Fulham v Aston Villa Post-Match Thread

[adrenachrome]

we're a mid table team doing what mid table teams do. Lose some, win some. We'll win some we shouldn't, we'll also lose some we shouldn't. We'll have very little consistency as will all of those sides around us. Yesterday we lost one that on form we shouldn't but against a side that has the quality in their squad to be exactly where we are this season. Fulham had massively underperformed under Jol. I expect that in January we'll have more points and be sitting close to where we are now. We'll pick up some wins and we'll be happy at times and wondering how the fuck did we do that? Then there will be games where we lose and the sky falls in.

The turning point for us will be when Benteke returns to any sort of form. The drop off has been stunning and is affecting everyone in the side. That for me is very evident to see. When you think what he was doing last season and immediately prior to his injury it's amazing to think how low his confidence is right now. Fix that, and a lot of things fall back into place. He was doing things instinctively last season. Right now he isn't sure of the most basic aspects of his game. As Benteke goes we go and our opponents are finding us very easy to defend against when the beast isn't the beast.

Are we "a mid table team doing what mid table teams do", though?  Or are we an experimental team doing what no other established PL club has done before by steadfastly refusing to bring in players with proven PL experience?

I think the table doesn't lie. It's easy to look at our flaws and say we've been lucky. But others teams for whatever reason haven't been able to capitalise. Part of that is luck, part of that is because we've improved. A mid table team almost by definition hasn't got everything right and sit in that position because they themselves are completely unpredicatable one week to next. The other aspect is just that we've gone about getting to where we are in a very non traditional manner. At times last season we looked spectacular; good and bad. We've matured a little now where we are neither spectacularly good or bad. We haven't hit the heights of some of our best games and are nowhere close to the depths of our worst moments.

I don't think we have been lucky; for example, I was in a distinct minority in refusing to so describe the victory against Man City. But I think saying what is happening is just typical of a mid table side is not accurate.

Thanks to the symbiosis of RL's experience with MoN and PL's Dortmund vision thing (DVT), we are embarked on a bold experiment which, as far as I can tell, has never worked in the PL to date. The theory is that it will come good at some point in the future when the young players bought from lower leagues get up to speed, and the bargains from abroad acclimatise. No panic buying for us, as graphically demonstrated during the last January window. 

I am quite sure if Okore had not got that injury, and Vlaar had stayed fot, things would be considerably different.   

[Toronto Villa]

I think it is more of a dedicated strategy than an experiment. I don't think the manager and board sat around a table and said "let's try this today or this season". I think they have a plan and we are in the middle of it. Much of it hasn't come off, some things are better than expected. In some areas we've regressed. If players were on form and healthy we'd be a bit further ahead than we are now. But not much further.

[pauliewalnuts]

I am quite sure if Okore had not got that injury, and Vlaar had stayed fot, things would be considerably different.   

Vlaar has only missed 1.5 matches, though, and we won one of them, so not really sure that's made much difference?

[adrenachrome]

I am quite sure if Okore had not got that injury, and Vlaar had stayed fot, things would be considerably different.   

Vlaar has only missed 1.5 matches, though, and we won one of them, so not really sure that's made much difference?

More to do with the reaction on here to the performance of the defence in the last 1.5 games without him, and the prospect of him missing for much longer.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

I am quite sure if Okore had not got that injury, and Vlaar had stayed fot, things would be considerably different.   

Vlaar has only missed 1.5 matches, though, and we won one of them, so not really sure that's made much difference?

More to do with the reaction on here to the performance of the defence in the last 1.5 games without him, and the prospect of him missing for much longer.

I think it's the full backs that give more concern rather than the central defenders. Obviously Vlaar is important, especially as he's actually found some form but overall I and I think most on here were pleased with the performances of Clark and Herd.

[amfy]

I didn't see the whole game yesterday because I was at work. I managed to listen to it on the radio on & off, and it did sound dreadful.

However, I have to put this out there, even though I know it has little chance of meaning anything to anybody, it did occur to me that it might mean something....

I watched MOTD2 when I got in, & we looked alright! Bear with me - I know it's only a few minutes of a whole 90. None the less, isn't it of some possible significance that we had a pretty much even share of the 'highlights' of a match we lost 2-0 & had very little play in?

As a group of supporters we have always held a fairly high level of conviction that MOTD has some kind of vendetta against us. So why, did they decide to show us as having a fairly even game when we all (including me from the radio) witnessed us never being in it?

It just left me thinking, that maybe a bit like the Southampton game, the other team had the ball a lot, but we didn't really allow them to do much with it. The highlights would bear this out. The match highlights showed us creating as much as them, and them getting a dodgy penalty, and us not getting a stick on. So perhaps we had a good share of the 'significant' play in that game. So maybe not so bad.

We're not very pretty, but we're probably not shit. I still think we will improve again in the latter half of this season, and it'll look a little better than the latter half of last season.

[eastie]

I didn't see the whole game yesterday because I was at work. I managed to listen to it on the radio on & off, and it did sound dreadful.

However, I have to put this out there, even though I know it has little chance of meaning anything to anybody, it did occur to me that it might mean something....

I watched MOTD2 when I got in, & we looked alright! Bear with me - I know it's only a few minutes of a whole 90. None the less, isn't it of some possible significance that we had a pretty much even share of the 'highlights' of a match we lost 2-0 & had very little play in?

As a group of supporters we have always held a fairly high level of conviction that MOTD has some kind of vendetta against us. So why, did they decide to show us as having a fairly even game when we all (including me from the radio) witnessed us never being in it?

It just left me thinking, that maybe a bit like the Southampton game, the other team had the ball a lot, but we didn't really allow them to do much with it. The highlights would bear this out. The match highlights showed us creating as much as them, and them getting a dodgy penalty, and us not getting a stick on. So perhaps we had a good share of the 'significant' play in that game. So maybe not so bad.

We're not very pretty, but we're probably not shit. I still think we will improve again in the latter half of this season, and it'll look a little better than the latter half of last season.

I didn't see motd las night but if they showed it as looking pretty even then I'd say they've been very generous to us - I thought Fulham were the better team by a distance in virtually every position .

To be honest I thought the score line flattered us losing 2-0.

[Duncan Shaw]

I'm with Eastie, I sat right behind the goal at that they scored in and they really could have had a few more.  We had a couple of good early chances for Benteke, and then nothing until the last 15 minutes.  That said it was long balls forward that caught us out most of the time, and the full backs getting caught too narrow.  Brad made some good saves but didn't cover himself in glory for sidwell's goal - a bit like Long's second v WBA, not out nearly quick enough.  All we did second half was punt it straight onto Aaron Hughes head, until Lowton and Alby came on then we showed far more promise.  But we were very poor and well beaten.  Once they had the lead, the onus was on us to break them down and we are not very good at that are we?  Never a pen though and definitely one for Gabby.
I will be bold enough to say I don;t think we'd have lost with Vlaar on the pitch.

[Pat McMahon]

I like your reasoning Amfy and you raise an interesting point re MOTD's neutrality - they had no need to big us up.

I guess the fact that there were only 2 games meant they could show more of the game than they would do on a Saturday. In reality I think we had 2 shots on target (the second from Benteke in injury time) whilst Guzan made a few decent saves, they hit the woodwork twice and had a couple cleared off the line. I could rant at the ref - in fact I did rant at the ref! - but in reality we were well below par and were second best. Most worrying of all was our inability to pass, move and retain possession, with a surfeit of aimless, depressing long balls.

[amfy]

I can well imagine why anyone who had already seen the whole thing, which would be most of us, would give MOTD2 a miss last night. I'd only heard it & I didn't want to watch it - it was only because it was on almost as soon as I switched on the telly when I got in from work.

They showed a few of those chances that the stats miss, and no one seems to count anymore, because they're not stats.......those ones where it whizzes across the face of the goal, but no-one quite gets to it. To be fair, in the highlights no-one got anywhere near it, but I still think those are better chances than those tame 'shots on target' which may as we'll be a back pass. When the ball is zipped across the face of the goal ke that it can go anywhere - you don't even need one of your own players to get on the end of it, because they are own goals waiting to happen. Anyway - we did a few of those according to the highlights, and the movement in the build up was pretty incisive fast & exciting.

[eastie]

I can well imagine why anyone who had already seen the whole thing, which would be most of us, would give MOTD2 a miss last night. I'd only heard it & I didn't want to watch it - it was only because it was on almost as soon as I switched on the telly when I got in from work.

They showed a few of those chances that the stats miss, and no one seems to count anymore, because they're not stats.......those ones where it whizzes across the face of the goal, but no-one quite gets to it. To be fair, in the highlights no-one got anywhere near it, but I still think those are better chances than those tame 'shots on target' which may as we'll be a back pass. When the ball is zipped across the face of the goal ke that it can go anywhere - you don't even need one of your own players to get on the end of it, because they are own goals waiting to happen. Anyway - we did a few of those according to the highlights, and the movement in the build up was pretty incisive fast & exciting.

Fulham had loads of low crosses into the box and I was concerned how easy it was for them to get crosses in - our full backs were very poor closing them down - i thought herd and Clark coped admirably as they were under the cosh for long periods and made some great tackles  and blocks at times.

[Toronto Villa]

anyone ever hear what happened to Kozak?

[pauliewalnuts]

anyone ever hear what happened to Kozak?

Toe knack.

Reckons he'll be back in a week, he hopes. On twitter today.

[fredm]

I take your point Amfy but having sat through the whole sorry debacle and watched MOTD2 this morning, I think they showed virtually every single little bit of our attacking play whereas Fulham had far more in and around our box than they showed.  However I would agree with you that we had a couple of decent chances early on and if we had taken the lead, I think we would probably have gone on to win the match.  However as it panned out, they got the first goal which should have been stopped, then a penalty shortly after which was a very benevolent decision and from then on decided basically to say to us, "come on then try and score if you can" and we simply did not have any ideas by way of movement, swift passing, etc to find a way through them and create a decent opening, instead resorting to our usual MO of hoofball.

[Toronto Villa]

anyone ever hear what happened to Kozak?

Toe knack.

Reckons he'll be back in a week, he hopes. On twitter today.

ah...he might have been more effective than those who ended up playing even with a buggered toe. Anyway, what kind of pussy calls off sick with a toe problem?