It's not Sherwood!

[brian green]

I stand by my definition of sabotage. Take any yardstick.  Letting in soft goals. Taking floaty corners. Copping stupid cards. Putting on weight by overeating and not training hard enough. Not using your height effectively to lay off goal kicks.  Not tracking runners. No movement whatsoever off the ball. No movement in the goalmouth for our corners. Shit spooned up, over hit crosses. Ball watching. Not fancying 50/50 balls.

You know all these failings, game after game after game and so does the manager.  The crux of the matter is that the players know it but they do nothing to correct it and carry on doing it.  That in my book is sabotage by negligence, just like allowing the January window to close without a single strengthening acquisition.

If I see a man hitting a dog with a stick and do nothing about it, I am just as guilty of animal cruelty.

[PaulWinch again]

Yep I'd agree with that brian. Strip away all the management stuff, excuses etc there are fundamental things that anybody who has played football should know you need to do. You need to work hard, you need to keep yourself in shape, you need to give your all in any game and maximise your own ability. Some of our players do none of those things and for me they're not fulfilling their side of their contract. The manager adds on some tactical planning, motivation and brings in an extract level, but the players need to take responsibility for a base level of effort and application.

[old man villa fan]

It's called being professional.

We are into the 'grass is greener .......' territory with many fans now.

To me, the difference in the working situation handed to each of the managers is that Sherwood started with virtually an injury free squad and a squad that had the start of the season confidence, whereas Garde had the exact opposite.

[Vegas]

It's called being professional.

We are into the 'grass is greener .......' territory with many fans now.

To me, the difference in the working situation handed to each of the managers is that Sherwood started with virtually an injury free squad and a squad that had the start of the season confidence, whereas Garde had the exact opposite.

the grass couldn't be much less green than being possibly the worst side in premier league history, having pretty much no likeable players, waving the white flag in matches and having open discontent between fans, players, manager and board .  So yes, to me at least, there are several scenarios where the grass is greener and it's hard to think of any where the grass is less green.

[SoccerHQ]

I think we'd have picked up a few points under Sherwood over the xmas period, maybe gone to Newcastle and won, beaten West Ham at home etc so may have picked up sooner and be in the pack much more quickly.

That said I had no issue with his sacking as it was a horrendous run of form from what was quite an easy first 3 month fixture list. I said at the time losing at home to West Brom, Stoke and Swansea would be very damaging in the run in as those are the games relegation threatened teams need to pick up wins and we'd already wasted them.

What I still can't understand on here and elsewhere is the marked difference in abuse marked out between Sherwood and Lambert.

Sherwood's reign was at least very shortlived, barely 6 months and he gave us a great semi final win and some good performances in the run in.

By contrast Lambert's tenure seem to last for flipping forever and while there was the good odd result here and there, he also presided over some of the most embarrasing defeats in our recent history.

And since they've both lost Sherwood's been the more complimentary of the two in the press while Lambert's been sniping from his Blackburn bunker, I just find it a bit odd.

[django]

I think we'd have picked up a few points under Sherwood over the xmas period, maybe gone to Newcastle and won, beaten West Ham at home etc so may have picked up sooner and be in the pack much more quickly.

That said I had no issue with his sacking as it was a horrendous run of form from what was quite an easy first 3 month fixture list. I said at the time losing at home to West Brom, Stoke and Swansea would be very damaging in the run in as those are the games relegation threatened teams need to pick up wins and we'd already wasted them.

What I still can't understand on here and elsewhere is the marked difference in abuse marked out between Sherwood and Lambert.

Sherwood's reign was at least very shortlived, barely 6 months and he gave us a great semi final win and some good performances in the run in.

By contrast Lambert's tenure seem to last for flipping forever and while there was the good odd result here and there, he also presided over some of the most embarrasing defeats in our recent history.

And since they've both lost Sherwood's been the more complimentary of the two in the press while Lambert's been sniping from his Blackburn bunker, I just find it a bit odd.

