Things I've heard on here this season

[danno]

By Christmas that year Carew Gabby and Emile had amassed two league goals between them.
Two!


Both of them were Emile's; in games we ended up winning. Maybe if we'd been scoring more freely,
we wouldn't have noticed quite how poor we'd become at the back.

As amusing as the ex marriage analogy is, this whole thing is a bit like picking scabs isn't it?

[not3bad]

For a few games Emile had something of a renaissance under Houllier.  Then he was having a great game at home and managed to get himself sent off.  When he came back after that he was shit again.

[danno]

For a few games Emile had something of a renaissance under Houllier.  Then he was having a great game at home and managed to get himself sent off.  When he came back after that he was shit again.

I just remember his bullet header against Wolves. the sending off was it against Sunderland?

[Somniloquism]

For a few games Emile had something of a renaissance under Houllier.  Then he was having a great game at home and managed to get himself sent off.  When he came back after that he was shit again.

I thought he managed to get injured after setting up a goal. But I also try not to remember too much of the last two years.

[SoccerHQ]

My abiding memory of the Houllier year (apart from all the off the pitch gaffes like not even being able to start the job for 2 weeks and waving to Liverpool fans) was playing Young in the hole all year.

Never understood it, Young wasn't even that great at it as he rarely scored from open play and didn't really tuck in as a third central midfielder when we were defending which we needed post Milner. Bit of a waste of his last year here not getting in those great crosses.

I also admit at the time I defended the back 4 as they still had credit in the bank from the great record the previous year but in hindsight Houllier got that spot on as they were as bad under TSM who I thought might organise them a little better.

Another solution would've been to play Cuellar a little more in central defence as despite all the crap games and ill discipline it's incredible to think Collins and Dunne remained our first choice defensive combination for the majority of 10/11 and 11/12.

[Dave]

I also admit at the time I defended the back 4 as they still had credit in the bank from the great record the previous year but in hindsight Houllier got that spot on as they were as bad under TSM who I thought might organise them a little better.

I very much disagree with that. When a new manager comes in and inherites one of the best defences in the league, he needs to be pretty confident in his vision to say 'scrap that, I can do it better'.

He's going to be judged on the end result of that and what he did with the defence clearly wasn't positive. The fact that McLeish messed things up just as much is no vindication of what Houllier tried to do either.

I do still think Houllier given time would have been alright (better than McLeish, worse than Lambert) but risking relegation just because he didn't like the way that a perfectly solid defence was organised wasn't the best way to do things.

[danno]

My abiding memory of the Houllier year (apart from all the off the pitch gaffes like not even being able to start the job for 2 weeks and waving to Liverpool fans) was playing Young in the hole all year.

Never understood it, Young wasn't even that great at it as he rarely scored from open play and didn't really tuck in as a third central midfielder when we were defending which we needed post Milner. Bit of a waste of his last year here not getting in those great crosses.

I always saw that as a vain attempt to caress his ego and charm him into staying.
See also:  giving him the captaincy.

[Somniloquism]

I very much disagree with that. When a new manager comes in and inherites one of the best defences in the league, he needs to pretty confident in his vision to say 'scrap that, I can do it better'.

He's going to be judged on the end result of that and what he did with the defence clearly wasn't positive. The fact that McLeish messed things up just as much is no vindication of what Houllier tried to do either.

I do still think Houllier given time would have been alright (better than McLeish, worse than Lambert) but risking relegation just because he didn't like the way that a perfectly solid defence was organised wasn't the best way to do things.

But that isn't taking into account Dunne doubling in size or Collins and Warnock being found out for what they were, very limited footballers playing above their abilities for a time under MON. (Something that MON could do quite well). Under a third (fourth?) manager now, Collins is still dropping similar clangers at Wet Spam where he lets players go, is easily pulled out of position or heads the ball only to the edge of the box for an attacker to pick up.

[Dave]

Agreed. They are limited players unless they are in a system that seems to suit them as a group, playing in a specific way.

So if you come in fresh, you play them in that way that works until you have a better way. Then ditch them. Rather than ditching them and realising that you don't really know what to do next.

[danno]

Agreed. They are limited players unless they are in a system that seems to suit them as a group, playing in a specific way.

So if you come in fresh, you play them in that way that works until you have a better way. Then ditch them. Rather than ditching them and realising that you don't really know what to do next.

Managing for the short term and the long term?!

 It will never catch on!

[Monty]

Agreed. They are limited players unless they are in a system that seems to suit them as a group, playing in a specific way.

So if you come in fresh, you play them in that way that works until you have a better way. Then ditch them. Rather than ditching them and realising that you don't really know what to do next.

I think Houllier must have been a bit surprised at both the lack of professionalism and the lack of intelligence - in every sense. I agree that he really didn't react well when the players didn't respond to his methods, which does indicate that his methods were somewhat one-eyed - but if you're going to be one-eyed in your approach to football, I for one would rather being one-eyed like Houllier more than MON or TSM.

[paul_e]

Houllier's biggest problem was down to his belief on the required fitness levels (if you look through his record his players have always been fit and have always had a good attitude to training).  I'm fairly sure he arrived expecting the squad to be much better prepared than they were and he decided that addressing that was the key issue.  That was probably a big mistake as it meant the defensive displays were poor for most of the season and it probably led, indirectly, to the number of injuries we saw in that autumn.

However it's a decision that he wouldn't have had to make if he'd come in to the club much sooner, starting the job in early september was always going to make it very difficult for him that year, particularly given the complete lack of continuity with coaches, etc.  There was literally no one at the club who'd had any day to day dealings with the coaching/tactics of the first team squad so 'just do what you were doing' wasn't really an option.

If he'd not had the health issues I believe the following summer would've been key as he'd have got the right type of players for what he wanted, the fitness levels would've been much closer to what he wanted and he'd have had chance to work on tactics a lot more.  I genuinely believe he would have turned out a good choice if he was still here now.

TSM I have no such regard for, he had a full summer with a squad of players suited to his football and he made us go backwards.

[sonlyme]

Exactly. Lambert didn't need to change the players. He did it with tactics and coaching, something Houllier had people believing was impossible.

I'm no sure who you're answering here Percy but I don't get the logic.  There are 3 key component to our upturn in defending for me:

1: The change of players in the defence.  We seem less likely to make mistakes and, when there is a mistake we seem better able to recover from it.
2: We have  a very vocal keeper who is very good at coming out and claiming the ball.
3: We have two really hard working midfielders who are providing a great shield.

Of those only the 3rd is tactical and I'd suggest the signing of Makoun (to play alongside petrov) was intended to address that.

Sorry Paul - I'm with Percy on this one.

Because football is not an individual game.

We could list personnel who kept clean sheets and personnel who leaked loads and many of the names would be the same.  The real upturn in Villa's fortunes has come about on the training pitches at BMH - the team are playing to a system as a team.  They all know what each other are doing and cover for each other.  The same personnel who thumped Liverpool last weekend were being derided as not good enough by many on here not so long ago - yet our second goal revealed the depth of the change for the better that Lambert and Culverhouse have fostered.

Same faces - different result.

Of course - individual brilliance will always find a place - but it is about balance and compatibility as well - hence Benteke not Bent.

And while we may not be the finished article - I have seen mainly good signs from Villa this season - even in the defeats (bar Southampton).

Lambert has shown that he has a lovely big pair of boll**ks in dropping Shay Given, Darren Bent, and now Stephen Ireland.  And he's done it for the good of the team as a whole and the philosophy he seeks to cultivate at VP.  The shift to a back 3 has not only shored up the defence - it has seen us score more goals in a week than in the previous two months.  The said lovely pair became even more swollen and metallic after Benteke's early wasteful displays.  Lambert saw the kid would come good and laid his neck on the line to keep faith with him.  He was right to do so.

Lambert is more than a motivator or a spotter of talent - he is a shrewd tactician - at Norwich he was lauded for often changing formations 2 or 3 times in a single game - and it lifted them to their highest position ever.  It won't always work - as goals change games - but I for one feel hugely optimistic about this season and hopefully the many more to come under the guidance of Lambert and Co.

If we as fans and supporters can show half the faith Paul Lambert has  - then the dark days are over - and the bright days are here.
UTV

[Chris Smith]

It isn't every day you read the phrase "lovely big pair of bollocks" on H & V.

[paul_e]

Exactly. Lambert didn't need to change the players. He did it with tactics and coaching, something Houllier had people believing was impossible.

I'm no sure who you're answering here Percy but I don't get the logic.  There are 3 key component to our upturn in defending for me:

1: The change of players in the defence.  We seem less likely to make mistakes and, when there is a mistake we seem better able to recover from it.
2: We have  a very vocal keeper who is very good at coming out and claiming the ball.
3: We have two really hard working midfielders who are providing a great shield.

Of those only the 3rd is tactical and I'd suggest the signing of Makoun (to play alongside petrov) was intended to address that.

Sorry Paul - I'm with Percy on this one.

Because football is not an individual game.

We could list personnel who kept clean sheets and personnel who leaked loads and many of the names would be the same.  The real upturn in Villa's fortunes has come about on the training pitches at BMH - the team are playing to a system as a team.  They all know what each other are doing and cover for each other.  The same personnel who thumped Liverpool last weekend were being derided as not good enough by many on here not so long ago - yet our second goal revealed the depth of the change for the better that Lambert and Culverhouse have fostered.

Same faces - different result.

Of course - individual brilliance will always find a place - but it is about balance and compatibility as well - hence Benteke not Bent.

And while we may not be the finished article - I have seen mainly good signs from Villa this season - even in the defeats (bar Southampton).

Lambert has shown I am a twat in dropping Shay Given, Darren Bent, and now Stephen Ireland.  And he's done it for the good of the team as a whole and the philosophy he seeks to cultivate at VP.  The shift to a back 3 has not only shored up the defence - it has seen us score more goals in a week than in the previous two months.  The said lovely pair became even more swollen and metallic after Benteke's early wasteful displays.  Lambert saw the kid would come good and laid his neck on the line to keep faith with him.  He was right to do so.

Lambert is more than a motivator or a spotter of talent - he is a shrewd tactician - at Norwich he was lauded for often changing formations 2 or 3 times in a single game - and it lifted them to their highest position ever.  It won't always work - as goals change games - but I for one feel hugely optimistic about this season and hopefully the many more to come under the guidance of Lambert and Co.

If we as fans and supporters can show half the faith Paul Lambert has  - then the dark days are over - and the bright days are here.
UTV

Yes training is hugely important and yes it's a team game but individual players are still hugely important and the attitudes of the players to the manager and his techniques are more important still.

The simplest break down is that GH thought our defense was full of overpaid wasters who had no place at the club and was quite honest in identifying that fixing things required him to replace those players with people who could play his system and who would accept his training methods, that's what he meant by solving things in the summer.

I'm not saying GH was perfect by any stretch but there were mitigating factors to some of the problems.