Aston Villa v Stoke City Post-Match Thread

[garyshawsknee]

Having read through most of the replies I'm a little surprised by the degree of positivity about that performance. To be clear though, Stoke were wretched and the Villa defence was superb. Stoke didn't get a sniff.

I think our team had something to do with that. To curtail an inform team to barely 1 shot not on target all through the game takes some doing.

None. Zero. Nada shots on target. And only one attempt.

This is the team Hansen reckons is easily top 10.
He 's probably right but that's a new set of wrong of all by itself.

I couldn't believe how MOTD ignored the fact that Stoke barely had a shot on goal,then Lineker ended the piece by saying they were a good team. BBC are way behind others now when it comes to pundits.

[Mortimer's Bear]

The defence were superb, stood up to the physical test with ease. I also thought Bannan had his best game for a while, every build up seems to go through him.

One minor bug-bear of mine, Benteke seems unable to put his laces through a shot, every shot seems to be a side-footed effort!

On a negative note, what has happened to Gabby?

[Matt Collins]

I agree about Benteke. Several times now he's had a bit of a chocolate leg when faced with a good chance, and not struck through the ball properly.

Also agree that it's the positions behind the strikers that are now the main concern, whether we play 3-4-2-1 (which I think we did yday?) or 4-2-3-1.

Benteke has to play the striker role, but I'd be surprised if he got well into double figures in league goals this year. We really need more creativity and goals from those positions. N'Zogbia is one obvious option but it hasn't worked out so far to say the least. If we could get a Benteke quality signing from abroad for that position in the winter it could make a huge difference. Someone with energy quality and capable of striking from outside the box would be nice.

I imagine the 5 at the back might come to an end after the Wigan game, but you never know.

[Witton Warrior]

Thought we retained the ball better than previously at the expense of forward movement. Others have commented on the lack of options when a midfielder looks up for the pass. A winger would have murdered them today.

Much has been said about how the youngsters stood up to Stokie intimidation, have to say that I expected far more! Stoke didn't seem to remember their game is based on cheating until the second half.

Wish Benteke would learn to strike a ball with some venom, reminds me too much of Carew who had a powder puff shot for a big guy. The chance 30 seconds into the 2nd half should have been buried.

Onward and sideways...

[Dante Lavelli]

I'd like to see Nzogbia given a run in the team before January if fitness permits.
He could be ideal in that role and I'd like to see him given a chance before we write a 10m investment off.

However I still think we need one other wide/inside forward player regardless of whether Nzogbia steps up.  I'd be happy to sign another unknown foreigner for about 6m and rotate him with gabby, weimann, ireland and Holman in the wide/creative births.

[stuart r]

Not long home, haven't read all this thread yet. Main observation - thank f*ck I'm not a Stoke fan, couldn't bear to watch them every week. First half thought we should have won it, seemed slightly more even second half.

Only caught a bit of 6-0-6 tonight; as calm as he is, Mr Lizz can't stand Robbie Savage. One caller, a Stoke fan, sounded like he wanted to take issue with Savage for defending Tony Pullis. The caller was basically saying Stoke's football is ugly and boring to watch. Found myself in total agreement with him. 6-0-6 with Savage and Johnny Vaughan [who made Colin Murray sound the consumate professional] is rapidly dumbing down, imo.

Thought things couldn't get much worse at the BBC in light of the Saville controversy but that 606 last night was a new low. The worst radio broadcast I have ever heard. (Don't) have a listen on iplayer.

[sirlordbaltimore]

Having read through most of the replies I'm a little surprised by the degree of positivity about that performance. To be clear though, Stoke were wretched and the Villa defence was superb. Stoke didn't get a sniff.

However there was never any tempo about our play. The attacks were slow and any momentum from a break was invariably curtailed by slowing down the play or a backwards pass.

It's easy to see why we don't score many goals. How many times did full-backs overlap to provide a forward pass when we broke? When the ball was played up to Benteke how often did a midfielder seek to run past him to receive a flick or pass? Never, not once that I can recall.

The pretty passing was all in safe, unthreatening areas. The Stoke defence were rarely turned or taken out of position.

All in all I thought it was a safety first performance from us. No risks.

We will not score if we don't try to give attacking options and based on what 16 games have shown the season's going to be a long and hard one to watch.

Didn't Lambert say that the Villa fans wouldn't put up with the first shot on target happening in the 41st minute or something? Well crowds of 28 then 30k suggest exactly that.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts too.

I'm not sure when just passing the ball around 10 yards either side of the half way line was considered great play. We never looked threatening, we had no actual creativity, and thus once again never looked like scoring bar a couple of ping pong efforts in the box.

