Dean Smith - Confirmed

[Demitri_C]

[Footy-Vill]

said it before but stats are a load of bollocks you can use them to prove anything you want

Well the stats I provided provide the relevant information about shots conceded.
It's very helpful to describe the situation.
Proves that their is a problem with conceding goals
And it's predictable that villa will keep conceding goals if we don't limit the amount of chances especially from inside the box.
Sure argue on other stats about other things by all means but those provided about the defence is clear evidence so there is no debate they are facts.and facts can't be debated

[SoccerHQ]

As a wing back when he's allowed to get forward and attack he can be very effective. In a more tradtional 4, where he has to actually be a defensive full back he's proven to be an average defender. To me he's a little like Matt Lowton in that regard.

With his long sleeves he actually reminds me of Warnock. Good (at least in his first season) of always providing an overlap option but weak at the back post against any lofted cross/pass and really struggles against direct wingers.

Warnock had a poor game in 2010 final and he really declined after that to the point he was a liability most games (still not as bad as Shorey!)

Targett is just average and to me if we really want to improve next season if we're still in premier league he replaces Taylor as the back up option on the bench.

[SheffieldVillain]

As a wing back when he's allowed to get forward and attack he can be very effective. In a more tradtional 4, where he has to actually be a defensive full back he's proven to be an average defender. To me he's a little like Matt Lowton in that regard.

With his long sleeves he actually reminds me of Warnock. Good (at least in his first season) of always providing an overlap option but weak at the back post against any lofted cross/pass and really struggles against direct wingers.

Warnock had a poor game in 2010 final and he really declined after that to the point he was a liability most games (still not as bad as Shorey!)

Targett is just average and to me if we really want to improve next season if we're still in premier league he replaces Taylor as the back up option on the bench.

Completely agree with your last point. In fact, I'd say that this should be the bottom line with any signing we make this summer - that they should be better than someone in our current first team. No reserve cover signings, no signings with potential, quality over quantity.

[john e]

said it before but stats are a load of bollocks you can use them to prove anything you want

Well the stats I provided provide the relevant information about shots conceded.
It's very helpful to describe the situation.
Proves that their is a problem with conceding goals
And it's predictable that villa will keep conceding goals if we don't limit the amount of chances especially from inside the box.
Sure argue on other stats about other things by all means but those provided about the defence is clear evidence so there is no debate they are facts.and facts can't be debated

Your stats are great obviously

It’s everybody else’s that’s shit

[Mister E]

As a wing back when he's allowed to get forward and attack he can be very effective. In a more tradtional 4, where he has to actually be a defensive full back he's proven to be an average defender. To me he's a little like Matt Lowton in that regard.

The killer is that he ball-watches when he should be tracking the overlapping player.
Also, I'm not sure he has always had great cover from those ahead of him for much of this season.

Agree that he'd make a great back-up for next season, if we can bring in someone else.

[Mister E]

Yep, correlation does not imply causation.

For me, the critical stats are those that relate to further up the pitch: how much possession, how many tackles, how many completed passes: if we're doing well in these it means the ball is not getting into our defensive areas.

[john e]

Yep, correlation does not imply causation.

For me, the critical stats are those that relate to further up the pitch: how much possession, how many tackles, how many completed passes: if we're doing well in these it means the ball is not getting into our defensive areas.

You don’t need a stat to tell you that though

You can see all that by just watching the game

[tomd2103]

As a wing back when he's allowed to get forward and attack he can be very effective. In a more tradtional 4, where he has to actually be a defensive full back he's proven to be an average defender. To me he's a little like Matt Lowton in that regard.

Agree TV.  He has done OK at wing-back and has linked up well with Grealish at times.  He is, however, defensively suspect and this has been exposed a number of times when he has played at full-back. 

[paul_e]

Yep, correlation does not imply causation.

For me, the critical stats are those that relate to further up the pitch: how much possession, how many tackles, how many completed passes: if we're doing well in these it means the ball is not getting into our defensive areas.

You don’t need a stat to tell you that though

You can see all that by just watching the game

but the entire point of stats is to get an impression of the game without having to rewatch it. For a game or 2 it's not very valuable but over a run of 10+ games having to watch all of them and try to keep tracks of things is messy. If you can use a stat to highlight a potential problem and then watch footage of those incidents it's much easier to find the patterns of good and bad play so you can try to address them.

You don't have to like stats but trying to suggest they have no value is simply wrong.

[brian green]

There is an old saying (respectfully) Paul, that you don't need to go down a coal mine to know that it is dark.

[chrisw1]

That won't include our disallowed goal at Palace I presume.

[john e]

Yep, correlation does not imply causation.

For me, the critical stats are those that relate to further up the pitch: how much possession, how many tackles, how many completed passes: if we're doing well in these it means the ball is not getting into our defensive areas.

You don’t need a stat to tell you that though

You can see all that by just watching the game

but the entire point of stats is to get an impression of the game without having to rewatch it. For a game or 2 it's not very valuable but over a run of 10+ games having to watch all of them and try to keep tracks of things is messy. If you can use a stat to highlight a potential problem and then watch footage of those incidents it's much easier to find the patterns of good and bad play so you can try to address them.

You don't have to like stats but trying to suggest they have no value is simply wrong.

I know it’s wrong

But I’m going to keep saying it anyway
because statistically it will piss of 54% of you

[brian green]

It won't piss me off.  I respect all Villa fans.

[paul_e]

There is an old saying (respectfully) Paul, that you don't need to go down a coal mine to know that it is dark.

Indeed not, in much the same way you don't need statistics to watch a single game of football.

However if you were trying to work out the most efficient way to light a coal mine having statistics about the mine, the lights, the cabling, etc is a lot better than walking through and dropping torches every now and then.