Emi Martinez

[KevinGage]

Also, in the case of Martinez, he sounded pissed off with our cup exit in Jan - a game he wasn't even allowed to feature in.

It was a nonsense decision to give Olsen more minutes after all the minutes he had prior to Stevenage.

It all matters.

[Risso]

Also, in the case of Martinez, he sounded pissed off with our cup exit in Jan - a game he wasn't even allowed to feature in.

It was a nonsense decision to give Olsen more minutes after all the minutes he had prior to Stevenage.

It all matters.

Yep, madness from Emery that.

[chrisw1]

Also, in the case of Martinez, he sounded pissed off with our cup exit in Jan - a game he wasn't even allowed to feature in.

It was a nonsense decision to give Olsen more minutes after all the minutes he had prior to Stevenage.

It all matters.

Yep, madness from Emery that.

I definitely felt so at the time, but we were playing Stevenage and there's more to that loss than the keeper.  Martinez has admitted he was still effected mentally by the w/c win, so maybe it was an understandable decision all circumstances considered.  The tuth is we should have smashed them whoever was in goal.

[KevinGage]

He'd had time off to spend Christmas with the family - unusual enough for a footballer at that time of year.

The U21s might have been good enough to beat Stevenage, we'll never know.

What we do know is we didn't give ourselves the best possible chance to win that game. Some get that point, some don't.  There are a finite amount of chances a player like Martinez has to win a cup with Villa.

Our selections in both cup games under Emery looked more like we had fixtures to fulfill and wanted to get them out of the way.

[chrisw1]

He'd had time off to spend Christmas with the family - unusual enough for a footballer at that time of year.

The U21s might have been good enough to beat Stevenage, we'll never know.

What we do know is we didn't give ourselves the best possible chance to win that game. Some get that point, some don't.  There are a finite amount of chances a player like Martinez has to win a cup with Villa.

Our selections in both cup games under Emery looked more like we had fixtures to fulfill and wanted to get them out of the way.

Even so, if he wasn't mentally right picking him may not have been giving ourselves the best chance.  At the time I thought he should have been back playing sooner, but he's said himself he was struggling after the win.

The truth is almost every team in the top two leagues would have made changes against Stevenage.  The selection wasn't the problem, the performance was.

[Clark W Griswold]

I’m sick to death of reading people seemingly happy to sell our best players but then moan when we’re hovering around the relegation zone when we have a bang average squad going nowhere. Who exactly would we replace Martinez with??? He’s currently our only world class player so let’s sell him!!!! We should be building around him and showing our ambition to encourage him to stay.

Yep true Allan. The only thing is, we have seen this before where top players pretty much always want to play in the CL. We're miles off it, probably some distance off Europe if we're honest and although Martinez isn't that old for a Goalkeeper he's certainly in his peak years. I don't want to see him go and i'm damn sure whoever we bring in will be well off the standard but i think with the way players are, and if he's desperate to go and we get a suitable fee i think how we are at the moment we'd have to accept it.

[Lastfootstamper]

Maybe we should point out to any want-away players that ex-Villa players lured by a promise of CL football have, at best, by and large, been anonymous and ineffectual in it.

[Bent Neilsens Screamer]

I see sections of the media are selling him for us now: they can all fork off!

If he does wants to go, just hope it's abroad, and not to anyone else here. I'm sick of us selling our best players!

I hope if it does happen it’s abroad as well but money could be a problem. A Villa podcast thought Chelsea and I could see that, we’d likely get the biggest fee possible the way that their throwing it around like confetti.

Chelsea are well stocked with keepers.  You'd think Man U or Spurs would be the most likely candidates in the PL.

Personally I don't think we should consider selling him unless his relationship with Emery becomes untenable.  The net profit after we've replaced him won't be that much and I just can't see how FFP can be a problem given our net spend over the last two seasons is about £48m (according to Transfermarkt)

Mendy was first choice but has been replaced by the previously mocked Kepa. I think the last transfer window proved that it doesn’t matter what Chelsea need, they’ll spend indiscriminately.

I don’t think FFP will come into it it’s more a case of leaving to further his career.

[Clark W Griswold]

Maybe we should point out to any want-away players that ex-Villa players lured by a promise of CL football have, at best, by and large, been anonymous and ineffectual in it.

Not sure i'd agree, Yorke and Milner had some great times for starters, the likes of Young and Barry i don't remember struggling too much. You wouldn't say Grealish has looked out of place either.

I think what we need to do is show want away players that we actually mean business and really go for it in the transfer window. It still might be too late for Martinez but for someone like Kamara who i'm sure will be the next example, we need to finally stop the fannying about and build a squad this summer that for starters is going to bang on the door of those Europa League places.

[eamonn]

the best goalkeeper in the world?
No

Did you see the other two contenders last night?

T-bow made a right howler.

And I've never known an Alison with such thick facial hair. Could Elvis Costello sing his song looking deep into those goalkeeping eyes? I doubt it.

[Rigadon]

I’m sick to death of reading people seemingly happy to sell our best players but then moan when we’re hovering around the relegation zone when we have a bang average squad going nowhere. Who exactly would we replace Martinez with??? He’s currently our only world class player so let’s sell him!!!! We should be building around him and showing our ambition to encourage him to stay.

Who is saying they'd be happy?  Most seem to be saying they don't want him to leave / be sold, with some resigned to the notion that he probably will be.  With the league being so weak this year, our chance to show ambition was January.  Maybe there's method in the decision not to splurge (right players being available etc), but I'd imagine that's all a bit meaningless for an over-30 year old player who's stock is as high as it ever will be.  And even if wed have spent big to leap the might of Brighton and Fulham into contention with 4th place, that STILL might not have convinced / worked.  He will also likely have a release clause, so no amount of ambition shown / promised will matter if he wants out and a club he wants to go to triggers that clause. 

[Smithy]

I thought Martinez had a poor game - his distribution was way off.  But that doesn't mean he's suddenly a shit keeper and we should sell him.

I've not got a problem with him going up for the corner.  Sometimes it pays off - it's a hail Mary.

Emery was very that he won’t be doing it again.

He's an idiot then. It was the 98th minute, we're 3-2 down, sure Emi's unlikely to score but he can add a bit of chaos in the box and maybe somebody else might score. I'm really struggling to understand why he's making such a big fuss over nothing. The media have picked up on it accusing him of throwing Emi under the bus etc. It's all very Steven Gerrard.

Our goal difference is at LEAST 10 worse than every team above us. And so goal difference could well cost us a place (or more) in the league come May. As others have said, it's SO rare that goalie going up actually results in a goal (not necessarily from them scoring it), that it should only be an option if the goal has huge positive consequences, and also negligible negative consequences if you lose another goal i.e. You're about to go out of a cup, or it's the final couple of games in the season and you need the point(s) to avoid relegation or to get a place in Europe.  A league game in Feb simply doesn't qualify, as losing a goal has consequences.

We lost 2-1 to Arsenal earlier in the season, but I don't remember Emi going up for a set-piece late in that game? If the third goal wasn't an OG I don't think he goes up - it was a rush of blood to the head based on him feeling responsible for us being behind against his old club.

It won't happen again, I'm sure of that.

Left with a choice of potentially getting a point or having no points and one additional goal in the minus column, I know what I'd choose. When you factor in the timing, a pissed off, emotional Emi or not, he made the right decision. Emery had so much to comment on about the game especially their third goal but he decided to be ridiculously petty instead. Each to their own.

Agree it won't happen again, more's the pity.

He didn't make the right decision though. We didn't score, and we immediately conceded. So it was the wrong decision. As I said above, sending the goalie up is an act of desperation, and ONLY makes sense if the rewards for a single goal FAR exceed the costs of conceding another one.  A league game for a mid-table team in Feb simply doesn't qualify.

Games are lost by the odd goal dozens of times every single weekend up and down the county, and do you know how many times the keeper goes up in the last couple of minutes? It's practically zero, because in 95% of cases the potential rewards do not outweigh the potential risks.

If a goal in the 93rd minute would get us into Europe in our last game of the season, then by all means, send in the entire cavalry.  But when you're 1-down in Feb to the league leaders? Nah.

So theoretically, come the end of the season you'd prefer we have less one goal against than one more point. You say it was the wrong decision because we didn't score but had we scored, what, it would have been the right decision? Maybe if Emery has said it was pointless Emi going up for the final corner in the last minute of the game because we're shit at corners and still don't know how to take them*, he'd have a more valid point.

*Luiz had been subbed.

No, I'd much prefer the point. Who wouldn't?  But the mistake you've made is in thinking that us scoring a goal while the keeper is up is AS LIKELY as us conceding one when he's up. It's not. One is FAR more likely than the other. I don't have the numbers required to tell you what those probabilities are, but I guarantee the clubs know them. 

