Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: eastie on September 26, 2013, 04:24:39 PM
-
Interesting piece here by James nursey -
Jose Mourinho started it.
It was post-match after Chelsea had beaten Aston Villa and I thought it was trademark Mourinho mischief-making.
Mourinho was just in the process of patronising Villa boss Paul Lambert for reminding himself of how he used to behave 10 years ago when he dropped it in.
Aston Villa played long ball football, he claimed.
I smirked (because Mourinho entertains and fascinates me) and I thought Lambert was right to dismiss the comment soon after.
Lambert pointed out sides with skilful but slender midfielders like Ashley Westwood and Karim El Ahmadi would not be playing to their strengths to operate like that.
Mourinho's comment was soon forgotten about but then Andre Villas-Boas made reference to Villa's "direct" tactics again in midweek after Spurs' Cup win.
The fellow Portuguese manager said: "Villa were very very aggressive, long balls and direct."
I contacted the fine statisticians at Opta for their perspective and sure enough, the stats (see below) appear to back up the claims.
Villa have had the most flick-ons with 64 so far - thanks largely no doubt to Christian Benteke's aerial prowess.
They are also the third ranked team in terms of playing long passes with these attributing to 15 per cent of their distribution.
And they have launched the ball up the pitch 153 times so far playing hopeful long balls, which is the third highest total in the top-flight.
Guess who are the only side to be bracketed with Villa in all three categories?
Yes, West Ham, who are widely regarded as the biggest exponents of long ball football in the top-flight under Big Sam Allardyce.
It is not a particularly pretty picture for Villa on the face of it.
And with star striker Benteke out for up to six weeks with a hip injury , Villa may have to refine their so-called "direct" approach.
Opta
For example, I think the main reason Gabriel Agbonlahor has had such a good start to the season out wide - with numerous assists already - is he was latching on to Benteke's flicks to sprint clear or running on to his knock backs from deep.
The term 'long ball' has such a negative stigma in the English game, I think Lambert has to be careful here actually.
He is clearly a decent up-and-coming manager but being harshly labelled as a practitioner of such tactics has hindered people's careers before.
I imagine Lambert will get increasingly annoyed if rival managers keep claiming Villa play 'long ball' football.
The term alone does not accurately reflect Villa's tactics which are essentially a high tempo approach to get the ball forward quickly to utilise their pace in attack and their greatest asset - Benteke.
Villa also tend to be at their best hitting teams quickly on the break to score as they did at Norwich last weekend.
Setting up rapid breaks by the likes of Agonlahor and Andreas Weimann often however entails a long pass or ball to release them.
So the comments have to be put in perspective and really only reflect Villa trying to maximise their resources.
But the Opta statistics do underline to me how badly Benteke will be missed during his rehabilitation and rest to cure a hip problem.
Without him, I can't see Villa getting any change from forthcoming matches against Man City or Tottenham in the League.
The 'long ball' debate is also very ironic given ex-Birmingham boss Alex McLeish was hounded out of Villa Park by fans who constantly moaned at his tactics.
Villa came 16th in Big 'Eck's season at the helm with 38 points against a backdrop of Ashley Young and Stewart Downing being sold, supporter unrest and Stiliyan Petrov being diagnosed with Leukaemia.
Last season Villa came 15th with 41 points.
It was a heck of a lot of upheaval and change for one place higher and just three points more.
Fair enough, call it a transition year, but it does mean Villa will only really be able to claim genuine progress if they now kick on this season and climb to mid-table at least.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/aston-villa-long-ball-team-2306575#ixzz2g0qR4uMB
-
Nursey shit-stirring? Never!
-
Has someone at the club shagged his missus or something?
-
I don't think we're a long ball team, in fact if and when we go long we struggle. At our best we're really sharp and snappy in how we play the game. Mourinho's got a nerve as well, dropping one of the most creative players in the league.
-
Not surprising when hoofing it to Benteke is central to how we play.
-
Not surprising when hoofing it to Benteke is central to how we play.
No when we 'hoof' it to Benteke we struggle, when we play it to him we don't.
-
Not surprising when hoofing it to Benteke is central to how we play.
No when we 'hoof' it to Benteke we struggle, when we play it to him we don't.
Playing the semantics card already? ;)
-
I think that stat could largely be skewed by how unimaginitive and a bit desperate we get at home. When we can't string 5 passes together on the ground we inevitably look long. The Newcastle game in particular was wretched. We were utterly clueless going forward.
Honestly though, if we have to resort to playing even more like Stoke while Benteke's out, I'll settle for it, as long as the points are rolling in. I'd rather win ugly than lose playing pretty (not that we play pretty all that often in truth).
-
Not surprising when hoofing it to Benteke is central to how we play.
No when we 'hoof' it to Benteke we struggle, when we play it to him we don't.
Playing the semantics card already? ;)
It's not semantics, it's a different approach. When we go long we struggle badly, I cite you Bradford and Newcastle as an example.
-
Our use of the ball this season has been seriously hampered by Westwood being out of form IMO. He ticked it over and we kept it well at times last season, although we started getting more counter attack and direct when the form improved after the Newcastle second half at home. That night second half we got it wide and went very direct. We do need to play more through the middle, but without a midfielder in an advanced role with the ability to keep hold of the ball, we are not going to change much. That lad who we were certain to sign but never did is the type we need to be going back in for.
-
Our use of the ball this season has been seriously hampered by Westwood being out of form IMO. He ticked it over and we kept it well at times last season, although we started getting more counter attack and direct when the form improved after the Newcastle second half at home. That night second half we got it wide and went very direct. We do need to play more through the middle, but without a midfielder in an advanced role with the ability to keep hold of the ball, we are not going to change much. That lad who we were certain to sign but never did is the type we need to be going back in for.
I think possibly in part too, is that we've not really played the midfield three that bought the best out of Westy, and the team as a whole last season. It's been a bit unbalanced. Having both Delph and Sylla provided plenty of energy and running, that made up for Westy's lack of pace and which also allowed him to utilize his vision a bit.
-
Not surprising when hoofing it to Benteke is central to how we play.
No when we 'hoof' it to Benteke we struggle, when we play it to him we don't.
Playing the semantics card already? ;)
It's not semantics, it's a different approach. When we go long we struggle badly, I cite you Bradford and Newcastle as an example.
I'd agree but it doesn't change the fact that it is a common tactic when we can't successfully counter or dominate possession (which happens extremely rarely). Especially at home...
-
Nursey shit-stirring? Never!
He does tend to have a pop every now and again, especially after a defeat or two.
-
I think Westwood's form has had an effect on us, as Ozz says we need to retain possession and play through the middle. This is why it is vitally important that was sign a Kagawa type player who can create through the centre. I obviously don't mean Kagawa as he's out of our league, but that style.
-
Nursey shit-stirring? Never!
He does tend to have a pop every now and again, especially after a defeat or two.
Or still smarting from seeing us beat his beloved Norwich last weekend :)
-
Nursey shit-stirring? Never!
He does tend to have a pop every now and again, especially after a defeat or two.
Or still smarting from seeing us beat his beloved Norwich last weekend :)
Either way he's a piss poor journalist.
-
Just to point out also that we rarely have majority possession even when Westwood is in the team. I think his importance is grossly exaggerated.
-
Just to point out also that we rarely have majority possession even when Westwood is in the team. I think his importance is grossly exaggerated.
I'm not sure. Our possession would probably be a lot worse having him out the side for 10 games, than in it. I agree he's definitely got to step his game up a level. Last season he very rarely wasted a pass, was always an available option for a teammate. He's really the one player who does his role, that we have. KEA I think is too cumbersome on the ball. He's generally quite tidy, but he's got to sharpen up. He gets caught on the ball too often and also makes Westwood look positively fleet of foot.
But yes, despite the fact Lambert wants us to be a side that gets the ball down and plays football. You'd find over the course of last season (and this) that far more often than not our possession stats would be under the 50 mark, not over it.
For that to change we're going to need more technically able midfielders and a suitable formation (certainly at home). He's got us as a reasonably effective counter attacking side at the moment, but as a footballing possession side, not really. It's work in progress and we look a good year away from it at least. Aside from Sunderland last season, I've not seen us walk all over a side at Villa park and just dominate possession virtually the whole game. We had 61% of possession that game which is almost unheard of for us.
Another couple of cultured midfielders, particularly one who can operate well behind the attackers, to compliment the more athletic players like Delphy, Sylla, and Bacuna mattata are essential.
-
I've noticed we've been more direct this season than the tail end of last. Would be interesting to know if this is due to a loss I momentum or if Lambert's directed the team to go long.
-
He cites 15% from Opta as his evidence, which means that 85% of the time it isn't classed as long ball. What a load of old bollocks to construct a whole article around that.
When we're under pressure we do go long at times but to make a whole argument based on such meagre evidence is desperate even by his low standards.
-
I have to say that much of the Premier League is about possession and tippy tappy football in areas that pose no threat ie around the half way line. Watching Match of the Day DVDs of the 70s and 80s reminds old codgers like me of how quick teams were to get forward using players who could run and go past players and on getting the ball in and around the opponents penalty area.
This attrition by passing does not get me on my feet, and I yearn for quick and decisive passing, wing play, overlapping full backs, speed of thought throw ins and corners, players unafraid to dribble and take a risk, one twos, goalkeepers who throw the ball out to a midfielder rather than a centre half, mobile and risk taking players who understand that play without the ball is as important as when in possession, movement and taking defenders out of position, midfielders who don't get a nose bleed when they find themselves in the penalty area. If a long ball to a forward is appropriate then use it, it's about decision making and adapting style to get the result.
Enough, rant over, apologies.
-
Just to point out also that we rarely have majority possession even when Westwood is in the team. I think his importance is grossly exaggerated.
I'm not sure. Our possession would probably be a lot worse having him out the side for 10 games, than in it. I agree he's definitely got to step his game up a level. Last season he very rarely wasted a pass, was always an available option for a teammate. He's really the one player who does his role, that we have. KEA I think is too cumbersome on the ball. He's generally quite tidy, but he's got to sharpen up. He gets caught on the ball too often and also makes Westwood look positively fleet of foot.
But yes, despite the fact Lambert wants us to be a side that gets the ball down and plays football. You'd find over the course of last season (and this) that far more often than not our possession stats would be under the 50 mark, not over it.
For that to change we're going to need more technically able midfielders and a suitable formation (certainly at home). He's got us as a reasonably effective counter attacking side at the moment, but as a footballing possession side, not really. It's work in progress and we look a good year away from it at least. Aside from Sunderland last season, I've not seen us walk all over a side at Villa park and just dominate possession virtually the whole game. We had 61% of possession that game which is almost unheard of for us.
Another couple of cultured midfielders, particularly one who can operate well behind the attackers, to compliment the more athletic players like Delphy, Sylla, and Bacuna mattata are essential.
I'd agree with that somewhat but his presence alone doesn't single-handedly make much difference to the way we play and whilst we continue to generally have less possession then our opponents, then there will be much more onus on the off the ball work of our midfielders of which Westwood is by far the weakest in this regard.
-
I think that stat could largely be skewed by how unimaginitive and a bit desperate we get at home. When we can't string 5 passes together on the ground we inevitably look long. The Newcastle game in particular was wretched. We were utterly clueless going forward.
Honestly though, if we have to resort to playing even more like Stoke while Benteke's out, I'll settle for it, as long as the points are rolling in. I'd rather win ugly than lose playing pretty (not that we play pretty all that often in truth).
Good post.
To be honest, I was expecting us to be playing better football. We started last season a passing team but we have got so much more direct since then. I think the manager found a formula to suit his players at the back end of last season and he will stick to that. I have been disappointed at how much pressure we invite by giving the ball away cheaply by playing direct. I'd rather see us knock it about a bit so that the other team gets tired chasing.
-
We are shit at retaining possession. the second half against norwich was a shambles and even worse on Tuesday. spurs were swarming all over us and we couldn't deal with it. no strength and lots of stray passes. Our one dimensional tactics and weak midfield concern me greatly
-
I've noticed so far this season that we play a lot more long balls at home than we do away.
-
The problem is we pass around get no where end up going back to Guzan who promptly blasts it up field.
We have 2 modes chase down the ball when we don't have it and quick counter attacks.As soon as we slow down we are lost.
-
I have to say that much of the Premier League is about possession and tippy tappy football in areas that pose no threat ie around the half way line. Watching Match of the Day DVDs of the 70s and 80s reminds old codgers like me of how quick teams were to get forward using players who could run and go past players and on getting the ball in and around the opponents penalty area.
This attrition by passing does not get me on my feet, and I yearn for quick and decisive passing, wing play, overlapping full backs, speed of thought throw ins and corners, players unafraid to dribble and take a risk, one twos, goalkeepers who throw the ball out to a midfielder rather than a centre half, mobile and risk taking players who understand that play without the ball is as important as when in possession, movement and taking defenders out of position, midfielders who don't get a nose bleed when they find themselves in the penalty area. If a long ball to a forward is appropriate then use it, it's about decision making and adapting style to get the result.
Enough, rant over, apologies.
From one codger to another: well said, Jez!
-
I've noticed so far this season that we play a lot more long balls at home than we do away.
Because we can't counter as much at home and with nobody in the team seemingly possessing much of a creative spark, lumping it to Benteke is the default plan B.
-
i remember under Redknapp, Spurs were amongst the most frequent players of long balls - which were almost always to Crouch to knock down for Van Der Vaart, or whoever.
It's too easy to reach for it as a stick to beat people with, because the term "long ball" can mean so many things. It can mean looking for an obvious man to hold the ball up and bring others into play - as we do with Benteke - or it can mean, at the other extreme, a 1980s Charles Hughes wet dream of whacking the ball long and playing a percentages game. These are totally different ways of playing, but can both be labelled long ball.
I am not so much bothered about what label people want to apply to the way we play, more so with the fact that, at home, we're a relegation side, whereas away from home, we're European places material.
Until we can fix that, we're going to struggle.
-
Biggest concern is Lambert reverting to this shitty narrow bollocks formation. It is complete wank and I thought he may have learned that last season. If he persists with this bullshit we are in deep trouble and I'd want him off the premises.
-
I have to say that much of the Premier League is about possession and tippy tappy football in areas that pose no threat ie around the half way line. Watching Match of the Day DVDs of the 70s and 80s reminds old codgers like me of how quick teams were to get forward using players who could run and go past players and on getting the ball in and around the opponents penalty area.
This attrition by passing does not get me on my feet, and I yearn for quick and decisive passing, wing play, overlapping full backs, speed of thought throw ins and corners, players unafraid to dribble and take a risk, one twos, goalkeepers who throw the ball out to a midfielder rather than a centre half, mobile and risk taking players who understand that play without the ball is as important as when in possession, movement and taking defenders out of position, midfielders who don't get a nose bleed when they find themselves in the penalty area. If a long ball to a forward is appropriate then use it, it's about decision making and adapting style to get the result.
Enough, rant over, apologies.
Absolutely bang on. The day two midfielders make it into the box from open play may be the day football at Villa Park gets entertaining again.
-
I've noticed we've been more direct this season than the tail end of last. Would be interesting to know if this is due to a loss I momentum or if Lambert's directed the team to go long.
I reckon it might be due to the standard of opposition we have been facing. We've had a high concentration of "top" sides which has possibly had an impact on our tactics (and the stats Nursey cites) so far.
-
I've noticed we've been more direct this season than the tail end of last. Would be interesting to know if this is due to a loss I momentum or if Lambert's directed the team to go long.
I reckon it might be due to the standard of opposition we have been facing. We've had a high concentration of "top" sides which has possibly had an impact on our tactics (and the stats Nursey cites) so far.
Which I think is worrying, and wrong. Is this the way we want to approach the game: to continue to accustom our play according to who the opponent is or rather approach the game like Swansea, that is, trust to your style no matter who the opponent. Even if this 'style based on opponent' mentality might be a better short term approach points-wise, I'm sure it has opposite effect long-term.
-
So far, Newcastle aside, I've been encouraged by some of our play-we need to get a hold of the ball more in midfield, quicker passing to feet, and look comfortable doing so.
-
I've noticed we've been more direct this season than the tail end of last. Would be interesting to know if this is due to a loss I momentum or if Lambert's directed the team to go long.
I reckon it might be due to the standard of opposition we have been facing. We've had a high concentration of "top" sides which has possibly had an impact on our tactics (and the stats Nursey cites) so far.
Which I think is worrying, and wrong. Is this the way we want to approach the game: to continue to accustom our play according to who the opponent is or rather approach the game like Swansea, that is, trust to your style no matter who the opponent. Even if this 'style based on opponent' mentality might be a better short term approach points-wise, I'm sure it has opposite effect long-term.
I must admit i find swansea a joy to watch with their fluent style of play and passing movements - the football we play particularly at home in the main leaves me far from entertained.
-
Swansea are great to watch, but it has stemmed from about 10 years of continuous evolution of a model of play.
We are a month into year 2 under Lambert. To not give him at least 3 or 4 as long as we are not relegated is futile. As long as we stay up, we are not going to challenge the other end in that time so why not give the bloke a few years to try and bring continuity and build on what he has started?
Or should we just react and sack every couple of years? What is sustainable about that?
-
I don't think anyone is calling for his head yet but just the dismal home displays have somewhat burst the optimism bubble of a month ago.
-
What I really don't get with this sneering article is:
The 'long ball' debate is also very ironic given ex-Birmingham boss Alex McLeish was hounded out of Villa Park by fans who constantly moaned at his tactics
Linking TSM to the current debate is just irrelevant and inflammatory. TSM's football was not necessarily 'long ball': it was just bereft of tactic and somewhat negative.
Furthermore, there is nothing inherently wrong with 'long ball' football: people used to positively purr when Hoddle, Cowans and others stroked a 40-50 yard pass. The holy grail for some managers is to have a ball-passer who can hit 1 yard or 50 yard passes with total reliability.
The issue is simple: when teams 'lump it' - as Baker sometimes does - there is a pointlessness to football. Why give the ball to those least skilled in passing - often the CB? This is where I get pissed off with Villa's attempt at the passing game. Giving it back to the CB for no obvious reason other than that it's the direction the passer is facing seems pointless.
But, long passing: not bad per se.
-
It was clear in the game on Tuesday that Spurs had more technically gifted players than us. The moved the ball very well, sometimes in areas where it didn't hurt, but they moved us about the pitch all half looking for openings. More and more sides are trying to play that way - as the half went on they created more opportunities. It was only a matter of time before they took one. We helped them by not closing them down well enough. It was interesting to see Spurs close down in twos and threes when we had the ball and the number of times we gave the ball away as a result - partly because we do not have the same level of technical ability but also because the player on the ball had no options.
Playing without the ball is much harder than with and as we nearly always have the ball less, have to up our game physically. We need to step up and pressurise the ball more to knock teams off their stride. It's all too easy at Villa Park in particular.
Having said all that, playing the ball forward quicker is not an unsophisitcated way to play but it does make it harder to retain the ball if it's not done well. Away from home it can work well and I think teams genuinely fear us, but at home as we are often behind, those tactics become more desperate and more 'hit and hope' as the game goes on.
I don' t think our home form will improve until Lambert seriously addresses this. Nine defeats in 13 home league games is embarassing.
-
The biggest issue I have with this article is that he has at no point attempted to find a reason for it. I'd suggest having played Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool and Tottenham who are all expected to be top 6 our number of long balls will be higher than normal because we've had to defend a lot. Add in that we had a bad day against Newcastle and ended up pumping log balls looking for an equaliser and the picture looks fairly obvious. I'd be interested in seeing the stats for Norwich though.
Aside from that I find the use of 'long-ball' as if it's an insult a bit pathetic mainly because it's not used consistently, for example, I personally think Man Utd played a lot of long ball football under Fergie (the offside RVP goal against us was a long punt behind our defence for example), but you never see them criticised for it, when they do it they're being 'direct', as far as the media are concerned 'smaller' clubs aren't allowed to do that it seems. I just find it hypocrtical that a media that lauded Steven Gerrard (who hits as many long balls into the channels as anyone) as one of the best players in the world also slags teams off for playing long balls.
-
It was clear in the game on Tuesday that Spurs had more technically gifted players than us. The moved the ball very well, sometimes in areas where it didn't hurt, but they moved us about the pitch all half looking for openings. More and more sides are trying to play that way - as the half went on they created more opportunities. It was only a matter of time before they took one. We helped them by not closing them down well enough. It was interesting to see Spurs close down in twos and threes when we had the ball and the number of times we gave the ball away as a result - partly because we do not have the same level of technical ability but also because the player on the ball had no options.
Playing without the ball is much harder than with and as we nearly always have the ball less, have to up our game physically. We need to step up and pressurise the ball more to knock teams off their stride. It's all too easy at Villa Park in particular.
Having said all that, playing the ball forward quicker is not an unsophisitcated way to play but it does make it harder to retain the ball if it's not done well. Away from home it can work well and I think teams genuinely fear us, but at home as we are often behind, those tactics become more desperate and more 'hit and hope' as the game goes on.
I don' t think our home form will improve until Lambert seriously addresses this. Nine defeats in 13 home league games is embarassing.
Pretty much perfect summing up of the situation.
-
It was clear in the game on Tuesday that Spurs had more technically gifted players than us. The moved the ball very well, sometimes in areas where it didn't hurt, but they moved us about the pitch all half looking for openings. More and more sides are trying to play that way - as the half went on they created more opportunities. It was only a matter of time before they took one. We helped them by not closing them down well enough. It was interesting to see Spurs close down in twos and threes when we had the ball and the number of times we gave the ball away as a result - partly because we do not have the same level of technical ability but also because the player on the ball had no options.
Playing without the ball is much harder than with and as we nearly always have the ball less, have to up our game physically. We need to step up and pressurise the ball more to knock teams off their stride. It's all too easy at Villa Park in particular.
Having said all that, playing the ball forward quicker is not an unsophisitcated way to play but it does make it harder to retain the ball if it's not done well. Away from home it can work well and I think teams genuinely fear us, but at home as we are often behind, those tactics become more desperate and more 'hit and hope' as the game goes on.
I don' t think our home form will improve until Lambert seriously addresses this. Nine defeats in 13 home league games is embarassing.
And the point has been made ad nauseam that Barcelona's 'blue riband' style of play relied as much on their pressing game when out of possession as their pass-and-move with it.
Many teams are trying it; Spurs may be further along that journey. We are trying the passing bit but are not really deliverng on the pressing game well enough yet.
-
The thing is, at times this (and last) season our pressing game has been very good, particularly the 1-3 at Arsenal. Its one of the reasons I think KEA keeps getting in the team - he was doing a reasonable job at chasing the ball and harrassing the opposition on tuesday as well, but wasn't getting much help, and he pretty much packed it in once the ref warned him.
Again, its a consistency thing. They can play, they just need to do it all the time.
-
It was clear in the game on Tuesday that Spurs had more technically gifted players than us. The moved the ball very well, sometimes in areas where it didn't hurt, but they moved us about the pitch all half looking for openings. More and more sides are trying to play that way - as the half went on they created more opportunities. It was only a matter of time before they took one. We helped them by not closing them down well enough. It was interesting to see Spurs close down in twos and threes when we had the ball and the number of times we gave the ball away as a result - partly because we do not have the same level of technical ability but also because the player on the ball had no options.
Playing without the ball is much harder than with and as we nearly always have the ball less, have to up our game physically. We need to step up and pressurise the ball more to knock teams off their stride. It's all too easy at Villa Park in particular.
Having said all that, playing the ball forward quicker is not an unsophisitcated way to play but it does make it harder to retain the ball if it's not done well. Away from home it can work well and I think teams genuinely fear us, but at home as we are often behind, those tactics become more desperate and more 'hit and hope' as the game goes on.
I don' t think our home form will improve until Lambert seriously addresses this. Nine defeats in 13 home league games is embarassing.
And the point has been made ad nauseam that Barcelona's 'blue riband' style of play relied as much on their pressing game when out of possession as their pass-and-move with it.
Many teams are trying it; Spurs may be further along that journey. We are trying the passing bit but are not really deliverng on the pressing game well enough yet.
Barcelona without the ball operate like a rugby team (go with it for a second before commenting on the tackling) in that they close the gaps ( Barce generally have a bank of 4 and a bank of 5 with 1 left up front, usually Messi) and hunt in pairs. Watch what they do when a man goes in to challenge, there is always a 2nd player close by, so if the ball bobbles free they're on hand to collect it and it reduces the options for an 'out ball' for the guy being challenged. On top of that they wait to spot a weakness, they're not rushing in to challenge everytime, rather they get close enough to be in the eyeline of the player taking the pass, and if his touch is weak they pounce on him whilst his control isn't quite good enough. All this is basic open field rugby union defence and the concepts translate perfectly.
-
It was clear in the game on Tuesday that Spurs had more technically gifted players than us. The moved the ball very well, sometimes in areas where it didn't hurt, but they moved us about the pitch all half looking for openings. More and more sides are trying to play that way - as the half went on they created more opportunities. It was only a matter of time before they took one. We helped them by not closing them down well enough. It was interesting to see Spurs close down in twos and threes when we had the ball and the number of times we gave the ball away as a result - partly because we do not have the same level of technical ability but also because the player on the ball had no options.
Playing without the ball is much harder than with and as we nearly always have the ball less, have to up our game physically. We need to step up and pressurise the ball more to knock teams off their stride. It's all too easy at Villa Park in particular.
Having said all that, playing the ball forward quicker is not an unsophisitcated way to play but it does make it harder to retain the ball if it's not done well. Away from home it can work well and I think teams genuinely fear us, but at home as we are often behind, those tactics become more desperate and more 'hit and hope' as the game goes on.
I don' t think our home form will improve until Lambert seriously addresses this. Nine defeats in 13 home league games is embarassing.
And the point has been made ad nauseam that Barcelona's 'blue riband' style of play relied as much on their pressing game when out of possession as their pass-and-move with it.
Many teams are trying it; Spurs may be further along that journey. We are trying the passing bit but are not really deliverng on the pressing game well enough yet.
Barcelona without the ball operate like a rugby team (go with it for a second before commenting on the tackling) in that they close the gaps ( Barce generally have a bank of 4 and a bank of 5 with 1 left up front, usually Messi) and hunt in pairs. Watch what they do when a man goes in to challenge, there is always a 2nd player close by, so if the ball bobbles free they're on hand to collect it and it reduces the options for an 'out ball' for the guy being challenged. On top of that they wait to spot a weakness, they're not rushing in to challenge everytime, rather they get close enough to be in the eyeline of the player taking the pass, and if his touch is weak they pounce on him whilst his control isn't quite good enough. All this is basic open field rugby union defence and the concepts translate perfectly.
The very point I was making, albeit you expressed more eloquently - and your rugby analogy is a good one.
-
Paul Lambert has angrily rejected accusations that his Aston Villa team are long-ball merchants – and vowed to improve their home form.
Andre Villas-Boas claimed the claret and blues adopted route-one tactics during Tottenham’s Capital One Cup victory at Villa Park on Tuesday.
Villas-Boas’ comments follow a similar suggestion from Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho after Villa’s Premier League defeat at Stamford Bridge last month.
Football statisticians classify ‘long balls’ as launches upfield, not to a specific player.
According to the Opta figures, Villa are the third-worst offenders in the Premier League this season, having hit 153 long balls, with only West Ham (169) and Crystal Palace (166) producing more.
Aston Villa v Man City: Live match report with Mat Kendrick
Of Villa’s total passes, 15.36 per cent are long, again ranking them third, this time behind West Ham (15.93 per cent) and Cardiff (15.61 per cent).
Lambert’s team have also made the most headed flick-ons – 64 – in the top flight, ahead of West Ham (61) and Newcastle (58).
But Lambert has hit back at the criticism, insisting it is “detrimental” to brand his team ‘hit and hope’ when they pride themselves on playing passing football.
“I don’t get that really,” said Lambert, whose team host title-chasing Manchester City tomorrow afternoon.
“If you go and look at your stats at how many long balls Chelsea played against us, I’m pretty sure we weren’t ahead of them. And Spurs.
Are Aston Villa a long ball team?
“We don’t have the players to play long balls. We might play a long pass. We don’t just hit it up front and hope for the best. I think that’s detrimental actually, to say things like that. I don’t agree with that.
“Even if Christian Benteke plays we don’t play long. You’re not telling me we’re a big side other than Christian or Nathan Baker?
“I don’t think it’s right to say that. We don’t play that way at all. I think they’re wrong in saying that.”
At the start of last season, the claret and blue faithful hailed Lambert’s preference for possession football with chants of “We’re Aston Villa, we’re passing the ball.”
View gallery
""""""""""
Aston Villa v Manchester City
View gallery
And he confirmed his players are encouraged to try to play attractively by taking as few touches as possible at a high tempo and working hard to regain possession.
“We go and try and pass it,” said Lambert. “We try and play football the right way, even in training.
“We certainly don’t kick the ball long, that’s for sure. You can ask anybody here, we don’t play long-ball football, we just don’t have players to do that.
‘‘Gabby Agbonlahor and Andi Weimann, for instance, Ashley Westwood, Fabian Delph, Karim El Ahmadi – they’re footballers.”
Villa welcome third-placed City, having lost nine of their past 13 Premier League games at Villa Park, including this season’s home fixtures against Liverpool and Newcastle.
“You need to win your home games,” added Lambert. “I think you should have a good solid base at home. We’ve got to improve that.
“It seems like we’re doing it the other way around, winning away from home and finding it hard at home. I don’t know how that is.
“We don’t set our stall out any different. We go and try and win every game that we play in.
The last sentence is the problem - we don't set our stall out any different - we need to change our system of play at home , its fine away but needs changing at home.
-
I think he means we don't go out and try and take a point from games, we try to win everyone.
-
I'm not bothered what style of football we play as long as we don't play like Wimbledon of old. Long ball football has been demonised by the likes of Sam Allardyce who genuinely just hoofs the ball up the pitch hoping it will land on someone's head, where as we mix it up a bit. I like a team with wingers where you get the ball out wide ASAP and whip in crosses, but even that isn't good enough for the purists these days who think if you don't try and emulate Barcelona then you must hate the game of football.
-
I'm a bit concerned he says, 'I don't know how that is.' I can tell him exactly how that is, it's because we don't retain possession and build pressure at home. Although I completely agree about his long ball comments.
-
Was that Lambert "angrily" rejecting accusations?!
The debate has been somewhat done to death and doesn't take us forward any.
The key issue is getting more points from those away games that seem to slip away from us and doing a whole lot better at home.
Like our set-piece conundrum of last season / season before last, Lambert's coaching team have to find some answers.
-
I'm not bothered what style of football we play as long as we don't play like Wimbledon of old. Long ball football has been demonised by the likes of Sam Allardyce who genuinely just hoofs the ball up the pitch hoping it will land on someone's head, where as we mix it up a bit. I like a team with wingers where you get the ball out wide ASAP and whip in crosses, but even that isn't good enough for the purists these days who think if you don't try and emulate Barcelona then you must hate the game of football.
Agreed - it's like Wenger who has regulalrly bemoaned the fact that teams like Stoke don't play the 'right' kind of football - i.e. one that will let the Arsenal style prevail. Football has no one designated approach and whether it's 'direct', winger-orientated or tiki-taka (the 'new' terminology for Barca's short pass-and-move style) should not really be the point.
Teams that do what they do well - and perhaps mix up their footballing style - will probably do rather well.
-
I'm not bothered what style of football we play as long as we don't play like Wimbledon of old. Long ball football has been demonised by the likes of Sam Allardyce who genuinely just hoofs the ball up the pitch hoping it will land on someone's head, where as we mix it up a bit. I like a team with wingers where you get the ball out wide ASAP and whip in crosses, but even that isn't good enough for the purists these days who think if you don't try and emulate Barcelona then you must hate the game of football.
Teams that do what they do well
I'm not 100% sure what it is that we do do well
-
I hope he can actually acknowledge that our passing is largely poor. Sometimes I worry just how much Lambert thinks we need to improve in certain areas. We've got a hell of a lot of work to do to move forward. If there's one thing that Lambo has let himself down with, it's identifying and rectifying problems in good time. Be it within a game (getting murdered by Ben Arfa), or over the course of a many games (inability to keep the ball efficiently. Too narrow. One way of playing effectively).
If he doesn't start rectifying problems then we're gonna go nowhere, and he's going to get fired. Less talk more action.
As for the long ball thing. Well stats back it up. Watching games does too. He says we don't hit and hope, but it's exactly what we do start doing when we're chasing a game. Particularly at Villa park. This is why our possession of the football must improve. That will require a switch of system at home as well as better footballers to come in during January.
-
I'm not bothered what style of football we play as long as we don't play like Wimbledon of old. Long ball football has been demonised by the likes of Sam Allardyce who genuinely just hoofs the ball up the pitch hoping it will land on someone's head, where as we mix it up a bit. I like a team with wingers where you get the ball out wide ASAP and whip in crosses, but even that isn't good enough for the purists these days who think if you don't try and emulate Barcelona then you must hate the game of football.
Agreed - it's like Wenger who has regulalrly bemoaned the fact that teams like Stoke don't play the 'right' kind of football - i.e. one that will let the Arsenal style prevail. Football has no one designated approach and whether it's 'direct', winger-orientated or tiki-taka (the 'new' terminology for Barca's short pass-and-move style) should not really be the point.
Teams that do what they do well - and perhaps mix up their footballing style - will probably do rather well.
I don't disagree with this. However you have to acknowledge that if you play a more 'direct' style, you will normally have less of the ball - as direct means getting the ball forward quickly- and at times that will be via a longer ball.
I have no issue with Lambert playing to his team's strength doing that. My issue is that when we don't have the ball, it's too easy for the opposition to play their game, especially at home. We need to up the effort in closing down and breaking up play, otherwise we will continue to lose home games in particular. Away from home it's less of an issue as we sit and break on teams.
In that sense, he must see that he has to change the style of play at home.
-
We do play long passes rather than long balls in the sense that they're not aimless, but they are unnecessary risky and we need to learn to keep the ball better. And Guzan should hoof it less.
-
We do play long passes rather than long balls in the sense that they're not aimless, but they are unnecessary risky and we need to learn to keep the ball better. And Guzan should hoof it less.
Part of the problem with hoofing it is that while Benteke/Kozak will probably win most of the headers, there isnt enough movement from our other players to get on the end of flick ons and lay offs and whatnot
-
We do play long passes rather than long balls in the sense that they're not aimless, but they are unnecessary risky and we need to learn to keep the ball better. And Guzan should hoof it less.
I'd like to see that stat with Guzan removed, like Monty I do find he has a tendency for long punts which doesn't help us build pressure.
In that sense, he must see that he has to change the style of play at home.
I don't quite agree, I think what we plan to do at home can be effective, I just don't think we're actually doing it very well right now.
-
I think we're all violently agreeing here ... worryingly!
-
Lambert does not, ever, criticise his players in public so it's hard to know his true feelings on the accusations of hoof-ball. There was a more revealing comment from him after a recent game where he said we don't quite have the nous yet to play a patient-passing game.
-
With their wonderful three-man attack, Aston Villa are one of the most entertaining sides in the league but while there is plenty to admire about the diligence of Gabriel Agbonlahor and Andreas Weimann, it is Christian Benteke whose goals grab the headlines. He has scored four of their goals this season, so the news that he will be out with a hip injury for six weeks comes as a crushing blow, putting pressure not just on Villa's other forwards but also a defence which is hardly renowned for its solidity. At least Benteke's replacement, Libor Kozak, scored the winner within minutes of coming on against Norwich last Saturday but the 6ft 4in Czech striker is less mobile than the Belgian and Villa's game is largely based around speed, especially on the break. Without his biggest goal threat, Paul Lambert may have to curb his attacking instincts and opt for a more cautious approach against City, whose defeat at Cardiff proved that they can toil against deep defences. Their best hope may be that City have one eye on the visit of Bayern Munich in the Champions League next Wednesday, though.
For today's Guardian.
Why the discrepency between how some on here see us, and the press sees us?
-
With their wonderful three-man attack, Aston Villa are one of the most entertaining sides in the league but while there is plenty to admire about the diligence of Gabriel Agbonlahor and Andreas Weimann, it is Christian Benteke whose goals grab the headlines. He has scored four of their goals this season, so the news that he will be out with a hip injury for six weeks comes as a crushing blow, putting pressure not just on Villa's other forwards but also a defence which is hardly renowned for its solidity. At least Benteke's replacement, Libor Kozak, scored the winner within minutes of coming on against Norwich last Saturday but the 6ft 4in Czech striker is less mobile than the Belgian and Villa's game is largely based around speed, especially on the break. Without his biggest goal threat, Paul Lambert may have to curb his attacking instincts and opt for a more cautious approach against City, whose defeat at Cardiff proved that they can toil against deep defences. Their best hope may be that City have one eye on the visit of Bayern Munich in the Champions League next Wednesday, though.
For today's Guardian.
Why the discrepency between how some on here see us, and the press sees us?
I think that applies away but not really at home.
-
With their wonderful three-man attack, Aston Villa are one of the most entertaining sides in the league but while there is plenty to admire about the diligence of Gabriel Agbonlahor and Andreas Weimann, it is Christian Benteke whose goals grab the headlines. He has scored four of their goals this season, so the news that he will be out with a hip injury for six weeks comes as a crushing blow, putting pressure not just on Villa's other forwards but also a defence which is hardly renowned for its solidity. At least Benteke's replacement, Libor Kozak, scored the winner within minutes of coming on against Norwich last Saturday but the 6ft 4in Czech striker is less mobile than the Belgian and Villa's game is largely based around speed, especially on the break. Without his biggest goal threat, Paul Lambert may have to curb his attacking instincts and opt for a more cautious approach against City, whose defeat at Cardiff proved that they can toil against deep defences. Their best hope may be that City have one eye on the visit of Bayern Munich in the Champions League next Wednesday, though.
For today's Guardian.
Why the discrepency between how some on here see us, and the press sees us?
I think that applies away but not really at home.
Because the lazy journalist most probably doesn't actually watch many Villa games.
-
With their wonderful three-man attack, Aston Villa are one of the most entertaining sides in the league but while there is plenty to admire about the diligence of Gabriel Agbonlahor and Andreas Weimann, it is Christian Benteke whose goals grab the headlines. He has scored four of their goals this season, so the news that he will be out with a hip injury for six weeks comes as a crushing blow, putting pressure not just on Villa's other forwards but also a defence which is hardly renowned for its solidity. At least Benteke's replacement, Libor Kozak, scored the winner within minutes of coming on against Norwich last Saturday but the 6ft 4in Czech striker is less mobile than the Belgian and Villa's game is largely based around speed, especially on the break. Without his biggest goal threat, Paul Lambert may have to curb his attacking instincts and opt for a more cautious approach against City, whose defeat at Cardiff proved that they can toil against deep defences. Their best hope may be that City have one eye on the visit of Bayern Munich in the Champions League next Wednesday, though.
For today's Guardian.
Why the discrepency between how some on here see us, and the press sees us?
I think that applies away but not really at home.
Because the lazy journalist most probably doesn't actually watch many Villa games.
Anybody with anything good to say doesn't watch us. Wonderful.
-
Anybody with anything good to say doesn't watch us. Wonderful.
Exactly.
Every team outside of the very top few would take our front three of our hands in a shot.
In the words of the song "You don't know what you've got 'til its gone".
-
Part of the problem with hoofing it is that while Benteke/Kozak will probably win most of the headers, there isn't enough movement from our other players to get on the end of flick ons and lay offs and whatnot
I do have to disagree with this. Certainly in terms of the front three. Weimann and Gabby never STOP moving.
The centre of midfield can be a little pedestrian admittedly, and certainly need to offer more in the way of goals. But I certainly don't think we are aimless of long ball by any stretch.
-
Because the lazy journalist most probably doesn't actually watch many Villa games.
Brilliant, that old cliche.
As patchy as the Grauniad's football coverage is, they generally have a good handle on whats going on at the Villa. Heres what they wrote in the '10 things' section after the Newcastle game:
Aston Villa lacking goals and guile in midfield
These are early days and it should not be overlooked that Aston Villa played Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool in their first three matches but it was still alarming to see Paul Lambert's side put on such a poor performance in Saturday's 2-1 home defeat by Newcastle United. Short of ideas going forward and fragile at the back, Villa were booed off. Take Christian Benteke out of the team and it is hard to imagine where the goals will come from. Certainly not midfield. Karim El Ahmadi, Fabian Delph and Ashley Westwood – the midfield three on Saturday – have played a combined 112 Premier League games. They have one goal (El Ahmadi) between them and seven assists (all Westwood). It would not be so bad if their presence gave Villa a more solid look defensively but the Midlands club have failed to keep a clean sheet in 26 league matches. The defence must take a large share of the blame for that record – the full-backs Matthew Lowton and Antonio Luna will not want to review footage of Newcastle's goals while there is always an air of vulnerability about central defence whatever pairing Lambert picks. At the same time it is hard to see how El Ahmadi, Delph and Westwood work as a midfield trio. El Ahmadi is the obvious fall guy. The replacement – a midfielder who is capable of breaking into the penalty area and has an eye for a killer pass – is harder to spot in the Villa squad.
Hard to argue with either article IMO
-
Their Villa man Stuart James is not only a top writer, he used to be on our books as a youth.
-
Because the lazy journalist most probably doesn't actually watch many Villa games.
Brilliant, that old cliche.
As patchy as the Grauniad's football coverage is, they generally have a good handle on whats going on at the Villa. Heres what they wrote in the '10 things' section after the Newcastle game:
Aston Villa lacking goals and guile in midfield
These are early days and it should not be overlooked that Aston Villa played Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool in their first three matches but it was still alarming to see Paul Lambert's side put on such a poor performance in Saturday's 2-1 home defeat by Newcastle United. Short of ideas going forward and fragile at the back, Villa were booed off. Take Christian Benteke out of the team and it is hard to imagine where the goals will come from. Certainly not midfield. Karim El Ahmadi, Fabian Delph and Ashley Westwood – the midfield three on Saturday – have played a combined 112 Premier League games. They have one goal (El Ahmadi) between them and seven assists (all Westwood). It would not be so bad if their presence gave Villa a more solid look defensively but the Midlands club have failed to keep a clean sheet in 26 league matches. The defence must take a large share of the blame for that record – the full-backs Matthew Lowton and Antonio Luna will not want to review footage of Newcastle's goals while there is always an air of vulnerability about central defence whatever pairing Lambert picks. At the same time it is hard to see how El Ahmadi, Delph and Westwood work as a midfield trio. El Ahmadi is the obvious fall guy. The replacement – a midfielder who is capable of breaking into the penalty area and has an eye for a killer pass – is harder to spot in the Villa squad.
Hard to argue with either article IMO
Seems pretty much bang on.
-
It's a very fair article.
-
Anybody with anything good to say doesn't watch us. Wonderful.
Exactly.
Every team outside of the very top few would take our front three of our hands in a shot.
In the words of the song "You don't know what you've got 'til its gone".
Cinderella ??
I think one of the main problems for us is lack of movement. When we're trying to press teams (at home) theres never an outlet which results in a) hoofball b) sideways running and passing back which makes the Holte End boil its pi*s collectively. This is the kind of stuff Lambert should be sorting out by now.
-
Anybody played Fifa 14 yet? We're bobbins on the game. Our playing style is long ball and the commentators always start with Alan Smith declaring that we're a mid-table club who have fallen below our place and will be lucky to stay up this season. Lol.
Granted that may well be true, but honestly, you'd think Smithy would have thrown the script away and been a bit more complimentary...mind you, he's never been one to be wildly positive about us.
-
Because the lazy journalist most probably doesn't actually watch many Villa games.
Brilliant, that old cliche.
As patchy as the Grauniad's football coverage is, they generally have a good handle on whats going on at the Villa. Heres what they wrote in the '10 things' section after the Newcastle game:
Aston Villa lacking goals and guile in midfield
These are early days and it should not be overlooked that Aston Villa played Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool in their first three matches but it was still alarming to see Paul Lambert's side put on such a poor performance in Saturday's 2-1 home defeat by Newcastle United. Short of ideas going forward and fragile at the back, Villa were booed off. Take Christian Benteke out of the team and it is hard to imagine where the goals will come from. Certainly not midfield. Karim El Ahmadi, Fabian Delph and Ashley Westwood – the midfield three on Saturday – have played a combined 112 Premier League games. They have one goal (El Ahmadi) between them and seven assists (all Westwood). It would not be so bad if their presence gave Villa a more solid look defensively but the Midlands club have failed to keep a clean sheet in 26 league matches. The defence must take a large share of the blame for that record – the full-backs Matthew Lowton and Antonio Luna will not want to review footage of Newcastle's goals while there is always an air of vulnerability about central defence whatever pairing Lambert picks. At the same time it is hard to see how El Ahmadi, Delph and Westwood work as a midfield trio. El Ahmadi is the obvious fall guy. The replacement – a midfielder who is capable of breaking into the penalty area and has an eye for a killer pass – is harder to spot in the Villa squad.
Hard to argue with either article IMO
Seems pretty much bang on.
A good summation definitely. I'd also agree, KEA seems to be the one who doesnt quite fit. Mostly I base that on Westy's form last season, that almost makes him undroppable from the current personnel. He's the only one who's capable of picking a pass for a goal. And as said that's evident from his 7 assists (only one of which is from this season, from a corner). That however is also not enough. He needs to deliver more.
ASAP I'd like to see us revert back to Delph, Sylla and Westwood together. It's the only midfield combo we've played that seems to work in any consistent manor.
-
Anybody played Fifa 14 yet? We're bobbins on the game. Our playing style is long ball and the commentators always start with Alan Smith declaring that we're a mid-table club who have fallen below our place and will be lucky to stay up this season. Lol.
Granted that may well be true, but honestly, you'd think Smithy would have thrown the script away and been a bit more complimentary...mind you, he's never been one to be wildly positive about us.
FIFA ratings have always been terrible. I'll wait until Football Manager 2014 comes out before I start getting angry about being disrespected by computer games ;)
-
Tomorrow, we will play like Brazil and smash these over paid, over rated tossers into next week.............................................grabs bible , falls to knees.
-
Lambert talks the talk, much like MON did about playing the right way but the facts are the facts. We also apparently have the lowest possession in the entire league.
It certainly doesn't point to us getting the ball down and playing it. I agree with Irish Villain, when Lambert started we were a passing team but more and more we seem to be going direct.
What is frustrating is that it's not even like we're any good at it. When you have Kojak and Helenius up front, you should be trying to get balls in to the box for them to get on the end of. Our direct stuff has been aimless in the last few matches.
I'd love to see more of an emphasis placed on getting in a few "cultured" players and being more comfortable in possession, especially at home.
-
I hope he can actually acknowledge that our passing is largely poor. Sometimes I worry just how much Lambert thinks we need to improve in certain areas. We've got a hell of a lot of work to do to move forward. If there's one thing that Lambo has let himself down with, it's identifying and rectifying problems in good time. Be it within a game (getting murdered by Ben Arfa), or over the course of a many games (inability to keep the ball efficiently. Too narrow. One way of playing effectively).
If he doesn't start rectifying problems then we're gonna go nowhere, and he's going to get fired. Less talk more action.
As for the long ball thing. Well stats back it up. Watching games does too. He says we don't hit and hope, but it's exactly what we do start doing when we're chasing a game. Particularly at Villa park. This is why our possession of the football must improve. That will require a switch of system at home as well as better footballers to come in during January.
This is exactly how I feel. It's all very well Lambert constantly repeating how we try to play the right way but he's in denial frankly. W've done incredibly well in some away games over the past 12 months but these have not been based on technique but rather endeavour and pace.
Our possession stat is statistically the worst in the league and our technique is on the whole very poor when compared with the rest of the league.
Spot on Tom, less talk, more action please Paul.
EDIT: Reading that back I feel it's perhaps unduly harsh. We do look a different side with Benteke, Gabby and Andi in it. Perhaps the 0-4 vs Spurs is fresher in the mind. I do feel that overall technique needs to be improved on massively and the balance in midfields needs addressing.
-
I certainly do not see us as a long ball team, far from it tbh. As for Lambert talking the talk like MON did, the slight difference is MON had a lot of money to back his ideas up. We are a young team but have to move on from this, they have some experience now and must kick on. There are a few who have not started well, lets hope they come back to form and we will improve on last season.
-
Lambert relies on his fullbacks to supply the crosses to supply the big strikers. The problem lies at home is that the opposition will push on the full backs stopping them from driving forward. By discarding poor full backs and going (in our situation) to 3-5-2 having wing backs. Lowton is no Walker (Spurs) as Luna is no Cole (Chelsea).
Full backs are there to stop attackers not provide ammuntion for strikers. Wingers do that, however Lambert is a believer of narrow play a la TSM.
Sadly lots of us called for the Frenchman's head, but we went into games with 4 defenders, 4 midfielders of which 2 were wingers, and 2 or 1/1 upfront.
Frenchman knew that if we got the ball wide. Bent would score. Simple.
Go back to January 3 seasons ago when we signed Bent. We had hope we could beat Man City. Tomorrow, we hope it won't be too painful.
-
Lambert relies on his fullbacks to supply the crosses to supply the big strikers. The problem lies at home is that the opposition will push on the full backs stopping them from driving forward. By discarding poor full backs and going (in our situation) to 3-5-2 having wing backs. Lowton is no Walker (Spurs) as Luna is no Cole (Chelsea).
Full backs are there to stop attackers not provide ammuntion for strikers. Wingers do that, however Lambert is a believer of narrow play a la TSM.
Sadly lots of us called for the Frenchman's head, but we went into games with 4 defenders, 4 midfielders of which 2 were wingers, and 2 or 1/1 upfront.
Frenchman knew that if we got the ball wide. Bent would score. Simple.
Go back to January 3 seasons ago when we signed Bent. We had hope we could beat Man City. Tomorrow, we hope it won't be too painful.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying but Manchester City are the last team to compare yourselves to for proof of how you've regressed in the past three years.
-
Not a long ball team? Hardly a possession based passing team though. We occasionally do play some good stuff but we have too many players that give up the ball far too easily. We are guilty of the hopeful pass too often when we should make certain of possession. Whatch how often Citeh give the ball away tomorrow.
-
Could anyone tell me how many games in the EPL have passed since one of the recognised Villa midfielders last scored a goal? I have a thought that it was probably Holman at QPR.
-
I worry about Dortmund being the model we aspire to. I mean it's all well and good and they're a great example to follow. At our best, we play their sort of game, which is high tempo, quick countering. But we don't have the technical ability to keep the ball as well as they can when they need to slow things down a bit.
But that's the problem. The culture of player development in Germany is far different. Whilst Dortmund have largely brought through their own young players over a long stretch of time now, they're bringing through players who are technically gifted. It allows them to play the way they do. I'd also guess that from the under 11's through to the senior team, they play virtually the same way. I'm guessing and I'm sure someone can confirm or deny that.
Our problem is, because young players don't get brought up as well here, they're not as good. If you took 10 young English players and 10 young German players. You'd be lucky if 2-3 of the English players even stood out.
Now we're buying our young players from overseas. And also, for as much as Lambert is blooding young players, he's not necessarily blooding too many of what he has at his disposal at the club. Honestly, Bowery? I'd have Fonz over him any day of the week.
We do actually have a few kids coming through who seem to have bit of skill and/or technical ability. I'm thinking of Johnson, Grealish and Carruthers, Robinson likewise looks a potentially exciting player. We've signed Bacuna, Kozak and Tonev for example. They all have their strengths, but their technique is questionnable. Almost to the point you wonder why we couldn't find similar players in this country. Helenius does seem to have a good touch, but on the flipside, whether he's physically able to handle the pace and physicality of the Prem is another matter.
If we really do aspire to be a possession based side and want to keep the ball well, then Lambert has to start signing players with better technique. Players who can dribble comfortably with the ball, control it well, pass it well.
-
Could anyone tell me how many games in the EPL have passed since one of the recognised Villa midfielders last scored a goal? I have a thought that it was probably Holman at QPR.
I can't tell you exactly, but a recent radio phone in a few weeks ago claimed it was 100 collective appearances from our current midfield staff since one of them scored in the Premiership. So by now that's got to be over 110 appearances at least
A truly shocking but unsurprising stat when you watch us play.
I can't imagine there's another team in the whole 4 leagues that could match that record.
-
Delph will score within the next four games I think. But I agree it's a weak spot for a number of reasons
-
Charlie Nicholas just said we're definitely not a long ball team, for once I agree with him.
-
Delph will score within the next four games I think. But I agree it's a weak spot for a number of reasons
I fancy Delphy to chip in. He's looked more adventurous over the last 20 odd games. He's been close a few times this season too. He's capable of it, as proven at Leeds.
Other than that, I'm not sure who. Albrighton has the ability. His goal record in Houlliers season (and assists) was pretty good. He's good at ghosting in at the far past. But lack someone like Young or even Downing to pick him out might be problematic. He had a particularly good understanding with Stewarse Downing.
-
I honestly believe that Delph is a goal away from becoming a great midfielder.
-
I honestly believe that Delph is a goal away from becoming a great midfielder.
He is already great.
-
His control of the ball is much better than his "second touch is a tackle" days. Great engine, like Sylla
-
I honestly believe that Delph is a goal away from becoming a great midfielder.
He is already great.
He's good. Ten goals a season will make him great.
-
Today showed the difference a bit of patience makes in the build up play. In the first half the ball went to from back to front to City defenders in no time at all - we had no goal threat and were just giving them the ball back to have another go. In the second, Clark got the ball in a tight spot at the back, played it calmly to Delph instead of whacking it and Delph was able to squirm away and set up the move which led to the first equaliser. We continued to pass it better and we looked so much better as a team. Kozak looked better with the ball into feet rather than straining for vain flick-ons.
We can pass the ball. And when we do, it all looks so much better. Now, if we had that playmaker...
-
Kozak doesn't seem (yet) able to do the benteke hold up any long ball coming role
It might be good for us if we're forced to play more balls on the deck and look for others to score
Need gabby back in tho. Any sense of how close he might be?
-
Kozak isn't as mobile as Benteke, although he hasn't had much service so far, but I think he is clever with his movement. He wins a great deal and holds it up well too.
-
I honestly believe that Delph is a goal away from becoming a great midfielder.
He is already great.
He's good. Ten goals a season will make him great.
Agree Dave. Might be an outside shout for the England World Cup squad should they make it to Brazil.
-
I honestly believe that Delph is a goal away from becoming a great midfielder.
He is already great.
He's good. Ten goals a season will make him great.
Agree Dave. Might be an outside shout for the England World Cup squad should they make it to Brazil.
