilla81 on August 03, 2011, 10:16:44 AM
Welcome to our World guys

This is an unknown Kenyan who has just signed for the (Self proclaimed greatest club in the world)

you may or may not have noticed that each and everyone of their new additions is immediately labelled the new (insert name)
who has rejected a whole host of top level European clubs to sign for them

example
Efrain Juarez signed last season for £3.5m and immediately declared he rejected Barcelona to sign for the hoops
Emilio Izzaguirre has declared he wants to stay long term at them disappointing a host of Premiership clubs, Barcelona and Real
and now Victor Wanayma has signed and revealed he is steeped in Celtic tradition and grew up in KENYA an avid fan so much so he has chosen the number 67 in tribute to the Lisbon Lions....!!

As unbelievable as all that sounds that is what the Celtic PR machine fires out on a monthly basis and teh masses of fans believe it and lap it all up.



as for Scottish Trophies amounting to nothing you can only aim to win competitions you are in not our fault standard of opposition is so poor
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Brend'Watkins on August 03, 2011, 10:42:02 AM
It must be somewhat disheartening when your only hope of achievement is that the team you support is less shit than your main rival.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: Gervilla81 on August 04, 2011, 02:12:21 PM
It must be somewhat disheartening when your only hope of achievement is that the team you support is less shit than your main rival.

it is diheartening knowing that no matter what you do others will always rubbish it

for example A Poor Poor Rangers team as reported in media everywhere reached a Uefa cup final recently and where only team last season to keep a clean sheet at Old Trafford other than Man Utd

I agree SPL is p**s poor compared to EPL but at same time it is competition we are in and as all teams do you aim to win no matter what it is. we manage this more often than not.
In Glasgow first is everything second is failure

I'd be more worried about a team with so much potential constantly under achieveing and never really looking like challenging for any honours I love to see Villa do well and hope one day we will fullfil our potential but come off it mate running down others whilst under performing ourselves isn't smartest thing to do is it
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: saunders_heroes on August 04, 2011, 03:08:25 PM
No, they probably wouldn't. But they'd immediately have an increase in revenues of 30 million plus per season given the differences in TV money north and south of the border. So, like Rangers, they would almost inevitably gradually narrow the gap after a few seasons. At the moment, the only way either of them can make any serious money is via a prolonged run in the Champions League.
and when they struggled, and they would with their current team, they would get crowds like small heath...

personally, i believe that without winning every week like they do against teams that have the likes of david weir, shaun maloney, and a load of failed championship players being better than the rest, that the fans simply wouldnt turn up, and that negates the "they would make more money so would complete" side of the discussion... lots of english clubs have good fan numbers and premier league money, but they dont compete at the top (newcastle being one)...

its very easy to say that they would make more money in the premier league and close the gap, however, its just as easy to say what i have just said...

both points could be argued, however, its impossible to prove either way...

as it is, celtic and rangers have poor quality players, and would struggle in the championship...

Absolutely no chance. Rangers and Celtic have got support the likes of Villa, Everton, Spurs and co can only dream of.
Title: Re: Celtic are better than Villa...
Post by: dave.woodhall on August 04, 2011, 06:04:46 PM
No, they probably wouldn't. But they'd immediately have an increase in revenues of 30 million plus per season given the differences in TV money north and south of the border. So, like Rangers, they would almost inevitably gradually narrow the gap after a few seasons. At the moment, the only way either of them can make any serious money is via a prolonged run in the Champions League.
and when they struggled, and they would with their current team, they would get crowds like small heath...

personally, i believe that without winning every week like they do against teams that have the likes of david weir, shaun maloney, and a load of failed championship players being better than the rest, that the fans simply wouldnt turn up, and that negates the "they would make more money so would complete" side of the discussion... lots of english clubs have good fan numbers and premier league money, but they dont compete at the top (newcastle being one)...

its very easy to say that they would make more money in the premier league and close the gap, however, its just as easy to say what i have just said...

both points could be argued, however, its impossible to prove either way...

as it is, celtic and rangers have poor quality players, and would struggle in the championship...

Absolutely no chance. Rangers and Celtic have got support the likes of Villa, Everton, Spurs and co can only dream of.

Sad to say, I agree. Give them the TV money Premier League clubs get and they'd be right up there.
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal