Marlon in the Champions League

[villa for life]

but Marlon did better than Bosko, didn't he?

[pauliewalnuts]

I'm not interested in your semantic, nitpicking bullshit.

You do your Tonto act to Risso's Lone Ranger on thread after thread, with the same tired old O'Neill bashing.

And no, I don't think I will take you at your word just because you've decided to have a hissy fit.

Sorry, I must have missed the part where I insulted you.

Sorry Villadawg, you're getting a ted sensitive.
Check the facts, only 1.3599228% of Risso's posts have involved any agression towards you.
Paulie's is even lower at 1.0000373%

Yeah, you’re right. I have had time to reflect on the facts that my original accusation of O’Neill bashing was without foundation and fully warranted the entirely reasonable “pathetic post…bullshit…acting so pompously” response from Paulie.

I can now see that my over the top response of “semantic nitpicking bullshit….hissy fit” and reference to Risso and Paulie as an O’Neill bashing double act was entirely without foundation or justification.

What I don't get is why you refuse to accept that I'm judging the Harewood signing the way I see it? I'm not demanding you agree with me, I'm suggesting (seemingly pointlessly) that you at least give me the respect to accept I actually believe what I'm saying.

I can point out loads of instances where he's handled situations very well - Barry, for example, and situations - such as Downing - where I think people are quick to judge. If I had some kind of agenda, I wouldn't even give him that praise.

Also, it's not "semantics". It is me disagreeing with you and pointing out where I think you're being unfair.

[ozzjim]

I am amazed that the signing of Harewood is being likened to Hargreaves - who has only failed only due to injury and Aquilani who was injured for a long time and then hardly played. When the latter is given a solid run in their side he can be judged, as for the former, I wish he was fit enough to be at the World Cup, as he is the best holding mid in England. Comparison to Marlon.... get out.


O'Neill has spent a lot of money and wages on dross, and then not played them, while moaning about a small squad. Doesn't wash, and defending it is futile as it is backed up with facts!

[Concrete John]

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.

Go on then - name them!

EDIT:  only one I can think of is Savo, signed the summer after we nearly went down in 1995.  I'll give you him.

OK John! No Problem!!!

Rambo, Keown and Elliott signed at a time when we looked well and truly on a downward spiral. Platt and Chris Price soon after relegation in '87.

McGrath Adrian Heath (even though he was pants for us)  and Nielsen soon after avoiding the drop on our return to the top flight in 89.

Staunton, Richardson, Atkinson signed soon after relegation in 1991.

Draper, Southgate and Savo soon after beating the drop in 1995.

Sorenson after GT's nightmare return in 2003.

And Petrov in 2006, on the back of a particularly grim season under DOL.


Odd that you think only Savo would qualify. Not a dig John, but when did you start following the club? If it was mid 90's or soon after then fair enough.

Point remains, after finishing a respectable 11th in 2007 with money in the bank and at a time just before wealthy owners became de rigueur, a club the size of Aston Villa could have done far better than signing the likes of Knight and Harewood.

1992, so you're not far wrong!

You bring up some good players, but I do think it's difficult to meaningfully compare present PL conditions with players signed in the 80s.  For instance, McGrath had 'certain issues' that were why Fergie was getting shot and Platt was a then unknown from Crewe.  Southgate came from as an average looking midfielder from a relegated Palace side.

Better than the Hare?  Well yes, of course they are.  Proof that we could have got better to be a reserve striker for the 11th placed PL side?  Not for me!

[hilts_coolerking]

Better than the Hare?  Well yes, of course they are.  Proof that we could have got better to be a reserve striker for the 11th placed PL side?  Not for me!

Are you saying John that you believe there is no-one we could have signed instead of Harewood who would have returned better figures than those paulie quoted earlier, i.e. 3 years, started 1 league game, 5 league goals.  Not to mention the costs involved.

I know you like to stick up for Martin but it's stretching  credulity to breaking point to suggest we couldn't possibly have done better than that.

[Concrete John]

Better than the Hare?  Well yes, of course they are.  Proof that we could have got better to be a reserve striker for the 11th placed PL side?  Not for me!

Are you saying John that you believe there is no-one we could have signed instead of Harewood who would have returned better figures than those paulie quoted earlier, i.e. 3 years, started 1 league game, 5 league goals.  Not to mention the costs involved.

I know you like to stick up for Martin but it's stretching  credulity to breaking point to suggest we couldn't possibly have done better than that.

I'm saying that of those strikers available at the time I don't think anyone better would have come to sit on our bench.

The three years is the thing that was the issue - we should have moved him on sooner!

[hilts_coolerking]

I'm saying that of those strikers available at the time I don't think anyone better would have come to sit on our bench.

The three years is the thing that was the issue - we should have moved him on sooner!

Of all the available strikers in world football, the best we could possibly have signed for that money was Marlon Harewood?  I'm sorry but I just don't buy that.

Quite obviously we should never have signed him the first place.  He had a reputation as a donkey long before we signed him.  But given that the error was made, I agree we should have moved him on as soon as it became apparent to Martin (as opposed to pretty much everyone else) how poor he was.

[Concrete John]

I'm saying that of those strikers available at the time I don't think anyone better would have come to sit on our bench.

The three years is the thing that was the issue - we should have moved him on sooner!

Of all the available strikers in world football, the best we could possibly have signed for that money was Marlon Harewood?  I'm sorry but I just don't buy that.

