Objectives and objectivity

[garyshawsknee]

The Spurs game was things coming to a head. The games against Wolves,Newcastle,Everton,West Brom,first half against QPR,we were completely out fought and passed,lacked any creativity apart from launching it up to Gabby.

And after reading his interview in the evening mail regarding Hutton and Cuellar leaves me with more dread as he said he'd do it again if he had to.

Most folk on here weren't happy with the appointment but would still back Mccleish,but as things seem to be getting worse,I think its completely understandable people questioning his future at the club.

[Hookeysmith]

I'd say that after 14 games into the season, the fact we've only won 4 and those were against Wigan (20th) Blackburn (19th) Norwich (2 years ago a Division 3 side) and Hereford (19th in Div 4) could be the reason a few people are getting a tad worried.

I personally would be just as worried regardless of who the manager is.

That is exactly it in a nutshell - the Blues thing is a smokescreen for the facts

He is turning us into the blues by sticking to the same gutless, lacklustre football he employed there - like most i thought it would be different when having better players to play with

He is actually making the better players worse and the shit players regulars

[Merv]

Can't speak for anyone else but I'm certainly drawing on what I've read, seen and learned over 12-odd games to form an opinion on the McLeish reign so far. Spurs was an interesting game to see what the manager would put in place tactically with practically the whole squad to utilise; it was a strange approach to take, didn't work (Bale involved in the both the goals) and since then McLeish has commented that he still believed it was the best thing to do.

I didn't protest about his appointment. I did think it was a poor choice and believed then that he was the wrong man for the job. I still consider myself open-minded on him, because I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong (I championed the signing of Stephen Ireland, and have held my hand up since to admit I was way off course then) but little has changed my opinion of McLeish as a manager to date.

I have been impressed with the way he generally conducts himself but doubt his credentials as a manager and as a coach; I believe he has a ceiling as a manager, which is probably a notch or two lower than where we perceive our potential to be.

[N'ZMAV]

Whenever there is a poor performance some people decide that it sums up everything about the manager. The games where we play well are ignored or dismissed as irrelevant, it's the game where he tried something different and it failed that are put forward as irrefutable proof of his utter shitness.

We're turning into Geordies, dancing around like fannies on SSN about the appointment and then calling for a change after 12 games.

That's modern football for you.

There was never going to be much singing and dancing after home wins against Wigan, Norwich and Blackburn though, was there?

[Concrete John]

Houllier got till this time last year so why anyone would think AM would get longer given the circumstances is beyond me.

Because Lerner has bet the house (in terms of his credibility) on this appointment.

You can forget any notion that AM is going to get sacked any time soon.

Exactly.

Aside from the fact that we would yet again have to pay compensation, Randy has taken an unpopular decision based on his belief in McLeish and the new club policy. The fact is that McLeish is capable more than many others of implementing a strategy of ‘steady as she goes’ with a possible cup flirtation and it is inconceivable that no matter what noise comes out of message boards or even from the Holte End that he’ll pull the trigger.

McLeish is here to stay, so like it or lump it.

Again i don't think thats true. while Lerner may ignore the fans opinion, the whole point of AM's appointment was to save money. If he's worried about the finances now he'll be on prozac if we go down. AM's minimum brief is to keep us up. If that looks like not happening then he'll be gone whether Lerner loses face or not.

I think the more likely scenario is he'll realise some funds to ensure safety, as he did Jan 2011.

[Risso]

I think the more likely scenario is he'll realise some funds to ensure safety, as he did Jan 2011.

If we are in that position then, it's hard to imagine a signing who'd have an immediate impact like Bent did.

That's partly what pisses me off about McLeish, despite everything, in Gabby and Bent we've a strike force that just about every team outside of the top 4 would kill for, and yet the way he set up the team for the Spurs game guaranteed that they'd struggle.

[PaulWinch again]

Houllier got till this time last year so why anyone would think AM would get longer given the circumstances is beyond me.

Because Lerner has bet the house (in terms of his credibility) on this appointment.

You can forget any notion that AM is going to get sacked any time soon.

Exactly.

Aside from the fact that we would yet again have to pay compensation, Randy has taken an unpopular decision based on his belief in McLeish and the new club policy. The fact is that McLeish is capable more than many others of implementing a strategy of ‘steady as she goes’ with a possible cup flirtation and it is inconceivable that no matter what noise comes out of message boards or even from the Holte End that he’ll pull the trigger.

McLeish is here to stay, so like it or lump it.

