Steve Bruce

[Keener window-cleaner]

48 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

I'm writing this post as someone who had given up on Bruce a couple of weeks ago, and who right now is thankful our leadership have more foresight than I.  For now at least.

But, I wonder what VT would've been like 30 years ago - after we'd beaten Hull 5-0 on New Years Day?

At that time we were playing what I imagine some VTers would've called Taylorball (or Turnipball if they'd been able to look into the future), hoofing it up to Garry Thompson (joint top scorer on 11 goals with Warren Aspinall over the course of the season) in a team featuring Kevin Gage and Steve Sims.

We scraped up into second place on the last day, our 0-0 draw away at Swindon proving enough only because Middlesbrough and Bradford lost at home.

That first season back in the top flight wasn't great either.  Yet we went on to finish second in 1990 and GT went on to manage England.

I wonder if our fans would've had the same patience if the internet had been created a few decades earlier?  Would Sir Graham, as we now know him, have been forced to fall on his sword long before his plans had reached fruition?

Very interesting post! I'm not sure that it has so much to do with the internet, I think what people say about the playing style and the manager was said more or less in the same way but in the stands and in the pubs before. But sure, with the social media it becomes more visible and opinions probably gathers pace and spins faster than before, with owners feeling they need to respond to it. But mainly I think it has to do with the unpatient culture of sacking managers, which in it's turn probably comes from the fact that we have more money in the game and more foreign owners and owners who demand instant success in another way. Even if Doug Ellis was unpatient and sacked managers when Brian Little or John Gregory got sacked it felt like a really big thing for me, compared to when for example Sherwood or Garde got sacked. 

[TRO]

14 hours ago, Dave J said:

I for one cannot come on here and be hypocritical- I don't like him and don't believe he is the correct man for the job - but neither will I deny him credit when it is due.

fantastic result against a team who have been flying this season.

well done SB - but can you now leave the handbrake well and truly alone please.

Dave, he reckons he told them no different to the Middlesbrough game.....

Despite me defending him.....I don't put that down directly to SB.....I put it down to a great confidence boost from 2 great headers from scott and confidence, just spread through the team.

[striker]

1 hour ago, Rob182 said:

“Playoffs are a lottery” >>> “We haven’t beaten anyone in the Top 6”

Don’t think I’ve stated the second part of your post. 

[TRO]

15 hours ago, peterms said:

I don't see why you think it must be one or the other.

We were excellent, after the first 20 or so minutes, which was much like previous games.

They were poor for the most part, with a couple of spells at the start of each half where they were dangerous.

They looked knackered.  I see it was their fifth game in 12 days, and according to their fans' site they have played nine of their outfield players pretty much all season, so perhaps it's not surprising.

Is there a concern that in acknowledging things like this, we are somehow disparaging our own team?

Yeah, i think so.

I would like to bet chelsea fans in the main would not pre- occupy their thoughts with "villa were poor tonight wasn't they"....when we lost 8-1

I would suspect our performance would not be in Liverpool's fans thoughts when we got tanked by them 6-0

Edited January 3, 2018 by TRO

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 minute ago, TRO said:

Yea, i think so.

I would like to bet chelsea fans in the main would not pre- occupy there thoughts with "villa were poor tonight wasn't they"....when we lost 8-1

I would suspect our performance would not be in Liverpool's fans thoughts when we got tanked by them 6-0

They would have and did say we were s**t. Which we were. They wouldn't for a second have been naive enough to think they were just superb and there was nothing Villa could do about it. 

Bristol on the other hand aren't as s**t as a 5-0 defeat. To believe we were that superior that we beat a team 3rd in the table 5-0 even though they played well is not quite accurate. 

Noone is preoccupied with how Bristol played. We are all waxing lyrical about how good we were. I just don't understand how by not ignoring how the opposition played its seen as a slight on Villa's performance.  

[TRO]

10 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Why is everytime we play well and win fans think we setup differently? We set up the same way we always do it's just Bristol City gave us space. Didn't double up on wingers and were second to every ball. 

We played very well and completely deserved the win. But I'm not buying all this 'the team showed what they capable of if Bruce lets them play'. It seems to be mentioned on every thread. 

We always play this way. Sometimes we do it well and other times we don't. The way the opponents sets up has a big impact. Especially at home when the emphasis is on to us break teams down. 

Edit: this is not a defence or criticism of Bruce. Just saying it how I see it. 

I think you are bang on the money.

Bruce said......I didn't say anything different to them from the Middlesbrough game.

Omg ....thats going to open another can of worms.

[TRO]

4 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

They would have and did say we were s**t. Which we were. They wouldn't for a second have been naive enough to think they were just superb and there was nothing Villa could do about it. 

Bristol on the other hand aren't as s**t as a 5-0 defeat. To believe we were that superior that we beat a team 3rd in the table 5-0 even though they played well is not quite accurate. 

Noone is preoccupied with how Bristol played. We are all waxing lyrical about how good we were. I just don't understand how by not ignoring how the opposition played its seen as a slight on Villa's performance.  

