The supporters of Aston Villa are not historically unrealistic in their expectations, and it’s not all down to the natural pessimism of the stereotypical cartoon brummie. For much of their existence, Villa have been a club able to justify quite lofty demands - albeit without necessarily snaring the silverware to prove it. This is a special club capable of special things, and the expectations have been there to match all along.
In the years since Villa’s explosive first Premier League season, football has changed. The expectations of many of the club’s supporters have not, and the current search for a new manager is exposing just how difficult a section of the Villa support has become.
The club’s previous chairman, Doug Ellis, was criticised frequently during his most recent stint at Villa Park, but for me his most damaging impact came not from a poor decision but from a missed opportunity.
In 1992/93, Villa missed out on the inaugural Premier League title after going toe-to-toe with Manchester United for the majority of the season. And while Villa would never have achieved anything like United’s successes in the intervening years it arguably shouldn’t be the case that Villa haven’t won the title since 1981 and have never qualified for the Champions League.
More important even than Ellis’ failures have been external factors entirely beyond Villa’s control. Roman Abramovich changed the Premier League forever when he took over at Chelsea, upping the financial stakes for the clubs that could afford to get involved in such things and, more pertinently, joining Manchester United and Arsenal in the ranks of teams with whom Villa hadn’t a hope of competing. Arsenal temporarily came back within striking distance recently, but other clubs have improved their lot, notably Tottenham Hotspur and Manchester City. With Liverpool seemingly revived for the time being, that makes for a top four and six awfully crowded with teams that all have significant advantages over Villa that cannot be blamed on the club.
There is nothing wrong with having high expectations of one’s football club, especially when it is one that has reached impressive heights throughout its history. Without a desire to push on, to qualify for the main continental competitions and to be the best, this is no longer sport in its truest sense.
Martin O’Neill’s four years at the club illustrated smartly where the expectations really are at Villa. The top two, even top three, is totally off the radar, but reaching fourth is an obsession for many, in itself a damning indictment of what the Premier League has come to be. O’Neill’s consecutive sixth-placed finishes were tempered by early-season “battles for fourth”, which seemed to allow the average Villa supporter to forgive the horrific collapses that followed.
O’Neill’s apparent successes with the club are, for me, soured by the dangerous wage bill incurred during his time at Villa. In the very same four years, Spurs and City have strengthened their positions in ways that make the assumption among Villa fans that a place in the top six is a God-given right look incredibly unrealistic. The landscape has changed beyond recognition in the last half a decade, and that’s without even considering that Villa were arguably just papering over the cracks for a lot of O’Neill’s reign.
Unfortunately, the phrase “lack of ambition” has now become the critical mantra of the football supporter unable to grasp reality. A reality check: Aston Villa are not a top four side, and they are also not a clear top six side. They’re capable of becoming either, but believing it’s possible does not equal expecting or demanding it, on pain of the sack. And Villa’s rediscovered place in the pecking order is not entirely within the club’s control. Simply put, things have changed and it’s not down to a lack of ambition (beyond remaining sensible) - at least not one that’s provable at present.
That supposed “lack of ambition” only really became an issue for the vocal critics under Gerard Houllier. The former Liverpool boss was an unpopular choice with a large section of the Villa support, and the ensuing season led to his position being untenable regardless of the health issues that sadly affected him in the meantime.
Houllier had an impossible job at Villa, having been tasked with reaching that insane minimum league position of sixth with a squad of players seemingly hell bent on stitching him up because he made them work too hard for their eye-watering salaries. Attempting to change the style of play to one whose viewing was less akin to shaving one’s b*llocks with a potato peeler was clearly a mistake, and it wasn’t his only one in a season that was, admittedly, genuinely disappointing. But failing to make the top six, regardless of the enormous odds stacked against him, was always going to leave him at the mercy of those with high expectations.
Now the time has come to replace Houllier, that “lack of ambition” is being exposed and pored over once more. The extended pursuit of Roberto Martinez divided supporters. Those that were unhappy maintained their position either on the grounds that Martinez was not a big enough name for the club and didn’t have enough experience to get Villa into the top four, or that there were better managers available. Funny word, “available” - it suggests that Villa can simply pick the manager they want, and if they went for an up-and-coming youngster with something to prove then the chairman isn’t backing the club.
