Karim El Ahmadi CONFIRMED (Reply #278)

[Dave Clark Five]

Just waiting for an article by N'Zogbia in the papers, saying how he is looking forward to playing for the new manager. That is when it will be confirmed that he knows his place is in jeopardy.

[Mister E]

Given may or may not prove to be value for money. Let's see how he performs in the next season or two. Let's see whether he transforms himself into a decent GK coach. Let's see if, like Friedel, he continues to attract interest from clubs requiring experience and assurance at the back.
I do think the agreed wage and length of contract seem excessive, but there you go (after all, we have form: we did also agree the Emule deal ....).

Regarding Hutton, I can see the logic for having bought him, given the timing and the fact that TSM knew him from previous managerial gigs. And Hutton did improve; I think he's taken a ton of stick from us here - some justified, some not.
I would not pick him if I were a Premiership manager; I thoroughly dislike his image and approach; I think his positioning and intelligence as a footballer is v limited. With CC still in the squad could have got by perhaps without signing another FB.

N'Zog - for me - was the biggest mistake: I was not a fan back then and am still not. Why? - simple: he has never demonstrated the ability to overcome his temperamental nature and put in a consistently-solid shift. Even at Wigan he flattered to deceive.

[Mazrim]

I dont know about that. The season before we signed him he was one of the better attacking players in the league.
He has to get back on track this season though or he can do one. The McLeish leeway he (and most of the others) perhaps had last season wont wash now. He's playing under a popular manager and will be out on his ear if he doesn't make it happen.
On the other hand, if he does, what a player we have.

[Dave]

Is that what constitutes a good signing then, the approval of supporters?

Let's look back at the clamour from fans to sign Yorke, Platt and Macca, and then we can work out if they were good signings or not.

Completely missing the point that our approval means fuck all, it's how they perform that matters.

So it's not hypocritical to have a go at a manager for signing a player we wanted him to sign?

I don't think it is actually - certainly not always. Managers are paid well to identify players and make the right decisions, we supporters can be blinded by temporary form, a good performance against our club, a couple of good reports in the press. A manager should be immune to all that and not be swayed by anything other than how he will fit into the way that he wants to play. They're approaching the situation with all the facts, we're playing blind.

A case in point, from what I'd read and seen when he arrived I'd was very pleased that we signed Mathieu Berson. He looked to be a decent player, with good pedigree who played well in a position that we needed someone like him in.

But I don't think it's particularly hypocritical to say that it was a poor signing and one that we shouldn't have made.

[Virgil Caine]

Same might be said of Sidwell - when he played at Reading I always thought he bossed midfield against us and I was glad when he signed for Villa, perhaps we should have spotted that he hardly got a game for Chelsea.

[nigel]

Is that what constitutes a good signing then, the approval of supporters?

Let's look back at the clamour from fans to sign Yorke, Platt and Macca, and then we can work out if they were good signings or not.

Completely missing the point that our approval means fuck all, it's how they perform that matters.

So it's not hypocritical to have a go at a manager for signing a player we wanted him to sign?

I don't think it is actually - certainly not always. Managers are paid well to identify players and make the right decisions, we supporters can be blinded by temporary form, a good performance against our club, a couple of good reports in the press. A manager should be immune to all that and not be swayed by anything other than how he will fit into the way that he wants to play. They're approaching the situation with all the facts, we're playing blind.

A case in point, from what I'd read and seen when he arrived I'd was very pleased that we signed Mathieu Berson. He looked to be a decent player, with good pedigree who played well in a position that we needed someone like him in.

But I don't think it's particularly hypocritical to say that it was a poor signing and one that we shouldn't have made.

A more recenct signing would be CN'Z.
I reckon +90% of Villa fans were in agreement with his signing. But, as soon as he didn't perform it was McLeish's fault.
I hope he can turn the corner with us this season. It might help with Makoun too, being a french speaker.

[Percy McCarthy]

I'm coming round to PWS's idea that the manager should just sign whoever we want on H&V.

