Houllier confirms Ireland wants to leave!

[taylorsworkrate]

I think that Houlllier would have been better served when he took the job by saying how important Ireland is to us.

I think Ireland is the sort of guy that constantly needs to be told how great a player he is.  He is certainly not the type to respond well to negative criticism, especially in public.

If as now looks likely he leaves, I have a nasty feeling he will go on to be an excellent player for another team.

Well, there are some excellent armchair psychologists on this board who no doubt would have had Ireland playing like Messi were they managers. However, imagine that GH joined Villa and immediately said what an important player Ireland is to us, and Ireland still did not play well. Should he keep an underperfoming player in the team? Should he play a youngster like Hogg instead of him but still go on about what a great player Ireland is? Wouldn't that look somewhat strange?

GH is not brutal with Ireland. He is actually saying that he likes him as a person and player but that there is a reason why he isn't playing that much at the moment.

This is a forum, it's all about opinions. 

I'm not saying that my point of view is definitely correct, its just what I think.

I'm also not saying that it would automatically transform Ireland's form around.  I also don't think that he should be in the team at present as his form has been poor.

I am definitely not an "excellent armchair psychologist".  Again it's my opinion based on thinking that Ireland comes across to me as quite a fragile being.  Again I could be wrong.

What I am sure of though, is that your post was needlessly condescending.

[Legion]

I think that Houlllier would have been better served when he took the job by saying how important Ireland is to us.

I think Ireland is the sort of guy that constantly needs to be told how great a player he is.  He is certainly not the type to respond well to negative criticism, especially in public.

If as now looks likely he leaves, I have a nasty feeling he will go on to be an excellent player for another team.

Well, there are some excellent armchair psychologists on this board who no doubt would have had Ireland playing like Messi were they managers. However, imagine that GH joined Villa and immediately said what an important player Ireland is to us, and Ireland still did not play well. Should he keep an underperfoming player in the team? Should he play a youngster like Hogg instead of him but still go on about what a great player Ireland is? Wouldn't that look somewhat strange?

GH is not brutal with Ireland. He is actually saying that he likes him as a person and player but that there is a reason why he isn't playing that much at the moment.

This is a forum, it's all about opinions. 

I'm not saying that my point of view is definitely correct, its just what I think.

I'm also not saying that it would automatically transform Ireland's form around.  I also don't think that he should be in the team at present as his form has been poor.

I am definitely not an "excellent armchair psychologist".  Again it's my opinion based on thinking that Ireland comes across to me as quite a fragile being.  Again I could be wrong.

What I am sure of though, is that your post was needlessly condescending.

Correct.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

From what I gather, the deal was done between AVFC and MCFC *before* MON left - signed and sealed. The delay was caused by issues between City and Ireland... Papers were signed and Aston Villa could not have backed out of the deal had they wanted to do so no matter the circumstances.

If this is the case, the board is blameless. There was a manager to make the footballing decision (signing Ireland for £8m) and a board to make the business decision (selling Ireland). It's just a shame that the manager made such a decision just days or weeks before he resigned.

From what I gather, MON resigned because AVFC and  MCFC had signed  a binding agreement to sell Milner on terms he didn't agree with and that they had made his position untenable by overruling him.

See what I've done there?

Spoken out your arse? Either that or you know more than the rest of us as to why MON left.

[Eigentor]

What I am sure of though, is that your post was needlessly condescending.

I apologize. The comment about "excellent armchair psychologist" was a throw-away remark. Don't take it personal. I actually agree that Ireland seems to be fragile and is probably overtly sensitive to criticism, and probably reacts better to praise.

However, the point I was trying to make is that there, at the same time, must be come consistency between what the manager is saying and what he is doing. If not, he will look ridiculous. He cannot go on and on about what a fantastic player Ireland is and at the same time always leave him out of the matchday squad. Thus. I think it is harsh to criticise him when he is saying that he likes Ireland but at the same time admits that there are reasons why he aren't playing him.

[taylorsworkrate]

What I am sure of though, is that your post was needlessly condescending.

I apologize. The comment about "excellent armchair psychologist" was a throw-away remark. Don't take it personal. I actually agree that Ireland seems to be fragile and is probably overtly sensitive to criticism, and probably reacts better to praise.