We all read things different.....it depends on the context interpreted.....personally I see it as a distraction, but hey ho.

shows different views.

Edited January 3, 2018 by TRO

[srsmithusa]

4 hours ago, Jareth said:

What is nuanced about enjoying a win then slating the manager? You'll revel in the win but then return to an adamant position you took months ago. It's pretty stubborn. Also, I wonder where we'd be if you had axed Bruce and Wyness 5 games into the season - with FFP and no manager in their right mind attracted to come here - we'd be sat right next to sha. 

"What is nuanced about enjoying a win then slating the manager?"   well if  stick with my opinion I'm "stubborn," if posters supported Bruce and then changed to think he should go, they are "fickle."  it actually seems that you thrive on calling names of those that don't agree with you and the only position the rest of us should be allowed to hold, is yours.

Nuance is being able to hold a tension of different views.  I can completely enjoy the clubs success and completely believe that Bruce has not been and is not the best way forward.

"Also, I wonder where we'd be if you had axed Bruce and Wyness 5 games into the season" -  neither of those will ever know the answer to that question.  clearly, you think we would be in deep shit... or sitting right next to it (SHA), of course.   I do not.  I think we would be better off.  unless Dr. Who can tell us which  time line would have worked better, faster, we'll never know.  I'm OK with you having your opinion.  But you really should keep in mind that is no more than that.  if we all agreed, there wouldn't be much need for forum would there?

Personally, I think that well planned changes some time ago, or even now, could reasonable produce performances so that matches like monday could much be closer to the norm than a delightful aberration.  Monday was so far off from the norm that pages and pages of posts have been baffled to explain where this team came from.  I think this team has been there all along, buried behind poor tactics, poor selections, poor coaching, poor motivation, poor instructions, poor discipline, poor management. Bruce has produced crap for 15 months.  Monday he did not.  It appears as though it's easy for you to look past all that.  Fair enough, not me.

 

 

[TRO]

9 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Everyone talks about how Nuno sets Wolves up to attack. I agree he does but what nobody mentions is how hard they work without the ball. They press all over the pitch. Every single player puts a shift in.  They have been grinding out wins for weeks now. 

To many times this season we haven't done that regardless of how we set up. That's what  makes the difference in my opinion. 

So much emphasis on whether a team sets up to defend or attack when most of the time its down to if the players are playing well or not.

Ditto

[lexicon]

7 hours ago, Keener window-cleaner said:

Very interesting post! I'm not sure that it has so much to do with the internet, I think what people say about the playing style and the manager was said more or less in the same way but in the stands and in the pubs before. But sure, with the social media it becomes more visible and opinions probably gathers pace and spins faster than before, with owners feeling they need to respond to it. But mainly I think it has to do with the unpatient culture of sacking managers, which in it's turn probably comes from the fact that we have more money in the game and more foreign owners and owners who demand instant success in another way. Even if Doug Ellis was unpatient and sacked managers when Brian Little or John Gregory got sacked it felt like a really big thing for me, compared to when for example Sherwood or Garde got sacked. 

It was a very different time tbf. The technical style of football that was mostly introduced to English football by Wenger hadn't happened yet and there weren't so many foreign players, which meant a more homogeneous British style of playing. 

[Villarocker]

I think the best post on here, post the Bristol City game, has been from Mark where he says that we just all need to just focus on cheering the team on now and back Bruce no matter what. We are definitely going til the end of the season with him now so just need to support him and the team and hope that we can all get what this club wants - promotion. 

[Jareth]

7 hours ago, srsmithusa said:

I think that well planned changes some time ago, or even now, could reasonable produce performances so that matches like monday could much be closer to the norm than a delightful aberration. 

This doesn't really chime with Bruce out Wyness out we'd be better off - you at least need to put a date on when they should have gone - saying this in Jan 2018 in the position we are now in is very SHA (amateur).

Also, 

Quote

Bruce has produced crap for 15 months.  Monday he did not.  It appears as though it's easy for you to look past all that.

The last 15 months has been a disaster? So how did we find ourselves with this platform to go get automatic promotion? I'm all for colourful ways to explain a view but beneath the lovely vocab is a bunch of contradictions and plain old inability to treat the manager fairly. 

[markavfc40]

8 hours ago, peterms said:

Because GT gave us attractive, attacking football,  where SB has given us 15 months of shite and one great game.

Will he produce a new strain of football, unknown to his entire previous managerial career?  Based on this one game?  Well, probably not.  But let's see.

I am not so sure GT did give us attractive attacking football in his first couple of seasons here. Obviously we are going back 30 years and I would have been 14 at the time but I remember that season we were promoted being a bit of a grind. It was a very workman like side with not too much flair, other than Mark Walters for half a season and an emerging Tony Daley, but it was a side full of grafters in the likes of Evans, Sims, Lillis, Gage, Stuart Gray, Steve Hunt, Paul Birch, Gary Thompson and the football was pretty agricultural and direct. Likewise in our first season back in the top flight under him and it wasn't until his final season where we did play some really good football.

