Bruce Sacked at last (now official)

[Mister E]

The rumours to which I referred of course hinted that Keith Wyness is a bigger fan of Steve Bruce than Tony Xia is.  If that rumour is to be believed how certain is the future of Bruce, Wyness or even Tony Xia if we fall short of promotion?  A summer with another season in the Championship staring us in the face could be a very turbulent one indeed.

Yes, I posed the question a few pages back about whether the Good Doctor would want to hang around for another tier-two season. Not that I have any insight as to his level of commitment to this Project.

[paul_e]

They do when they're 5 ft nothing and spend most of those 34 up front on their own trying to do something with long balls punted up to them.

I've said it before but it's like spending £200k on a Ferrari and then complaining about it being rubbish at pulling the plough in your field.

This is the point really, he is a terrible footballer (in context of what we paid and what we're trying to achieve) but he can be a decent striker in a team built to play a specific way.  I don't think either of those views contradicts the other and I don't think it's impossible to hold both views.

[Mister E]

Hogan I think is somewhere in the middle, he can be an effective striker but I think he's a poor footballer.  He's clearly not capable of adapting to suit a style that he isn't used to because he doesn't have the technical skills needed.  I wanted to see him with a functioning midfield behind him before I properly judged him and he is better then but, for me, he's still not good enough to be at a club that has serious ambitions to get promotion.

My biggest issue is the number of signings he's made to be 2nd or 3rd choice when we have youngsters in those positions that need game time.  I'd happily see Lansbury, Onomah and Bjarnason taken out of the squad and replaced by O'Hare and Doyle-Hayes, I think Suliman and Mitch Clark offer as much as Samba was ever going to as backup defenders and I'd happily have RHM on the bench ahead of Hogan.

Absolutely where my head has been ... and we'll probably see something like this next season if we continue to be in the second tier.

[Mister E]

Re Hogan, yesterday's game absolutely summed up why he has been so poor for us (yes, I know he didn't play much of the game, but just go with my thinking!).
We spent most of the game hoiking the ball into the snowy sky (which made it very difficult for us to see it!) so that the large, cumbersome Bolton CB could smash it back at us. Last night was the classic opportunity to play the ball through the channels and let the opposition make mistakes.
Hogan has had crap service, and it is the manager and his coaching team that bear the responsibility for making the best use of the assets at their disposal.
Since our MF has not contained any decent ball-playing players for a while, it does beg the question why Hogan was purchased (or, why we haven't obtained a couple of better midfielders).

[robleflaneur]

The issue for me is not how good his signings have been,most came with good reputations except for Taylor who got awful ratings from a fan here who regularly watched Swansea,but his use of those players.
Bree ,Hourihane and Lansbury seem to have gone backwards.Hogan started to shine only when Agnew came.Thor arrived with Bruce singing his praises and how the fans would take to him.Most fans praise Chester,Terry and Johnston but even with a defensive midfielder shielding them,our defence is only the 5th best in this league,on a par with Millwall...And where are the chances for the youngsters to reinvigorate this team ?As he said in an interview when Sunderland boss 'I don't do tactics' How would these players perform under the Serbian warlord at Fulham or the Villa fan at Brentford ?

[Ad@m]

They do when they're 5 ft nothing and spend most of those 34 up front on their own trying to do something with long balls punted up to them.

I've said it before but it's like spending £200k on a Ferrari and then complaining about it being rubbish at pulling the plough in your field.

This is the point really, he is a terrible footballer (in context of what we paid and what we're trying to achieve) but he can be a decent striker in a team built to play a specific way.  I don't think either of those views contradicts the other and I don't think it's impossible to hold both views.

It is. If a players a good player in certain ways and uses then he's a good player. I imagine Messi is crap in goal but that doesn't mean he's both a good and terrible player.

Bruce has admitted that he signed Hogan and Hourihane because they had the best stats in the league. That's the sort of management any of us who obsessed over Championship Manager as kids could've done.

[paul_e]

They do when they're 5 ft nothing and spend most of those 34 up front on their own trying to do something with long balls punted up to them.

I've said it before but it's like spending £200k on a Ferrari and then complaining about it being rubbish at pulling the plough in your field.

This is the point really, he is a terrible footballer (in context of what we paid and what we're trying to achieve) but he can be a decent striker in a team built to play a specific way.  I don't think either of those views contradicts the other and I don't think it's impossible to hold both views.

It is. If a players a good player in certain ways and uses then he's a good player. I imagine Messi is crap in goal but that doesn't mean he's both a good and terrible player.

Bruce has admitted that he signed Hogan and Hourihane because they had the best stats in the league. That's the sort of management any of us who obsessed over Championship Manager as kids could've done.

Using an absurd example weakens your point rather than making it, a mistake you've made twice now.  Hogan is a striker, and we've always played him as a striker, but he's only been effective in about 4 games out of 30 and when he doesn't score he contributes nothing.  In the car world he wouldn't be a ferrari, he'd be a drag racer, decent at 1 very specific function but totally out of place in any other setting.  By quoting Messi or Ferrari you're suggesting that he's 'top of the class' in what he does but he's nowhere near that.