If having your goalie go up for a set piece increased your chances of scoring more than it increased your chances of conceding, then EVERY club would do it - for EVERY single set piece.  The simple fact is it doesn't. The opposite is true. It makes it more likely you'll concede, which is why teams don't do it.  Attackers and the ball move FAR quicker than goalies, so if you DON'T score you're facing a counter attack with your goal defended by players who can't use their hands while your goalie "sprints" back into position.

As I've said repeatedly, it's a desperate last throw of the dice, and generally only makes sense when the risk of conceding another goal makes little to no difference.

If we sent Emi up for every corner we get for the rest of the season, do you think we'd score more than we concede in the minute or so from the corner being awarded?

[LukeJames]

I thought Martinez had a poor game - his distribution was way off.  But that doesn't mean he's suddenly a shit keeper and we should sell him.

I've not got a problem with him going up for the corner.  Sometimes it pays off - it's a hail Mary.

Emery was very that he won’t be doing it again.

He's an idiot then. It was the 98th minute, we're 3-2 down, sure Emi's unlikely to score but he can add a bit of chaos in the box and maybe somebody else might score. I'm really struggling to understand why he's making such a big fuss over nothing. The media have picked up on it accusing him of throwing Emi under the bus etc. It's all very Steven Gerrard.

Our goal difference is at LEAST 10 worse than every team above us. And so goal difference could well cost us a place (or more) in the league come May. As others have said, it's SO rare that goalie going up actually results in a goal (not necessarily from them scoring it), that it should only be an option if the goal has huge positive consequences, and also negligible negative consequences if you lose another goal i.e. You're about to go out of a cup, or it's the final couple of games in the season and you need the point(s) to avoid relegation or to get a place in Europe.  A league game in Feb simply doesn't qualify, as losing a goal has consequences.

We lost 2-1 to Arsenal earlier in the season, but I don't remember Emi going up for a set-piece late in that game? If the third goal wasn't an OG I don't think he goes up - it was a rush of blood to the head based on him feeling responsible for us being behind against his old club.

It won't happen again, I'm sure of that.

Left with a choice of potentially getting a point or having no points and one additional goal in the minus column, I know what I'd choose. When you factor in the timing, a pissed off, emotional Emi or not, he made the right decision. Emery had so much to comment on about the game especially their third goal but he decided to be ridiculously petty instead. Each to their own.

Agree it won't happen again, more's the pity.

He didn't make the right decision though. We didn't score, and we immediately conceded. So it was the wrong decision. As I said above, sending the goalie up is an act of desperation, and ONLY makes sense if the rewards for a single goal FAR exceed the costs of conceding another one.  A league game for a mid-table team in Feb simply doesn't qualify.

Games are lost by the odd goal dozens of times every single weekend up and down the county, and do you know how many times the keeper goes up in the last couple of minutes? It's practically zero, because in 95% of cases the potential rewards do not outweigh the potential risks.

If a goal in the 93rd minute would get us into Europe in our last game of the season, then by all means, send in the entire cavalry.  But when you're 1-down in Feb to the league leaders? Nah.

So theoretically, come the end of the season you'd prefer we have less one goal against than one more point. You say it was the wrong decision because we didn't score but had we scored, what, it would have been the right decision? Maybe if Emery has said it was pointless Emi going up for the final corner in the last minute of the game because we're shit at corners and still don't know how to take them*, he'd have a more valid point.

*Luiz had been subbed.

No, I'd much prefer the point. Who wouldn't?  But the mistake you've made is in thinking that us scoring a goal while the keeper is up is AS LIKELY as us conceding one when he's up. It's not. One is FAR more likely than the other. I don't have the numbers required to tell you what those probabilities are, but I guarantee the clubs know them. 

If having your goalie go up for a set piece increased your chances of scoring more than it increased your chances of conceding, then EVERY club would do it - for EVERY single set piece.  The simple fact is it doesn't. The opposite is true. It makes it more likely you'll concede, which is why teams don't do it.  Attackers and the ball move FAR quicker than goalies, so if you DON'T score you're facing a counter attack with your goal defended by players who can't use their hands while your goalie "sprints" back into position.

As I've said repeatedly, it's a desperate last throw of the dice, and generally only makes sense when the risk of conceding another goal makes little to no difference.

