Poll - Sherwood - got rid

[SamTheMouse]

Scoring goals is not really the problem though is it at the moment? It's keeping them out which is buggering us up. Throw in one or two of Sherwood's blunders and we are where are. It can change though because overall, under Sherwood, we don't look too bad a side.

Yet, there we are, second from bottom. Don't get me wrong, I take your point, sometimes we look decent. We looked more than decent at Leicester until Tim tried to change some things.

The "looked good for spells" argument (not saying you are talking about this, but in general) - how often have we heard that precise sentence over the last few years? Fuck knows. Lots.

The problem is, you don't get points for a decent half here and there, it takes much more than that.

Exactly. I remember being impressed with some of the performances under Lambert, especially early on in his tenure. He even managed to win at Anfield. It didn't make him a good manager.

[Clampy]

Scoring goals is not really the problem though is it at the moment? It's keeping them out which is buggering us up. Throw in one or two of Sherwood's blunders and we are where are. It can change though because overall, under Sherwood, we don't look too bad a side.

Yet, there we are, second from bottom. Don't get me wrong, I take your point, sometimes we look decent. We looked more than decent at Leicester until Tim tried to change some things.

The "looked good for spells" argument (not saying you are talking about this, but in general) - how often have we heard that precise sentence over the last few years? Fuck knows. Lots.

The problem is, you don't get points for a decent half here and there, it takes much more than that.

Yes I know, but there's promise there. I'd be more worried if we creating nothing at all. We were coasting at Leicester and despite playing really poorly on saturday, we managed to somehow score two. It's not good enough at the moment, but there are signs there that it could be given time. We were dire under McLeish and Lambert. I don't think we are under Sherwood, just very naive at times.

[Toronto Villa]

it doesn't. It just means we should have bought a forward. In fact Benteke is a perfect example against the notion of net spend. There have been plenty of forwards bought for much more than we spent on Benteke without close to the same level of return. In fact had we spent four times as much on him we'd still be ahead. The fact is we used our available resources to find a player that for not very much was superb. We could have bought someone else for twice the price and not had anything like the same performance. In simplistic terms I would argue this season instead of bringing in Ayew and Gestede for example we'd be better off for a little bit more getting Austin. Our net spend would have been much the same but we'd have a player who scores goals. We create chances but don't convert as many as we should. That has been Sherwood's main transfer failing.

But how often does a Benteke come along? We can;t just expect the club to unearth a gem like that every summer. That's just pie in the sky stuff. Because we bought Beneteke for £7m and sold him for £32.5 net spend should no longer be a consideration for transfer-budgets?

I just don’t understand this blind-eye people are willing to turn to net spend. It’s like me telling you you’ve got £100k to make improvements to your house, but then knocking down your garage and setting fire to your kitchen. You’re not going to improve your house by the overall spend, are you? Now imagine your house is already the shittest house on the block...

If you have £100k to improve your house but you really need £200k you make as many good choices as you can within your budget until such time as you can invest more. Also while making those choices, if two blokes offer you very similar kitchen cabinets, you're not going to go and spend 30% more just because it makes you feel better, or so you can tell your neighbour you spent more.

[Toronto Villa]

Scoring goals is not really the problem though is it at the moment? It's keeping them out which is buggering us up. Throw in one or two of Sherwood's blunders and we are where are. It can change though because overall, under Sherwood, we don't look too bad a side.

Yet, there we are, second from bottom. Don't get me wrong, I take your point, sometimes we look decent. We looked more than decent at Leicester until Tim tried to change some things.

The "looked good for spells" argument (not saying you are talking about this, but in general) - how often have we heard that precise sentence over the last few years? Fuck knows. Lots.

The problem is, you don't get points for a decent half here and there, it takes much more than that.

Yes I know, but there's promise there. I'd be more worried if we creating nothing at all. We were coasting at Leicester and despite playing really poorly on saturday, we managed to somehow score two. It's not good enough at the moment, but there are signs there that it could be given time. We were dire under McLeish and Lambert. I don't think we are under Sherwood, just very naive at times.

what concerns be massively is that we are becoming quite predictable. When it comes off it looks great, but we don't create anything through the middle and if we play through the middle Gestede is useless. And outside of scoring we must give the ball away more than any other side which must drive the manager mad. Is it something he's doing or just the players? Either way when we do we seem to leave massive gaps for the opponents to coast through. And this isn't a Sherwood issue. It's been going on for ages now.