Graham Taylor is probably my favourite Villa manager during my time following us and in terms of what he came into it is not too dissimilar to what Bruce inherited. A club that had been on the slide for years and then finally hit rock bottom and needed rebuilding. Whereas Taylor came in and reshaped the club from top to bottom Steve Bruce's only concern it seems has been the first team, with Steve Round over seeing other aspects of the playing side, and in that regard there is a big difference between the two.

I also think you are being harsh to say we have had 15 months of shite and one great game. This season whilst we haven't matched the performance of the Bristol game we have played well in other games like Preston, Barnsley, Burton, Norwich, QPR, second half at Leeds etc.

I do agree that we are unlikely to see Bruce change his playing style over what we have seen previously and I certainly do not expect to see too many more 5-0 victories and performances like the other night. I do though think he has put a squad together capable of producing something approaching that more often and one of the biggest factors in that is confidence so I am hopeful that the other nights result could be a springboard to consistently better performances.

[Stevo985]

8 hours ago, srsmithusa said:

Bruce has produced crap for 15 months. 

 

This kind of stuff is getting silly.

He hasn't produced crap for 15 months. You don't sit 5th in the league having played crap for 15 months.

It hasn't been as good as it should be, and I go along with Bruce is falling short of his targets. But that doesn't make it crap.

 

There is a middle ground between amazing and crap. It's ok to explore it.

[briny_ear]

14 hours ago, srsmithusa said:

We've seen 15 months already.   We'll ignore a whole bunch of stuff before today, if the next 4 are good?   If we get promotion, of course he will be due some credit.  1) Big "if"  2) He'll also be due some criticism for the ways he messed up in the first 15 months.  And he has.  or do you think not?

Now it's my turn to be pejorative, why do you have such a hard time with nuance? Not everything must be black or white.  I have thought for some time and still do that we would be better with Bruce and Wyness both out.  I think we would be farther ahead if they were replaced months ago.  Why can I not think that and completely, thoroughly delight in a long overdue performance like the one on Monday?

 

Now maybe THAT gives us the message we need for “THE BANNER”?

IT’S NOT HYSTERIA - WE’RE JUST SHOWING NUANCE

[peterms]

1 hour ago, markavfc40 said:

I also think you are being harsh to say we have had 15 months of shite and one great game. This season whilst we haven't matched the performance of the Bristol game we have played well in other games like Preston, Barnsley, Burton, Norwich, QPR, second half at Leeds etc.

Yes, I'm not saying that every minute of every match has been unremittingly dreadful.  But taken as a whole, it's been pretty poor stuff, hasn't it?  As we knew before the Bristol game and as that game so emphatically showed, we are capable of much better football than the dreary stuff we have so often been served up.  Let's see some more.

[Stevo985]

3 minutes ago, peterms said:

Yes, I'm not saying that every minute of every match has been unremittingly dreadful.  But taken as a whole, it's been pretty poor stuff, hasn't it?  As we knew before the Bristol game and as that game so emphatically showed, we are capable of much better football than the dreary stuff we have so often been served up.  Let's see some more.

This season taken as a whole has been pretty good in my opinion.

The recent bad run was awful, and has meant the season as a whole hasn't been good enough.

But I don't agree that as a whole this season has been "pretty poor stuff".

I know I personally have very much enjoyed the majority of the home games

[bannedfromHandV]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

This kind of stuff is getting silly.

He hasn't produced crap for 15 months. You don't sit 5th in the league having played crap for 15 months.

It hasn't been as good as it should be, and I go along with Bruce is falling short of his targets. But that doesn't make it crap.

 

There is a middle ground between amazing and crap. It's ok to explore it.

No middle ground in the good ol' USA, you're either first or last.

The great Ricky Bobby said so.

[striker]

10 hours ago, srsmithusa said:

Monday was so far off from the norm that pages and pages of posts have been baffled to explain where this team came from.  I think this team has been there all along, buried behind poor tactics, poor selections, poor coaching, poor motivation, poor instructions, poor discipline, poor management. Bruce has produced crap for 15 months.  Monday he did not.  It appears as though it's easy for you to look past all that.  Fair enough, not me.

 

 

Up until the ‘Bruce has produced crap for 15 months’ comment I agree with much of the rest and I’m sorry to say I don’t necessarily believe Bruce’s comment that he sent the team out with the same instructions against Boro.

 

[TRO]

17 minutes ago, striker said:

Up until the ‘Bruce has produced crap for 15 months’ comment I agree with much of the rest and I’m sorry to say I don’t necessarily believe Bruce’s comment that he sent the team out with the same instructions against Boro.

 

Whilst I accept managers do have an in tangible affect on a game.

The tangible affect is the players.....too often the manager gets the blame or the credit and its misplaced imo.

players respond in terms of confidence to their collegues and opposition players have an affect on them.

There are compendium of factors.I can't always be easily explained.

I think its best to just enjoy the moment and not link the great games to the shite ones to negate the glory.