Quite obviously we should never have signed him the first place.  He had a reputation as a donkey long before we signed him.  But given that the error was made, I agree we should have moved him on as soon as it became apparent to Martin (as opposed to pretty much everyone else) how poor he was.

He had scored 16 PL goals not long before we signed him and that was what Martin was after.  I didn't want him either and never rated him, but that doesn't mean I can't step back and understand the reasoning and I don't let what happened since change my view of the decision he made at the time.

[Whiney MacWhineface]

I know a few West Ham fans. All of them quite independently at the time said that Marlon had done well for them but that he was a confidence player - one who needed to keep his spirits up or he'd be rubbish.

Given that he was brought here as a squad player it seemed an unlikely ploy by Martin. However, as none of the West Ham fans I spoke to were qualified Premiership Managers, their opinions must have been wrong. Or just lucky.

[Dave]

Better than the Hare?  Well yes, of course they are.  Proof that we could have got better to be a reserve striker for the 11th placed PL side?  Not for me!

Are you saying John that you believe there is no-one we could have signed instead of Harewood who would have returned better figures than those paulie quoted earlier, i.e. 3 years, started 1 league game, 5 league goals.  Not to mention the costs involved.

I know you like to stick up for Martin but it's stretching  credulity to breaking point to suggest we couldn't possibly have done better than that.

I'm saying that of those strikers available at the time I don't think anyone better would have come to sit on our bench

Why did we have to sign someone to sit on our bench?

Why not sign someone who would be able to push Carew to the bench?

[Concrete John]

Why did we have to sign someone to sit on our bench?

Why not sign someone who would be able to push Carew to the bench?

If you think that Gabby and Carew are a starting partnership for a top 6 club now, who could we have got?

I think we were lucky to get Carew in when we did and have Gabby emerging.  The strikeforce was the first part of his top 6 side Martin put together and now the first part he needs to rebuild to get u to be a top 4 side!

[Villa'Zawg]

I'm not interested in your semantic, nitpicking bullshit.

You do your Tonto act to Risso's Lone Ranger on thread after thread, with the same tired old O'Neill bashing.

And no, I don't think I will take you at your word just because you've decided to have a hissy fit.

Sorry, I must have missed the part where I insulted you.

Sorry Villadawg, you're getting a ted sensitive.
Check the facts, only 1.3599228% of Risso's posts have involved any agression towards you.
Paulie's is even lower at 1.0000373%

Yeah, you’re right. I have had time to reflect on the facts that my original accusation of O’Neill bashing was without foundation and fully warranted the entirely reasonable “pathetic post…bullshit…acting so pompously” response from Paulie.

I can now see that my over the top response of “semantic nitpicking bullshit….hissy fit” and reference to Risso and Paulie as an O’Neill bashing double act was entirely without foundation or justification.

What I don't get is why you refuse to accept that I'm judging the Harewood signing the way I see it? I'm not demanding you agree with me, I'm suggesting (seemingly pointlessly) that you at least give me the respect to accept I actually believe what I'm saying.

I can point out loads of instances where he's handled situations very well - Barry, for example, and situations - such as Downing - where I think people are quick to judge. If I had some kind of agenda, I wouldn't even give him that praise.

Also, it's not "semantics". It is me disagreeing with you and pointing out where I think you're being unfair.

My post does seem rather rude and abrupt now that I read it back, I had thought at the time it was in keeping with the tone of your previous 3:17 pm post, which wasn't the most respectful response ever was it? I didn't expect to upset/annoy you as much as I did. Sorry for that.

I think I was just a bit peeved that my killer Heskey statistic was lost in all the blather ;-)

[Dave]

Why did we have to sign someone to sit on our bench?

Why not sign someone who would be able to push Carew to the bench?

If you think that Gabby and Carew are a starting partnership for a top 6 club now, who could we have got?

I think we were lucky to get Carew in when we did and have Gabby emerging.  The strikeforce was the first part of his top 6 side Martin put together and now the first part he needs to rebuild to get u to be a top 4 side!

Blackburn (who finished two points ahead of us) signed Santa Cruz eleven days after we signed Harewood for £500,00 less. A cheap, obtainable striker who would have offered genuine competition.

Middesbrough who finished four points behind signed Tuncay on a free transfer.

Kenwyne Jones went to newly promoted Sunderland for a couple of million more than Harewood cost.

I'd say that any of those would have happily joined us and would have provided more.

[cheltenhamlion]

I really can't understand why there is any kind of argument that Harewood was anything other than poor business for the reasons noted by Paulie and Dave.

Let's hope this summer we can find a more inspiring striker to sign.

[ktvillan]

I remember the close season we signed Marlon (and then Knight) as the time I started to realise MON was not the dream ticket we'd all hoped he'd be.  I tried to be fair and said let's give him a chance, but deep down I was bitterly disappointed as everyone knew Harewood was shite.  And so it proved.

There's no way to justify it, it was a monumental cock-up in  both a football and financial sense, and most people knew it would be.  Yes all managers make mistakes, but this thread is specifically about Harewood, who happens to have been signed by our manager.  

I don't see why stating these bald facts should be interpreted as a witch hunt against MON, but some people seem to suffer paranoia by proxy and feel the need to justify even the most blatant of bad decisions, when it comes to anything that doesn't show O'Neill in the very best of lights.  

Just admit it guys, O'Neill screwed up big time on this one - that's it, purge yourselves, unclench those buttocks and feel the catharsis....

And good luck to Marlon wherever he ends up.