[RussellC]

it doesn't. It just means we should have bought a forward. In fact Benteke is a perfect example against the notion of net spend. There have been plenty of forwards bought for much more than we spent on Benteke without close to the same level of return. In fact had we spent four times as much on him we'd still be ahead. The fact is we used our available resources to find a player that for not very much was superb. We could have bought someone else for twice the price and not had anything like the same performance. In simplistic terms I would argue this season instead of bringing in Ayew and Gestede for example we'd be better off for a little bit more getting Austin. Our net spend would have been much the same but we'd have a player who scores goals. We create chances but don't convert as many as we should. That has been Sherwood's main transfer failing.

But how often does a Benteke come along? We can;t just expect the club to unearth a gem like that every summer. That's just pie in the sky stuff. Because we bought Beneteke for £7m and sold him for £32.5 net spend should no longer be a consideration for transfer-budgets?

I just don’t understand this blind-eye people are willing to turn to net spend. It’s like me telling you you’ve got £100k to make improvements to your house, but then knocking down your garage and setting fire to your kitchen. You’re not going to improve your house by the overall spend, are you? Now imagine your house is already the shittest house on the block...

If you have £100k to improve your house but you really need £200k you make as many good choices as you can within your budget until such time as you can invest more. Also while making those choices, if two blokes offer you very similar kitchen cabinets, you're not going to go and spend 30% more just because it makes you feel better, or so you can tell your neighbour you spent more.

If you're competing for best house in the road (or at least aiming not to be amongst the 3 worse ones) you probably are.

[kippaxvilla2]

I accept it is a different age but can you imagine what the clamour would be now for SGT to get the boot given his record up to when we turned the corner in his first season?  Remember we couldn't win at home (sound familiar)?  We lost at home to Blues.  What about his first season back in the old First Division - not fantastic was it?  He would have been out by October in his first season if the internet had been invented then.

[kippaxvilla2]

And it was a very similar overhaul job he had to complete when he came in - I remember him describing the club as a shambles.  It was close to that under Lambert.

[Clampy]

Let's take Saturday for instance. There's no way we should be letting them score straight after we pulled it back to 2-1, that's where the naivety comes in and we need to cut that kind of thing out. We were very poor on Saturday but with a bit more nous, we could have got a point we probably wouldn't have deserved.

[Chico Hamilton III]

And it was a very similar overhaul job he had to complete when he came in - I remember him describing the club as a shambles.  It was close to that under Lambert.

Under Taylor, I seem to remember going on a long undefeated run from October until the end of the year, winning about 7 games in the process. Same again from Sherwood and he should keep his job. And be mentioned in the same sentence as Graham Taylor.

Never mind the internet, Sherwood should be grateful he wasn't in charge of Villa when the Argus letters page was around.....

[Risso]

He did indeed, and that was never going to be turned round over night.  However, the end to last season and the start to this has been woeful, and whatever he said after the Liverpool game at the weekend, his view last season was that this wasn't going to be another season of struggle. He's actually given us the worst start to a season since we last went down, and needs to turn things round quick smart. 

I'd imagine that when Sherwood said that he probably thought he'd have Vlaar, Delph, Cleverley and around £40m to play around with in the forthcoming summer.

That said, I fully agree that we need an upturn in results and soon. Very soon.

I don't think Vlaar would have made any difference at all, as Richards looks much, much better at every facet of the game.  He's isn't made of straw, and actually leads the team by example.  If Vlaar had attempted the sorts of tackles that Richards was making against SHA, they'd still be scraping bit of him up now.  And Delph/Gueye seems almost like an exact swap, so it's only really Benteke that's the big miss in my opinion.  And would Sherwood really have expected him to stay?  I doubt it somehow.

[Risso]

I see the OS is spinning the "youthful side" bullshit again today.

The average age of the side that started against Liverpool was 26. Hardly an U21 team ffs.

Talking out of his arse.  Going on about players who are both young and haven't played in England before.

All of the following who started at the weekend are neither young (in the footballing sense of the word) nor lacking experience in English football:

Guzan, Hutton, Richards, Lescott, Sanchez, Gestede, Sinclair, Westwood.  And of the others, Amavi (both young and foreign) has probably been our most consistent player this season.  It isn't youth and inexperience that's been costing us, it's been poor organisation, individual mistakes, rubbish tactics and inexplicable substitutions, plus sticking with tediously shit players like Gabby (again, both English and not young).

