Aston Villa v Reading Post-Match Thread

[l_mckay]

Just got back now,that was a dreadful game and performance but the  3'points are all that mattered tonight,hope we play a lot better Saturday an pick up at least a draw!

[Keeno]

I don't understand where the "we weren't creating chances" argument is coming from at all. Our problem is consistently putting them away (and the shocking reaction of the crowd at times tonight, esp in the 2nd half). In the 1st we played some OK stuff - Westwood and Bannan excellent, and there were at least three great chances that should have resulted in goals - Weimann's panicky shot over the bar, Benteke's poor effort after Holman's excellent run and pull-back, and Baker's header into the ground off a Bannan corner. All three of those came from fairly young and inexperienced players, and the "Pro-Bent argument" certainly holds weight here. If one of those had gone in then it would hopefully have resulted in a less nervier second half.

I don't think we created that many clear chances tonight, certainly not enough against a team as poor as Reading.  And we've hardly been carving them out for fun in other games.  That said Benteke and Weimann both missed very presentable chances an Bent may well have done better with both.

There were at least four or five chances that should have been goals though - three of which I named - Benteke cut in from the left in the first half and sent another tame effort at federici. Clark had a header which was half a foot wide from a corner in the second half too...

It's very difficult to carve open a team who sat as deep as they did, especially in the circumstances of the 2nd half where most of us started whinging and we began to go long. We certainly need more options though, and Zog would be a good fit for the current Weimann role...

[mrfuse]

I dont even know what point your trying to make?

I'm asking a question.

I know but the question doesn't make any sense regarding Percy's statement

[PeterWithesShin]

I don't understand where the "we weren't creating chances" argument is coming from at all. Our problem is consistently putting them away (and the shocking reaction of the crowd at times tonight, esp in the 2nd half). In the 1st we played some OK stuff - Westwood and Bannan excellent, and there were at least three great chances that should have resulted in goals - Weimann's panicky shot over the bar, Benteke's poor effort after Holman's excellent run and pull-back, and Baker's header into the ground off a Bannan corner. All three of those came from fairly young and inexperienced players, and the "Pro-Bent argument" certainly holds weight here. If one of those had gone in then it would hopefully have resulted in a less nervier second half.

I don't think we created that many clear chances tonight, certainly not enough against a team as poor as Reading.  And we've hardly been carving them out for fun in other games.  That said Benteke and Weimann both missed very presentable chances an Bent may well have done better with both.

There were at least four or five chances that should have been goals though - three of which I named - Benteke cut in from the left in the first half and sent another tame effort at federici. Clark had a header which was half a foot wide from a corner in the second half too...

It's very difficult to carve open a team who sat as deep as they did, especially in the circumstances of the 2nd half where most of us started whinging and we began to go long. We certainly need more options though, and Zog would be a good fit for the current Weimann role...

Plus the break where Weimann didn't pass quick enough.

[Matt Collins]

We DID have loads of chances. Benteke scored, had two other great chances; weimann missed a sitter and twice should have played Holman in on goal, Holman almost scored, as did Clark and baker.  I agree it was a poor performance, but there were still aspects of promise. Roll on QPR and let's play with a bit more composure. Ireland has to start for me

[mrfuse]

QPR highlights v Mackems show that THEY USE THE WINGS AND GET CROSSES IN! FFS Lambert, why don't we?!

And  it was 0-0...FFS I am glad we don't do that!

ha-ha that made me chuckle

[hilts_coolerking]

I didn't say anything about anyone being vindicated. I just find it amusing that those who have been saying performances don't mean shit suddenly becoming apoplectic about performances.

I might equally say that those who were less concerned about recent results because performances had been decent are, tonight, suddenly less interested in the performance than they are the result.

Which ever way you choose to look at it, it was a very welcome three points from a poor performance in an awful match.

[eamonn]

Yeah, the match-thread is a bit of a fright to read after the game. I'm sure I was effing and blinding at the telly but when poor Albrighton skyed that cross I did think of the pelters he would have been getting on here.

We've entered an era now with a young manager who wants to slowly build a young side - and I think that's crucial. He, not Lerner's budgetary policy, Lambert himself, wants to build a team of hungry, hard-working, flexible players which seems to be the explanation for Bent's omission - and we are really just going to have to be patient with all the errors and inconsistencies that go with that.

[hilts_coolerking]

I know but the question doesn't make any sense regarding Percy's statement

I'm sorry you don't understand it but I can't put it any plainer than I already have.

[Mister E]

I don't think we created that many clear chances tonight, certainly not enough against a team as poor as Reading.  And we've hardly been carving them out for fun in other games.  That said Benteke and Weimann both missed very presentable chances an Bent may well have done better with both.

Disagree, kt: the first half should have put the game to bed, really. Weimann's was very scorable (despite the defender's attention); Benteke could have placed the ball to the keeper's right where there was much more space. Baker's header was excellent, just bounced too high.

And those were the clear-cut opportunities.

[dl9]

Brent's 3 games away from his 50th appearance & a £6mil payment to Sunderland. This along with the fact that he goes missing far too often means he won't be playing for us again and come Jan he'll be gone.

[dl9]

'Bent' even

[PeterWithesShin]

Brent's 3 games away from his 50th appearance & a £6mil payment to Sunderland. This along with the fact that he goes missing far too often means he won't be playing for us again and come Jan he'll be gone.

Why on earth would a 50th appearance trigger an additional £6mill when for £18million i'm pretty sure you'd expect the player to manage less than a season and a half of appearances?

[dave.woodhall]

Brent's 3 games away from his 50th appearance & a £6mil payment to Sunderland. This along with the fact that he goes missing far too often means he won't be playing for us again and come Jan he'll be gone.

...any advance on six million?

[Percy McCarthy]

That Ricky Gervais is fucking raking it in. No wonder thay stopped it after two series and a two-part special.

And Gareth was funnier.

Hilts: I got the impression that some people thought performances were irrelevant. I don't think anyone praising performances thought that about results.