Again i don't think thats true. while Lerner may ignore the fans opinion, the whole point of AM's appointment was to save money. If he's worried about the finances now he'll be on prozac if we go down. AM's minimum brief is to keep us up. If that looks like not happening then he'll be gone whether Lerner loses face or not.

I think the more likely scenario is he'll realise some funds to ensure safety, as he did Jan 2011.

To be honest that's not the greatest way to do build a club, I'd rather we tried to be proactive than reactive.

[Iago]

I think the more likely scenario is he'll realise some funds to ensure safety, as he did Jan 2011.

If we are in that position then, it's hard to imagine a signing who'd have an immediate impact like Bent did.

That's partly what pisses me off about McLeish, despite everything, in Gabby and Bent we've a strike force that just about every team outside of the top 4 would kill for, and yet the way he set up the team for the Spurs game guaranteed that they'd struggle.

Exactly. I do not understand it, why do we play with shackles on? Not one sensible fan expects us to compete with the top teams.

[Zhong Yi]

Regarding some of the posts during this thread that state Learner may have lost interest...well IMO his recent statement was dignified and called for, however it is rightly questionable that Learner, an Aston Villa supporter who started following the club when he was a University student at Cambridge (and even has the club badge tattooed on his leg) would hire a manager that THE SUPPORTERS do not want and who would certainly compromise what many felt was going to be a make or break season. Granted, we are in the top half but personally, for the good of Aston Villa FC I'd sack McLeish now and go for a Villa man. There are not too many out there at the moment in club management but Dean Saunders would do for me.

[Concrete John]

To be honest that's not the greatest way to do build a club, I'd rather we tried to be proactive than reactive.

As would I, but should we be in that position I won't turn down another Darren Bent!

[Chris Smith]

Whenever there is a poor performance some people decide that it sums up everything about the manager. The games where we play well are ignored or dismissed as irrelevant, it's the game where he tried something different and it failed that are put forward as irrefutable proof of his utter shitness.

We're turning into Geordies, dancing around like fannies on SSN about the appointment and then calling for a change after 12 games.

That's modern football for you.

Commenting about games you haven't even seen.  There's modern football for you.

I wasn't commentating about the game though, was I. It's the reaction to it that I'm talking it. Trying to add more significance to this game than the previous two where we'd played pretty well.

[Chris Smith]

I think the more likely scenario is he'll realise some funds to ensure safety, as he did Jan 2011.

If we are in that position then, it's hard to imagine a signing who'd have an immediate impact like Bent did.

That's partly what pisses me off about McLeish, despite everything, in Gabby and Bent we've a strike force that just about every team outside of the top 4 would kill for, and yet the way he set up the team for the Spurs game guaranteed that they'd struggle.

Exactly. I do not understand it, why do we play with shackles on? Not one sensible fan expects us to compete with the top teams.

Really, I thought this thread was all about expecting us to compete with one of the top teams on Monday night. Or are you saying that none of the posters on here are sensible? ;-)

[Mazrim]

I thought we were lining Bent up in the summer before the January we bought him?
In which case how could it have been anything to do with relegation fears?

[pauliewalnuts]

I think the more likely scenario is he'll realise some funds to ensure safety, as he did Jan 2011.

If we are in that position then, it's hard to imagine a signing who'd have an immediate impact like Bent did.

That's partly what pisses me off about McLeish, despite everything, in Gabby and Bent we've a strike force that just about every team outside of the top 4 would kill for, and yet the way he set up the team for the Spurs game guaranteed that they'd struggle.

Exactly. I do not understand it, why do we play with shackles on? Not one sensible fan expects us to compete with the top teams.

Really, I thought this thread was all about expecting us to compete with one of the top teams on Monday night. Or are you saying that none of the posters on here are sensible? ;-)

No, it's not about that.

If we'd just lost to Spurs - even by a large margin - having had a go at least, there would be far less anger than there has been.

In that sense it is not at all about not competing with Spurs on Monday, it is about going out to play for a draw, then after conceding a goal, to keep the score down.

It was a shockingly unambitious display, and it is that which people are annoyed about, not the fact we got zero points.

[Risso]

I thought we were lining Bent up in the summer before the January we bought him?
In which case how could it have been anything to do with relegation fears?

Hard to imagine we were, given that O'Neill walked out after being told he wouldn't be given the Milner money to spend, and Houllier didn't actually start until the transfer window had shut.  Nope, it was a signing to stave off imminent and inevitable relegation.  it worked to be fair, but in the context of the last two years, it's impossible to believe that Bent was a long term plan, given the fact that we've sold so many other good players and not replaced them.