Gerard Houllier

[Chris Smith]

Chelsea were only in front because "super Marc" fucked up, we played well and a lot of that was to do with the side he picked and the tactics employed. One game doesn't prove or disprove anything but it is a bit petty to not acknowledge when he gets thing right.

[Olneythelonely]

The good new is that yesterday GH palyed Albrighton and Bannan from the start (unlike  he did against Chelsea and Sunderland).
Ok, maybe at Barça Super Mark would start from the bench, but at Villa?

To be honest, unlike many users here,  I wasn't remained  impressed with the team even after the 3-3 at the Bridge. I have been watching football since 30 years, and one thing  that I have learnt is to judge a game without being conditioned by the final result. So, the last lucky Clarke's equalizer  (lucky because it's not too often that the team that won the League leaves one of your players unmarked in the box, at their home, after completing a dramatic comeback) didn't change my mind. I thought  that we had lost the occasion to win against a team in deep crisis and the following games, their with Wolves and ours with Sunderland, confirmed that I was right.

Unfortunately I'm convinced that, if things don't change,  with his absurd tactics and choices this manager will bring us deep in championship as he doesn't have a clue of what he's doing, but I'll support him until he's in charge. 

Chelsea were lucky to be beating us 3-2.

[Eigentor]

I think we would have won quite comfortably at Stamford Bridge if Petrov and NRC had been 100% match fit. Chelsea were only pushing when our midfielders lost their legs and fell too deep.

[olaftab]

I have been watching football since 30 years, and one thing  that I have learnt is to judge a game without being conditioned by the final result. So, the last lucky Clarke's equalizer

Clearly than your jugement would have been  that at half time against Chelses we should have been 2 up rather than 1-1?
and you are not giving Clark any credit for sneaking in like he did.

[Archie]

Chelsea were only pushing when our midfielders lost their legs and fell too deep.

Spot on, and imo even because the defence always hits the ball clear and never tries to to build the play from the back, so we can't hold the ball and we are  always under pressure.

And this is for this that I am disappointed and worried, because the same had happened at Fulham and with Man. Utd, two games that we had dominated.
When shall we learn?

[ozzjim]

That is not new though Archie. We were the same last season to the point where Terry even said Chelsea knew we tired on 60 minutes. The issue is we can't bring on 2 other centre mids at the moment of the erm.. quality of Reo Coker and Petrov. When Delph is fully fit and we maybe get Makoun, there are 4 of good quality that can rotate about even during games to keep us fresh.

Yesterday we did this, and Petrov got the goal in injury time, and Super Mark looked as sharp as he has in a while following a rest for 2 games.

[SteveD]

I'm glad we had a winnable if potentially tricky FA Cup tie for Houllier to try to get the winning mentality back and change a few things. A point at Chelsea was a bonus (ultimately a disappointment in the sense we were deservedly ahead for most of the 2nd half) but the real test was always going to be our matches with Sunderland and next Sunday. If it is more of the same next weekend (performance, attitude, result as in midweek), then his position will once again questioned. Motivation for a local derby shouldn't normally be an issue but it's the very least we should expect.

[ozzjim]

Might be mad, but I reckon we are going to win it 2-1 at their place. Just a feeling.

[Archie]

Yes, nice touch, Ozzjim.
Obviously I hope with all the heart to be wrong and that you're right, mates!

[Shrek]

I think we would have won quite comfortably at Stamford Bridge if Petrov and NRC had been 100% match fit. Chelsea were only pushing when our midfielders lost their legs and fell too deep.

More like we would have won if half our team weren't on yellow cards, preventing them challenging in the second half!

[Matt C]

David James' column in The Observer today about managers (and Houllier & Grant specifically) worth a read:

http://bit.ly/h9EYxy

[hawkeye]

David James' column in The Observer today about managers (and Houllier & Grant specifically) worth a read:

http://bit.ly/h9EYxy

A good insight.

[KevinGage]

"Losing the confidence of the dressing room is not as rare as it seems. We only tend to hear about it when there are heavy defeats, but I've played for managers whom the team has disliked and we've been floating along mid-table. Mediocrity is itself a reason to dislike a manager. Players are ambitious and want to win, not settle for safety."

Gregory

"As the pressure builds, the unrest gains momentum and is difficult for a manager to contain. It is at this point that they often start to make crazy decisions. One manager I had brought in a rule that English was the only language allowed in the dressing room. That alienated the foreign players who then refused to speak English and suddenly there was a rift."

Keegan

[Shrek]

David James' column in The Observer today about managers (and Houllier & Grant specifically) worth a read:

http://bit.ly/h9EYxy

Really good read there.

Abit worrying though, he seems to indicate that Houllier has always had a problem with player disliking him.

He also has the opinion that success early in the managers tenure usually means you have time when things get abit rough. Houllier is on thin ice then Jamo!

[hawkeye]

Players not liking him is not news, there were a few ex pool players who made the point when he joined us.