Albrighton Going to Leicester

[RussellC]

Excellent post Rolta - and I agree about Houllier, I remember us playing extremely well in a number of games that season - Man Utd at home, Arsenal way. Looking back I think you could probably argue that the likes of Young, Bent and Downing played some of the best football of their careers in that period.

The fact that he was 'let go' because of health issues just highlights what a stupid appointment it was in the first place though, as these weren't exactly unpredictable.

Of all of the speculated takeovers, I must admit, the idea of Red Bull coming in (with no re-branding obviously) and Houllier returning as Director of Football, is one that actually quite appeals to me.

[Clampy]

So many people wanted him out, called him a clown (ring any bells) – and look what happened, we got Mcleish. It's a shame, because according to the man himself we had Cabaye lined up that summer. If that was a sample of his recruitment policy, then I would have loved to have seen what else he could do. And we really did play some nice football at times under him, but again, because we didn't do it in every single game then Houllier was clueless and all the know-it-all fans could have done so much better.

Your making it sound like the fans hounded Houiller out, which wasn't the case.

[RussellC]

Whilst on the Houllier-era (which clearly divides opinions) the one that really baffled me was Michael Bradley. I had really high hopes when he came-in but I don;t think I can recall a VIall player being moved-on without being given a decent chance in the manner that he was.

[Legion]

Bosko Balaban.

[RussellC]

Bosko Balaban.

Maybe, but you get the feeling that John Gregory saw enough of him in training to realise he'd made a cock-up. With Bradley you get the impression that once TSM came-in, he was sacrificed to make way for the loan-signing of Jermaine Jenas. (!)

It's frustrating because, by all accounts, he made quite a decent impression in Serie A after leaving us.

[silhillvilla]

I don't get this post era love in a minority of fans have for houllier. The guy was a dinosaur and a condescending twat of one. His tactics were awful his signings were ridiculous and I hated him as manager as do 99% of villa fans I speak to. Signing Pires was a joke, mako un useless oh and let's not forget Omar Cummings

[RussellC]

I don't get this post era love in a minority of fans have for houllier. The guy was a dinosaur and a condescending twat of one. His tactics were awful his signings were ridiculous and I hated him as manager as do 99% of villa fans I speak to. Signing Pires was a joke, mako un useless oh and let's not forget Omar Cummings

It's probably because all of the above have been a damn site worse since he left. I agree that he was condescending (and his love for Liverpool was sickly at best) but tactically, and in terms of a coaching set-up, he was head and shoulders above the guys that have succeeded him.

[Rolta]

I don't get this post era love in a minority of fans have for houllier. The guy was a dinosaur and a condescending twat of one. His tactics were awful his signings were ridiculous and I hated him as manager as do 99% of villa fans I speak to. Signing Pires was a joke, mako un useless oh and let's not forget Omar Cummings

Who he never signed? He was only on trial as far as I remember.

For me, 'His tactics were awful' seems like an easy thing to say whenever things are going wrong :/ It's jus tthe way I see it. I think with Barry Bannan and Hogg in midfield anyone's tactics would seem awful. I think this phrase ignores the other teams we have to play and the quality and qualities of their players etc. IMO, it's part of the "We're Aston Villa, we should just win" mindset. It's a football cliche that's used one week, forgotten the next when things go well, and comes up once more with the next defeat.

Er, Mcleish though – he had bad tactics 

[Monty]

Who he never signed? He was only on trial as far as I remember.

For me, 'His tactics were awful' seems like an easy thing to say whenever things are going wrong :/ It's jus tthe way I see it. I think with Barry Bannan and Hogg in midfield anyone's tactics would seem awful. I think this phrase ignores the other teams we have to play and the quality and qualities of their players etc. IMO, it's part of the "We're Aston Villa, we should just win" mindset. It's a football cliche that's used one week, forgotten the next when things go well, and comes up once more with the next defeat.

Er, Mcleish though – he had bad tactics 

It's a cliche and it's an utter caricature.

[Clampy]

I don't get this post era love in a minority of fans have for houllier. The guy was a dinosaur and a condescending twat of one. His tactics were awful his signings were ridiculous and I hated him as manager as do 99% of villa fans I speak to. Signing Pires was a joke, mako un useless oh and let's not forget Omar Cummings

Who he never signed? He was only on trial as far as I remember.