However, the point I was trying to make is that there, at the same time, must be come consistency between what the manager is saying and what he is doing. If not, he will look ridiculous. He cannot go on and on about what a fantastic player Ireland is and at the same time always leave him out of the matchday squad. Thus. I think it is harsh to criticise him when he is saying that he likes Ireland but at the same time admits that there are reasons why he aren't playing him.

No worries, my reaction was probably a bit over the top which I apologise for

The problem I have, is that Houllier could have told Ireland in private that he needed to work harder.

I agree with your point that he can't continously praise Ireland in public.  I think he could have done that when he initially took the job, then pulled Ireland aside afterwards and let him know what improvements he has to make.

It might not have made much difference in the grand scheme of things, but I think it would have been a better way to go about it.

[JJ-AV]

Steve Sidwell is shite. But when he's in the team he works his bollocks off. You can't fault him for a lack of effort, just a lack of ability.

Ireland came here thinking he was better than this, he didn't want to leave Citeh. He's absolutely brilliant but obviously thinks we're beneath him.

Ashley had the shirt, Ireland was used sparingly or out of position and obviously wasn't willing to do a job for the team in order to help us out in times of trouble.

We took him on when few others wanted him. It's a shame because we'll struggle to get someone equally as talented - but we'll have to send him on his way should we get a decent offer.

[Legion]

Steve Sidwell is shite. But when he's in the team he works his bollocks off.

No he doesn't. He hides.

[Ross]

You'd have thought the penny may have dropped with Ireland that he won't get a move to a bigger club than Villa at the moment, or at least certainly not as anything other than a squad player.  It's downhill from here....

[Greg N'Ash]

depends. if he's had a whispa in his ear that could explain it. wouldn't put it past redknapp offering us a swap deal for Keane

[curiousorange]

Steve Sidwell is shite. But when he's in the team he works his bollocks off.

No he doesn't. He hides.

The man has ankles made from custard. I'd rather play with ten men than have Sidwell on the pitch.

[KevinGage]

From what I gather, the deal was done between AVFC and MCFC *before* MON left - signed and sealed. The delay was caused by issues between City and Ireland... Papers were signed and Aston Villa could not have backed out of the deal had they wanted to do so no matter the circumstances.

If this is the case, the board is blameless. There was a manager to make the footballing decision (signing Ireland for £8m) and a board to make the business decision (selling Ireland). It's just a shame that the manager made such a decision just days or weeks before he resigned.

From what I gather, MON resigned because AVFC and  MCFC had signed  a binding agreement to sell Milner on terms he didn't agree with and that they had made his position untenable by overruling him.

See what I've done there?

Spoken out your arse? Either that or you know more than the rest of us as to why MON left.

I think VD would very much like that to be true.

Every post since the departure of the love of his life would indicate that's how he see's it, and it would exonerate MON.

But wanting it to be true and it actually being true are two different things.

[KevinGage]

Steve Sidwell is shite. But when he's in the team he works his bollocks off. You can't fault him for a lack of effort, just a lack of ability.

Does he balls.

I've never seen a player duck out of so many return passes as Sidwell seems to manage. For the few games he has started in recent years you'd barely notice he was even on the pitch.

A rare achievement for a ginner.

[WarszaVillan]

From what I gather, the deal was done between AVFC and MCFC *before* MON left - signed and sealed. The delay was caused by issues between City and Ireland... Papers were signed and Aston Villa could not have backed out of the deal had they wanted to do so no matter the circumstances.

If this is the case, the board is blameless. There was a manager to make the footballing decision (signing Ireland for £8m) and a board to make the business decision (selling Ireland). It's just a shame that the manager made such a decision just days or weeks before he resigned.

From what I gather, MON resigned because AVFC and  MCFC had signed  a binding agreement to sell Milner on terms he didn't agree with and that they had made his position untenable by overruling him.

See what I've done there?

Spoken out your arse? Either that or you know more than the rest of us as to why MON left.

I think VD would very much like that to be true.

Every post since the departure of the love of his life would indicate that's how he see's it, and it would exonerate MON.

But wanting it to be true and it actually being true are two different things.

Who knows what is true, its as good as theory as any other but stating it as fact is pretending that you know something that others don't. However, its no more far-fetched than Pelty 's laughable theory that we could not get out of the deal as everything had been signed.

[Greg N'Ash]

erm..pelty is slightly well placed with people who would know

[Nigel Macdougall]

erm..pelty is slightly well placed with people who would know

And they would never mislead anyone would they?