Aston Villa vs Stoke Post Match Thread

[Ron Manager]

On the way home we tried to remember a goal bound shot from our lot, in either half. There wasn't one. It was a truly disappointing performance. Apart from Ciaran Clark ,that is ,who Mr Lambert would have called "excellent", and he would have been right, there was very little else.
Hutton showed enthusiasm and energy and Sinclair scored a good goal and that was about it. In the pre match thread I suggested Delph should be benched, I was right. Sanchez tried hard but is not suited to a high tempo pace and Carles Gil was knocked off the ball a lot and possibly was not fully fit.
If people on this forum think Darren Bent is a busted flush how can Agbonlahor's constant abysmal performances be described? He was awful.

I think Sherwood has taken on too much and we are not going to stay up.

[maigrait]

One day I might be able to watch and possibly record match of the day...
Pointless today....

[john2710]

If we are to have any hope we need players who are ready to fight to the death, unfortunately we have too few. The 'style' today was as much of a contrast to that under Lambert as it could have been but with the same shite outcome. Individual errors costs us at the end of each half. In truth we didn't do enough against a truly horrible Stoke City team. Perhaps Sherwood can now see the size of the job & those players he can rely on but on the evidence of today, I think It's too late. He's certainly no saviour.

Gabby's contribution, as it has been for at least 2 seasons, was non-existent, problem is Weimann offers little more.

A midfield of Gil, Delph, Sanchez & Sinclair is not good enough or strong enough to play in the Premiership. Gil should only be used as an impact player, Sanchez is too slow / reckless & as a defensive midfielder Delph flatters to deceive. I'd like to see Delph further forwards.

[Toronto Villa]

Actually Hilts, my post really was about the long balls, which can happen in any formation. You appear to be having a different conversation to the one I'm having. I was talking about long balls, not formations, but apparently you're determined to change the subject while acting like you're not.

It's no good just saying unbelievably obvious platitudes 'Sherwood has to go with the method he most believes in and which he thinks will get us the most points' (well, gee, thanks professor) - what if he's wrong? I think he got it wrong today, in a few ways, most of which aren't the formation. It's not about 'aesthetic nirvana' (again, I like the implied ad hominem - it's beneath you, Hilts, it really is) it's about getting the football wrong on the pitch. Debate those points with me, if you want. Or we can just have a general discussion about 4-4-2, which I do actually think can work in some situations based on what I've seen. Not that that fits your straw man image of me and my views, I'm sure.

If I have an image your views it comes solely from what you post on here - often that is about tactics, particularly the shortcomings of 442 and your dislike of it.  If I said you were a big fan of 442 and agreed with Sherwood's use of it, that would be misrepresenting your views.  If I think your views on tactics are largely theoretical, in some cases way off the mark and of limited applicability to a relegation struggle, which I do, then I am entitled to say so.  There's nothing ad hominem about that: it's a genuinely held and, admittedly, forcefully expressed belief.  It's not a personal attack for goodness' sake:  I'm not saying 'Monty hates 442 because he's an idiot', I'm saying 'Monty's got a massive blind spot re 442 and I think he's wrong'.  If you think I'm being unfair then I would respectfully disagree.

And yes maybe Sherwood is wrong, maybe he did get it wrong today.  But as Mike Brearley said when journos questioned his tactics, "You never know, the alternative might have been still worse."  (I accept this may the one and only time Sherwood and Brearley are mentioned in the same paragraph.)  Which most of this season has been the case.  When I say Sherwood has to go with the method he most believes in it's because with 12 games to go and points desperately needed he'd be an idiot if he did anything else.  I hope and expect that he will tweak his tactics depending on the game but I'm not expecting him to trial a tactical method neither he nor the players are familiar with.  That really would be pissing in the wind. 

That's going to be the litmus test for Sherwood. He's going to have become tactically astute very quickly now as well as retain all of the confidence and bravado that is associated with him. He's going to have to look at the game and find all of things he never wants to see again, and communicate that to the players, resulting in playing players who can understand quickly and execute those instructions. Whether it is 4-4-2, 4-5-1 or any other formation is largely immaterial to finding anything that works to get the first win. He can figure out the absolute right formation for this team in the long run as he starts to bring in and ship out players based on his beliefs. Right now he doesn't have the luxury of time so what he did today he felt would work, given what he thought he had after one week of training. He's either going to stick to it or try something else and see if that works in the next game. There's nothing at all perfect about this.

[silhillvilla]

This is the lowest I've felt all season, and boy there have been some epic Lows.

[mr underhill]

I'm going to get shot down in flames for this but I think its more than possible Benteke won't score for us again,  stay up or go down, he'll be gone.

[Monty]

If I have an image your views it comes solely from what you post on here - often that is about tactics, particularly the shortcomings of 442 and your dislike of it.  If I said you were a big fan of 442 and agreed with Sherwood's use of it, that would be misrepresenting your views.  If I think your views on tactics are largely theoretical, in some cases way off the mark and of limited applicability to a relegation struggle, which I do, then I am entitled to say so.  There's nothing ad hominem about that: it's a genuinely held and, admittedly, forcefully expressed belief.  It's not a personal attack for goodness' sake:  I'm not saying 'Monty hates 442 because he's an idiot', I'm saying 'Monty's got a massive blind spot re 442 and I think he's wrong'.  If you think I'm being unfair then I would respectfully disagree.

And yes maybe Sherwood is wrong, maybe he did get it wrong today.  But as Mike Brearley said when journos questioned his tactics, "You never know, the alternative might have been still worse."  (I accept this may the one and only time Sherwood and Brearley are mentioned in the same paragraph.)  Which most of this season has been the case.  When I say Sherwood has to go with the method he most believes in it's because with 12 games to go and points desperately needed he'd be an idiot if he did anything else.  I hope and expect that he will tweak his tactics depending on the game but I'm not expecting him to trial a tactical method neither he nor the players are familiar with.  That really would be pissing in the wind. 

You can say they're theoretical, and have limited applicability, but you never actually give me much by way of examples. It's hard to argue with this: every tactic you might like is practical, and everything else is highfalutin hypotheses from the ivory tower. This is clearly an unfair way to debate. Anyway, it's hardly 'theoretical' to say 'the long balls didn't work' or 'the 4-4-2 gave us too few passing options in the middle'. That's just what happened. As for the Brearley quote, sure, an alternative might not have worked, but what he did do didn't work and in very predictable ways. It's the predictability which frustrates.

On 4-4-2 - it's partly my fault, but it's too simplistic just to say '4-4-2 doesn't work'. It's a particular kind of 4-4-2 played in a particular way to try and achieve a particular end which I don't like. But then, if I went into more detail you'd probably accuse me of being too 'theoretical'.

Again, Sherwood may believe in it, but that has no relevance at all to whether he's right or wrong. As a matter of fact he has changed the methods immediately and quite drastically - Lambert had been failing this season with blunt possession every bit as much as he did with useless hoofing - and to play a formation the team hasn't actually played in years while changing the approach as well is quite the big step. And yes, I agree, pissing in the wind. As it happens, I don't think we lost today because of the tactics, it's more that they didn't help us win much, IMO. We lost because of the dumb-as-nuts defending.

[pooligan]

Very disappointed at the way we played today, was expecting a lot more to be honest than just hoof ball

[Mister E]

That midfield selection was always going to be a risk - even though in the end it was poor defending from someone who should be more reliable than he currently is.
Whatever division we're in next season, I can see a big change in personnel in the squad.

I've become inured to the losses this season - that's how bad it is.

Went to see Harrogate town beat Chorley 4-1 this afeternoon ...

[Archbishop Herbert Cockthrottle]

At least we haven't had either a false dawn or honeymoon period.

[Risso]

I don't know how many corners we had, but half of them didn't get above waist high. Terrible technique. Players have no real fight or passion. What was Vlaar thinking? A right cock-up!

Vlaar has been rubbish for us.  Permanently crocked or making mistakes when in the team.  I trust that's the last we've seen of him after today.  Okore and Clark for the rest of the season please.

As I said in the summer when people were going all Rita Hayworth that he was into his final year, I don't blame the club at all. Nothing special for us, when he does actually manage to make it on to the pitch. I won't be bothered when he leaves in a few months, and I hope he does.

Spot on.

[silhillvilla]

I'm going to get shot down in flames for this but I think its more than possible Benteke won't score for us again,  stay up or go down, he'll be gone.

Of course he will be gone , most of the internationals will have release clauses

[Risso]

Re: the tactics discussion, Sherwood is faced with players who had three years of counter-attacking and punting it up to Benteke, then all of a sudden being told to keep hold of the ball at all costs.  Lambert couldn't have made more of a pig's ear of things if he'd tried, and Sherwood s going to have the devil's own job putting that right.

[supertom]

I'm going to get shot down in flames for this but I think its more than possible Benteke won't score for us again,  stay up or go down, he'll be gone.

He looks unenthused, totally lacking in confidence and devoid of energy. It's shocking a player who looked on the verge of being a Worldy, suddenly looks fucking awful. He's not getting the service, and the standard of player around him isn't always brilliant but he's not working hard enough for me.
We'll be lucky to get 10 mill for him. A player who on top form could have fetched us around 25 million.

[supertom]

Re: the tactics discussion, Sherwood is faced with players who had three years of counter-attacking and punting it up to Benteke, then all of a sudden being told to keep hold of the ball at all costs.  Lambert couldn't have made more of a pig's ear of things if he'd tried, and Sherwood s going to have the devil's own job putting that right.

Undoubtedly. He's got a squad not nearly fit enough to play the high tempo that Sherwood will require, and ultimately playing a high tempo is probably the only way we could effectively play with these players.