I also agree completely, Delph now has everything to his game except goals, if he can add those he'll be a superb player. Midfield is still the weak part of our team for me, but Bacuna, Sylla, Delph and Westwood all have the potential to be superb and are all still young enough to improve massively. Add Grealish (who could be a fantastic 10 if he keeps working for it) and I think we've got the makings of a really good set in there, I'd like someone in who's a bit further along than Grealish in the attacking role though. I still think we need to see Gardner and Johnson as well.
-
Kozak isn't as mobile as Benteke, although he hasn't had much service so far, but I think he is clever with his movement. He wins a great deal and holds it up well too.
Ads - I hope this won't start people tagging Kozak with Bent's feeble excuse.
-
Kozak isn't as mobile as Benteke, although he hasn't had much service so far, but I think he is clever with his movement. He wins a great deal and holds it up well too.
Ads - I hope this won't start people tagging Kozak with Bent's feeble excuse.
No chance. Kozak was felled like a tree yesterday, whenever he got the ball he was just taken out.
-
Charlie Nicholas just said we're definitely not a long ball team, for once I agree with him.
Me too. A lazy journalist just picked up on a few opta stats and wrote a dodgy article about it. We do play it long now and again and it worked a bloody treat yesterday.
-
We played some really good passing football for much of last season, even when we weren't getting results.
I don't think we've knocked it around we'll much this season though. Hopefully we can improve on this once we get past our run of really tricky fixtures
I think we need Westwood and Lowton back in form to do that. That'd make a huge difference.
-
I think our problem is that it takes us 45 mins to rediscover our self belief. That might be down to the inexperienced squad, inferiority complex against the likes of Man City or for what ever reason. When we can overcome it we could be a great outfit. Delph is one of the few with an abundance of self belief and is improving game on game.
-
Yep, more than the worrying about passing, I'd like us just to start a game on the front-foot for once. I guess we kinda did at Norwich but we need to do it more as we'll give ourselves a hell of a better chance of success.
-
Self-belief and passing are one and the same. They don't look confident in the first half and they whack it away downfield as fast as possible. When they get confidence, they stop whacking it and pass the ball shorter and better.
-
Self-belief and passing are one and the same. They don't look confident in the first half and they whack it away downfield as fast as possible. When they get confidence, they stop whacking it and pass the ball shorter and better.
Yep my only concern is we tend to start games very slowly I'm not sure why.
-
We should be outpassing a team like Man City, is a disgrace we let them have all that possission when we have players who have cost us 2 million. Lambert should be sacked
-
I still think we're going in the right direction and our points tally tells us that already. Incidently if we beat Hull next week that'll be three league wins on the bounce, when did we last do that?
-
Paulwinch, positive thinking, we will beat Hull lol. Must be near top 6 after that
-
Although it doesn't always seem that way to us as fans, we must be doing something right. Hands up anyone who thought we would win 3 of the first 6 when they saw the fixtures, and that the three defeats would all be by one goal. Or that we'd be 9th with a +GD? Even someone as optimistic as me is currently sat on my hands.
-
Although it doesn't always seem that way to us as fans, we must be doing something right. Hands up anyone who thought we would win 3 of the first 6 when they saw the fixtures, and that the three defeats would all be by one goal. Or that we'd be 9th with a +GD? Even someone as optimistic as me is currently sat on my hands.
This.
We've had a fucking horrible start to the season, in terms of the fixture list.
We've come out of it pretty well, and people need to remember, we're not going to have to go to Arsenal and Chelsea, or play Man City or Liverpool at home, or even Norwich away, which isn't an easy fixture, because we've already played those matches.
I thought we were excellent at Chelsea, but we got no points, despite deserving all three. I thought we were very poor for long spells yesterday, but we got all three points.
Had we played poorly on several occasions already this season, i'd have been more worried about yesterday's performance, but we haven't, on the whole we've looked OK.
I like Lambert's approach, and - although we resorted to it in the first half yesterday a bit too much - that long ball tag is utter bollocks. I am still worried, though, that we didn't buy players from a level above those we already had this summer, but am willing to see how the season pans out with what we've got, plus there's always the option to strengthen in January.
-
Although it doesn't always seem that way to us as fans, we must be doing something right. Hands up anyone who thought we would win 3 of the first 6 when they saw the fixtures, and that the three defeats would all be by one goal. Or that we'd be 9th with a +GD? Even someone as optimistic as me is currently sat on my hands.
This.
We've had a fucking horrible start to the season, in terms of the fixture list.
We've come out of it pretty well, and people need to remember, we're not going to have to go to Arsenal and Chelsea, or play Man City or Liverpool at home, or even Norwich away, which isn't an easy fixture, because we've already played those matches.
I thought we were excellent at Chelsea, but we got no points, despite deserving all three. I thought we were very poor for long spells yesterday, but we got all three points.
Had we played poorly on several occasions already this season, i'd have been more worried about yesterday's performance, but we haven't, on the whole we've looked OK.
It also makes it laughable how Moyes has said how tough Manure's start has been.
-
I do feel so sorry for Moyes to be fair, thast start for him was a disgrace and they should have sorted out a far better beginning for the now grey haired no ginga bloke
-
Don't just consider the fixtures, we've had - think of the injuries we've had too. The more obvious one's are recent but even in the first few games, we couldn't get a settled defence because Baker, then Clark then finally Okore all got injured.
-
I love the way we don't draw anymore. A season of shit or bust would be much preferable to one of 20-odd fucking draws like under nO' Deal or TSM. I'd be delighted with a league campaign of 17 wins and 21 defeats to be honest!
-
Although it doesn't always seem that way to us as fans, we must be doing something right. Hands up anyone who thought we would win 3 of the first 6 when they saw the fixtures, and that the three defeats would all be by one goal. Or that we'd be 9th with a +GD? Even someone as optimistic as me is currently sat on my hands.
This.
We've had a fucking horrible start to the season, in terms of the fixture list.
We've come out of it pretty well, and people need to remember, we're not going to have to go to Arsenal and Chelsea, or play Man City or Liverpool at home, or even Norwich away, which isn't an easy fixture, because we've already played those matches.
I thought we were excellent at Chelsea, but we got no points, despite deserving all three. I thought we were very poor for long spells yesterday, but we got all three points.
Had we played poorly on several occasions already this season, i'd have been more worried about yesterday's performance, but we haven't, on the whole we've looked OK.
I like Lambert's approach, and - although we resorted to it in the first half yesterday a bit too much - that long ball tag is utter bollocks. I am still worried, though, that we didn't buy players from a level above those we already had this summer, but am willing to see how the season pans out with what we've got, plus there's always the option to strengthen in January.
Agreed. It's unlucky that that first half happened on Saturday after all the questions in the week. We put it right in the second though.
-
I do feel so sorry for Moyes to be fair, thast start for him was a disgrace and they should have sorted out a far better beginning for the now grey haired no ginga bloke
You know, I thought that about Moyes's hair yesterday. That job seems to have got to him already.
-
I do feel so sorry for Moyes to be fair, thast start for him was a disgrace and they should have sorted out a far better beginning for the now grey haired no ginga bloke
You know, I thought that about Moyes's hair yesterday. That job seems to have got to him already.
Looks like he hasn't slept for a week - a poor decision by united considering his lack of European experience - I am enjoying their decline greatly , would love it if they missed the top 4. :)
-
I think the only performance so far this season I have been genuinely disappointed with was the Newcastle game, when I thought we were terrible.
-
We have been criticised by 2 managers for being a long ball team so I loved our direct as you can get winner. They left 2 on 2 at the back, not a good idea at any level. A long ball has it's place at times.
-
We have been criticised by 2 managers for being a long ball team so I loved our direct as you can get winner. They left 2 on 2 at the back, not a good idea at any level. A long ball has it's place at times.
I read in the paper yesterday that Guzan became the first keeper this season to get an assist although I thought Kuzak knocked it on.
-
We have been criticised by 2 managers for being a long ball team so I loved our direct as you can get winner. They left 2 on 2 at the back, not a good idea at any level. A long ball has it's place at times.
I read in the paper yesterday that Guzan became the first keeper this season to get an assist although I thought Kuzak knocked it on.
Glad he didn't as it would have been offside.
Re: the Newcastle game, it looked like we hadn't played for 3 weeks. They couldn't even do simple things like short passing on the day.
-
We have been criticised by 2 managers for being a long ball team so I loved our direct as you can get winner. They left 2 on 2 at the back, not a good idea at any level. A long ball has it's place at times.
I read in the paper yesterday that Guzan became the first keeper this season to get an assist although I thought Kuzak knocked it on.
I don't think Kozak touched it , if so Weimann would have been probably offside but at the time Guzan kicked it Weimann was in his own half and as the city defenders missed it was clean through.
Was lovely to see the ball go from our keeper to their net in about 5 seconds :)
-
We have been criticised by 2 managers for being a long ball team so I loved our direct as you can get winner. They left 2 on 2 at the back, not a good idea at any level. A long ball has it's place at times.
I read in the paper yesterday that Guzan became the first keeper this season to get an assist although I thought Kuzak knocked it on.
Glad he didn't as it would have been offside.
I did wonder why at the time the ref went over to the linesman just after the goal.
-
We have been criticised by 2 managers for being a long ball team so I loved our direct as you can get winner. They left 2 on 2 at the back, not a good idea at any level. A long ball has it's place at times.
I read in the paper yesterday that Guzan became the first keeper this season to get an assist although I thought Kuzak knocked it on.
I don't think Kozak touched it , if so Weimann would have been probably offside but at the time Guzan kicked it Weimann was in his own half and as the city defenders missed it was clean through.
Was lovely to see the ball go from our keeper to their net in about 5 seconds :)
Surely it was longer than that. Seemed to take the ball best part of an hour to make it from the edge of the box!
-
think we are playing some awful muck of late. It isnt helped with Lowton and Westwood out of the side as they are two of our better players with the ball (and two of our worst without it to be fair to Lambert).
Compare the three centre halves yesterday to the three under Little where McGrath and Staunton were very comfortable with the ball. Southgate too was an ex-midfielder.
Difficult to play possession football with the players we have, Baker in particular is atrocious with the ball. El Ahmadi doesnt have the physical strength or pace to keep the ball in tight situations. Delph in the second half showed he is well able to. Sylla hasnt a first touch to speak of and Weimann's touch also leaves a lot to be desired at times. But despite all that we should be a lot better with the ball, hoofing against a good side without Benteke in the side guarantees one thing, concession of possession (farcical Man City defending aside).
Guzan doesnt help matters as he clearly just wants to hoof it every time, not much better than Bozzy in that respect. Clark and Vlaar should be forcing him to play it shorter more often, between the three of them they take the cowardly way out too often when it comes to retaining possession.
-
think we are playing some awful muck of late. It isnt helped with Lowton and Westwood out of the side as they are two of our better players with the ball (and two of our worst without it to be fair to Lambert).
Compare the three centre halves yesterday to the three under Little where McGrath and Staunton were very comfortable with the ball. Southgate too was an ex-midfielder.
Difficult to play possession football with the players we have, Baker in particular is atrocious with the ball. El Ahmadi doesnt have the physical strength or pace to keep the ball in tight situations. Delph in the second half showed he is well able to. Sylla hasnt a first touch to speak of and Weimann's touch also leaves a lot to be desired at times. But despite all that we should be a lot better with the ball, hoofing against a good side without Benteke in the side guarantees one thing, concession of possession (farcical Man City defending aside).
Guzan doesnt help matters as he clearly just wants to hoof it every time, not much better than Bozzy in that respect. Clark and Vlaar should be forcing him to play it shorter more often, between the three of them they take the cowardly way out too often when it comes to retaining possession.
After reading that, i'm going to double check that we've actually won any games at all.
-
think we are playing some awful muck of late. It isnt helped with Lowton and Westwood out of the side as they are two of our better players with the ball (and two of our worst without it to be fair to Lambert).
Compare the three centre halves yesterday to the three under Little where McGrath and Staunton were very comfortable with the ball. Southgate too was an ex-midfielder.
Difficult to play possession football with the players we have, Baker in particular is atrocious with the ball. El Ahmadi doesnt have the physical strength or pace to keep the ball in tight situations. Delph in the second half showed he is well able to. Sylla hasnt a first touch to speak of and Weimann's touch also leaves a lot to be desired at times. But despite all that we should be a lot better with the ball, hoofing against a good side without Benteke in the side guarantees one thing, concession of possession (farcical Man City defending aside).
Guzan doesnt help matters as he clearly just wants to hoof it every time, not much better than Bozzy in that respect. Clark and Vlaar should be forcing him to play it shorter more often, between the three of them they take the cowardly way out too often when it comes to retaining possession.
Too true. God knows how we'll get on when we play a decent team like Manchester City.
-
think we are playing some awful muck of late. It isnt helped with Lowton and Westwood out of the side as they are two of our better players with the ball (and two of our worst without it to be fair to Lambert).
Compare the three centre halves yesterday to the three under Little where McGrath and Staunton were very comfortable with the ball. Southgate too was an ex-midfielder.
Difficult to play possession football with the players we have, Baker in particular is atrocious with the ball. El Ahmadi doesnt have the physical strength or pace to keep the ball in tight situations. Delph in the second half showed he is well able to. Sylla hasnt a first touch to speak of and Weimann's touch also leaves a lot to be desired at times. But despite all that we should be a lot better with the ball, hoofing against a good side without Benteke in the side guarantees one thing, concession of possession (farcical Man City defending aside).
Guzan doesnt help matters as he clearly just wants to hoof it every time, not much better than Bozzy in that respect. Clark and Vlaar should be forcing him to play it shorter more often, between the three of them they take the cowardly way out too often when it comes to retaining possession.
Too true. God knows how we'll get on when we play a decent team like Manchester City.
Yep Guzan should really, REALLY stop punting the ball up the field all the time. It never leads to anything. ;)
-
think we are playing some awful muck of late. It isnt helped with Lowton and Westwood out of the side as they are two of our better players with the ball (and two of our worst without it to be fair to Lambert).
Compare the three centre halves yesterday to the three under Little where McGrath and Staunton were very comfortable with the ball. Southgate too was an ex-midfielder.
Difficult to play possession football with the players we have, Baker in particular is atrocious with the ball. El Ahmadi doesnt have the physical strength or pace to keep the ball in tight situations. Delph in the second half showed he is well able to. Sylla hasnt a first touch to speak of and Weimann's touch also leaves a lot to be desired at times. But despite all that we should be a lot better with the ball, hoofing against a good side without Benteke in the side guarantees one thing, concession of possession (farcical Man City defending aside).
Guzan doesnt help matters as he clearly just wants to hoof it every time, not much better than Bozzy in that respect. Clark and Vlaar should be forcing him to play it shorter more often, between the three of them they take the cowardly way out too often when it comes to retaining possession.
Goodness gracious me , what a depressing post - cheer up sir :)
-
think we are playing some awful muck of late. It isnt helped with Lowton and Westwood out of the side as they are two of our better players with the ball (and two of our worst without it to be fair to Lambert).
Compare the three centre halves yesterday to the three under Little where McGrath and Staunton were very comfortable with the ball. Southgate too was an ex-midfielder.
Difficult to play possession football with the players we have, Baker in particular is atrocious with the ball. El Ahmadi doesnt have the physical strength or pace to keep the ball in tight situations. Delph in the second half showed he is well able to. Sylla hasnt a first touch to speak of and Weimann's touch also leaves a lot to be desired at times. But despite all that we should be a lot better with the ball, hoofing against a good side without Benteke in the side guarantees one thing, concession of possession (farcical Man City defending aside).
Guzan doesnt help matters as he clearly just wants to hoof it every time, not much better than Bozzy in that respect. Clark and Vlaar should be forcing him to play it shorter more often, between the three of them they take the cowardly way out too often when it comes to retaining possession.
"..still, on the brightside..."
-
I would say that there are only three games this season so far where we have got what our play merited. Spurs & Rotherham in the cup, and Newcastle at home. Maybe Arsenal at a push too. The others we have either been unlucky not to draw at least or fortunate to win.
We don't do things the easy way..
-
think we are playing some awful muck of late. It isnt helped with Lowton and Westwood out of the side as they are two of our better players with the ball (and two of our worst without it to be fair to Lambert).
Compare the three centre halves yesterday to the three under Little where McGrath and Staunton were very comfortable with the ball. Southgate too was an ex-midfielder.
Difficult to play possession football with the players we have, Baker in particular is atrocious with the ball. El Ahmadi doesnt have the physical strength or pace to keep the ball in tight situations. Delph in the second half showed he is well able to. Sylla hasnt a first touch to speak of and Weimann's touch also leaves a lot to be desired at times. But despite all that we should be a lot better with the ball, hoofing against a good side without Benteke in the side guarantees one thing, concession of possession (farcical Man City defending aside).
Guzan doesnt help matters as he clearly just wants to hoof it every time, not much better than Bozzy in that respect. Clark and Vlaar should be forcing him to play it shorter more often, between the three of them they take the cowardly way out too often when it comes to retaining possession.
Too true. God knows how we'll get on when we play a decent team like Manchester City.
Or away at Arsenal, I hear they've won 5 on the bounce after losing on the opening day, must've been a good side that turned them over at home that opening weekend.
-
It's really weird how people can't seem to air a view that we're playing some piss poor football without being shot down with the 'well we've won games' cry.
NOBODY has said we haven't won games, and to my knowledge NOBODY has said we haven't beaten some good sides.
But what has that got to do with also saying we HAVE played some fucking awful football at the same time ?
You don't always get what you deserve in football, i'm sure most of us are old and ugly enough to know that by now.
-
It's really weird how people can't seem to air a view that we're playing some piss poor football without being shot down with the 'well we've won games' cry.
NOBODY has said we haven't won games, and to my knowledge NOBODY has said we haven't beaten some good sides.
But what has that got to do with also saying we HAVE played some fucking awful football at the same time ?
You don't always get what you deserve in football, i'm sure most of us are old and ugly enough to know that by now.
Maybe but if you can't bask in the enjoying the good days then why bother, there will be plenty of times to criticise during the season but lets just enjoy the fact that we beat the title favourites for a little while longer.
-
It's really weird how people can't seem to air a view that we're playing some piss poor football without being shot down with the 'well we've won games' cry.
What, you mean you air a view and then someone with a different view disagrees with you? Disgraceful!!!
-
It's really weird how people can't seem to air a view that we're playing some piss poor football without being shot down with the 'well we've won games' cry.