The harsh reality of the situation is this: Villa have - by not bankrupting themselves financially (by trying to compete with Manchester City) or morally (by employing Harry Redknapp) - stood still while others around them have progressed. In the grand scheme of things that’s not so abhorrent, and in fact the club’s arguably done quite well to achieve it with the teams above pulling away and the teams below increasingly snapping at their heels.
As at every club, a section of supporters needs to get real. Is it better to have a big name whose star is on the wane, or a young and hungry up-and-comer with plenty to prove? There are arguments for each, but the vitriol with which the latter stance is criticised is extremely unfair. Regardless, which of these supposed “big names” would have joined Villa? Most of those named have either been over-rated and mistakes in waiting, or indicative of mild delusion within the fanbase.
Their expectations may not have been unrealistic fifteen or even ten years ago, and maybe they haven’t changed. But football has.
Tags: Aston Villa, Gerard Houllier, Randy Lerner, Roberto Martinez, Supporters
I think this is a reasonable analysis of the sitaution at Villa. Its often overlooked how things have changed in Football, and its not something I would say has been beneficial for football unless you are a shareholder in one of the so called big four. I think that Villa fans have watched a series of lost opportunities over the years. Frankly, villa fans (I am one by the way) have been incredibly tolerant of mediocrity. O’neills tenure was I think a mixed blessing. His appalling behaviour in walking out when he did, the expensive signings who never got a game, the bright young things that were trashing opposition of the highest calibre at youth level who were not given the chance to show what they are about until he left. The problem is that there are not many obvious talents management wise out there and I think Lerner wants to do the right thing, but how? The future is defniatley uncertain and frankly looks bleak. More watching paint dry for a few seasons I fear.
Excellent piece Chris. Shame it was a blog I cannot nick :p
Fine analysis Chris. While I wouldn’t want to defend Martin O’Neill from signing some of the dross he did, surely it wasn’t up to him how much they were paid.
Hi Steve. Lerner has to take his (large) share of responsibility for that. I just mean that it doesn’t seem like such an achievement when one considers how it was achieved.
Hit the nail right on the head with this.
To be fair to Villa supporters, since Lerner came I’ve noticed that ticket prices in the away end have jumped from £23 to £40 in the last 4 years, if this has happened to the home suporters i think they’ve a right to express their dissapointment at being 17th at christmas and maintain an expectation of a top 6 finish.
Whilst I agree that Villa operating on an 80% ratio of wages to turnover is risking the clubs future. I think allowing O’Neill to sign players like Beye, Sidwell, Ireland (purely off fireld reasons), Shorey etc for big transfer fees and huge wages and then not play them has had a bigger effect on the club then people will credit.
O’Neill fell out because Lerner wanted to correct this, and not reinvest the Milner money into the team but then bought Darren Bent for £20m. Mixed messages from the board in philosophy when it comes to building the team.
I think they would have done well to bring in Martinez (or someone of similar ilk) as it looks like they want to adopt Wigan/Everton’s approach, higher up the table, and invest in young players they can improve cheaply and then move them on for huge profits albeit, whilst trying to keep a top 6 finish. Houllier would have been the second-to-last person I would pick for this job (Benitez the first) and wisely they’ve moved onto Owen Coyle who also has a reputation for this.
I’m Ri of changerules.net and I just got directed here through The Guardian’s listing of the best football blogs. First, what great writing this particular post has; it almost reminds you of the late David Foster Wallace. I’m new here so saying this might not be as otherwise nothworthy. The thing with the write-up though is that it might be too long for me, but then what’s soccer if not about concrete analysis?
Definitely some sound analysis there. I certainly agree that Villa are by no means a guaranteed top 6 side anymore. Realistically we are at that next tier down competing with Everton for 7th. We need to put things in persepctive now about O’neils consecutive 6th place finishes. At the time Man City and Spurs were not the force they are now so frankly O’neil achieved the bare minimum
I would say that most Villa fans I speak to are realistic about the level of manager we should aim for. Those that didn’t want Martinez, wanted someone like Mark Hughes (not unrealistic) rather than say Jose Mourinhio. I don’t think we are being unrelistic in wanting better than Curbishley and Hughton which some press sources seem to consider our lot
Excellent article and - what’s more - excellent responses from everyone that’s written more than 10 words.
I do think the article is not all-embracing but on what it does cover it’s spot on i.m.o. The decision to be made about the new manager and how the squad is to evolve is crucial if we don’t want to see Downing and Bent wanting to be away by next summer. Villa could be forever in selling mode for a very long time the ways things are going.