[Toronto Villa]

I see the OS is spinning the "youthful side" bullshit again today.

The average age of the side that started against Liverpool was 26. Hardly an U21 team ffs.

Talking out of his arse.  Going on about players who are both young and haven't played in England before.

All of the following who started at the weekend are neither young (in the footballing sense of the word) nor lacking experience in English football:

Guzan, Hutton, Richards, Lescott, Sanchez, Gestede, Sinclair, Westwood.  And of the others, Amavi (both young and foreign) has probably been our most consistent player this season.  It isn't youth and inexperience that's been costing us, it's been poor organisation, individual mistakes, rubbish tactics and inexplicable substitutions, plus sticking with tediously shit players like Gabby (again, both English and not young).

His recent comments are appearing desperate and acknowledgement of frustration that he can't figure it out.

[Toronto Villa]

it doesn't. It just means we should have bought a forward. In fact Benteke is a perfect example against the notion of net spend. There have been plenty of forwards bought for much more than we spent on Benteke without close to the same level of return. In fact had we spent four times as much on him we'd still be ahead. The fact is we used our available resources to find a player that for not very much was superb. We could have bought someone else for twice the price and not had anything like the same performance. In simplistic terms I would argue this season instead of bringing in Ayew and Gestede for example we'd be better off for a little bit more getting Austin. Our net spend would have been much the same but we'd have a player who scores goals. We create chances but don't convert as many as we should. That has been Sherwood's main transfer failing.

But how often does a Benteke come along? We can;t just expect the club to unearth a gem like that every summer. That's just pie in the sky stuff. Because we bought Beneteke for £7m and sold him for £32.5 net spend should no longer be a consideration for transfer-budgets?

I just don’t understand this blind-eye people are willing to turn to net spend. It’s like me telling you you’ve got £100k to make improvements to your house, but then knocking down your garage and setting fire to your kitchen. You’re not going to improve your house by the overall spend, are you? Now imagine your house is already the shittest house on the block...

If you have £100k to improve your house but you really need £200k you make as many good choices as you can within your budget until such time as you can invest more. Also while making those choices, if two blokes offer you very similar kitchen cabinets, you're not going to go and spend 30% more just because it makes you feel better, or so you can tell your neighbour you spent more.

If you're competing for best house in the road (or at least aiming not to be amongst the 3 worse ones) you probably are.

You've lost me. You'd spend more than you need to on your cabinets for no reason at all and something that doesn't add any incremental value just so you can tell people you spent more. Is that right?

[Hookeysmith]

Let's take Saturday for instance. There's no way we should be letting them score straight after we pulled it back to 2-1, that's where the naivety comes in and we need to cut that kind of thing out. We were very poor on Saturday but with a bit more nous, we could have got a point we probably wouldn't have deserved.

Hutton, Richards and Lescott are hardly naïve youngsters as well so you cannot legislate for a collective switch off  - which has happened a few times this year

Bournemouth - a few said we rode our luck but the stats showed good possession and actually more attempts than the home side

Man U - never really created much but neither did they - deflected goal

Palace - not great buy how do you legislate for Amavi cocking it up at the death?

Sunderland - once we were in a winning position an individual error cost us not tactics or shape

Leicester - Granted - manager got this wrong with his call - but, 2-0 away from home with a lot of pace up front get the 3rd goal and it was game over - he gambled and lost

Bitters - just collectively awful - give a Pulis team a goal start and its as good as over

Liverpoo - what did we all say "put pressure on them, keep it tight and fans will turn" although we can question Sinclair instead of Ayew etc how do you legislate to keeping it tight by giving them a goal after 70 seconds

These are not offered as excuses but it shows me the margins are so thin between where we are and where we could be. I like his arrogance and confidence we are good enough to sort it out, I do think its only a matter of time before we gel (the magic word)

Managers also need a slice of luck, an unforeseen injury meaning you play another choice instead of a regular, a formation is found rather than worked on (SGT 1 certainly had this)

We have to give him time. The most pleasing thing is that the players seemingly want to play for him (Kozak aside)

[Dr Butler]

spot on for me Hookey...

UTV
The Doc