What, you mean you air a view and then someone with a different view disagrees with you? Disgraceful!!!
well yes i suppose so. but i honestly don't believe the people saying that we don't play some god awful stuff actually believe it themselves. its like the result means everything is okay and therefore no one can question the actual quality and the bigger picture
-
It's really weird how people can't seem to air a view that we're playing some piss poor football without being shot down with the 'well we've won games' cry.
NOBODY has said we haven't won games, and to my knowledge NOBODY has said we haven't beaten some good sides.
But what has that got to do with also saying we HAVE played some fucking awful football at the same time ?
You don't always get what you deserve in football, i'm sure most of us are old and ugly enough to know that by now.
Isn't it weird that all you ever do is moan, or damn with faint praise.
-
It's really weird how people can't seem to air a view that we're playing some piss poor football without being shot down with the 'well we've won games' cry.
What, you mean you air a view and then someone with a different view disagrees with you? Disgraceful!!!
well yes i suppose so. but i honestly don't believe the people saying that we don't play some god awful stuff actually believe it themselves. its like the result means everything is okay and therefore no one can question the actual quality and the bigger picture
I think individually Villa have some good players, the main thing we've struggled with this season, is the cohesion between those players. I think that can and will improve as the season goes on and players either become used to each other or regain the form they've been slow to recapture this season so far.
But the one thing that is a lot more difficult to coach into a team is the kind of spirit that saw Villa refuse to be beaten on Saturday. That's why I think looking on the bright side is not the unreasonable view.
-
It's really weird how people can't seem to air a view that we're playing some piss poor football without being shot down with the 'well we've won games' cry.
What, you mean you air a view and then someone with a different view disagrees with you? Disgraceful!!!
well yes i suppose so. but i honestly don't believe the people saying that we don't play some god awful stuff actually believe it themselves. its like the result means everything is okay and therefore no one can question the actual quality and the bigger picture
When was the last time the people posting the comments about the playstyle posted something positive though? That's the issue, we've just beaten the title favourites after coming from behind twice and people want to bitch about the fact that we didn't do it by playing like the dutch team from the 70s. Everyone knows we're not the finished article and I don't think anyone is trying to say otherwise but some people seem determined to state that we're absolutely shit regardless of whether the facts back that up. 2nd half on saturday we played some very effective, probing football, but both yourself and bronte have completely ignored that when commenting and instead focused on the first half where we were a bit backs to the wall.
the issue is if someone is positive about the club you lot jump on them as soon as there is anything bad and then get offended when the positive people do it back.
-
When was the last time the people posting the comments about the playstyle posted something positive though? That's the issue, we've just beaten the title favourites after coming from behind twice and people want to bitch about the fact that we didn't do it by playing like the dutch team from the 70s. Everyone knows we're not the finished article and I don't think anyone is trying to say otherwise but some people seem determined to state that we're absolutely shit regardless of whether the facts back that up. 2nd half on saturday we played some very effective, probing football, but both yourself and bronte have completely ignored that when commenting and instead focused on the first half where we were a bit backs to the wall.
the issue is if someone is positive about the club you lot jump on them as soon as there is anything bad and then get offended when the positive people do it back.
Well, i'll happily take that on board.
If you are asking for postives from a 'playing perspective' rather than a result one, i can't think of any.
I don't think the defence look good. Does anybody?
I don't think the midfield look good as a unit.
and without Benteke i don't think the attack looks good at all
So without lying it'd be hard to come up with any positives from the playing side of things
The results against Arsenal, Norwich and Man City have been hugely POSITIVE. But that's not what i'm talking about
-
We do have problems keeping the ball and we are very good at giving it away when the player in possession isn't under any pressure... we don't help ourselves sometimes. That's the frustrating part.
It's like taking and defending corners. These are parts of the game you can practice, but it looks like our players don't do anything with corners from one matchday to the next. If we had player on the post on Saturday then they would have stopped Dezcko's header.
-
When was the last time the people posting the comments about the playstyle posted something positive though? That's the issue, we've just beaten the title favourites after coming from behind twice and people want to bitch about the fact that we didn't do it by playing like the dutch team from the 70s. Everyone knows we're not the finished article and I don't think anyone is trying to say otherwise but some people seem determined to state that we're absolutely shit regardless of whether the facts back that up. 2nd half on saturday we played some very effective, probing football, but both yourself and bronte have completely ignored that when commenting and instead focused on the first half where we were a bit backs to the wall.
the issue is if someone is positive about the club you lot jump on them as soon as there is anything bad and then get offended when the positive people do it back.
Well, i'll happily take that on board.
If you are asking for postives from a 'playing perspective' rather than a result one, i can't think of any.
I don't think the defence look good. Does anybody?
I don't think the midfield look good as a unit.
and without Benteke i don't think the attack looks good at all
So without lying it'd be hard to come up with any positives from the playing side of things
The results against Arsenal, Norwich and Man City have been hugely POSITIVE. But that's not what i'm talking about
So you see no positive in having a couple of new full backs who attack well and defend better than the last two, or the fact Vlaar and Clark look back on form - the improvement of Delph and the fact kea has discovered his form at long last ?
Yes we have faults but are still work in progress and improvement can be seen if you want to see it.
-
I think we got lucky playing rope-a-dope at the weekend. It's a very, very dangerous way to play against teams that have very talented players. However that's not to say that we managed to weather the storm against all odds and came back to win in somewhat convincing fashion when you consider the very few clear cut chances Man City had in the second half.
It's ok to admit that we were lucky. There are going to be plenty of times during the season where we will be hugely unlucky for one reason or another. It's already happened a few times this season and it will again. Admitting that we got away with one despite the win isn't being negative at all.
-
It's really weird how people can't seem to air a view that we're playing some piss poor football without being shot down with the 'well we've won games' cry.
NOBODY has said we haven't won games, and to my knowledge NOBODY has said we haven't beaten some good sides.
But what has that got to do with also saying we HAVE played some fucking awful football at the same time ?
You don't always get what you deserve in football, i'm sure most of us are old and ugly enough to know that by now.
I think we play a mixture of good and very poor stuff, but that's reflective of our current position. We're trying to build a team and we'll have some good days and some bad, but hopefully over time it'll improve on a consistent basis.
-
So you see no positive in having a couple of new full backs who attack well and defend better than the last two, or the fact Vlaar and Clark look back on form - the improvement of Delph and the fact kea has discovered his form at long last ?
Yes we have faults but are still work in progress and improvement can be seen if you want to see it.
I don't see Luna as much better defensively than Bennett. I think they're both equally as ropey in that department.
I think Bacuna has a had a couple of very positive right back showings, then again i liked Lowton too. You could probably make one very good right back from the two combined. I prefer Lowton going forwards and i prefer Bacuna defensively, which appears to be the wrong way round.
Although i'd agree Vlaar has improved a bit, to me that's from say a 4/10 to a 6/10. He still gives me very little confidence as the lynchpin of our defence or as a captain.
Clark is Clark. Potentially very good but with a great knack of dropping a clanger every now and again. Ditto Baker but with less potential.
Overall i'd say our defence is about a 5/10. There can't be many supporters who'd rate them higher i'm sure. And this zonal marking thing from corners ... they were lined up like a bus queue on Saturday and Man City still managed to score twice
-
We defended eleven corners reasonably well.
This season in terms of the amount of corners we've had to defend Norwich had 7 Man City had 13.
Liverpool and Newcastle 2 a piece. Chelsea had one. Arsenal four.
So that's 2 goals conceded from 29 corners this season.
Man City won a lot of corners on Saturday and we almost paid for it.
But overall I think a case could be made that we've improved in that area.
-
Spirit wise ya can't knock them there's obviously some real commraderie at the club between players, staff and fans and has been for the last 12/18 months.
-
When was the last time the people posting the comments about the playstyle posted something positive though? That's the issue, we've just beaten the title favourites after coming from behind twice and people want to bitch about the fact that we didn't do it by playing like the dutch team from the 70s. Everyone knows we're not the finished article and I don't think anyone is trying to say otherwise but some people seem determined to state that we're absolutely shit regardless of whether the facts back that up. 2nd half on saturday we played some very effective, probing football, but both yourself and bronte have completely ignored that when commenting and instead focused on the first half where we were a bit backs to the wall.
the issue is if someone is positive about the club you lot jump on them as soon as there is anything bad and then get offended when the positive people do it back.
Well, i'll happily take that on board.
If you are asking for postives from a 'playing perspective' rather than a result one, i can't think of any.
I don't think the defence look good. Does anybody?
I don't think the midfield look good as a unit.
and without Benteke i don't think the attack looks good at all
So without lying it'd be hard to come up with any positives from the playing side of things
The results against Arsenal, Norwich and Man City have been hugely POSITIVE. But that's not what i'm talking about
we've played 6 games, 4 against sides that most people have predicted for the top 6, and have a positive goal difference and 9points, if our defence, midfield and attack are as shit as you seem to think how has that happened?
Positives:
The most expensive team in the history of the game managed 2 shots on target from inside the box - that suggests our defence was very good in open play, a fact you've completely ignored.
Our midfield were competitive all 2nd half and stopped them putting us under much pressure at the end.
Weimann was quiet but earned an important free kick for the equaliser and scored the winner, that's a clear sign of a quality striker.
We scored from a right-back playing a slide-rule through ball to a midfielder who ran beyond the strikers, something we've not been doing anything like enough.
Delph continues to show that he's developed into a very good midfielder, Sylla continues to show that he has the makings of being a very good workhorse in midfield, Luna and Bacuna have shown they can be very effective full backs, both in defence and attack.
We have as good a team spirit and attitude as anyone in the league and our players are all working for each other.
They're just from Saturday.
For a 1 man team (in attack) as you suggest it's interesting that we've had 6 different goalscorers to share 9 goals in 6 games. Add in the cups and it's 8 different scorers in 8 games, by the way.
To simplify, if you don't want to look for positives you won't see them unless we play amazing football and win 10-0 and there is literally nothing to be negative about.
-
We defended eleven corners reasonably well.
This season in terms of the amount of corners we've had to defend Norwich had 7 Man City had 13.
Liverpool and Newcastle 2 a piece. Chelsea had one. Arsenal four.
So that's 2 goals conceded from 29 corners this season.
Man City won a lot of corners on Saturday and we almost paid for it.
But overall I think a case could be made that we've improved in that area.
I agree we may well have defended the others fairly well, but the marking for the two that they did score was totally amateurish. It wasn't the luck of the draw and that they were bound to score from one eventually, it was just rank bad defending. Goals On Sunday picked up on it quite brilliantly
-
The one genuine 'positive' bit of football i've seen us play this season as team was Delph's goal against Rotherham. That was football.
I can get behind that as 'a style of play'. What i can't get behind is people claiming that players running around a lot and niggling away is 'progress' on the pitch.
But everyone's different. And this thread is about our 'style of play' not results.
-
The one genuine 'positive' bit of football i've seen us play this season as team was Delph's goal against Rotherham. That was football.
I can get behind that as 'a style of play'. What i can't get behind is people claiming that players running around a lot and niggling away is 'progress' on the pitch.
But everyone's different. And this thread is about our 'style of play' not results.
Barcelona are based around "running around a lot and niggling away" as much as they are passing, getting that side of the game right is more important than getting the nice passing triangles in place, particularly in the premier league. Just look at the number of goals that result from winning the ball and countering compared to the number that come at the end of lovely passing moves. So yes, getting the work without the ball right does count as progress and we are significantly better at it than we were last season so we have progressed.
-
When was the last time the people posting the comments about the playstyle posted something positive though? That's the issue, we've just beaten the title favourites after coming from behind twice and people want to bitch about the fact that we didn't do it by playing like the dutch team from the 70s. Everyone knows we're not the finished article and I don't think anyone is trying to say otherwise but some people seem determined to state that we're absolutely shit regardless of whether the facts back that up. 2nd half on saturday we played some very effective, probing football, but both yourself and bronte have completely ignored that when commenting and instead focused on the first half where we were a bit backs to the wall.
the issue is if someone is positive about the club you lot jump on them as soon as there is anything bad and then get offended when the positive people do it back.
Well, i'll happily take that on board.
If you are asking for postives from a 'playing perspective' rather than a result one, i can't think of any.
I don't think the defence look good. Does anybody?
I don't think the midfield look good as a unit.
and without Benteke i don't think the attack looks good at all
So without lying it'd be hard to come up with any positives from the playing side of things
The results against Arsenal, Norwich and Man City have been hugely POSITIVE. But that's not what i'm talking about
So you see no positive in having a couple of new full backs who attack well and defend better than the last two, or the fact Vlaar and Clark look back on form - the improvement of Delph and the fact kea has discovered his form at long last ?
How about the fact that we were complaining that the midfield weren't chipping in with any goals and two goals came from midfield on Saturday?
-
We defended eleven corners reasonably well.
This season in terms of the amount of corners we've had to defend Norwich had 7 Man City had 13.
Liverpool and Newcastle 2 a piece. Chelsea had one. Arsenal four.
So that's 2 goals conceded from 29 corners this season.
Man City won a lot of corners on Saturday and we almost paid for it.
But overall I think a case could be made that we've improved in that area.
I agree we may well have defended the others fairly well, but the marking for the two that they did score was totally amateurish. It wasn't the luck of the draw and that they were bound to score from one eventually, it was just rank bad defending. Goals On Sunday picked up on it quite brilliantly
I think if you (as the opposition) force that many corners, you'd expect to score from one.
Law of averages rather than luck of the draw.
The Dzeko goal was very disappointing.
I suppose it depends if like last season and under TSM, we're under a lot of pressure in our own half
then we'll concede a lot of corners and goals from them.
Which takes us neatly back to our style of play.
-
The one genuine 'positive' bit of football i've seen us play this season as team was Delph's goal against Rotherham. That was football.
I can get behind that as 'a style of play'. What i can't get behind is people claiming that players running around a lot and niggling away is 'progress' on the pitch.
But everyone's different. And this thread is about our 'style of play' not results.
Fighting a losing battle here mate
I honestly saw nothing in the past two games to suggest the football we are playing has improved or that we will finish higher in the table this season.
Beating Man City at home is an incredible result especially missing our two best forwards but it was Citeh's lack of professionalism that was key to us getting a result at the weekend more so than any decent football we played.
Without Benteke and Gabby, some of the play at the weekend was every bit as bad as it was under McLeish. A lot of the players Lambert has brought in are pretty average technically too - Sylla, Kea, Bacuna for example. There is no defined style of play that I can see him implementing as opposed to let's say Swansea.
With Kozak, Helenius and Bowery in the squad, plan B is going to be pretty in a Tony Pulis kind of way it seems
-
While joyless in their reasoning, I think William Bronte and Sir Baltimore (weren't they dominoes partners at Aston Hall circa 1865?) do have a point. Not pleasing to admit, but take a look at the way West Brom played at the other Mancs' backyard on Sat. Little in the way of defending deep and relying on quick punts/counter attacks. They took the game to Yanited from the off. Carved out plenty of chances and bullied the United defence into submission.
Amalfitano and Sessegnon (who, when on his game, is a joy to watch) played the cultured, quick-thinking midfield play that I'd love to see from us. Not in a lets laugh at Tony Mowbray 1970 Brazilbaggies way, just a team skilful and quick in their opponents half and at times outplaying superior individuals on their own turf.
-
Nonsense, you will notice that when we improved in the second half it was because we got the ball on the deck and passed and moved. That's probably because Lambert told them to stop panicking and to play on the floor.
-
Nonsense, you will notice that when we improved in the second half it was because we got the ball on the deck and passed and moved. That's probably because Lambert told them to stop panicking and to play on the floor.
I agree, although I do wish we wouldn't wait until we go behind before we start to look good, it would be nice to go out on the front foot and start well at times , hopefully at hull.
Man city are are a top team and the fact we came twice from behind to beat them with 4 of our best players missing augurs well for the future - i think we will gain a great deal of confidence from this win .
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
-
Nonsense, you will notice that when we improved in the second half it was because we got the ball on the deck and passed and moved. That's probably because Lambert told them to stop panicking and to play on the floor.
I agree, although I do wish we wouldn't wait until we go behind before we start to look good, it would be nice to go out on the front foot and start well at times , hopefully at hull.
Man city are are a top team and the fact we came twice from behind to beat them with 4 of our best players missing augurs well for the future - i think we will gain a great deal of confidence from this win .
Well yes it's not ideal, but I think that's a lack of experience rather than some sort of anti-football sentiment. Lambert wants to attack and keep the ball on the deck, he's said as much.
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
It's the way some people are Dave. Instead of looking at the positives from beating a team who cost god knows how much more than us, it seems they try and claw any negatives they can just to have a bit of a whinge.
There's criticism about Dzeko's goal. Yeah it was sloppy but to some people we're the only team that lets in goals from set pieces. Totttenham's defence left John Terry totally unmarked for Chelsea's goal, it happens.
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
It's the way some people are Dave. Instead of looking at the positives from beating a team who cost god knows how much more than us, it seems they try and claw any negatives they can just to have a bit of a whinge.
There's criticism about Dzeko's goal. Yeah it was sloppy but to some people we're the only team that lets in goals from set pieces. Totttenham's defence left John Terry totally unmarked for Chelsea's goal, it happens.
Genuinely think the manager does want to win every game not hope to hang on for a draw. Saturday was difficult for lambert as injuries limited the attacking options. I remember often thinking even when winning under MON that I was bored, TSM well it went to despair but I like how we try to play. Yes at times I wish we had genuine width and we appear to launch goal kicks towards Benteke without variation (sure goal licks went short at the start of last season) but I like watching them now! it's never dull for me.
-
Nonsense, you will notice that when we improved in the second half it was because we got the ball on the deck and passed and moved. That's probably because Lambert told them to stop panicking and to play on the floor.
To be fair, I would like to ask Lambert why we have only done that for one half in the games against Newcastle, Spurs and Man City.
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
It's the way some people are Dave. Instead of looking at the positives from beating a team who cost god knows how much more than us, it seems they try and claw any negatives they can just to have a bit of a whinge.
There's criticism about Dzeko's goal. Yeah it was sloppy but to some people we're the only team that lets in goals from set pieces. Totttenham's defence left John Terry totally unmarked for Chelsea's goal, it happens.
Genuinely think the manager does want to win every game not hope to hang on for a draw. Saturday was difficult for lambert as injuries limited the attacking options. I remember often thinking even when winning under MON that I was bored, TSM well it went to despair but I like how we try to play. Yes at times I wish we had genuine width and we appear to launch goal kicks towards Benteke without variation (sure goal licks went short at the start of last season) but I like watching them now! it's never dull for me.
Yep, watching us play is fun again. I think MON's team did try to attack, but just in a different fashion that a lot of people found dull.
Lambert's team is really speaking still a work in progress and I expect the style and entetainment to get better, along with the results, as we progress.
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
AARGGHH
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
AARGGHH
Indeed.
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
AARGGHH
Indeed.
Quite ;)
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
AARGGHH
Indeed.
Quite ;)
Agreed.
-
Nonsense, you will notice that when we improved in the second half it was because we got the ball on the deck and passed and moved. That's probably because Lambert told them to stop panicking and to play on the floor.
We created as much from open play as City did.
I can recall two speculative shots (one of which lead to our goal) and two set pieces.
Its smoke and mirrors from Man City about domianting the game. Dominated in what sense? A lot of possession in areas of the pitch that you were unable to hurt us in?
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
Not only that, we limited them, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool to next to bugger all. We conceded 5 compared to the 13 of last season and scored 7 compared to the 2 last campaign.
The former result, being as you say, without one of the best out and out centre forwards in Europe and three of our other best players.
But we're not improving?
-
We're without our top defender, top two strikers and most consistent midfielder from last season. We're playing the favourites to win the league, go behind twice, come back to win and still some of our supporters can only moan.
Not only that, we limited them, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool to next to bugger all. We conceded 5 compared to the 13 of last season and scored 7 compared to the 2 last campaign.
The former result, being as you say, without one of the best out and out centre forwards in Europe and three of our other best players.
But we're not improving?
Yes the stats suggest we are improving on last season however the facts suggest that we are still conceding from set pieces - something that has gone unchecked for quite some time. I understand that Citeh had a rash of corners on Saturday and we successfully defended most of them however we still concede two in a sloppy manner - granted the second was off the guys back.
I think it is frustrating for fans to see us concede in this way so many times - as suggested this appears to be our achilles heel - Something I would like to think that the defensive coaches and Lambert are looking to "iron out". Sort that out and even I will start to think positively :)
Also good to hear we defended higher up the park - another criticism of our home play is that we sit too deep, inviting teams onto us.
-
Isn't this thread supposed to be about Villa's style of play ?
Not results
-
Isn't this thread supposed to be about Villa's style of play ?
Not results
The two aren't exclusive. The style of play is ultimately responsible for the results.
So far this season we are winning more games, scoring more goals, and conceding less. That will do me. And shows that the style of play is working.
-
We have conceded three goals from set pieces.
-
Isn't this thread supposed to be about Villa's style of play ?
Not results
The two aren't exclusive. The style of play is ultimately responsible for the results.
So far this season we are winning more games, scoring more goals, and conceding less. That will do me. And shows that the style of play is working.
Yep agreed, I don't think anyone is saying we're the finished article. There is still plenty to improve on, we need to be a lot more crisp with our passing and need to work on out set piece defending. We also have a tendency to go long when we panic, but we are definitely moving in the right direction.
-
We have conceded three goals from set pieces.
To emphasise, that is one goal less than Man City, who will likely win the league, in no small part because they have the best centre half in the country playing for them.
-
We have conceded three goals from set pieces.
To emphasise, that is one goal less tan Man City who will likely win the league, in no small part because they have the best centre half in the country playing for them.
Indeed, and two of our three conceded were against same Man City, whose team is absolutely enormous.
-
The size difference, especially in midfield was very noticeable.
I think that given the quality of players we have come up against, with the quality of ball they can put in and the scarce amount of goals we have conceded, shows a real improvement defensively. It also shows that perceptions are misleading.
There is no doubt about it that the goals were sloppy, but when you accept they're the first corners we have shipped, the reality proves that we're not leaking them left right and centre.
If we really want to be pedantic, then Ivanovic should not have been on the pitch to score the other set piece!
-
Isn't this thread supposed to be about Villa's style of play ?
Not results
Yes, but you appear to completely ignore big chunks of the game and focus entirely on passing to form your criticism. Our passing isn't where we want it to be at times but the rest of our game is better than it has been for a while and the results in a very tough start to the season, back that up. You seem to be suggesting that there is nothing positive in our play style and I'm afraid that's complete nonsense, that people keep referring to the results is to highlight the fact that we couldn't be where we are if we were as shit as you seem to think.
Can you explain what you'd need to see to be happy without mentioning anything that has happened so far this season and that's realistic as an aspiration, I genuinely can't think of anything, we're inconsistent but that's different to shit, which seems to be something you and bronte completely fail to grasp.
-
A more settled midfield such as we had in the second half of last season would help the style I think.
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
-
It's better than last season - at times.
We're very much a work in progress and an accomplished passing game will take time, particularly with the players PL has brought in - young and with potential to grow into the league and develop as individuals and as a team. It's the nature of the beast we have.
They will make mistakes and lack cohesion at times, but I see signs that it is coming, albeit slowly and inconsistently.
Can't make Hull on Sat (working) and gutted. First game I'll miss this season and am hoping to see some sense of progression in the team passing game following two league wins on the trot to give them a sense of confidence.
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
Well said.
-
Did we not have anyone on either post for the corner that City scored their second goal? I cannot recall anyone there and if so, that to me was a major mistake as the ball went in about chest high just inside the post and was fairly preventable.
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
We don't half seem to be getting a lot of luck lately.
-
We're six games into the season, have nine points, and have played 4 of the most difficult games we'll have.
You sound like a whiny kid.
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
We've had one bit of luck this season with the offside on Saturday and we still scored another two goals on top of that.
If we pick up three points against a teams like Man City from time to time whilst not playing at our best then i'll happily take that. If you're as bored as you say, go and watch Barcelona, it's only a two hour flight away.
-
It's only 1.45 hrs for me. I will stay on Lanza and watch Villa on telly thanks Clamps
-
It's only 1.45 hrs for me. I will stay on Lanza and watch Villa on telly thanks Clamps
He was obviously replying to SLB.
-
It's only 1.45 hrs for me. I will stay on Lanza and watch Villa on telly thanks Clamps
He was obviously replying to SLB.
I thought so.
-
And despite what SLB wants us all to agree with, we are not shit, boring or lucky.
-
The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch.
It's generally agreed Newcastle was pretty bad but you're exaggerating with Liverpool. We finished the first half pretty strongly as I recall.
-
And despite what SLB wants us all to agree with, we are not shit, boring or lucky.
We are Villa, F..k all the rest.
-
SLB is correct, 40m is a massive amount of money when its largely coming from the chairman's pocket, however it has pretty much bought us a whole new squad. Most of which have increased in value (considerably in some cases).
Hopefully this level of spending will be maintained (20m a season) but on two or three players rather than six or seven each season.
Personally I think we're finally in a good position to start growing again
-
Yes it's almost been £40m off a baseline of zero. We've got rid of a whole squad of players and got almost no money for them
We'd generally spent £20m pa for several years, and there's hardly any residual value left in the squad after that. Criminal really.
But two more years of this calibre of signing and I think we'll be a decent top half side. Even if we have to lose benteke
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
If you watch when we play well it's from passing it on the deck. Lambert has had to clear out a lot of shit players who were also hoofball merchants. We are progressing, we're not instantly going to turn in Brazil but we are improving.
-
Luck is a funny bloody thing innit?
Was it luck that Ivanovic wasn't sent off then scored the winner in a game we should have got something out of?
Was it luck that Terry's handball was overlooked by the ref?
Was it luck that Citeh scored 2 goals on Sat, both from set pieces and our 3 were much better?
In a Sky Premier League world where apparently only about 5 teams matter I'm pissed off with them getting all of the "luck". If other teams get the rub of the green now and again, that's the way it goes.
We forced the "luck" on Saturday - if you don't try you don't get anything.
We tried like f**k on Saturday and got what we deserved.
If Citeh have 65% possession but can't put the ball in the net from open play is that luck? Or are they just a bit shit now and again?
Like all teams.
Great win on Saturday. Don't know if there was a lot of "style" in it, or "luck", but we deserved to win.
Simple.
UTV!
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
We earn our victories by our sporting prowess, it's not like we're Stoke playing for throw ins and lumping a bunch of giants in the box, we've scored a few very good goals this season already based on playing to our strengths which are to counter quickly and make the most of the pace and the movement of our attacking players. This is the norm in premier league football, most teams that have won the league since it formed have done so by scoring a lot of goals on the break. If you don't like it then English football isn't the game for you. Clinical passing has a place of course, and we do it very well at times (our first goal on saturday for example) but if 75% of our goals come from breaking with pace then i'm all for it.
You still haven't given any examples of elements of the game that you want to see and have seen no sign of from us. Everyone agrees we're inconsistent, that's part of the problem with having a squad with an average age of 22-23 they're going to be inexperienced, but your insistence that there's nothing positive about us is sounding like a wind up right now.
I find it quite amusing as well that you state you find nothing good about the way we play but then specify the first half against Liverpool, does the 2nd half get dismissed because it doesn't fit your narrative? Much like you've completely ignored the half a game against the title favourites where we scored 3 to their 1 and looked comfortable protecting that lead.
I give up with you, as above, I'm convinced you're on the windup, no one can be so pathetically pessamistic about their own club, I just don't understand your angle for it.
-
It would be nice to dominate posession in a game, or even the lion's share. Just once as a dying wish...
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
If you watch when we play well it's from passing it on the deck. Lambert has had to clear out a lot of shit players who were also hoofball merchants. We are progressing, we're not instantly going to turn in Brazil but we are improving.
Some of the players Lambert has brought in (either signings or former academy players) are hoofball merchants too though. Baker is worse than Collins ever was for example.
Fair enough if your attitude is the result is all that matters but this thread is about style of play ain't it...
Think there is more chance of us picking up points if we keep the ball more.... That's likely to require Westwood coming back in
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
If you watch when we play well it's from passing it on the deck. Lambert has had to clear out a lot of shit players who were also hoofball merchants. We are progressing, we're not instantly going to turn in Brazil but we are improving.
Some of the players Lambert has brought in (either signings or former academy players) are hoofball merchants too though. Baker is worse than Collins ever was for example.
Fair enough if your attitude is the result is all that matters but this thread is about style of play ain't it...
Think there is more chance of us picking up points if we keep the ball more.... That's likely to require Westwood coming back in
I can think of Baker and that's it, it's hardly loads.
-
I think the style of play is still evolving. Given the injuries we've already had this season it is difficult to have had a settled team and style. Add to that the number of new players it is going to take time for everything to gel.
I think we are exciting to watch for the very reason that none of us have any idea how we will play. Saturday saw two contrasting styles and as we got more confident we started to play better. I think it took us a bit of time to get to grips with Man City's set up and their mobility. Once we started closing them down more, we realised we were fit enough to match them by playing through them.
I think (and hope) that the players take great confidence from the second half and result on Saturday and we hit the ground running against Hull.
-
I'd like to see us actually hit the game running for once and impose ourselves on the other team. Going behind in 5 of the 6 games so far cannot continue. We need to be more agressive and confident from minute one. Especially at home.
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
Numbers like £40m always seem excessive, but you need to put it into context. A massive rebuilding job was needed, so that £40m has had to be spread over something like 16 players. That's an average of just £2.5m a player, which isn't really a lot in Premier League terms. Rather than go for established, but limited, players with that, he's gone the youth route, hence why patience is needed.
If you added £40m of talent to the squad MON left then you can rightly say we should be seeing better. But £40m to the squad TSM left is a whole other story.
-
Discussed this with the chaps I sit with on Saturday - we reckon the style is best described as "Harum-Scarum"
-
Discussed this with the chaps I sit with on Saturday - we reckon the style is best described as "Harum-Scarum"
It certainly leaves me stressed, but "Bored shitless"? Hardly.
-
Discussed this with the chaps I sit with on Saturday - we reckon the style is best described as "Harum-Scarum"
I don't think we play in a reckless or impetuous style at all.
-
Discussed this with the chaps I sit with on Saturday - we reckon the style is best described as "Harum-Scarum"
I don't think we play in a reckless or impetuous style at all.
I wouldn't personally use the word reckless, but we do seem to have very much an attacking philosophy to our game.
-
Discussed this with the chaps I sit with on Saturday - we reckon the style is best described as "Harum-Scarum"
I don't think we play in a reckless or impetuous style at all.
I wouldn't personally use the word reckless, but we do seem to have very much an attacking philosophy to our game.
I agree we've an attacking philosophy but if we were reckless with it we'd have been beaten heavily in most games this season.
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
Going back to this again, Everton have had two 0-0 draws already this season. And one was against the baggies.
Bet that was scintillating stuff.
-
In fairness I think we've had a very tough start. Taking the Toon game out the equation and we've played Liverpool, and Man City at home. Spurs too if we're counting the Milk cup. Those are very tough teams to try and dominate on our own patch. Likewise, away from home we've had tough games against Arse and Chelsea.
That we probably average about 40% possession at the minute is not that big a surprise.
Our passing does need to improve. The way we keep the ball, especially at Villa park, needs to improve. But lets wait and see how we fare in a run of games against bottom half opposition. If we want to make that step up to mid-table this season and finish around 8th-11th, then we have to dominate teams at home, particularly the bottom 12 sides. What we've desperately got to improve upon is shifting momentum in a match. Newcastle came flying out the traps and we couldn't counter it. Lambert did nothing to change matters either, particularly regarding Ben Arfas dominance. I'd hope hes learned that the 4-2-4 bollocks doesn't work. But he showed saturday that he's got the ability to switch things around to suit a game. It might have had a degree of luck, but it paid off.
We're only 6 games in so far. Lets start worrying about the style at Christmas if we've hosted a lot of low end clubs and been complete shite to watch. As we saw against Sunderland last season. We do have the capability of putting someone to the sword and absolutely twonking them in great style.
Honestly though, I think this is a results first business. If we have to win games ugly then so be it. We've already seen from last season though, that we're capable of producing some cracking goals. I also think Benteke being injured will be a benefit in the long run. It's forcing us to alter the way we play because basically our game largely revolves around CB. We play through him, off him, or just give him the ball and let him make something out of nothing. That's good in someways but leaves you a bit one note generally. It was like under O Neill. Most of our game revolved around hitting the ball out to the left wing for Ashley Young.
-
Discussed this with the chaps I sit with on Saturday - we reckon the style is best described as "Harum-Scarum"
I don't think we play in a reckless or impetuous style at all.
I wouldn't personally use the word reckless, but we do seem to have very much an attacking philosophy to our game.
I agree we've an attacking philosophy but if we were reckless with it we'd have been beaten heavily in most games this season.
I think the difference between 'reckless' and having an 'attacking philosophy' is how good a side you are. We're better this season, so are avoiding some of the hammerings we got last season, while not really changing how we approach a game.
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
Going back to this again, Everton have had two 0-0 draws already this season. And one was against the baggies.
Bet that was scintillating stuff.
Also neither Everton or Albion have totally rebuilt their squads, on a budget, in the last twelve months.
I don't know where the "so called lucky wins" bit comes from either. Our points this season have been earned by hard work.
It wasn't lucky that Man City had hardly any clear cut chances on Saturday. That happened because our defense worked their socks off and while it wasn't always pretty it was pretty effective.
-
We are doing fine on the budget we have ffs. Moan, moan bloody moan.
Stop moaning when we beat Hull on Saturday. You might just realise how far we have come in the last 18 months.
A near 40m transfer spend in two seasons budget?. Jesus, if this is considered fine for that kind of outlay i'm shocked at how low some of our supporters requirements are.
Personally i expect more quality on the pitch for that kind of outlay. As it is i'm literally bored shitless at the game 90% of the time. The first half against Liverpool and the Newcastle match were mind numbing in their uselessness on the pitch. The City performance probably ranked a brief step up from those but that's not saying a lot.
If the likes of Everton and even the Baggies can actually play good football then so can we. I just want to see us do it. We're getting by with so called lucky wins, other teams are stepping up and earning them by their actual footballing prowess, why do we have to be different ?
If you watch when we play well it's from passing it on the deck. Lambert has had to clear out a lot of shit players who were also hoofball merchants. We are progressing, we're not instantly going to turn in Brazil but we are improving.
Some of the players Lambert has brought in (either signings or former academy players) are hoofball merchants too though. Baker is worse than Collins ever was for example.
Fair enough if your attitude is the result is all that matters but this thread is about style of play ain't it...
Think there is more chance of us picking up points if we keep the ball more.... That's likely to require Westwood coming back in
I can think of Baker and that's it, it's hardly loads.
Sylla, Bacuna, Kea from Lambert's signings, Guzan too if I'm being pedantic about it.....
Weimann and Clark from the academy give the ball away routinely. Clark is capable of bringing the ball down and passing it but far too often just volleys it first time out of play. Weimann's energy is great but his touch is poor and lets him down a lot.
Delph stood out so much from the rest of our players in the second half in that he didnt shit himself when an opposition player came close to him. He would feint to turn to the right and buy a bit of time and space on his left. He has a nice turn of pace that takes him away from a player too. To be honest using a Johnny Giles cliche, it just takes moral courage for the player to do the right thing, get in a position for a pass, demanding the ball to feet, quick kick outs and throw ins etc. Too many of our players seem scared stiff of making a mistake or losing the ball and just resort to hoofing it towards Gabby or Benteke. Its basic stuff that any reasonable player should have at 16 but is lacking in so many players at Villa at the moment. Swansea, Everton, West Brom are all at our level but play much better football.
In Lambert's first game at West Ham, it was clear we were trying to play from the back more. But whether he has admitted defeat on that or not, we are far too Wimbeldon like for my liking at the moment anyway. Our defenders and keeper take the easy option far too much in hoofing it long and it seems to be getting worse this season. For me, its up to the manager to ensure his philosophy is implemented by the players. But we now have a glut of 6ft 6 strikers, little guile in midfield which Lambert seems to have given up on rectifying (why were Helenius and Kozak both signed this summer?) and have now put in physically stronger players for ball players e.g. Bacuna for Lowton and Sylla for Westwood. It should improve us defensively but it sure aint going to be pretty especially if this 5-3-2 formation is maintained.
-
Lambert seems to have given up on rectifying... and have now put in physically stronger players for ball players e.g. Bacuna for Lowton and Sylla for Westwood.
What a load of crap. Westwood is injured and everyone has noticed Lowton's loss of form. This is not "giving up" at all.
-
Lambert seems to have given up on rectifying... and have now put in physically stronger players for ball players e.g. Bacuna for Lowton and Sylla for Westwood.
What a load of crap. Westwood is injured and everyone has noticed Lowton's loss of form. This is not "giving up" at all.
And how is Bacuna any less a ball player than Lowton?
It's almost as if he didn't play a delightful pass for KEA to score and then later on, score a fantastic free kick.
-
Lambert seems to have given up on rectifying... and have now put in physically stronger players for ball players e.g. Bacuna for Lowton and Sylla for Westwood.
What a load of crap. Westwood is injured and everyone has noticed Lowton's loss of form. This is not "giving up" at all.
by giving up I meant not signing a genuine creative midfielder this summer, a number ten that our side has been crying out for. An attacking midfielder that can create, get beyond the strikers and score goals. That player isnt Westwood
Instead he signs Helenius and Kozak. Seems to be making his intentions clear to me anyway
-
Lambert seems to have given up on rectifying... and have now put in physically stronger players for ball players e.g. Bacuna for Lowton and Sylla for Westwood.
What a load of crap. Westwood is injured and everyone has noticed Lowton's loss of form. This is not "giving up" at all.
by giving up I meant not signing a genuine creative midfielder this summer, a number ten that our side has been crying out for. An attacking midfielder that can create, get beyond the strikers and score goals. That player isnt Westwood
Instead he signs Helenius and Kozak. Seems to be making his intentions clear to me anyway
He wants to score goals. The anti-football bastard.
-
Lambert seems to have given up on rectifying... and have now put in physically stronger players for ball players e.g. Bacuna for Lowton and Sylla for Westwood.
What a load of crap. Westwood is injured and everyone has noticed Lowton's loss of form. This is not "giving up" at all.
by giving up I meant not signing a genuine creative midfielder this summer, a number ten that our side has been crying out for. An attacking midfielder that can create, get beyond the strikers and score goals. That player isnt Westwood
Instead he signs Helenius and Kozak. Seems to be making his intentions clear to me anyway
That's because you've made your mind up despite the evidence.
-
Lambert seems to have given up on rectifying... and have now put in physically stronger players for ball players e.g. Bacuna for Lowton and Sylla for Westwood.
What a load of crap. Westwood is injured and everyone has noticed Lowton's loss of form. This is not "giving up" at all.
by giving up I meant not signing a genuine creative midfielder this summer, a number ten that our side has been crying out for. An attacking midfielder that can create, get beyond the strikers and score goals. That player isnt Westwood
Instead he signs Helenius and Kozak. Seems to be making his intentions clear to me anyway
Sweeping statements this early in the season have a habit of biting people on the arse. Why not wait and see how the team develops instead of making your mind up in September?
-
Despite their both being tall, aren't Helenius and Kozak very different players anyway? I thought Kozak was a target man while Helenius was more of a No. 10?
-
I think we are just one player away from being a very, very good side. I would like a goal scoring midfielder that can get 10 to 15 goals in a season on a regular basis. It worries me that we rely so heavily on our forwards, and one of the great features of Saturdays game was seeing Al Hamedi score, the first midfielder to notch one up since, bizarrely, Al Hamedi against Everton August 2012 (EPL).
-
We're the 3rd highest scorers in the PL so far. Didn't realise that.
-
Lambert seems to have given up on rectifying... and have now put in physically stronger players for ball players e.g. Bacuna for Lowton and Sylla for Westwood.
What a load of crap. Westwood is injured and everyone has noticed Lowton's loss of form. This is not "giving up" at all.
by giving up I meant not signing a genuine creative midfielder this summer, a number ten that our side has been crying out for. An attacking midfielder that can create, get beyond the strikers and score goals. That player isnt Westwood
Instead he signs Helenius and Kozak. Seems to be making his intentions clear to me anyway
He wants to score goals. The anti-football bastard.
;D I'm sure even McLeish wanted to score goals, Tony Pulis too
Sweeping statements this early in the season have a habit of biting people on the arse. Why not wait and see how the team develops instead of making your mind up in September?
sweeping statements early in the season is what makes football forum's great. its an opinion, bit like an arsehole everyone has one. I'll just about get by I reckon if I'm proven wrong ;D
-
We're the 3rd highest scorers in the PL so far. Didn't realise that.
It is as I said earlier, the argument against so to speak, appears to be based on perception rather than evidence.
“We concede lots from corners and set pieces” – Saturday was the first time we’ve conceded from a corner and we’ve only conceded three in comparison to the four Man City have.
“We’re anti-football/no attacking midfielder equals no goals” – We’ve scored more goals than all but two sides.
Again, to stress, we have played Arsenal and Chelsea away, with Liverpool and Man City at home.
-
If we're going to be balanced and fair, then the positives so far this season shouldn't be made too much of in the same way that negatives shouldn't. 6 games is the time to make observations, not draw conclusions.
-
6 games is the time to make observations, not draw conclusions.
Nice quote there.
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
He "cannot be serious " is the only comparison I can make with his comments and wimbledon .
New balls please.
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
Its because we scored from a long punt from the goalkeeper. You'd never see Everton score a goal like that, nope. Never.
H
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
Its because we scored from a long punt from the goalkeeper. You'd never see Everton score a goal like that, nope. Never.
H
Liverpool scored many like that in their glory era, big punt from Clemence, flick on from toshack and in the net from keegan .
-
6 games is the time to make observations, not draw conclusions.
Nice quote there.
Indeed, very well put. It also works both ways, it's too early to decide if we're going to be world beaters this season, and similarly it is too early to decide we've given up and resorted to pre-planned long ball football.
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
Its because we scored from a long punt from the goalkeeper. You'd never see Everton score a goal like that, nope. Never.
H
The thing is it wasn't just a lucky punt up field. You can clearly see the moment when Guzan notices the opportunity. Awareness and good execution from both Guzan and Weimann resulted in that goal.
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
Its because we scored from a long punt from the goalkeeper. You'd never see Everton score a goal like that, nope. Never.
H
The thing is it wasn't just a lucky punt up field. You can clearly see the moment when Guzan notices the opportunity. Awareness and good execution from both Guzan and Weimann resulted in that goal.
Also good movement from Kozak too .
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
Its because we scored from a long punt from the goalkeeper. You'd never see Everton score a goal like that, nope. Never.
H
The thing is it wasn't just a lucky punt up field. You can clearly see the moment when Guzan notices the opportunity. Awareness and good execution from both Guzan and Weimann resulted in that goal.
As it didn't involve a 147 pass move, 3 back heels, a 45 yard overhead strike and 2 clowns, I think we should be embarassed about it and ask the league to take the extra 2 point away from us.
-
I remember after the first game of last season hearing lots of people complain about 'powder-puff, tippy-tappy' football, and wherever I sit at VP there's always somebody moaning at the players to ' >:( GET IT FORWARD >:('
Whatever style you play, it won't please everyone.
However, comparisons to TSM and old Wimbledon sides are so far from the mark its unbelieveable.
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
Its because we scored from a long punt from the goalkeeper. You'd never see Everton score a goal like that, nope. Never.
H
The thing is it wasn't just a lucky punt up field. You can clearly see the moment when Guzan notices the opportunity. Awareness and good execution from both Guzan and Weimann resulted in that goal.
I agree, the Goose had a good look up and saw a two on two, but I was being facetious. Somebody who described our play as "muck" pointed to Everton as an example of the type of football we should be playing, yet they scored a goal fairly similar to ours; long kick from the keeper and rank defending.
I bet Lambert wishes when he walked into the job just over a year ago, that he'd inherited a top six squad full of experienced quality players; but he didn’t.
He inherited the footballing equivalent of ground zero. 1874 and 2012 are both year 1 for Aston Villa FC in terms of football. He had a squad chock full of attitude problems, lacking in professionalism and absent in quality, who had played the worst football any of us will have seen.
I am sure he would have loved to have spent £40 million over two seasons on two or three players to strengthen the spine, rather than 15 plus in completely rebuilding the squad.
And despite all that, we play some good stuff. Bacuna unlocked Man City with a delightful pass. How many times did they unlock our back four to work Guzan? 0.
We’re by no means the finished article and to be honest, I haven’t read a comment which suggests we are. But given the start we’ve had, the football and results have been by and large good.
-
How on earth are Bacuna, Sylla and KEA hoofers?! Again nonsense.
-
The thing about a style of play is that almost nobody does exclusively one thing or another - that's why Pep Guardiola and Tony Pulis represent such extremes. The point is, what is the basis of your style? For Lambert, it is undoubtedly passing along the ground and from player to player rather than from player to general areas of the pitch. However, sometimes we feel the need to punt it, which is acceptable if we're being pressed back in our own half, but the players do rather resort to it a lot, which is frustrating. However, it does not make us a long ball side - that would be Allardyce's West Ham, who do sometimes pass but whose game is built on preplanned direct balls into specified areas of the pitch, rather than from player to player.
Yes we hoof it too much, but the style is based on passing, and will become even more so as we go along.
-
However, comparisons to TSM and old Wimbledon sides are so far from the mark its unbelieveable.
I can only presume that it's an attempt by the poster in question to prolong the argument by coming up with different comparisons every day. The only thing they're doing though is coming across as stupid.
-
The thing is it wasn't just a lucky punt up field. You can clearly see the moment when Guzan notices the opportunity. Awareness and good execution from both Guzan and Weimann resulted in that goal.
I agree, the Goose had a good look up and saw a two on two, but I was being facetious. Somebody who described our play as "muck" pointed to Everton as an example of the type of football we should be playing, yet they scored a goal fairly similar to ours; long kick from the keeper and rank defending.
I bet Lambert wishes when he walked into the job just over a year ago, that he'd inherited a top six squad full of experienced quality players; but he didn’t.
He inherited the footballing equivalent of ground zero. 1874 and 2012 are both year 1 for Aston Villa FC in terms of football. He had a squad chock full of attitude problems, lacking in professionalism and absent in quality, who had played the worst football any of us will have seen.
I am sure he would have loved to have spent £40 million over two seasons on two or three players to strengthen the spine, rather than 15 plus in completely rebuilding the squad.
And despite all that, we play some good stuff. Bacuna unlocked Man City with a delightful pass. How many times did they unlock our back four to work Guzan? 0.
We’re by no means the finished article and to be honest, I haven’t read a comment which suggests we are. But given the start we’ve had, the football and results have been by and large good.
I totally agree. My post was intended to add to yours not question it.
The transformation of the squad in just over a year, especially with mainly young players being brought in, means that we're bound to be inconsistent at times.
Sometimes they do panic and lump it up field, when a more considered pass might be better, but the more experience they get the better their decision making will become. At our best we're a very good side but that consistency will take time.
We are not strong enough to play an expansive passing game against Man City, especially with four important players out injured. No conclusions about our style can be made from a game like that.
As for any comparisons to Wimbledon made previously
-
Lambert seems to have given up on rectifying... and have now put in physically stronger players for ball players e.g. Bacuna for Lowton and Sylla for Westwood.
What a load of crap. Westwood is injured and everyone has noticed Lowton's loss of form. This is not "giving up" at all.
by giving up I meant not signing a genuine creative midfielder this summer, a number ten that our side has been crying out for. An attacking midfielder that can create, get beyond the strikers and score goals. That player isnt Westwood
Instead he signs Helenius and Kozak. Seems to be making his intentions clear to me anyway
How many times does he have to say that 'Helenius is a different sort of player' and not a target man, and then bring him on in a Number Tenish position, for people to stop assuming that Helenius is another big man centre forward? He's never played like that, not in Denmark and not over here, so far.
I agree I'd have preferred the midfielder rather than the Kozak, but he was after several of these players, as we know, and probably never found the right deal (the argument I've heard some put about, by the way, that instead of Kiyotake he signed Tonev, is surely incorrect - Tonev was around £2m, and however cheaply he hoped to Kiyotake, it would never have been along those lines - ie, they're not like-for-like).
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
Its because we scored from a long punt from the goalkeeper. You'd never see Everton score a goal like that, nope. Never.
H
The thing is it wasn't just a lucky punt up field. You can clearly see the moment when Guzan notices the opportunity. Awareness and good execution from both Guzan and Weimann resulted in that goal.
Also good movement from Kozak too .
Very true. His movement back unsettled the defender and his attempted flick on caused the hesitation. Awareness and good execution from Guzan, Kozak and Weimann.
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
Its because we scored from a long punt from the goalkeeper. You'd never see Everton score a goal like that, nope. Never.
H
The thing is it wasn't just a lucky punt up field. You can clearly see the moment when Guzan notices the opportunity. Awareness and good execution from both Guzan and Weimann resulted in that goal.
Spot on. I was in the north stand right in line of the attack and you could see Guzan notice the move was on right before he booted it upfield. It was a really good goal. Couldn't care less if it was long ball, it was a bloody good move.
-
When a poster reckons that we're 'like Wimbledon' then you know it's time to stop taking him seriously and let him get on with being a grump.
Its because we scored from a long punt from the goalkeeper. You'd never see Everton score a goal like that, nope. Never.
H
The thing is it wasn't just a lucky punt up field. You can clearly see the moment when Guzan notices the opportunity. Awareness and good execution from both Guzan and Weimann resulted in that goal.
Spot on. I was in the north stand right in line of the attack and you could see Guzan notice the move was on right before he booted it upfield. It was a really good goal. Couldn't care less if it was long ball, it was a bloody good move.
To paraphrase SGT by one name: 'why when Glenn Hoddle does it is it called a long pass, but when Brad Guzan does it it's called a long ball?'
-
To me, a long ball is when someone just blindly lumps it forward into an area where he thinks the centre forward will be for a flick on. Guzan did neither of these things so it wasn't a long ball. He saw the 2-on-2 situation so it wasn't blind and there was control over the way in which he kicked the ball so it wasn't a lump/punt forward either. I'm a bit reluctant to use the term 'long pass' but he knew exactly what he was doing and he played it.
-
I urge anyone who thinks we are long ball merchants to watch the second half of the Man City game again. We are anything but. When you are playing a side of Man City's quality you do what is needed to clear the lines at times. To say we did pumped the long ball the time is ludicrous. We are also having to come to terms with various changes in personel that will naturally change how we play. Kozak isn't Benteke, not even close, so if it means we need to play a bit more to his strenths then we need to learn to do that quickly until Benteke returns.
Frankly, we got a win and when you have been dealt the fixtures and injuries we have who cares how we get the points? Almost everyone on here would have taken where we are with a +1 GD before the first ball was kicked. And not one person would have insisted we play in a specific way to achieve that. I'd rather have done what we have than be pretty and get utterly battered.
-
I urge anyone who thinks we are long ball merchants to watch the second half of the Man City game again. We are anything but. When you are playing a side of Man City's quality you do what is needed to clear the lines at times. To say we did pumped the long ball the time is ludicrous. We are also having to come to terms with various changes in personel that will naturally change how we play. Kozak isn't Benteke, not even close, so if it means we need to play a bit more to his strenths then we need to learn to do that quickly until Benteke returns.
Frankly, we got a win and when you have been dealt the fixtures and injuries we have who cares how we get the points? Almost everyone on here would have taken where we are with a +1 GD before the first ball was kicked. And not one person would have insisted we play in a specific way to achieve that. I'd rather have done what we have than be pretty and get utterly battered.
Well said tv, we have had a decent start to the season against the backdrop of a very tough fixture list and with some top players injured - we have the base now to kick on and have a decent season and 9 points from the games played is very good indeed.
Sure, we have faults, and need to work at a few things but we are improving and the squad is looking better - there is decent competition for places and it all bodes well.
-
I urge anyone who thinks we are long ball merchants to watch the second half of the Man City game again. We are anything but. When you are playing a side of Man City's quality you do what is needed to clear the lines at times. To say we did pumped the long ball the time is ludicrous. We are also having to come to terms with various changes in personel that will naturally change how we play. Kozak isn't Benteke, not even close, so if it means we need to play a bit more to his strenths then we need to learn to do that quickly until Benteke returns.
Frankly, we got a win and when you have been dealt the fixtures and injuries we have who cares how we get the points? Almost everyone on here would have taken where we are with a +1 GD before the first ball was kicked. And not one person would have insisted we play in a specific way to achieve that. I'd rather have done what we have than be pretty and get utterly battered.
I doubt we'd have got these results by being truly 'ugly'. Our rapid counters are great to watch when they get going, and that's the part of our game which has got us to where we are despite the tough fixtures. Without that, by just 'digging in' with defensive lines and hopeful hoofing we'd have never beaten Norwich, never mind Arsenal or City.
-
I urge anyone who thinks we are long ball merchants to watch the second half of the Man City game again. We are anything but. When you are playing a side of Man City's quality you do what is needed to clear the lines at times. To say we did pumped the long ball the time is ludicrous. We are also having to come to terms with various changes in personel that will naturally change how we play. Kozak isn't Benteke, not even close, so if it means we need to play a bit more to his strenths then we need to learn to do that quickly until Benteke returns.
Frankly, we got a win and when you have been dealt the fixtures and injuries we have who cares how we get the points? Almost everyone on here would have taken where we are with a +1 GD before the first ball was kicked. And not one person would have insisted we play in a specific way to achieve that. I'd rather have done what we have than be pretty and get utterly battered.
I still can't quite believe that, after playing Arsenal and Chelsea away and Liverpool and Man City at home in our first six games, we've got a positive goal difference. That is a huge positive for us. How many of the teams that are likely to be around us will be able to look at those fixtures at the end of the season and say the same.
Our goal difference was worrying everyone last season. So far that looks like it won't be the case this season, as long as we carry it on.
-
By the same token, Sralix's team last year were hoofers as I keep getting reminded by that Sky Go advert about Van Persie's volley from a hoof at Old Trafford last season.
-
By the same token, Sralix's team last year were hoofers as I keep getting reminded by that Sky Go advert about Van Persie's volley from a hoof at Old Trafford last season.
Man Utd under SAF always had it in them to go long. With them it was a variation of tactics, with us it's hoofing the ball because the players aren't good enough.
-
By the same token, Sralix's team last year were hoofers as I keep getting reminded by that Sky Go advert about Van Persie's volley from a hoof at Old Trafford last season.
Man Utd under SAF always had it in them to go long. With them it was a variation of tactics, with us it's hoofing the ball because the players aren't good enough.
That Night In Barcelona happened because they started piling everything forward.
-
By the same token, Sralix's team last year were hoofers as I keep getting reminded by that Sky Go advert about Van Persie's volley from a hoof at Old Trafford last season.
Man Utd under SAF always had it in them to go long. With them it was a variation of tactics, with us it's hoofing the ball because the players aren't good enough.
I disagree what your describing there is the exact insinuation that is intended by differentiating direct long passes and long ball football. In some cases almost all teams with hoof the ball away up field, or into row z, sometimes it's the best thing to do. If you make your entire game plan around that and having players who try to make the most of it at the other end then you can be criticised as anti-football but we don't, and I just can't see how anyone can believe we do.
-
Surely any decent team has to have a variation in playing style to break opponents down, if a team had only one way of playing they would soon be Sussed out - we have scored a variety of goals under lambert and the more variation in our play the better a team we will be
If the long ball is on and can set up a goal then why not play it - we certainly haven't overdone it and cannot be called a long ball team by any means .
There are times when I would like to see more width in our play but it's an ongoing process and we are making progress - the strength of the bench is encouraging and provides options.
-
If you want proper evidence of Lambert's style of play I suggest watching last seasons video in it's entirety as opposed to judging it based on 6 games this season. In less that two years we have scored more exciting individual and team goals than I can recall in almost 20 years.
-
Andi's goal at Anfield was one of the best Villa goals I have ever seen. To watch us cut Liverpool to shreds like that was as good as anything Yanited served up.
And as for Lowton's volley...
-
We have conceded three goals from set pieces.
Is that 3 from 8 then? If so that`s 37% which is significant :)
Seriously though - if we can further improve our defending of set pieces , the defence and ultimately the whole team will benefit as confidence will grow. As for us being up against "larger players" then surely that is discussed in training and worked on to mitigate just that.
I thought we conceded too easily from set pieces when Given was between the sticks - Brad is more vocal however sometimes he can get too rooted to his line when the box is heavily populated. My biggest criticism is the failure to cover front and back posts - schoolboy stuff really.
If we are to see improvement this season I feel it has to come from the defence - the reduction in goals conceded at Stamford Bridge is an early positive sign of this. Conceding two "sloppy" goals from corners this weekend will have fans responding with "Oh no not again" which is understandable. Ultimately the aim should be to keep clean sheets in as many games as possible. Whilst the "you score three, we will score four" philosophy is admirable most successful sides are built around a solid defence. I think the true understanding of our level of improvement will be the Tottenham game where hopefully we will be more determined to get a result and put up more of a show against a talented side. - See I can be positive !!!
-
Lots of positive comments about our evolving style of play but I have still seen us lose 9 of our last 14 home games in the league. The second half on Saturday was a glimpse of what we can do if we get the ball down and we get our good ball players into space.
We tend struggle when a team closes us down quickly at Villa Park - that's when it goes longer and more aimless. City didn't do that as well as others and we looked a more threatening side as a result.
Nevertheless, there are positive signs. Be interesting how Spurs and Everton go.
-
... We tend struggle when a team closes us down quickly at Villa Park - that's when it goes longer and more aimless ...
Yes; I put that down to our players perhaps not having the confidence and / or skill to beat their man and create their own space when presented with the ball whilst being closed down. Also, in the first half last Saturday and against the Barcodes there was a distinct lack of movement from the players around the man with the ball.
The effect of both being that the distribution and possession-retention are poor.
-
Lots of positive comments about our evolving style of play but I have still seen us lose 9 of our last 14 home games in the league. The second half on Saturday was a glimpse of what we can do if we get the ball down and we get our good ball players into space.
We tend struggle when a team closes us down quickly at Villa Park - that's when it goes longer and more aimless. City didn't do that as well as others and we looked a more threatening side as a result.
Nevertheless, there are positive signs. Be interesting how Spurs and Everton go.
Losing 9 of the last 14 is true but a little misleading in that 4 of those defeats came immediately after the 8-0 hammering at Chelsea. The last of those defeats against Newcastle was at the end of January and half time in that game saw the turn around in performances. Those defeats were not helped with injuries crippling our defence.
There have been disappointments since that Newcastle game but if you disregard those 4 games, it becomes 5 from 10, having played Liverpool twice, Man City twice and Chelsea. What that shows, I believe, is that we are improving, particularly in defence and midfield.
-
We are heading in the right direction, if you look at since Lambert took over our results are starting to improve, the squad has been overhauled and the players are gaining more experience. Lambert clearly wants to play attacking football, and we pass on the deck when we play at our best. Look at some of our goals last season, they are truly great. Obviously we're a work in progress and there will be some steps back before we move forward on occasion, but this club is moving in the right direction. All it takes now is investment to add some real quality to supplement the squad.
-
Lots of positive comments about our evolving style of play but I have still seen us lose 9 of our last 14 home games in the league. The second half on Saturday was a glimpse of what we can do if we get the ball down and we get our good ball players into space.
We tend struggle when a team closes us down quickly at Villa Park - that's when it goes longer and more aimless. City didn't do that as well as others and we looked a more threatening side as a result.
Nevertheless, there are positive signs. Be interesting how Spurs and Everton go.
Losing 9 of the last 14 is true but a little misleading in that 4 of those defeats came immediately after the 8-0 hammering at Chelsea. The last of those defeats against Newcastle was at the end of January and half time in that game saw the turn around in performances. Those defeats were not helped with injuries crippling our defence.
There have been disappointments since that Newcastle game but if you disregard those 4 games, it becomes 5 from 10, having played Liverpool twice, Man City twice and Chelsea. What that shows, I believe, is that we are improving, particularly in defence and midfield.
I've always viewed last season in 3 specific junks. There was the games up until Chelsea away. Chelsea away until Newcastle at home. And then Everton away onwards.
We were poor but improving in the first lot. Utter garbage in the middle. And then showed midtable form at the end. That final junk of 14 games we actually had a points per game ratio of 1.5, which is eaxctly what we've got during the first 6 this season. If we can maintain that form, we'll be upper midtable come May.
-
It's funny. On the one hand we've continued the form from the back end of last season.
But there are actually lots of differences.
Even in our good form last year we lost against all the top sides. We've beaten two already this season.
We were much too good for everyone else. Whereas I don't think we played that well v Newcastle or Norwich this year.
We've been more resilient this year but passed the ball much less well
Hopefully we can package all of these things together. I know I keep on banging on about it but it we can get through the Everton and spurs games with a point or two, plus beat hull, I think we are well set to rack up quite a few points over November and December. We'll need a pretty for squad to choose from and some of our better players to find their feet this season
I'm not expecting top eight form but I do think top ten is realistic. They're much of a muchness after Everton. But the top seven seem to be streets ahead
-
"Junk?" The only way I've seen that word being malleable is in its use for peope's private parts.
-
"Junk?" The only way I've seen that word being malleable is in its use for peope's private parts.
What he meant was, we were bollocks. ;)
-
It's funny. On the one hand we've continued the form from the back end of last season.
But there are actually lots of differences.
Even in our good form last year we lost against all the top sides. We've beaten two already this season.
We were much too good for everyone else. Whereas I don't think we played that well v Newcastle or Norwich this year.
We've been more resilient this year but passed the ball much less well
Hopefully we can package all of these things together. I know I keep on banging on about it but it we can get through the Everton and spurs games with a point or two, plus beat hull, I think we are well set to rack up quite a few points over November and December. We'll need a pretty for squad to choose from and some of our better players to find their feet this season
I'm not expecting top eight form but I do think top ten is realistic. They're much of a muchness after Everton. But the top seven seem to be streets ahead
I personally think we'd have beaten Norwich more comfortably had Gabby and Benteke stayed on the pitch. You can't really play a counter attacking game with Weimann and Kozak up front so it was case of having to dig in and take any other chances that came our way. In that respect it was a great result even if the performance didn't match.
-
It will interesting to see how we line up at hull if as expected both gabby and Westwood are available .
I would expect we go back to the 433 system which has profited in away games with , gabby , andi and Kozak up front , but I would hope hat lambert sticks with the same midfield of sylla, kea and Delph for this one .
A month ago I could never have imagined that I would be advocating both Westwood and Lowton to be on the bench but kea and bacuna deserve the shirts at the moment.
-
Anyone else notice we played more like 4-3-1-2 with Weimann dropping deep almost midfield and tekkers as the big man linking with gabby? Was yet another change for Lambert. It worked well.
-
Anyone else notice we played more like 4-3-1-2 with Weimann dropping deep almost midfield and tekkers as the big man linking with gabby? Was yet another change for Lambert. It worked well.
I thought it worked poorly. We lost all the width which stretched Liverpool in the first half and bypassed all 4 1/2 midfielders, bunting it long to two Big Men and promptly losing it.
-
Anyone else notice we played more like 4-3-1-2 with Weimann dropping deep almost midfield and tekkers as the big man linking with gabby? Was yet another change for Lambert. It worked well.
I thought it worked poorly. We lost all the width which stretched Liverpool in the first half and bypassed all 4 1/2 midfielders, bunting it long to two Big Men and promptly losing it.
I think we tend to play better when we are narrow to be honest. When we swamp the central midfield I think we do best. Also we get width "for free" when we have Gabby & Weimanns pace on the pitch even of they are playing centrally, if that makes sense.
I agree we definitely lost something when Holt played in Gabby's position though. he isnt that kind of player. As you say he was too similar to Tekkers really. Might have been better to bring on Helenius and have him take Weimmans role with Weimann moving into Gabby's maybe?
-
I feel that would have been too much of the same. For all his much-debated faults, I would've had Albrighton staying wide on the right and keeping the pitch big. As it was, Liverpool found it too easy to cram the centre and crowd us off the ball.
-
Anyone else notice we played more like 4-3-1-2 with Weimann dropping deep almost midfield and tekkers as the big man linking with gabby? Was yet another change for Lambert. It worked well.
I thought it worked poorly. We lost all the width which stretched Liverpool in the first half and bypassed all 4 1/2 midfielders, bunting it long to two Big Men and promptly losing it.
I think you're talking about different things here. In the first half, when we had the ball Weimann and Gabby were working out wide and swapping sides depending on where their start position was, which worked going forward and gave us the bit of width to drag their players out of the centre. When we were defending Gabby and Benteke were closing the defenders but Weimann was coming inside and deeper and pretty much man-marking Gerrard, which completely nullified him. After half time we lost Gabby which broke our width in attack but also they moved Gerrard 20yards up the pitch and had Lucas/Allen sit in front of the defence instead, which allowed Gerrard a lot more time and space to work in. I think we made the Kea-Sylla switch to counter act that but Sylla didn't get close enough to him at times.
Despite it not working as intended I thought bringing Sylla on was one of the better tactical moves I've seen from Lambert recently as he reacted pretty quickly to a tactical change by them, something he hasn't done very well in the last few months.
-
I think we went 4-3-1-2 once Holt came on.
In the first half with Gabby and Weimann moving wide really worked well.
I think Albrighton would have worked better than Holt.
Sylla coming on worked well, but I thought KEA had one of his better games, as he was allowed to break forward from the centre circle.
All-in-all it worked much better and Lambert needs some credit for a strong attacking side. Hope it continues.
-
I love it when we are prepared to press the opposition in that way. For some reason, we have tended to sit back and let other teams have the ball a lot under Paul Lambert. That's fine, we are a good counter-attacking side, but defending is not our strength. When Vlaar was out injured it just looked so stupidto watch us invite so much pressure on ourselves.
Vlaar has been my player of the season so far. He is so important to us.
-
Perhaps some won't give him credit but KEA was great in the first half, pressing unceasingly and making some good passes.
Weimann did do well against Gerrard first half but the Holt-for-Gabby sub was a poor move. Not that Holt played badly, far from it, it just narrowed us and cramped us, and made us go long when all our best stuff had come about by passing through the midfield.
-
I will give KEA credit, I'm not a fan as I think he goes missing too often, but on Saturday he played in the right areas of the pitch and got involved in play a lot more. I don't think he's suited to sitting in and trying to be a deep playmaker but that's what he's been doing most of this season, with the better performances being the ones where he's played higher up the pitch.
If he did this in every game I'd be more than happy to keep him around the team.
-
If there's one thing I think KEA does quite well it's his movement, finding space in the penalty area. He just needs to do it more, and he looks better pressing high up the pitch. It's just a shame he goes missing so often in games, especially at home. For want of a better option, should the Hoolahoop deal fall through and no one else is bought in, it might be worth having KEA playing a Number 10 sort of role. Let him find pockets of space in good areas, make runs into the box beyond the front men.
He certainly needs to stop being seemingly happy to just disappear in games.
-
Perhaps some won't give him credit but KEA was great in the first half, pressing unceasingly and making some good passes.
Weimann did do well against Gerrard first half but the Holt-for-Gabby sub was a poor move. Not that Holt played badly, far from it, it just narrowed us and cramped us, and made us go long when all our best stuff had come about by passing through the midfield.
True, and as others have said on the transfer thread, a back up for Gabby would be beneficial because we don't have a replacement who can do anything close to what Gabbaldinho can do.
Albrighton certainly should have come on ahead of Holt, just to keep some width in the side.
-
Perhaps some won't give him credit but KEA was great in the first half, pressing unceasingly and making some good passes.
Weimann did do well against Gerrard first half but the Holt-for-Gabby sub was a poor move. Not that Holt played badly, far from it, it just narrowed us and cramped us, and made us go long when all our best stuff had come about by passing through the midfield.
I thought KEA was poor on Saturday night, and said so on the post match thread.
I re-watched the first half on LFC TV yesterday and changed my mind. Thought he did do quite well, as it goes.
I thought the Gabby replacement should have been Albrighton, and keep the shape/counter attack threat.
Agreed, Holt was decent, but was never going to give us that speed on the break we are so good at.
-
I love it when we are prepared to press the opposition in that way. For some reason, we have tended to sit back and let other teams have the ball a lot under Paul Lambert. That's fine, we are a good counter-attacking side, but defending is not our strength. When Vlaar was out injured it just looked so stupidto watch us invite so much pressure on ourselves.
Vlaar has been my player of the season so far. He is so important to us.
I think it was Guardiola who drummed into Barca that you have about three seconds of chaos when posession is lost to pressure the opposition and attampt to win the ball back. If you haven't won it in that 3 seconds then as a team you funnel back into your defensive shape with the objective of being hard to break down.
I'm not saying that is the only way of doing it however I certainly think it's something we've done badly in the nov - jan period. We seem happy to sit back far too quickly.
-
I agree that Albrighton would have been the better substitution for Gabby but Lambert was probably thinking in terms of getting some experience onto the pitch. It wasn't long after it had gone 2-2 and when it would have been quite feasible for Liverpool to start building the pressure up to get their third, we seemed to have enough experience and composure on the ball to not allow that to happen. Instead we gradually came back into more and more and in truth, we could have still won it from that position if there had been a bit more belief about us.
-
It was 4312 from the start as shown on motd. Meant our strikers could get one on one with their centre backs, we had numbers in central midfield to outnumber them, and wrimann's bursts through the middle could exploit their lack of a holding midfielder
So he kept the same formation when holt came on. But it obviously meant a different approach and by that stage Liverpool had changed formation so I'd have thought albrighton would have been the Better bet
-
as soon as Gabby went off Liverpool were able to push on to us as they knew we had no pace to hurt them, as I said on the post match thread bringing Holt on was a mistake and showed again Lamberts lack of tactical awareness.
-
as soon as Gabby went off Liverpool were able to push on to us as they knew we had no pace to hurt them, as I said on the post match thread bringing Holt on was a mistake and showed again Lamberts lack of tactical awareness.
I was screaming at the Tv saying the same. Should have been Albrighton which would have been virtual like for like with Gabby. It was as if he thought he had to make a point aout playing his old mate Holt and give credence to the signing. 'The Mighty Reds YNWA' were there for the taking and we and we missed out
-
It was 4312 from the start as shown on motd. Meant our strikers could get one on one with their centre backs, we had numbers in central midfield to outnumber them, and wrimann's bursts through the middle could exploit their lack of a holding midfielder
So he kept the same formation when holt came on. But it obviously meant a different approach and by that stage Liverpool had changed formation so I'd have thought albrighton would have been the Better bet
4-3-1-2 out of possession but, as Fergie would always say, you shouldn't really have a formation in attack, and Gabby and Weimann were always moving into wide positions to support the full-backs and we stretched them. Holt as has been said didn't have the pace to really move wide and drag Liverpool players with him and we ended up stodgy and crowded out.
-
as soon as Gabby went off Liverpool were able to push on to us as they knew we had no pace to hurt them, as I said on the post match thread bringing Holt on was a mistake and showed again Lamberts lack of tactical awareness.
I was screaming at the Tv saying the same. Should have been Albrighton which would have been virtual like for like with Gabby. It was as if he thought he had to make a point aout playing his old mate Holt and give credence to the signing. 'The Mighty Reds YNWA' were there for the taking and we and we missed out
'Like for like' - you're joking, surely.
Albrighton can do one thing well, cross the ball. Against that he can't hold it up, he doesn't track back well and he can't tackle. He's the sort of player to bring on if you are chasing the game not trying to defend a lead.
-
I have to agree that there is no way Albrighton, who isn't blessed with pace, would have been a like for like replacement for Gabby.
-
Albrighton is quicker than Holt and would've provided width of the kind more likely to help us keep the ball.
-
It was 4312 from the start as shown on motd. Meant our strikers could get one on one with their centre backs, we had numbers in central midfield to outnumber them, and wrimann's bursts through the middle could exploit their lack of a holding midfielder
So he kept the same formation when holt came on. But it obviously meant a different approach and by that stage Liverpool had changed formation so I'd have thought albrighton would have been the Better bet
4-3-1-2 out of possession but, as Fergie would always say, you shouldn't really have a formation in attack, and Gabby and Weimann were always moving into wide positions to support the full-backs and we stretched them. Holt as has been said didn't have the pace to really move wide and drag Liverpool players with him and we ended up stodgy and crowded out.
Exactly, I've said it a few times before, formations are all about your defensive shape, once you have the ball the only restrictions should be that players are available to fill into that defensive shape reasonably quickly if you give the ball away, hence you tend to see 3-4 players roughly holding their position. With the change to bring Holt on we needed Weimann to offer a lot more out wide but he came in very central.