Steve Bruce

[Vive_La_Villa]

11 minutes ago, terrytini said:

I’m just going on your posts saying how key he was, and he is the difference between a Win and a Draw.

I would repeat, if after 18 months the difference between us winning and drawing against Sheffield Wednesday is simply Jack, that is - without question - a damning indictment.

What’s been built, then , if we are so heavily dependent upon one man ?

At the very highest level a World class player can make the difference, but in the Championship ?

As I say, I have more faith in our players and what has been built, I’m quite sure we can win plenty games without Jack, and we will likely start tomorrow.

A top 6 team. Grealish makes it a top 2 team.

[terrytini]

2 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

A top 6 team. Grealish makes it a top 2 team.

I don’t see any other side needing one specific player .

And I don’t think we need to.

But in any event, Wednesday are a side a Top 6 team should be capable of beating.

I must admit when we won 7 in a row I didn’t hear too many people saying “ it’s not the result of 18 months work, it’s just because we have Grealish”

In fact, I distinctly recall the prevailing view being very much that our success was largely down to the abilities of the Manager.

I will stick by my view that we don’t need Jack Grealish to win games.

We need a good positive selection and a good positive approach. We’ve had neither in the last week.

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 minute ago, terrytini said:

I don’t see any other side needing one specific player .

And I don’t think we need to.

But in any event, Wednesday are a side a Top 6 team should be capable of beating.

I must admit when we won 7 in a row I didn’t hear too many people saying “ it’s not the result of 18 months work, it’s just because we have Grealish”

In fact, I distinctly recall the prevailing view being very much that our success was largely down to the abilities of the Manager.

I will stick by my view that we don’t need Jack Grealish to win games.

We need a good positive selection and a good positive approach. We’ve had neither in the last week.

I did. I thougt he was the difference. 

I agree we should have enough to beat Shef Wed without jack as we did win many games without him for a few months. We should have enough to win the next 3.

We still won a lot of games but it was rarely convincing. But I would still happily take that.

[vreitti]

22 minutes ago, terrytini said:

I don’t see any other side needing one specific player .

And I don’t think we need to.

But in any event, Wednesday are a side a Top 6 team should be capable of beating.

I must admit when we won 7 in a row I didn’t hear too many people saying “ it’s not the result of 18 months work, it’s just because we have Grealish”

In fact, I distinctly recall the prevailing view being very much that our success was largely down to the abilities of the Manager.

I will stick by my view that we don’t need Jack Grealish to win games.

We need a good positive selection and a good positive approach. We’ve had neither in the last week.

Having just listened to Bruce's prematch interview, don't think we'll see either tomorrow. It's going to be ugly, but we might still win, which will be good enough for me.

Fwiw I agree with everything you've said.

[Eastie]

52 minutes ago, terrytini said:

I don’t see any other side needing one specific player .

And I don’t think we need to.

But in any event, Wednesday are a side a Top 6 team should be capable of beating.

I must admit when we won 7 in a row I didn’t hear too many people saying “ it’s not the result of 18 months work, it’s just because we have Grealish”

In fact, I distinctly recall the prevailing view being very much that our success was largely down to the abilities of the Manager.

I will stick by my view that we don’t need Jack Grealish to win games.

We need a good positive selection and a good positive approach. We’ve had neither in the last week.

I believe Fulham only won 4 in 17 without cairney,  I think Grealish is a huge reason to our upturn in form and also helped get the best out of hogan - we really need him back soon , but good to see o hare in the mix at last 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Eastie

[ciggiesnbeer]

Its not just Grealish though. Lose Grealish AND Adomah AND then put Snodgrass on the opposite wing and you have just about removed our chance creators.

 

Again I am not really very concerned just yet. We had a blip , it happens. We can also go on another 7 game winning streak, that can happen as well. I am looking forward to the next game. I reckon Bruce might even change our shape a bit to get the best out of our available players.

[Tomaszk]

Big selection for him. How much has been learnt?

[Vive_La_Villa]

Big day for Bruce and the team. It's a must win to get some momentum back. 

[praisedmambo]

15 hours ago, terrytini said:

I must admit when we won 7 in a row I didn’t hear too many people saying “ it’s not the result of 18 months work, it’s just because we have Grealish”

In fact, I distinctly recall the prevailing view being very much that our success was largely down to the abilities of the Manager.

For the record, I definitely put it down to Grealish and said so—you can pretty much define the change in form from half-time in the Boro game when he came on. 

Loads of people didn't put it down to Bruce but Agnew. 

This is a general comment and not aimed at anyone:

Grealish is a level above other players in the league. But to be fair to the current situation, we're also missing Adomah too, who is our top scorer. There is 100% going to be a marked difference when missing your two most influential attacking players (Snodgrass is a big one too obvs). And if you want to go further and judge 18 months of squad building, we're also missing last season's top-scorer too. Arguably, they're three of the biggest players we have, along with a couple of others like Terry, Snodgrass and, for my money, Elmohamady, who is also injured. On that note though, replacing the attacking players is so much harder than replacing the defenders. 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2018 by praisedmambo

[praisedmambo]

In this non-Grealish period we need to start Davies. If that means dropping Hogan, so be it—or play them together. 

[Eastie]

56 minutes ago, praisedmambo said:

In this non-Grealish period we need to start Davies. If that means dropping Hogan, so be it—or play them together. 

Why would you start davis when grabban is here?

[striker]

I’d keep the same system when Villa went on the 7 game run. O’Hare in the Grealish role and Grabban replacing Adomah with Hogan up top. Keep changes to a minimum.

Bruce should have done this two games ago.

[Eastie]

To start with whelan hourihane and onomah as our midfield is a gamble  - o hare not on the bench either . 

‘Hopefully Bruce has got this right as it’s very questionable 

Edited February 24, 2018 by Eastie

[TRO]

22 minutes ago, Eastie said:

To start with whelan hourihane and onomah as our midfield is a gamble  - o hare not on the bench either . 

‘Hopefully Bruce has got this right as it’s very questionable 

Well, its tough....ish and durable.

but not really creative.

[Eastie]

3 minutes ago, TRO said:

Well, its tough....ish and durable.

but not really creative.

Three midfielders on the bench all similar - o hare would have offered that bit of creativity , rather him on the bench than both davis and rhm - o hare did get off the coach so has travelled 

[mykeyb]

Awful team selection in a game we really need three points from, and Whelan, what's the question that he is the answer to for Bruce?

[bobzy]

4 minutes ago, mykeyb said:

Awful team selection in a game we really need three points from, and Whelan, what's the question that he is the answer to for Bruce?

"Who can I put in defensive midfield to ensure the opposition get a nice boost?"

[Eastie]

4 minutes ago, mykeyb said:

Awful team selection in a game we really need three points from, and Whelan, what's the question that he is the answer to for Bruce?

Losing already , Wednesday bring in a young lad and he scores

 

 

[mykeyb]

39 minutes ago, TRO said:

Well, its tough....ish and durable.

but not really creative.

Sounds like a standard Bruce selection

[TRO]

16 minutes ago, mykeyb said:

Sounds like a standard Bruce selection

Well its one thing playing these kind of players.....but the paradox is we stand off the opposition and they score easily......what really is the point of playing them?

thats the bit that baffles me.