Marlon in the Champions League

[Concrete John]

He came to us after scoring 42 goals in the previous 3 seasons for West Ham. He was bought as a backup to Gabby and Carew and managed to score 5 goals in only approx 500 mins on the pitch during the season when he was used, which isn't bad at all.

That'll just change the argument from 'Why did he buy him' to 'He should have given him more of a chance'

I was hoping to confuse them.

In that case you should've gone with an argument about us playing it to feet more whenever Marlon was in the side!

[Dave Cooper please]

He was utterly average and the odd cameo apart, a total waste of wages. Just as some of us said he would be when he was signed.

Pisspoor and pointless.

[Andy_Lochhead_in_the_air]

Strange time Harewood had with us. As I recall his performance for us was something like this....Slow start grinding to a standstill, got another chance having a couple of stinkers and you thought he was finished,then he suddenly seemed to get a new lease of life and became mr popular, i was thinking he was going to become a cult hero, then it just seemed to fade away again.
As others have said, he never bad mouthed us and I say good luck to him.

[hilts_coolerking]

Poor judgment from Martin.

Most people knew Marlon was shite and so he proved to be.

[PaulWinch again]

Good luck to him, wasn't good enough for us but always tried and never complained.

[Risso]

He started one league game.  One of the worst signings ever.

[KevinGage]

You can make a case for not being able to sign better than the likes of Knight, Harewood et al back in 2007 after our previous campaign.

Personally I don't buy it, as we were able to attract far better players than that during far darker times for the club.

They were always a level or two below the standard of player a club this size could realistically attract, particularly with the money we had available. As indeed indicated by the competition we fought off to sign them, B-lose/ Wigan et.c.

A far more likely reason for their signing would be the idea that such journeymen would be grateful to play for a club like Aston Villa (and perhaps more importantly MON) . There is a pretty consistent theme to most of MON's purchases, either promising young players or old, low maintenance pros who hopefully won't rock the boat. It's probably why we won't see any genuinely top drawer players pitch up at VP. One ego at the club is enough.

 Those players who did the unexpected, perhaps knew their worth and voiced their opinions were given short shrift and effectively ostracised.

[Chris Smith]

You can make a case for not being able to sign better than the likes of Knight, Harewood et al back in 2007 after our previous campaign.

Personally I don't buy it, as we were able to attract far better players than that during far darker times for the club.

They were always a level or two below the standard of player a club this size could realistically attract, particularly with the money we had available. As indeed indicated by the competition we fought off to sign them, B-lose/ Wigan et.c.

A far more likely reason for their signing would be the idea that such journeymen would be grateful to play for a club like Aston Villa (and perhaps more importantly MON) . There is a pretty consistent theme to most of MON's purchases, either promising young players or old, low maintenance pros who hopefully won't rock the boat. It's probably why we won't see any genuinely top drawer players pitch up at VP. One ego at the club is enough.

 Those players who did the unexpected, perhaps knew their worth and voiced their opinions were given short shrift and effectively ostracised.

You're over thinking it again, he was bought as a backup striker, another big man to cover Carew. He accepted his role without complaint.

[eamonn]

Spot on Gagey. We signed Carew and Young in Jan 07. To regress to signing the likes of Harewood and Knight the following summer was very disappointing.
If they were never intended to be first team regulars (though ultimately Knight got a fair old whack in the first team) I'd have rathered we blooded our own young players instead.

[Chris Smith]

Spot on Gagey. We signed Carew and Young in Jan 07. To regress to signing the likes of Harewood and Knight the following summer was very disappointing.
If they were never intended to be first team regulars (though ultimately Knight got a fair old whack in the first team) I'd have rathered we blooded our own young players instead.

Which young striker did you want us to blood in 2007?

[eamonn]

But surely when building a squad you buy players as much for competition as for cover, Chris?
 Harewood should have been told that he'd be given a chance and if he took it he'd stay in the team. Maybe MON did tell him this.
Sub appearances but no starts would suggest that O'Neill realised pretty quickly he'd made a mistake.

[Chris Smith]

But surely when building a squad you buy players as much for competition as for cover, Chris?
 Harewood should have been told that he'd be given a chance and if he took it he'd stay in the team. Maybe MON did tell him this.
Sub appearances but no starts would suggest that O'Neill realised pretty quickly he'd made a mistake.

I always thought he was signed to be backup or a player to bring on to make a late impact and it worked to a certain extent for a while. He just wasn't able to progress beyond that and we outgrew him. Not the greatest signing ever but as I said earlier all clubs have them from time to time and I'm not sure why we're making such a big deal. It's not like he was a Francis Jeffers scale of waste.

[eamonn]

Spot on Gagey. We signed Carew and Young in Jan 07. To regress to signing the likes of Harewood and Knight the following summer was very disappointing.
If they were never intended to be first team regulars (though ultimately Knight got a fair old whack in the first team) I'd have rathered we blooded our own young players instead.

Which young striker did you want us to blood in 2007?

I wanted Luke Moore to get more games. Fair enough he's not exactly proved me wrong since we let him go but the kid had talent as he had shown the previous season. Harewood's impact amounted to a fantastic equaliser at Anfield and a goal at Reading which you could argue proved to be the winner (it put us 2-0 up before Nicky feckin' Shorey scored a free-kick right at the death for them which Scott handsfree Carson should have saved). On the debit side, he gave away a penalty at Spurs in the infamous 4-4 game. I think there was no way back for him after that. His other goals were ones that didn't matter as we were already hamering the opposition (Blackbun, Bolton, Derby).
As contributions go, he barely broke even.
Do you think he was a good signing?

[eamonn]

Just seen your last post. Fair enough.

[john e]

he wasnt a good signing,

and for all the talk of him being signed as a back up striker, he was very rarely used there,
MON was very loathe to use him even when the game was crying out for a 'back up striker' because he knew he wasnt good enough.
he made a mistake, and was vertualy admitting it by not playing him

i remember when we signed him i was gobsmacked, just couldnt beleive it,
and for the first time started to lose a bit of confidence in the manager