I think personally I feel I bit more favourably disposed to Lambert because I know he had to cut the wage bill dramatically, he took he heat for the players and Lerner which while it may have been misguided at least suggests a bit of professional integrity. Sherwood got to actually spend some money and wasted no time passing the buck onto the players the transfer committee etc. He is someone who grabs every bit of credit for himself and passes the blame onto others.

What I don't understand is why Garde and Sherwood get such different receptions.

[Ads]

I'm not sure what it was about the first half of the season that had anybody convinced we'd have picked up any points under Sherwood.

[rob_bridge]

I'm not sure what it was about the first half of the season that had anybody convinced we'd have picked up any points under Sherwood.

There wasn't a team we played who really had any sort of form whilst Sherwood was in charge this season. Palace at a push.

Losses at home to Manure, Swansea (who not won in 10), Albion, Sturke as well away at the worst Liverpool and Chelsea sides in I dunno how long.

This coupled with 3 utterly dismal results at the tail end of last season meant his time was up.

[Tokyo Sexwhale]

I'm not sure what it was about the first half of the season that had anybody convinced we'd have picked up any points under Sherwood.

Under Sherwood, we at least looked like we were in the game.  Other than Chelsea, our defeats were by the odd goal - often some stupid defensive mistake, condeding late goals and yes the odd tactical error  - but with a bit of luck we could have gotten more points.

[Lastfootstamper]

He was getting madder by the day. I dread to think what insanity he'd have inflicted upon us by now. I recall nothing to make me think we'd be better off had he stayed. He didn't know what he was doing, and he built a team that reflected this. I can't understate the mortal damage I feel he did in a relatively brief time. The bloke's an arse, yet he's out of the shit while we drown in it.

[brian green]

Tokyo, do you really think under Sherwood we "were in the game"?

The most important game we have played under the last four managers was played last May at Wembley.  Goals nil, corners nil, shots on goal nil.   That was when the Sherwood edifice came tumbling down.  We could have lost that game 10-0 and it would have been a fair result.

[old man villa fan]

It's called being professional.

We are into the 'grass is greener .......' territory with many fans now.

To me, the difference in the working situation handed to each of the managers is that Sherwood started with virtually an injury free squad and a squad that had the start of the season confidence, whereas Garde had the exact opposite.

the grass couldn't be much less green than being possibly the worst side in premier league history, having pretty much no likeable players, waving the white flag in matches and having open discontent between fans, players, manager and board .  So yes, to me at least, there are several scenarios where the grass is greener and it's hard to think of any where the grass is less green.

Grass is greener in the context of the alternative is always better e.g. X player gets better the longer he is not selected or somebody else will do a better job. Impossible to prove or disprove unless the change is made. Comparisons of things that have happened in the past can be discussed based on facts. Things in the future are just speculation to enhance an opinion.

[Proposition Joe]

Did anyone listen to the first game of the season on 5Live, away at Bournemouth.  Joey Barton was the co-commentator and was basically applying for a job with us with his comments - he was a free agent at the time.

In hindsight, he would have been a really usefully addition to the wet behind the ears recruits we bought in, not to mention he fancies himself as a francophile (and claimed to know Ayew to a certain degree).  It's easy to remember the terrible rut we got into under Sherwood that he couldn't get us out of, but early in the season we were definitely on top in a lot of games, to be later either undone by an opposition tactical switch or naivety.  Barton would certainly have made a difference in the latter case, bit of steel and nouse.

[Ian.]

Sherwood should never have got the job, I think anyone and his dog would have kept us up last season but the big surprise was the cup run.

How can you drop your main goalkeeper, play a nearly 40 year old who then leaves in the summer and not replace the goalkeeper you lost faith in?

Also to replace Benteke with a 2nd Division striker was a massive mistake.

Come the end we saw the true Tim Sherwood, he blagged his interview and he knew it.

[Ads]

I'm not sure what it was about the first half of the season that had anybody convinced we'd have picked up any points under Sherwood.

Under Sherwood, we at least looked like we were in the game.  Other than Chelsea, our defeats were by the odd goal - often some stupid defensive mistake, condeding late goals and yes the odd tactical error  - but with a bit of luck we could have gotten more points.

Luck doesn't exist. We got four points because that's what we deserved.