Two new wallpapers available in 1280x800, 1280x1024 & 1024x768.

Available in claret, blue or check...

All three available in the usual resolutions here.

Three resolutions here.

A 2-0 victory against Arsenal at the Emirates Stadium after two disappointing loses to Newcastle and Boro wasn't quite what most of us would have expected, but we'll all be delighted. Obviously.

Sometimes it seems to me like we allow ourselves to sink to the level of teams we'd expect to beat and turn on the style against the teams we'd expect to struggle against. Is that complacency perhaps?? It certainly shows how good we can be and exposes our consistency as a key area of improvement.

Was it just a coincidence that Petrov returned today and the team once again showed how good they can be??

continue reading...

Yesterday I did some statistical research on Villa's Premiership history which I intended to publish today to celebrate Villa reaching the 900 point mark. Sadly Middlesborough didn't read the script and after the final whistle was blown on their visit to Villa Park today the club are still sat on 897 points.

So instead I'm going to do some finger pointing and for the first time I'm going to shove it directly in MON's direction. Don't get me wrong, MON is one of the best managers we've had at Villa Park (I have the stats to prove it, but I'll save them for another time) and last year I defended his lack of activity in the transfer market to the hilt. I was more than patient with him apparently wanting to wait to bring in the right players. And I think he did a great job this past summer bringing those players in.


So what's the problem then? Well, for me, it's simple.... having spent a shed load of Randy's money and brought in a bunch of quality players he's not actually using them properly!!

continue reading...

Three different resolutions available here.

Let's look at the 22 league games Harewood came on as a substitute.  Here I break down at what time during the game he made his appearance, what the score was at the time and what the final score was.

Looking at it like this we can how many points we potentially had in our grasp before he stepped on the pitch and how many we left the stadium with.  Check it out...

Game	On @	Score B4 Harewood	Final Score	Pts B4 The Hare	Pts After The Hare	Pts Won / Lost
Aston Villa vs Fulham	77	1-1	2-1	1	3	2
Aston Villa vs Everton	80	2-0	2-0	3	3	0
Tottenham vs Aston Villa	66	1-4	4-4	3	1	-2
Blackburn vs Aston Villa	85	0-3	0-4	3	3	0
Aston Villa vs Portsmouth	70	0-3	1-3	0	0	0
Chelsea vs Aston Villa	90	4-4	4-4	1	1	0
Barry Penalty timed at 90, injury time. Harewood also on at 90. Which happened first??
Aston Villa vs Reading	88	3-1	3-1	3	3	0
Carew Goal timed at 88. Harewood on at 88. Which happened first??
Liverpool vs Aston Villa	66	1-0	2-2	0	1	1
Aston Villa vs Blackburn	60	0-0	1-1	1	1	0
Fulham vs Aston Villa	46	0-0	2-1	1	0	-1
Aston Villa vs Newcastle	46	0-1	4-1	0	3	3
Reading vs Aston Villa	73	0-1	1-2	3	3	0
Arsenal vs Aston Villa	71	0-1	1-1	3	1	-2
Aston Villa vs Middlesboro	46	0-1	1-1	0	1	1
Portsmouth vs Aston Villa	57	2-0	2-0	0	0	0
Aston Villa vs Sunderland	57	0-0	0-1	1	0	-1
Aston Villa vs Bolton	77	3-0	4-0	3	3	0
Derby vs Aston Villa	73	0-4	0-6	3	3	0
Aston Villa vs Birmingham	85	5-1	5-1	3	3	0
Everton vs Aston Villa	78	1-0	2-2	0	1	1
Aston Villa vs Wigan	69	0-2	0-2	0	0	0
West Ham vs Aston Villa	87	1-2	2-2	3	1	-2
						0

So, the net effect of Harewood's 22 substitute appearances to the points column is zero.  Zip.  Nothing. Nada.

Now I'm not looking to start a witch hunt here and I appreciate this stats are overly simplistic, football is a much more complicated game than these stats can possibly show.  But it remains a fact that Harewood only scored two goals that had an effect on the result and the overall during his time on the pitch we gained absolutely no points.

I still think he's a worthy squad member, who knows what contribution he may make behind the scenes, but I do dispute the title "impact player".  The evidence suggests he's made precisely zero impact.

Following the recent league cup exit to QPR, Damian wrote a front page article questioning the abilities of Harewood. I'm going to agree with him and here's why...

Firstly, I didn't see anyone in the comments answering the question of his stats during the game, so I'll fill in that blank first. Marlon had 5 of the total 18 shots on goal. 2 of them were on target. Draw your own conclusions.

So let's go back in time a bit. When MON made the signing there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth. Since then the lad has won over a large proportion of the fans with his sheer commitment and attitude. But is that enough?? I'd attribute those same characteristics to Robbie Savage, but I don't want him in the side.... do you??

He's often described as an "impact player", largely due to him making so many appearances as a substitute and so few starts. So let's have a look at his "impact" during last season:-

In the league he was introduced as a substitute 22 times, we'll come back to those in a moment. His one start was in the 4-0 drubbing at Old Trafford. We'll leave that there shall we??

He made two starts in the league cup; the 5-0 win at Wrexham where he scored the 5^th and final goal when the game was well and truly won. He also started the game in the next round against Leicester where, er, he didn't score. In fact he didn't have a single shot!! He was offside once though and he gave away 4 fouls. No wonder he made way for Luke Moore on 77 minutes. Moore did little with the time he had on the pitch either.

