collapse collapse

Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.

Recent Topics

Snooker by dcdavecollett
[Today at 12:41:07 AM]


Kits 23/24 by edgysatsuma89
[Today at 12:39:26 AM]


Calum Chambers -signed by edgysatsuma89
[Today at 12:37:42 AM]


Champions League Contention by Percy McCarthy
[Today at 12:25:38 AM]


Summer 2024 Transfer Window - hopes, speculation, rumours etc. by Percy McCarthy
[Today at 12:10:47 AM]


Aston Villa 2 Chelsea 2 Post Match Heart Massage. by Percy McCarthy
[Today at 12:05:56 AM]


FFP by Percy McCarthy
[April 29, 2024, 11:45:39 PM]


Aston Villa v Olympiacos - UECL Semi Final First Leg Pre Match by DrGonzo
[April 29, 2024, 10:59:54 PM]

Recent Posts

Re: Snooker by dcdavecollett
[Today at 12:41:07 AM]


Re: Kits 23/24 by edgysatsuma89
[Today at 12:39:26 AM]


Re: Calum Chambers -signed by edgysatsuma89
[Today at 12:37:42 AM]


Re: Kits 23/24 by villadelph
[Today at 12:33:50 AM]


Re: Champions League Contention by Percy McCarthy
[Today at 12:25:38 AM]


Re: Kits 23/24 by edgysatsuma89
[Today at 12:24:53 AM]


Re: Champions League Contention by Percy McCarthy
[Today at 12:14:40 AM]


Re: Summer 2024 Transfer Window - hopes, speculation, rumours etc. by Percy McCarthy
[Today at 12:10:47 AM]

Follow us on...

Author Topic: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city  (Read 7354 times)

Offline richardhubbard

  • Member
  • Posts: 8145
  • Location: manchester
90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« on: March 26, 2012, 12:44:13 PM »
Have you noticed the theme of who helping city lose the title

Luke Moore, Gary Cahill, Peter Crouch the last 3 players to score against city. Next Manchester City v Sunderland,

Step up one Craig Gardner?

May be if we kept team of 2002 -05, we now be in top 3??

Offline Rip Van We Go Again

  • Member
  • Posts: 26039
  • Location: Up and down, i'm up the wall, i'm up the bloody tree
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2012, 12:48:24 PM »
O'Neill make um heap big mistake getting rid of Cahill.

Offline not3bad

  • Member
  • Posts: 12123
  • Location: Back in Brum
  • GM : 15.06.2022
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2012, 01:04:21 PM »
Luke Moore was set up for his goal by another ex-Villa player.

Offline nigel

  • Member
  • Posts: 5389
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2012, 01:22:46 PM »
O'Neill make um heap big mistake getting rid of Cahill.
I said at the time MO'N f**ked up with that move.
I know many might disagree but he also f**ked up selling Ridgewell too.
I admit Ridgewell wasn't as accomplished as some, but, he and Cahill formed a great partnership, they understood each other brilliantly as they came though the ranks together.
They were a unit and should have been given the chance together at 1st team.

Offline N'ZMAV

  • Member
  • Posts: 9666
  • Location: Peckham
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2012, 01:24:12 PM »
Everyone in the world (apart from MON) knew he dropped a bollock with Cahill. Still, he'll always be remembered for it, oh, and replacing him with Knight.

Offline N'ZMAV

  • Member
  • Posts: 9666
  • Location: Peckham
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2012, 01:24:23 PM »
Not to mention Curtis Davies.

Offline darren woolley

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 34244
  • Location: London
  • GM : 12.12.2024
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #6 on: March 26, 2012, 02:44:52 PM »
Everyone in the world (apart from MON) knew he dropped a bollock with Cahill. Still, he'll always be remembered for it, oh, and replacing him with Knight.


I agree.

Offline Duncan Shaw

  • Member
  • Posts: 3283
  • Location: Epsom, Surrey
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2012, 03:35:25 PM »
Everyone in the world (apart from MON) knew he dropped a bollock with Cahill. Still, he'll always be remembered for it, oh, and replacing him with Knight.
Only by us though, I don't see many of his mates in the press saying it!

I agree.

Offline DB

  • Member
  • Posts: 4966
  • Location: Absolute zero
  • GM : 11.01.2021
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #8 on: March 26, 2012, 03:39:15 PM »
O'Neill make um heap big mistake getting rid of Cahill.

He did get on Curtis Davies though.....ahem.

Online dcdavecollett

  • Member
  • Posts: 2948
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #9 on: March 26, 2012, 11:11:30 PM »
The alternative to letting Cahill go was to allow him to pick himself for the first-team. Not a position that many managers would accept.

Offline Bottom Right 89

  • Member
  • Posts: 857
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #10 on: March 27, 2012, 12:17:35 AM »
Have you noticed the theme of who helping city lose the title

Luke Moore, Gary Cahill, Peter Crouch the last 3 players to score against city. Next Manchester City v Sunderland,

Step up one Craig Gardner?

May be if we kept team of 2002 -05, we now be in top 3??
And to think when we were going for the premier league title, Keith Curle caught the ball to gift us a penalty when we were stuttering and they had good luck Villa banners in the away end. 

Offline PeterWithesShin

  • Member
  • Posts: 68537
  • GM : 17.03.2015
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #11 on: March 27, 2012, 12:53:59 AM »
Have you noticed the theme of who helping city lose the title

Luke Moore, Gary Cahill, Peter Crouch the last 3 players to score against city. Next Manchester City v Sunderland,

Step up one Craig Gardner?

May be if we kept team of 2002 -05, we now be in top 3??
And to think when we were going for the premier league title, Keith Curle caught the ball to gift us a penalty when we were stuttering and they had good luck Villa banners in the away end. 

That game was one of the few times I was a right sider. Didn't the banner say something like "Good luck Villa from the city of Manchester"?

Offline Matt C

  • Member
  • Posts: 5754
  • Location: Southern California
  • GM : 18.06.2020
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #12 on: March 27, 2012, 03:16:39 AM »
It did. They were winning 1-0 and we came back to win 3-1.

Offline Steve R

  • Member
  • Posts: 3347
  • Age: 72
  • GM : Aug, 2013
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #13 on: March 27, 2012, 07:12:23 PM »
The alternative to letting Cahill go was to allow him to pick himself for the first-team. Not a position that many managers would accept.

There's a difference between wanting first team football and wanting to pick the team.

It's hard to criticise Cahill for not wanting to fall into the 20 - 22 age group abyss that has claimed so many of our promising youngsters for lack of first team opportunity.

It looked a bad decision by O'Neill then, and it certainly does now. Even worse than not offering Mellberg a new contract at the start of the season and then proceeding to play him at right back.

Offline LeeB

  • Member
  • Posts: 31481
  • Location: Standing in the Klix-O-Gum queue.
  • GM : May, 2014
Re: 90% villa , 100% Manchester city
« Reply #14 on: March 27, 2012, 10:35:19 PM »
Have you noticed the theme of who helping city lose the title

Luke Moore, Gary Cahill, Peter Crouch the last 3 players to score against city. Next Manchester City v Sunderland,

Step up one Craig Gardner?

May be if we kept team of 2002 -05, we now be in top 3??
And to think when we were going for the premier league title, Keith Curle caught the ball to gift us a penalty when we were stuttering and they had good luck Villa banners in the away end. 

That game was one of the few times I was a right sider. Didn't the banner say something like "Good luck Villa from the city of Manchester"?

One of the few times we let you in.

The right side was for the righteous.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal