Sunderland v Aston Villa Post-Match Thread

[Dante Lavelli]

With regards to Luna (and Lowton to a lesser extent), is there any tactical logic in them positioning themselves so narrow.

Watching the match against Swansea all of the defence seemed to drift across so they were bunched on the side where the ball was.  Furthermore you could see Baker instructing Luna to come in narrow (so he was almost the CB) even when there was a man over.  Indeed the headed goal was arguably from a deep cross exploiting the fact that Luna had drifted in.

It happened too many times for it to be positional/communication errors, so I was wondering whether any of the football hipsters were aware of this being a recognised tactic?  Maybe the school of thought being that the time taken for the ball to switch wings the full back could have corrected their position?

[silhillvilla]

Did anyone else get up early to watch the MOTD re-run  what a difference a win makes.
Anyhow I noticed when lineker summed up by saying "still it's a good result for the 2 West Midlands clubs" he said it with all the enthusiasm as if he'd just seen his cat run over.

Get up early?? It wasn't on this morning until 9.00! Sadly, I got up a lot earlier than that - to go to work :-(

Apols not back in work mode yet.

[paul_e]

With regards to Luna (and Lowton to a lesser extent), is there any tactical logic in them positioning themselves so narrow.

Watching the match against Swansea all of the defence seemed to drift across so they were bunched on the side where the ball was.  Furthermore you could see Baker instructing Luna to come in narrow (so he was almost the CB) even when there was a man over.  Indeed the headed goal was arguably from a deep cross exploiting the fact that Luna had drifted in.

It happened too many times for it to be positional/communication errors, so I was wondering whether any of the football hipsters were aware of this being a recognised tactic?  Maybe the school of thought being that the time taken for the ball to switch wings the full back could have corrected their position?

I don't know if it's a legitimate tactic but as I pointed out it's something has happened to every fullback we've had under Lambert and is also common with younger fullbacks in general.  I guess it would be fine if you're between the 6yard and 18yard lines (sideways rather than forward if that makes sense) but once you get closer in than that the very best players are capable of scoring from the area where you're leaving them unchallenged.

[London Villan]

I'm not sure it is a tactic with the amount of grief Luna was getting off Culverhouse...

[SamTheMouse]

I really like Albrighton and always have done. He's a tryer, and I'm a fan of Weimann for the same reason.

[Des Little]

I'm not sure it is a tactic with the amount of grief Luna was getting off Culverhouse...

Was he calling him a fucking moron as well?

[fredm]

With regards to Luna (and Lowton to a lesser extent), is there any tactical logic in them positioning themselves so narrow.

Watching the match against Swansea all of the defence seemed to drift across so they were bunched on the side where the ball was.  Furthermore you could see Baker instructing Luna to come in narrow (so he was almost the CB) even when there was a man over.  Indeed the headed goal was arguably from a deep cross exploiting the fact that Luna had drifted in.

It happened too many times for it to be positional/communication errors, so I was wondering whether any of the football hipsters were aware of this being a recognised tactic?  Maybe the school of thought being that the time taken for the ball to switch wings the full back could have corrected their position?

This has annoyed me since PL has been here and, IMO, part of the reason the defence was so bad last season. At times Lowton, last season, was stood in the centre of the penalty area when the play was on our left flank. All the opposition did then was make a couple of quick passes and their winger/wide man was free on their left flank with acres of room in front of him to make ground and then get a decent cross in by the time Lowton had got back out in an attempt to cover him.

[London Villan]

It has to be a flaw because every team seems to target our left to attack...

[Dave Clark Five]

I'm not sure it is a tactic with the amount of grief Luna was getting off Culverhouse...

Was he calling him a fucking moron as well?

Nice one, Des.

[Somniloquism]

In the aftermath of Benteke's shot that was cleared off line I noticed that Benteke just stood around as Gabby desperately tried to get hold of the ball. Not sure if he did that because he would have been offside or it's another cause of his lack of involvement just now?

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he thought he might have been in an offside position.

As for the Sunderland offside decision, the striker was leaning forward so his head was ahead of the Vlaar and the rules are any part of the body a goal can be scored from. It even showed it on the graphic yet Hamann said he was level. And they wonder why they get beaten time and again in punditry stakes by Sky.

Absolutely right The graphics showed the decision was correct Im surprised Lineker didnt correct Hamann.....no im not!

If it was the other way around we would have been saying he was onside, that's the difficulty with an offside that is so close, it could have gone either way I'm just glad it went our way.

I wouldn't, especially with that graphic. It shows there is no doubt really if you know the goal scoring part of the body rule. Obviously that was the benefit of the replay but if the linesman had called it the other way, I could have seen why in a split second decision.

[Des Little]

Some you win...some you don't.  It's tough shit!

[Matt Collins]

It was technically offside, so the right decision.

But I can't imagine it's possible to tell the difference to that degree of accuracy, that quickly. So the guidance (rather than the rules) is that you should give the attacker the benefit of the doubt. So I do think we got a bit lucky.

I just watched the highlights on AVTV. Looks like we had a lot more chances than shown on MOTD. But Lowton and in particular Luna looked awful defensively.

On narrow full backs, I think it's a legitimate tactic if you fancy your chances of defending crosses. Let's say you're playing a team like Liverpool with no real height in attack. You can let them have it wide, and crowd your own box, and back yourself to head away any crosses you are letting come in.

It's a bad idea against Shearer and Ferdinand I imagine. But can we point to many goals we've conceded this season that result from having our full backs too narrow?

[Somniloquism]

"Benefit of the doubt" is if you are not sure, then don't raise the flag. So yesterday he was sure he was offside and it turned out it was right. The Bony decision showed Benefit of the Doubt as the linesman was not sure he was offside and he turned out to be considerably wrong.

[Caiphus]

Narrow fullbacks is a legitimate tactic if you have a well drilled midfield tracking deep runners to cut out the short ball inside. You have to defend perfectly otherwise you have given the opposition nice neat triangles in the 18 yard box which is the last thing you ever want.

It's not a safe way to play, because you are banking on the opposition to fuck up themselves so you can set up a counter with an extra man. It's not practical with a developing team because we are just as likely to make a mistake.

It would be working much better if we had the cutting edge of the end of last season, but we aren't putting together enough dangerous counters as it is, let alone finishing them.

[Dave Clark Five]

Only Villa fans argue about a goal that was scored against us being disallowed.
Only Villa players roll the ball further away from its correct position when taking a free kick.