You'd have thought coming home from a 0-0 home game with Stoke having never worked their keeper that people would be throwing their arms up in anger. It shows how successful the clubs dampening of expectations has been when people are happy with that (IMHO of course)

What are people seeing that i'm clearly not ?, Yes I can see players passing the ball around the middle of the park (as already referenced to above) but no opposition will mind that as it's actually not threatening them at all. I thought we defended pretty well but never had to deal with much, and up front/wide we had absolutely nothing to my eyes.

I thought Benteke had a pretty poor game and showed exactly why pinning all your hopes on a 22 year old with an average goal scoring record is madness. The lad shouldn't have that weight of expectation on him to my mind. We should rotate if needs be and use what we have at our disposal (eg Bent, Gabby, Weimann)

Something else that has puzzled me since yesterday are claims we lost shape once Bent and Ireland came on. For me we'd lost all threat BEFORE they came on which is why Lambert chose to make the changes. I wouldn't have took Gabby off personally mind, i'd have took Lichaj and Holman off and gone 4-3-3 for the last 25 minutes. But that's just me.

Holman fails to convince me he's starting material, he's full of grit/running/etc but his actual quality with the ball is pretty basic at best. And as much as I wanted him on, I thought Ireland was appalling, giving the ball away constantly and taking that daft angled shot instead of simply hitting it across the box. That said, neither him or Bent are 25 minute players to my mind.

The only real plus points I took were Westwood, Bannan (in patches) and the three centre backs. That said I didn't see much postive in the 3-5-2 as neither Lowton or Lichaj played as wing backs in reality.

To sum up. All I'm seeing is a toothless team that worries me.

[supertom]

I'd like to see CNZ come in when he returns. Either as left wing back, or as the advanced midfielder. He's capable of producing something from nothing (just as capable of producing nothing sadly too.) But I just think his injury came at a bad time. He wasn't tearing up trees by any means but he was putting in more effort and looking like he was enjoying things just a little more. I'd like to see if we can get him in form because he may well offer the difference we're looking for. We can't rely purely on Benteke for some spark in the final third.

If we're to play with wing backs then we need more pace on the left side than Lichaj offers. I thought he played very well yesterday, defensively at least but going forward he's far too limited. We could have had more joy with someone better there.

[Ads]

Yes I would agree with CNZ coming in. Give him a run on the left over the next five or six games as one last chance. A couple of widemen/forwards to play off Benteke is what is needed in January.

[Percy McCarthy]

We could really do with a Robbie Keane-type player in that advanced midfield role. Someone who moves into space, demands the ball, and looks to do something imaginative and threatening with it.

How about Robbie Keane?

[PeterWithesShin]

Having read through most of the replies I'm a little surprised by the degree of positivity about that performance. To be clear though, Stoke were wretched and the Villa defence was superb. Stoke didn't get a sniff.

I think our team had something to do with that. To curtail an inform team to barely 1 shot not on target all through the game takes some doing.

None. Zero. Nada shots on target. And only one attempt.

This is the team Hansen reckons is easily top 10.
He 's probably right but that's a new set of wrong of all by itself.

They actually managed 2 shots, but one went for a throw in so seems the Beeb don't count that one.

[JUAN PABLO]

Big positive is the defence , from the goalie , the back four and Westwood looked excellent . Herd did well.

Its the rest that needs sorting . Holman was alright in parts but needs to get in the box more. I would have actually taken BB off than Holman thou
especially with Ireland on the pitch.

I cant blame PL with the subs , as we had no cutting edge and never looked like scoring but we were pretty poor after. Benteke had one chance second half , he should have done better.

Gabby a waste of a player at the moment . works hard for 30 minutes but not a lot else as the stats proved again.

Clean sheet a bonus , another point . If we can get a result in the next 3 games then it is a good point.

[Monty]

What I think is noticeable is that, despite people expecting us to lose out for lack of physicality, it was actually a lack of creativity which cost us. Them being physical was no real problem for us, because by and large we just passed it around their pituitary cases in midfield. The problem was breaking down their massed defence, and we lacked some incision there.

[ktvillan]

Good posts from AVFC Rob and SirLordBaltimore.  I've been saying for ages that far too much far too much store is given to passing stats, without considering the type of pass attempted.  Too many are of the ultra safe variety which don't bother the opposition in the slightest and which they are happy to let you do all day.  This is why I cringed when someone earlier said Westwood is the new Petrov.  I really hope not, because the latter used to drive me mad with his ultra safe "stop, turn back, pass it to Cuellar, out for a throw" routine.  I think Westwood and Bannan and others are a little too happy to tippy tap it sideways or backwards too often.  At some stage you need players who are willing to get forward and make higher risk incisive passes, without fearing that their stats will be affected if they don't get it quite right.   Or just to bomb forward with the ball at their feet and try to punch some holes.

For all our new found solidity (and I can see why Lambert is prioritising that aspect) I get really frustrated that we haven't been a little more adventurous in the home games against Reading and Stoke. 

[Richard]

spot on ktvillan