So back to the league and his 22 substitute appearances. He managed to rack up 5 goals. With his limited pitch time, on a per-minute basis his goal return probably isn't that bad, but did he win or save any games with those goals?

Well, his first league goal was away at Blackburn. He scored the 4^th and final goal in the 89^th minute. Again, the game was already won.

His next goal was the equaliser at Anfield. This definitely made an impact on the game. 3 minutes later an Aurelio own goal gave Villa a 2-1 lead. Of course we crumbled to an 88^th minute Crouch equaliser, but still, Marlon's goal made the difference between a point and nothing. Before the game we'd all have taken a point away to Liverpool and thanks to Marlon we did.

About a month later Marlon's 83^rd minute goal extended the 1-0 lead at Reading provided earlier by Ashley Young. Shorey, then a Reading player, popped up at the end of the game to score a consolation goal. So, without Marlon's goal it would have been a point at the Madjeski.

Marlon's next goal was again the final goal in Villa's 4-0 home destruction of Bolton. And once again the game was won, his goal makes no difference to the result.

And finally, continuing the theme, our Marlon put the icing on the cake a week later at Derby. He scored our 6^th goal in the 85^th minute. Nice yes, but changed nothing except the goal difference column.

So, there you go. Our “impact player” only scored two goals all season that made a difference to the results. Surely he must have a few assists to his name then?? Er, nope. Sorry.

And I haven't even mentioned that incident at White Heart Lane have I??

But as Eddie likes to point out to me, statistics don't show you everything. Personally, I think they're very much like a bikini... what they reveal is very interesting, but what they hide is vital!! ;)

Your definition of “impact player” might be very subjective. For instance, you might feel Marlon coming on the pitch changes the dynamics of the game enough to free up space for someone else to score and that's valid. It's hard to quantify statistically, but I can look at how the scoreline changed during the minutes Marlon was on the pitch and that will be Part 2.

I'm sure there will be many Villa fans left bemused at what is apparently our record signing's omission from the starting line up.  In fairness, it isn't unusual not to throw such a recent signing into the first available team sheet.  And after Barrygate this summer, I don't think this game was the one to do it either.  So on Milner starting this game on the bench I'm with MON, or I can at least get my head around it.  No problem.

And I'm also pleased to see MON looking to actually use his bench today.  Personally, I also would have looked to bring our newest acquisition into the fray around the hour mark.  So up to this point I'm with MON, but that's where it ends.

So what would I have done at that point??  Well, for me Gabby was looking pretty toothless.  He often lacks the smarts required to exploit the opposition back line and if the rest of the team aren't offering him plenty of balls over the top to chase he isn't bringing much to the party.  That's how I saw things after an hour - a midfield quagmire leaving Gabby anonymous.

So I would have done the unthinkable; bring off Gabby for Milner and play 5 across the middle to combat Liverpool's midfield.  Milner and Ashley Young could play out wide exploiting the scouser's infamous lack of width and joining up with big John in a 4-3-3 in attack.  Barry and NRC could play holding roles in the middle - NRC playing in his natural position... OMG!!!  Petrov could play a creative role also as a third foil for Carew up front.  Guess what??  That also leaves our new full-backs on the pitch playing as full-backs.  Everyone's a winner.

MON's second substitution was more of the same.  Off came Shorey for Gardner.  That left no less than 4 players playing outside of their preferred positions!!  NRC at right back, Barry at left back, Ashley Young on the right and Milner on the left.  All quite capable of doing a job in those positions when required, but I wouldn't do that by design.

So I'll stick with Gardner being my choice of replacement, but it wouldn't have been for Shorey.  For me it's simply a case of assessing which of my central 3 weren't adapting to the current formation and I wouldn't care less which one.  NRC, Barry or Petrov, one of them is making way for Gardner.  In all likelihood it would have been Stan.  Again, we're keeping players roughly where they're best employed on the pitch.  Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.

So that's basically it, we weren't all that bad today, but we weren't great either.  Liverpool were very beatable, but more than likely it would have to come from a set play.  I felt we wasted some of those opportunities today, Laursen in particular didn't project any real menace in the box.  

On the subject of Laursen; I don't think he was up to his usual standard and it was his odd diving header, half clearance that left a big hole for Keane to run on to the inevitable knock back.  I'm not sure where Curtis was, but Laursen should have had an idea that throwing himself to the ground wasn't the right move.  NRC's run back to tackle was impressive, but I think we can consider his timing just good enough not to give away a penalty.  Replays don't show much contact with the Irishman, but he got nothing on the ball at all.  Other refs may have given it and Coker an early bath and suspension to boot as reward for being the "last man".  Yup, Laursen putting himself out the game when Davies wasn't there to cover left the prospect of NRC and Shorey chasing down Keane pincer style - if that isn't asking for trouble, I don't know what is!!

So I'm left feeling underwhelmed somewhat.  I've given the lads some slack in my own mind for the last two lackluster performances on the basis that they must really, really be up for this game after everything that's happened this summer.  I fully expected them to come out today and play in such a way that even if they didn't win, they'd send the Fat Spanish Waiter back up the M6 wishing he'd never messed with us.  We didn't though.  I'm reasonably happy with a point against Liverpool anywhere, but I'd like them to feel very fortunate to get it at Villa Park and today I doubt that's the case.