Dr_Pangloss Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) 9 games is plenty of time, what should we do, give him half a season before we can 'judge' LOL. By then, we could be in the damn Championship. Sherwood knew what he was getting into, his job is to keep us up, so if he doesn't keep us up he will have failed. Edited April 7, 2015 by Dr_Pangloss 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 well he has only had 8 but we have a 50 percent win record in them 8 games and before that we won 7 in 28 with 3 against lower league opposition all at home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcTheObsession Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Sherwood's win ratio is 37.5% Wins: Baggies x2, Sunderland Losses: Stoke, Newcastle, Swansea, Man Utd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnStortford Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Sherwood's win ratio is 37.5% Wins: Baggies x2, Sunderland Losses: Stoke, Newcastle, Swansea, Man Utd Think he's counting Leicester, which is pretty fair if you ask me. Everything changed in the 2nd half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dn1982 Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 If Sherwood keeps his current ratio going we will be fine. 3 of the 4 defeats were very close and we probably deserved more from them. We have 4 winnable home games left and if we show the attacking intent as we have in our previous ones we will get the wins needed. If we had lost badly away to a crap team I could understand some of the apprehension but we just lost to the leagues inform team at a ground we very rarely get anything. Will we have similar panic after every away game seeing as they're the ones we will more than likely lose as we have some top teams to come?? QPR have had 1 good 45 mins since Ramsey took over and it's all doom and gloom. I'm confident for tonight because they're defence is crap so I expect a few goals. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I can understand him not starting games but when he's bringing on kids and Cole ahead of him then I think his days must be numbered at Villa. Personally I would like to see him play even if its 20 or 30 mins. I like Sherwood but maybe at times he's a little too stubborn. Can you not see you might be overreacting slightly? Gil has been here since january, and probably hasnt been played since sherwood came in because he doesnt think hes the type of player for a relegation fight. It isnt like the guy has been dropped from the scene completely! And to say Sherwood is a little too stubborn at times, when he has only been here for a handful of games is unbeliavable. We've just had successive seasons of stubborn scotsmen, that doesnt mean Sherwood will take after them! Can we not just give sherwood a little bit of faith and consider that he might actually have explained to Gil why he isnt playing, and that he has solid reasoning behind it? Sherwood was my first pick as a manager so I'm not having a go at him. Even if we go down i won't however we all saw the type of quality Gil had in those few games he played and I saw it at Elche as well. I don't think anybody is saying Gil is as good as Silva but he's that type of player and he shouldn't be just frozen out completely and it is taking the piss when he brings a 16 year old on ahead of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) 9 games is plenty of time, what should we do, give him half a season before we can 'judge' LOL. By then, we could be in the damn Championship. Sherwood knew what he was getting into, his job is to keep us up, so if he doesn't keep us up he will have failed. Damn! I knew there was something wrong with the way the club has been run over the past 5 years. You review a manager's performance after 9 games and sack him if it doesn't match up to requirements! (Do you repeat this every 9 matches?) Mind you, Lambert's first 9 matches rendered 3 wins, two draws and four defeats so if we had applied these criteria to his regime, we could have sacked him back in 2012 and spared ourselves two and a half seasons of dreary misery. Edited April 7, 2015 by briny_ear 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 9 games is plenty of time, what should we do, give him half a season before we can 'judge' LOL. By then, we could be in the damn Championship. Sherwood knew what he was getting into, his job is to keep us up, so if he doesn't keep us up he will have failed. Damn! I knew there was something wrong with the way the club has been run over the past 5 years. You review a manager's performance after 9 games and sack him if it doesn't match up to requirements! (Do you repeat this every 9 matches?) Mind you, Lambert's first 9 matches rendered 3 wins, two draws and four defeats so if we had applied these criteria to his regime, we could have sacked him back in 2012 and spared ourselves two and a half seasons of dreary misery. No one is saying sack him, rather just that it's fair to judge a manager with Sherwood's very particular remit after 9 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 9 games is plenty of time, what should we do, give him half a season before we can 'judge' LOL. By then, we could be in the damn Championship. Sherwood knew what he was getting into, his job is to keep us up, so if he doesn't keep us up he will have failed. Damn! I knew there was something wrong with the way the club has been run over the past 5 years. You review a manager's performance after 9 games and sack him if it doesn't match up to requirements! (Do you repeat this every 9 matches?) Mind you, Lambert's first 9 matches rendered 3 wins, two draws and four defeats so if we had applied these criteria to his regime, we could have sacked him back in 2012 and spared ourselves two and a half seasons of dreary misery. No one is saying sack him, rather just that it's fair to judge a manager with Sherwood's very particular remit after 9 games. Sherwood has a three year contract with Villa, so his "particular remit" is to manage Villa for three years. He came to us at a very low point when the board had delayed the obvious move of sacking the failing former manager for far too long. Nobody can demand a guarantee that he keeps us up given the position of the club when he took over. However, Sherwood has said he believes he can keep us up and I think he deserves the wholehearted support of the fans in that, rather than the sharpening of knives that I hear on this thread and the spouting of rubbish about how Gil should be selected regardless of form. Just as a matter of fact, his personal commitment to keep us in the premier league can only be judged on 24th May, not after 9 games as you suggest, or any other arbitrary number of matches you care to choose. What would be the point of judging him positively after 9 games if we then went down; or negatively after 9 games if we then stay up? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 His particular remit is to keep us up this season, it's as simple as that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 9 games is plenty of time, what should we do, give him half a season before we can 'judge' LOL. By then, we could be in the damn Championship. Sherwood knew what he was getting into, his job is to keep us up, so if he doesn't keep us up he will have failed. Damn! I knew there was something wrong with the way the club has been run over the past 5 years. You review a manager's performance after 9 games and sack him if it doesn't match up to requirements! (Do you repeat this every 9 matches?) Mind you, Lambert's first 9 matches rendered 3 wins, two draws and four defeats so if we had applied these criteria to his regime, we could have sacked him back in 2012 and spared ourselves two and a half seasons of dreary misery. No one is saying sack him, rather just that it's fair to judge a manager with Sherwood's very particular remit after 9 games. Sherwood has a three year contract with Villa, so his "particular remit" is to manage Villa for three years. He came to us at a very low point when the board had delayed the obvious move of sacking the failing former manager for far too long. Nobody can demand a guarantee that he keeps us up given the position of the club when he took over. However, Sherwood has said he believes he can keep us up and I think he deserves the wholehearted support of the fans in that, rather than the sharpening of knives that I hear on this thread and the spouting of rubbish about how Gil should be selected regardless of form. Just as a matter of fact, his personal commitment to keep us in the premier league can only be judged on 24th May, not after 9 games as you suggest, or any other arbitrary number of matches you care to choose. What would be the point of judging him positively after 9 games if we then went down; or negatively after 9 games if we then stay up? Considering we were in the bottom 3 on goal difference and a run of easy games when he arrived - I would hope that was demanded. Even if he keeps us up the manner in which he does it, is important to me - we then need to be asking has he shown enough that he is the man to take us forward ? - Scrambling a victory tonight and another v Burnley wouldn't cut it for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Considering we were in the bottom 3 on goal difference and a run of easy games when he arrived - I would hope that was demanded. Even if he keeps us up the manner in which he does it, is important to me - we then need to be asking has he shown enough that he is the man to take us forward ? - Scrambling a victory tonight and another v Burnley wouldn't cut it for me. Sherwood hasn't had the opportunity to bring in his own players or improve the side with fresh blood, so he's doing the best he can with the bunch of under achievers who were failing so badly under Lambert. I've seen enough of an improvement though to say that Sherwood stands a better chance of keeping us up than Lambert, and if Lambert had been binned off earlier as he should have been, then Sherwood would almost certainly have kept us up. Yes, Sherwood will have to hold his hands up to a certain extent if we do go down, but the main blame will be shared by Lerner for keeping the abysmal Lambert in a job for far too long, and Lambert himself for being so utterly inept. In any case, I think we'll beat QPR tonight which will give us a bit of breathing space. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 7, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted April 7, 2015 His remit is to keep us up. The 3 year contract would be what he wanted in order to take the job. His primary objective will be to avoid relegation. If it isn't then there's something seriously wrong. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabby Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I would have liked more wins but we have been close in games. Stoke and Swansea we were very disappointing in that I think we deserved a point but for some poor defending and in the former ,Vlaar have a moment of stupidity. If we go down Sherwood is not blameless of course , but he came into a team that has been appalling for 12-18 months with no chance to add his own player's.Hopefully we start tonight as we did against WBA , get at them from the off and not let them settle.Their defence is still poor and we need to exploit that.Need Gabby /Benteke and who ever else starts to have good games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 It's important to note that he hasn't failed yet. If his remit is to keep us up then we judge him at the end of the season. "Simple" as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 7, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted April 7, 2015 It's important to note that he hasn't failed yet. If his remit is to keep us up then we judge him at the end of the season. "Simple" as that. Judge his overall achievement then yes. But I don't see what's wrong with people passing some judgement on what we've already seen, good and bad. Nobody is saying he should be sacked now, which would be giving an overall judgement. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 It's important to note that he hasn't failed yet. If his remit is to keep us up then we judge him at the end of the season. "Simple" as that. Judge his overall achievement then yes. But I don't see what's wrong with people passing some judgement on what we've already seen, good and bad. Nobody is saying he should be sacked now, which would be giving an overall judgement. Fair enough. What I've seen is a considerable improvement on the dismal football Lambert served up, and I think he'll keep us up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 It's important to note that he hasn't failed yet. If his remit is to keep us up then we judge him at the end of the season. "Simple" as that.Judge his overall achievement then yes. But I don't see what's wrong with people passing some judgement on what we've already seen, good and bad. Nobody is saying he should be sacked now, which would be giving an overall judgement. I was replying to the 9 game is enough theory being purported. Totally agree with you. I have been critical of his use of 4-4-2 myself and his nativity against United in particular. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condimentalist Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Even putting the Gil issue, which is **** me off tbh, to one side, that's a seriously bold line up. The sort where if it pays off you have to commend him but if it goes wrong he's going to get massive pelters. Seriously nervous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSV Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) How is it bold? It's what Lambert picked but he starts Grealish instead of wiemann Edited April 7, 2015 by KSV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts