Guest firetotheworks Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I feel a lot better knowing Jose might play like. Duff hasn't been too bad at left back, but going forward he's painfully one dimensional to watch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hamper Villa, meanwhile, have enjoyed a far more successful season and sit in sixth position, guaranteed of a spot in the Europa League and hoping to overtake fifth-placed Everton. Injuries continue to hamper Newcastle as Habib Beye, the club's only senior right-back, has been ruled out with a hamstring injury. Central defender Sebastien Bassong is suspended after an appeal to overturn his red card against Fulham failed, meaning Steven Taylor is likely to switch to right-back as Fabricio Coloccini is offered rare opportunity under Shearer. Left-back Jose Enrique could return from his hamstring problem, while skipper Michael Owen is expected to train as he continues his recovery from a groin injury. Nursed Obafemi Martins is being nursed through his own long-standing groin problem, although Alan Smith (thigh) is fit. Joey Barton is banned. Wilfred Bouma remains on the sidelines for Villa as the full-back continues his season-long recovery from an ankle problem suffered last July. Midfielder Gareth Barry and defender Carlos Cuellar overcame illness to feature in last weekend's draw at Middlesbrough and should again start. Full-back Luke Young did not play at The Riverside after suffering a recurrence of a foot problem in the build-up to the match, while Ashley Young sustained a calf injury in the 1-1 draw. Villa boss Martin O'Neill will be without retired centre-back Martin Laursen, who last Friday announced he was bringing an end to his playing career due to injury. Possible starting XIs Aston Villa: Friedel, Milner, Cuellar, Davies, Shorey, Barry, Petrov, Ashley Young, Agbonlahor, Heskey, Carew. Newcastle: Harper, Taylor, Bassong, Coloccini, Duff, Guthrie, Butt, Nolan, Gutierrez, Owen, Viduka. They're just so good! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I like how the second half of the sentence ignores what they've said in the first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Heneage Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Sky reckon 3 draws this weekend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Nowt like sitting on the fence. Useless bastards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 GK - Harper RB - R.Taylor LB - Duff CB - Taylor CB - Coloccini CM - Nolan CM - Guthrie CM - Butt CF - Owen CF - Viduka CF - Martins Krul, Edgar, Lovenkrands, Lua Lua, Jonas, Ranger, Ameobi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Just saw 2 magpies, just knocking about with each other on a shed roof. IT'S AN OMEN (although I dunno if the Magpie thing applies 45 hours in advance). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 At the end of the day, you think the decision to play Oba for the 90 minutes was right, others think Lovenkrands starting with Oba being used from the bench later would have been the right decision. Your preferred method saw us lose the game 1-0, lose Bassong for 30 minutes of it (and the following match) and found us back in the relegation zone with a game to play. I would add Beye's injury to this list, but I'm not sure whether that was inevitable anyway. Obviously it could have been worse, but it could also have been a hell of a lot better. But you cannot determine that it would have been better when theres little to base that on. There are no endless examples of us being amazed when we start with Lovenkrands, so its based on nothing. The fact that Martins had such an incredibly clear chance to give us the lead, would suggest that the decision to play him at the start wasnt the wrong one. On another day he scores that and we go on to win the game, yet some are talking about starting him as if it were a silly decision. The manager wasnt in charge of Martins finishing. Unless a person believes martins finishing is determined by what part of the game he starts playing at, there isnt much of a case for saying it was pointless to start him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 An "incredibly clear chance" my arse. It's a decent chance but from an acute angle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Martins started and we lost, without scoring a goal... so surely people are entitled to question the decision? He's half-fit as well, I hadn't even mentioned that yet. I'm not usually one for questioning managerial selections too vigorously as these blokes are paid well to make those decisions and they see the players in training and have more experience than anyone on here (I realise all of that goes without saying.) I certainly haven't "determined" that it would have been better, hence me saying "it could have been worse, but it could also been a hell of a lot better". However, the selection you support meant we lost 1-0 and lost our two best defenders for the most important game in our recent history. How much worse could it realistically have been? I'm not calling Martins starting "silly", either, would just have preferred to see a fully-fit Lovenkrands given the nod alongside Viduka with Oba coming from the bench as he did against 'Boro. Of course there's no way of saying after the event how it would have panned out if that was what happened and as you say, there's no empirical evidence we could use to assume such an event, but my view is that the actual outcome was extremely poor for the club and it would have taken a fair bit for us to come off any worse (conceding a fair few more goals could arguably be suicidal should the season be decided on GD.) I can't make it any clearer than that. I have the feeling you're just being a stubborn bugger. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 An "incredibly clear chance" my arse. It's a decent chance but from an acute angle. fair enough, he could have finished better or worse than he did. Regardless he made the right run, he got a good chance & came very close to giving us the lead. This suggests shearer didnt get it wrong in starting him. Theres no reason to believe lovenkrands or anyone else would have come closer than that beyond wishful thinking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I love the fact that you're justifying the selection entirely on a chance that he got and didn't score, as well Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 An "incredibly clear chance" my arse. It's a decent chance but from an acute angle. fair enough, he could have finished better or worse than he did. Regardless he made the right run, he got a good chance & came very close to giving us the lead. This suggests shearer didnt get it wrong in starting him. Theres no reason to believe lovenkrands or anyone else would have come closer than that beyond wishful thinking. can we use that excuse for owen against pompey ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 