He's a poor footballer because he's got a poor touch, poor pass, can't hold up the ball or bring other players into the game, however he can time a run and is an ok finisher, the latter 2 meaning that in a team that is creating gaps around the box and playing lots of through balls he'll score goals but you have to play that specific way all the time.  He scored a shedload for Brentford last season and yet they were a bottom half team for the entire time and were better after he left (when he was there they averaged about a goal a game, after he left they averaged over 2).

[Risso]

Hogan came on for 18 minutes yesterday, and managed to touch the ball three times.

[Steve67]

Hogan is just a poor fit for our style of play. Grabban is much better for that and imo we'd be second now if we'd signed him in August.

Again lack of attention to detail. I still think Bruce just saw a striker scoring loads in the championship and thought he'd do the same here without properly checking what sort of service he needed.

I agree with this. Hogan is a better player with the ball played properly to him.  Bruce has done Hogan no favours at all with the tactical stuff.  Then again, Grabban does seem a better fit with where we are currently.

[Mister E]

Just watching Wigan and how Morsy and Roberts are dominating midfield. Yes, Southampton are giving them space but their ball retention puts us to shame.

[Clark W Griswold]

Hogan is just a poor fit for our style of play. Grabban is much better for that and imo we'd be second now if we'd signed him in August.

Again lack of attention to detail. I still think Bruce just saw a striker scoring loads in the championship and thought he'd do the same here without properly checking what sort of service he needed.

I agree with this. Hogan is a better player with the ball played properly to him.  Bruce has done Hogan no favours at all with the tactical stuff.  Then again, Grabban does seem a better fit with where we are currently.

Grabban is more mobile and physical, therefore he suits the way we play (particularly with 1 up front) better. From what i've seen of Grabban so far it is a mystery to me why he hasn't done better in the game. Even taking the 'suits us better than Hogan' out of it, he actually looks a better player full stop and as it stands there is no question who i'd pick out of the two.
But, i still think Hogan is a good striker for this league, we've seen glimpses of it here despite the bad fit and 21 goals in 30 odd appearances for Brentford only quite recently would back that up.

[Drummond]

They do when they're 5 ft nothing and spend most of those 34 up front on their own trying to do something with long balls punted up to them.

I've said it before but it's like spending £200k on a Ferrari and then complaining about it being rubbish at pulling the plough in your field.

This is the point really, he is a terrible footballer (in context of what we paid and what we're trying to achieve) but he can be a decent striker in a team built to play a specific way.  I don't think either of those views contradicts the other and I don't think it's impossible to hold both views.

It is. If a players a good player in certain ways and uses then he's a good player. I imagine Messi is crap in goal but that doesn't mean he's both a good and terrible player.

Bruce has admitted that he signed Hogan and Hourihane because they had the best stats in the league. That's the sort of management any of us who obsessed over Championship Manager as kids could've done.

Using an absurd example weakens your point rather than making it, a mistake you've made twice now.  Hogan is a striker, and we've always played him as a striker, but he's only been effective in about 4 games out of 30 and when he doesn't score he contributes nothing.  In the car world he wouldn't be a ferrari, he'd be a drag racer, decent at 1 very specific function but totally out of place in any other setting.  By quoting Messi or Ferrari you're suggesting that he's 'top of the class' in what he does but he's nowhere near that.

He's a poor footballer because he's got a poor touch, poor pass, can't hold up the ball or bring other players into the game, however he can time a run and is an ok finisher, the latter 2 meaning that in a team that is creating gaps around the box and playing lots of through balls he'll score goals but you have to play that specific way all the time.  He scored a shedload for Brentford last season and yet they were a bottom half team for the entire time and were better after he left (when he was there they averaged about a goal a game, after he left they averaged over 2).

You real a patronising (blank) aren't you?

Hogan was bought because he scored a lot of goals and had a great strike rate, pretty much what any team needing a striker will look for. Just because he's not working particularly well in our system doesn't make him shit.

[Ads]

You're talking shite. It bears repeating.

Where was your I used to go in the 70s, I wouldn't pay to watch this shite, I love being a faddy Scouser routine after we smashed the Dingles. Bore off.

Why don’t you drop the hardman routine you try and cultivate on here, stop being such an arrogant arsehole. People can have different opinions to you, you’re not the authority on all things Aston Villa.
 

Whose cultivating anything? I speak as I find,as you've always done yourself.

[Allan C]

I think Snoddgrass, Johnestone, Elmo, Hourihane, Grabban and Bjarnasson have done ok for us. Each to their own if others think they're crap I suppose.

3 of the 6 are loan deals they are not our players I was talking about actual signings that we would be going forward building a team for the top league with

and there isn’t any

You said like the rest of his signings. He signed them on loan. They are one's he's brought in so they count.

Shall we leave it there?
[/quo
But John e’s argument is correct as we will lose the loan players at the end of the season most likely. I like Snoddy and Johnstone and they will be difficult to replace.

[Monty]

I remember looking at Darren Bent's career and noticing how the more goals he scored, the fewer his team did overall. It was especially noticeable at Spurs I seem to recall. A kind of inverted Heskey, who helped the team overall but didn't pull his own weight on front of goal.