For me, 'His tactics were awful' seems like an easy thing to say whenever things are going wrong :/ It's jus tthe way I see it. I think with Barry Bannan and Hogg in midfield anyone's tactics would seem awful. I think this phrase ignores the other teams we have to play and the quality and qualities of their players etc. IMO, it's part of the "We're Aston Villa, we should just win" mindset. It's a football cliche that's used one week, forgotten the next when things go well, and comes up once more with the next defeat.

Er, Mcleish though – he had bad tactics 

Lambert's tactics are awful. That's just the way I see it.

[rob_bridge]

Bosko Balaban.

Maybe, but you get the feeling that John Gregory saw enough of him in training to realise he'd made a cock-up. With Bradley you get the impression that once TSM came-in, he was sacrificed to make way for the loan-signing of Jermaine Jenas. (!)

It's frustrating because, by all accounts, he made quite a decent impression in Serie A after leaving us.

Jenas - I shuddered when I heard he was signing. Maybe that is how he got injured.

Who sanctioned the £2 wages with no recompense in the event of an injury?

[Jarpie]

Even if people dislike Houllier, you gotta admit that his press conferences in the january and february were great when Steve Bruce and Holloway were moaning about Villa buying Bent and made an "insulting" offer for Charlie Adam.

I remember Houllier just sitting back, chuckling and refusing to stoop down at their level, it was great to see.

[pauliewalnuts]

For me, 'His tactics were awful' seems like an easy thing to say whenever things are going wrong :/ It's jus tthe way I see it. I think with Barry Bannan and Hogg in midfield anyone's tactics would seem awful.

I disagree entirely.

For starters, I recall a very decent performance at home to Man United in which we started with Barry Bannan and Hogg in the middle together.

Sometimes managers do get tactics wrong. Lambert got them wrong frequently last season. In fact, it would genuinely be easier to list the times he got them right. You can't just write things like that off as some sort of stock bone of contention that people roll out - it's not just a handful of people saying he got them wrong, is it?

As for all the self loathing impatient fanbase nonsense, at the time Houllier came, we'd had three consecutive sixth place finishes, expectations would have been higher. Expectations the last three years genuinely couldn't have been much lower.

I can only speak for myself, but really, if you want to label yourself fickle / impatient / unrealistic, then knock yourself out, but leave me out of it.

[dave shelley]

Whilst on the Houllier-era (which clearly divides opinions) the one that really baffled me was Michael Bradley. I had really high hopes when he came-in but I don;t think I can recall a VIall player being moved-on without being given a decent chance in the manner that he was.

Paul Mortimer

[supertom]

Houllier wasn't great by any means and changed a lot very quickly. That combined with a lot of injuries in the middle of the season which saw us fielding very young sides, saw us struggling. Obviously he alienated a lot of the senior players (and in many cases he spotted the bad eggs pretty quickly in fairness). But there was a plan there and it was starting to bear fruit toward the end. Bent gave us a cutting edge that we'd lacked previously, when we'd played okay football in the first 2/3 of the pitch but had no one making the right runs in the box or finishing the chances.

The difference for me between Houlliers strong finish in his first season, compared to Lamberts, was that Lamberts wasn't by any great tactical nous. He hit on something which was all about attacking direct and quick, utilizing a pacey front 3. It worked for 4 months but it wasn't subtle, and teams had as worked out the following season. In Houlliers cases the guy had genuinely orchestrated a different approach to our play that was becoming fruitful, and given his apparent summer targets I think he could have taken us on a level. Our ball retention was better than under O Neill and hasn't been matched since.  Who knows, another year of Houllier and we could have handed a solid side, that played reasonable football, over to someone like Martinez.

But really, the biggest issue as to why Houllier was overall a bad appointment, was his Health. He wasn't up to it. In the end I don't think that was Randy's only consideration for axing him either. It was part of it, but I think mostly it was because Houllier's plan of action was too expensive. In retrospect now, and this is partly down to Randy's footballing naivety, Houllier wasn't the right appointment given that we didn't see it through. What he was putting in place, in principal was more in line with modern football, but I don't think tactics, playing style or anything like that is ever considered by Lerner when making appointments. We've reverted back to O Neill-esque managers. I actually think had we appointed McLeish a year earlier, or Lambert 2 years earlier, neither would have been quite as disastrous as they have been now (still wouldn't have been pretty mind you). They would have offered a consistency from what O Neill left behind in terms of style. If you're not going to see a change around like Houllier implemented, through to the end, there's no point doing it. One year. Boom. Done. Then we reverted again, disastrously.

It's just been a total cluster fuck since O Neill fecked off and took any footballing nous out of the club with him. No manager has been offered anything like his freedom since either, as Randy's been a bit burned by that whole experience I imagine.