ATTACK!!! -------------------Harper ----------Taylor-------------Enrique Jonas----------------------------------Duff -------------Nolan--------Butt Lua----------------------------------Loven ----------Martins----------Viduka Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 That's Skirge-tastic that is. Fantasy football has never been so brilliant Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Skirge, I'd love to have your brain for a day mate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Skirge, I'd love to have your brain for a day mate. to break it in ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 we would go down but at least we would go down fighting Mind you can laugh but 1-0 doon with 15 mins to go we could see that 11 on the pitch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Here's what I'd do. If, with ten minutes remaining, Villa are one nil up, visit the gambling site of your choice and go to their Live Betting page. Stick whatever you have on it finishing 1-1. We're pretty much unable (with the exception of Hull City recently) of closing out games like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Martins started and we lost, without scoring a goal... so surely people are entitled to question the decision? He's half-fit as well, I hadn't even mentioned that yet. I'm not usually one for questioning managerial selections too vigorously as these blokes are paid well to make those decisions and they see the players in training and have more experience than anyone on here (I realise all of that goes without saying.) I certainly haven't "determined" that it would have been better, hence me saying "it could have been worse, but it could also been a hell of a lot better". However, the selection you support meant we lost 1-0 and lost our two best defenders for the most important game in our recent history. How much worse could it realistically have been? I'm not calling Martins starting "silly", either, would just have preferred to see a fully-fit Lovenkrands given the nod alongside Viduka with Oba coming from the bench as he did against 'Boro. Of course there's no way of saying after the event how it would have panned out if that was what happened and as you say, there's no empirical evidence we could use to assume such an event, but my view is that the actual outcome was extremely poor for the club and it would have taken a fair bit for us to come off any worse (conceding a fair few more goals could arguably be suicidal should the season be decided on GD.) I can't make it any clearer than that. I have the feeling you're just being a stubborn bugger. Dont see what the problem is. You basically believe wishfully that lovenkrands would have had a better effect on the game than martins. I see no reason to believe that. I think the fact that on another day martins would have given us the lead, suggests more than shearer got the selection right & we were just unlucky with how it turned out. Seems to me im basing my conclusion that the starting line up was correct based on something that nearly happened. You're basing your idea on something that could have happened, without much reason to believe that it would have. I see more reason to put faith in one of those being right than the other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I love the fact that you're justifying the selection entirely on a chance that he got and didn't score, as well Where as you're justifying the idea that it might have been wrong on nothing beyond wishful thinking as i say Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Martins started and we lost, without scoring a goal... so surely people are entitled to question the decision? He's half-fit as well, I hadn't even mentioned that yet. I'm not usually one for questioning managerial selections too vigorously as these blokes are paid well to make those decisions and they see the players in training and have more experience than anyone on here (I realise all of that goes without saying.) I certainly haven't "determined" that it would have been better, hence me saying "it could have been worse, but it could also been a hell of a lot better". However, the selection you support meant we lost 1-0 and lost our two best defenders for the most important game in our recent history. How much worse could it realistically have been? I'm not calling Martins starting "silly", either, would just have preferred to see a fully-fit Lovenkrands given the nod alongside Viduka with Oba coming from the bench as he did against 'Boro. Of course there's no way of saying after the event how it would have panned out if that was what happened and as you say, there's no empirical evidence we could use to assume such an event, but my view is that the actual outcome was extremely poor for the club and it would have taken a fair bit for us to come off any worse (conceding a fair few more goals could arguably be suicidal should the season be decided on GD.) I can't make it any clearer than that. I have the feeling you're just being a stubborn bugger. Dont see what the problem is. You basically believe wishfully that lovenkrands would have had a better effect on the game than martins. I see no reason to believe that. I think the fact that on another day martins would have given us the lead, suggests more than shearer got the selection right & we were just unlucky with how it turned out. Seems to me im basing my conclusion that the starting line up was correct based on something that nearly happened. You're basing your idea on something that could have happened, without much reason to believe that it would have. I see more reason to put faith in one of those being right than the other. Best way to tell how well he did on the goal chance and how tough an angle it was, was Shearers reaction, he was not angry he applauded the effort. I think we are the point with Al where when it comes down to Owen & Oba Al would rather start his more mobile goal threat, and thats Oba. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 You continue to ignore the fact we lost the game and didn't actually score a goal. How much worse could it have been if Lovenkrands had started? That's my point, which you've ignored about two or three times now. Just because Martins had 2 good chances, the selection was right?? I can't agree with that in a game we were at home for and maybe needed to have won. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliMag Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 soccernet.com has us winning with both Hull and Sunderland losing... if only. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hold out for a 0-0, keep an eye on other score we have to win change it. Start with ------------------Harper Edgar---Taylor---Colo---Cacapa----Enrique Smith------Butt---------Nolan--------Jonas --------------------Oba Changes if needed Duff for Smith, Ranger for Nolan, Viduka for Cacapa Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts