Concrete Ron

[RussellC]

This keeps getting rolled out like its a definitive answer and in some way an end to the debate. Whether you agree or not, there are still those of us who think the club have made a mistake in allowing Vlaar and Delph's contracts to run this far without being renewed. And if we're really expected to cut the club some slack because they were too busy dealing with the Culverhouse/Karsa fiasco, then we really are in a mess.

Fair enough, you're getting fed up of regularly seeing this trotted out.
Some of us are fed up with the assertion that everything to do with the club is unremittingly FUBAR.

Let's try it from another perspective.
I've explained why I think it's not unreasonable to have ended up here with Vlaar's contract, based on consensus around his fitness, performance levels and external distractions.

Can you specifically say when you'd have offered one, justified by his performances and taking into account whatever else was going on at the club that is now public knowledge?

As soon as we were mathematically safe last season I would have offered them both new deals. I really don't see why anything else going on at the club should be an acceptable reason to neglect the contract situation of two of our best players.

And it's the assertion that you're somehow saving everybody the time and effort of the debate by telling us your opinion that I'm getting fed up with. It's almost as lazy as as the implication that those of us unhappy with the situation are just looking to criticise the club at every opportunity. It's just not the case.

[paul_e]

This keeps getting rolled out like its a definitive answer and in some way an end to the debate. Whether you agree or not, there are still those of us who think the club have made a mistake in allowing Vlaar and Delph's contracts to run this far without being renewed. And if we're really expected to cut the club some slack because they were too busy dealing with the Culverhouse/Karsa fiasco, then we really are in a mess.

Fair enough, you're getting fed up of regularly seeing this trotted out.
Some of us are fed up with the assertion that everything to do with the club is unremittingly FUBAR.

Let's try it from another perspective.
I've explained why I think it's not unreasonable to have ended up here with Vlaar's contract, based on consensus around his fitness, performance levels and external distractions.

Can you specifically say when you'd have offered one, justified by his performances and taking into account whatever else was going on at the club that is now public knowledge?

As soon as we were mathematically safe last season I would have offered them both new deals. I really don't see why anything else going on at the club should be an acceptable reason to neglect the contract situation of two of our best players.

And it's the assertion that you're somehow saving everybody the time and effort of the debate by telling us your opinion that I'm getting fed up with. It's almost as lazy as as the implication that those of us unhappy with the situation are just looking to criticise the club at every opportunity. It's just not the case.

So with a week left then, so you think a player who is playing 1 more club game before going to join up with his world cup squad was going to be happy to discuss a new contract? Add on that there was a very public "I'll share my plans at the end of the season" from the owner hanging over the club; as a player would you want to discuss a new contract when you might be a week from being told that a multi-billionaire has taken us over?

[RussellC]

This keeps getting rolled out like its a definitive answer and in some way an end to the debate. Whether you agree or not, there are still those of us who think the club have made a mistake in allowing Vlaar and Delph's contracts to run this far without being renewed. And if we're really expected to cut the club some slack because they were too busy dealing with the Culverhouse/Karsa fiasco, then we really are in a mess.

Fair enough, you're getting fed up of regularly seeing this trotted out.
Some of us are fed up with the assertion that everything to do with the club is unremittingly FUBAR.

Let's try it from another perspective.
I've explained why I think it's not unreasonable to have ended up here with Vlaar's contract, based on consensus around his fitness, performance levels and external distractions.

Can you specifically say when you'd have offered one, justified by his performances and taking into account whatever else was going on at the club that is now public knowledge?

As soon as we were mathematically safe last season I would have offered them both new deals. I really don't see why anything else going on at the club should be an acceptable reason to neglect the contract situation of two of our best players.

And it's the assertion that you're somehow saving everybody the time and effort of the debate by telling us your opinion that I'm getting fed up with. It's almost as lazy as as the implication that those of us unhappy with the situation are just looking to criticise the club at every opportunity. It's just not the case.

So with a week left then, so you think a player who is playing 1 more club game before going to join up with his world cup squad was going to be happy to discuss a new contract? Add on that there was a very public "I'll share my plans at the end of the season" from the owner hanging over the club; as a player would you want to discuss a new contract when you might be a week from being told that a multi-billionaire has taken us over?

Regardless of whether I was intending to keep or sell the club I'd be looking to tie the Captain down to a longer contract. Same goes for Delph. I would want them both settled and secured at the club well in advance of pre-season training. The situation we're currently in, along with all of unsettling speculation should have been foreseen (and avoided) by the club in my opinion. The fact that we've been put up for sale, had a change of CEO and had an overhaul of the coaching staff are irrelevant to me. The owner and management are both still in place and things like contract offers to key employees should still be attended to.

[villan from luton]

It is total madness allowing two of your better players get down to the last year of their contracts, but it is typical of how the club is run at the moment

[PeterWithesShin]

How is typical when they have given out at least 7 new contracts to players already at the club in the last 12 months?

[mr underhill]

typical in so much as the most important two have not been tied down to new contracts.

[dave.woodhall]

typical in so much as the most important two have not been tied down to new contracts.

And that happened before when, exactly?

[PeterWithesShin]

So they are both more important than Benteke and Guzan who got new deals last summer?

[Mister E]

I think that's very naive . He'll leave for someone either a great contract.

He's most likely to leave for a club that offers a decent contract and - more importantly - the prospect of Euro football. That's why Sourhampton would be second choice for him, behind other - not yet declared - interested parties. I would say Villa is at least as interesting to him as Sourhampton (and maybe more so if a new buyer arrives with loads of lucre to lavish on key players).

[PeterWithesShin]

Last summer we gave out a bunch of new deals, which drew criticism from some on here. Neither Vlaar or Delph warranted one at the time. One was called as the worst defender ever to play for Villa and missed a third of the season, the other was described as the worst player to ever play for Villa, and finally put in a decent 6 months after 5 years at the club and who has admitted "he went missing for a few years".

We are now at the stage that both are deserving new contracts, let's see what actually happens.

[mr underhill]

other less influential players have received new contracts this summer ahead of Ron and Fabian, which in my opinion, is a managerial mistake.

[dave.woodhall]

other less influential players have received new contracts this summer ahead of Ron and Fabian, which in my opinion, is a managerial mistake.

Do you think they may have been offered them but haven't signed yet, or does that not fit the narrative?

[silhillvilla]

How is typical when they have given out at least 7 new contracts to players already at the club in the last 12 months?

7 ? Really ? Who ?

[RussellC]

other less influential players have received new contracts this summer ahead of Ron and Fabian, which in my opinion, is a managerial mistake.

Do you think they may have been offered them but haven't signed yet, or does that not fit the narrative?

It is possible, but if so, it would be odd that the club have made no reference to deals having been offered, or at least something along the lines of 'talks being underway' if for no other reason than to set supporters minds at ease. It would also make Delph's comments very odd if he had been offered a new deal.

[PeterWithesShin]

How is typical when they have given out at least 7 new contracts to players already at the club in the last 12 months?

7 ? Really ? Who ?

Guzan, Lowton, Westwood, Clark, Baker, Weimann, Benteke, Gardner, Robinson and I think Grealish. Might be more but they are the ones I remember.