Like saturday.

[Chris Smith]

In his post match interview Emery said he didn’t have the exact figures but “maybe it’s one goal out of 100 [that goalkeepers score from corners].

‘And maybe 20 times they [the opposition] are doing the transition and 10 times they will score a goal. And today, it happened.”

[Smithy]

I thought Martinez had a poor game - his distribution was way off.  But that doesn't mean he's suddenly a shit keeper and we should sell him.

I've not got a problem with him going up for the corner.  Sometimes it pays off - it's a hail Mary.

Emery was very that he won’t be doing it again.

He's an idiot then. It was the 98th minute, we're 3-2 down, sure Emi's unlikely to score but he can add a bit of chaos in the box and maybe somebody else might score. I'm really struggling to understand why he's making such a big fuss over nothing. The media have picked up on it accusing him of throwing Emi under the bus etc. It's all very Steven Gerrard.

Our goal difference is at LEAST 10 worse than every team above us. And so goal difference could well cost us a place (or more) in the league come May. As others have said, it's SO rare that goalie going up actually results in a goal (not necessarily from them scoring it), that it should only be an option if the goal has huge positive consequences, and also negligible negative consequences if you lose another goal i.e. You're about to go out of a cup, or it's the final couple of games in the season and you need the point(s) to avoid relegation or to get a place in Europe.  A league game in Feb simply doesn't qualify, as losing a goal has consequences.

We lost 2-1 to Arsenal earlier in the season, but I don't remember Emi going up for a set-piece late in that game? If the third goal wasn't an OG I don't think he goes up - it was a rush of blood to the head based on him feeling responsible for us being behind against his old club.

It won't happen again, I'm sure of that.

Left with a choice of potentially getting a point or having no points and one additional goal in the minus column, I know what I'd choose. When you factor in the timing, a pissed off, emotional Emi or not, he made the right decision. Emery had so much to comment on about the game especially their third goal but he decided to be ridiculously petty instead. Each to their own.

Agree it won't happen again, more's the pity.

He didn't make the right decision though. We didn't score, and we immediately conceded. So it was the wrong decision. As I said above, sending the goalie up is an act of desperation, and ONLY makes sense if the rewards for a single goal FAR exceed the costs of conceding another one.  A league game for a mid-table team in Feb simply doesn't qualify.

Games are lost by the odd goal dozens of times every single weekend up and down the county, and do you know how many times the keeper goes up in the last couple of minutes? It's practically zero, because in 95% of cases the potential rewards do not outweigh the potential risks.

If a goal in the 93rd minute would get us into Europe in our last game of the season, then by all means, send in the entire cavalry.  But when you're 1-down in Feb to the league leaders? Nah.

So theoretically, come the end of the season you'd prefer we have less one goal against than one more point. You say it was the wrong decision because we didn't score but had we scored, what, it would have been the right decision? Maybe if Emery has said it was pointless Emi going up for the final corner in the last minute of the game because we're shit at corners and still don't know how to take them*, he'd have a more valid point.

*Luiz had been subbed.

No, I'd much prefer the point. Who wouldn't?  But the mistake you've made is in thinking that us scoring a goal while the keeper is up is AS LIKELY as us conceding one when he's up. It's not. One is FAR more likely than the other. I don't have the numbers required to tell you what those probabilities are, but I guarantee the clubs know them. 

If having your goalie go up for a set piece increased your chances of scoring more than it increased your chances of conceding, then EVERY club would do it - for EVERY single set piece.  The simple fact is it doesn't. The opposite is true. It makes it more likely you'll concede, which is why teams don't do it.  Attackers and the ball move FAR quicker than goalies, so if you DON'T score you're facing a counter attack with your goal defended by players who can't use their hands while your goalie "sprints" back into position.

As I've said repeatedly, it's a desperate last throw of the dice, and generally only makes sense when the risk of conceding another goal makes little to no difference.

Like saturday.

But by that logic, that's true of every single game that any team is ever losing by the odd goal? The reality is, goal difference DOES matter in the league. Last season, the difference between 9th and 10th position was two goals.  £2.2m in prize money for one league place, over two extra goals across the entire season. Fine margins. The season before (when we finished 11th) 12th and 13th place were separated by goals scored. So when you suggest it made "little or no difference" on Saturday, you might be right come the season end, and that Arsenal's 4th goal makes no difference in the end -  but goal difference DOES matter, and it could determine our final league place.