[john e]

Is that what constitutes a good signing then, the approval of supporters?

Let's look back at the clamour from fans to sign Yorke, Platt and Macca, and then we can work out if they were good signings or not.

Completely missing the point that our approval means fuck all, it's how they perform that matters.

So it's not hypocritical to have a go at a manager for signing a player we wanted him to sign?

I don't think it is actually - certainly not always. Managers are paid well to identify players and make the right decisions, we supporters can be blinded by temporary form, a good performance against our club, a couple of good reports in the press. A manager should be immune to all that and not be swayed by anything other than how he will fit into the way that he wants to play. They're approaching the situation with all the facts, we're playing blind.

A case in point, from what I'd read and seen when he arrived I'd was very pleased that we signed Mathieu Berson. He looked to be a decent player, with good pedigree who played well in a position that we needed someone like him in.

But I don't think it's particularly hypocritical to say that it was a poor signing and one that we shouldn't have made.

i think what PWS is saying is that there is a big difference between signing Harewood or Heskey who most people said was not going to work out well and probably end up a disaster,
 and the signing of N'Zog who people were wetting there pants over, i can still remember the level of hype on here over the mythical tussle with Sunderland and how we had just signed the next great thing.

i dont think the manager did necesarily take supporters views seriously, he certainly didnt with on any other subject, and ultimately whoever he signs good or bad are down to him, but there was massive support for the signing of N'zog at the time, so i can see what PWS is saying, in that we can be to critical in AM bringing in N'zog when we all thought it was good business.

on the other hand i cant remember many posters saying that Keane was going to be any good for us, but turned out a good loan deal, might even have scored the goals that kept us up, so AM got that one right, no doubts

[john e]

I'm coming round to PWS's idea that the manager should just sign whoever we want on H&V.

i dont think thats what he is saying in fairness

[nigel]

I'm coming round to PWS's idea that the manager should just sign whoever we want on H&V.

9 goalkeepers
12 right backs
35 centre backs
17 left backs
27 defensive midfielders
2 wingers
and 1 striker

and we said McLeish was defensive 

[silhillvilla]

It's not really the wage I'm concerned about (even though I think it's way too much for Given), it's the length of the contract. 5 years @£50k a week for a 34 year old keeper is bonkers.

Agree & his euros performance is a real concern, I don't think he'll last another two years at PL level personally
Silly contract length

[not3bad]

Just waiting for an article by N'Zogbia in the papers, saying how he is looking forward to playing for the new manager. That is when it will be confirmed that he knows his place is in jeopardy.

Shouldn't everybody's place be in jeopardy?

[pauliewalnuts]

Just watched a few of his youtube videos (I know, I know).

It is pretty evident that he likes to put a tackle in, but also i thought it was quite noticeable how comfortable he is on the ball. Added to that, he busts a gut to get the ball when he doesn't have it.

He's like a Reo-Coker with 90 percent of the stuff NRC was missing.

[pauliewalnuts]

Much as I agree that Given was a bad signing, I don't see how he can be labelled a bench-warmer.

Something seems to have happened over the summer which has caused a lot of us to reevaluate Shay Given.

It's true, he tends to stay on his line a bit too much and doesn't command his area as the truly great keepers do, but he has always been like this *

However, I also remember him pulling off some fantastic saves last season and keeping us in matches when we really didn't deserve to be.

He has his faults, yes, but "bad signing"? Really? In a summer in which we also signed that clueless clogger Hutton?



* As an aside, a while ago someone posted something from The Fiver about SG which was quite funny but summed up these weaknesses brilliantly. I'll try and find it.

[Mazrim]

I knew Given was a goalie that stayed on his line too much but then again so did Friedel and Given is younger and more agile so I thought it was an improvement. It was, in my opinion.
I'd like a more complete goalkeeper but there are other priorities. I'm convinced Siegrist will become that in a year or three, in the mean time we need a convincing #2 to genuinely compete with Given. It would be nice if that keeper knew how to completely command his area. It takes a lot of heat off the centre halves.