Noticeable again last night was the terrible quality of our shooting at goal, notwithstanding Duran's goal (and even that one should have been saved).
Probably our best performance this season, we opened them up with ease. I'm not sure if it was just that Leipzig were poor but would prefer to think we were good. On paper last night should have been our toughest game.The first goal conceded was obviously a Martinez error, the second was simply a well worked goal. Whilst all the talk is about how fragile we look defensively, we also lack the killer instinct at the other end of the pitch. We need to bear in mind we've been successful over the last two seasons because we take risks at the back, sometimes with players who weren't bought to play that system.
A couple observations on last night. Everything at the stadium was efficient and orderly.I hope they never allow drinks into seats at Villa Park. Most people got unwanted soaking by beer being thrown into the air after every goal. It was horrible from 3rd minute onwards. Not pleasant.The buses after the match were super efficient. Leipzig fans were very good, knowledgeable and friendly. Public transport everywhere was good.
Quote from: AV82EC on December 11, 2024, 12:17:03 PMAs a minor point for all those young lads who’ve started throwing beer whenever we score….fuck off you immature little dickheads. +1 for this - Knobheads. And a special shoutout for the teen knobhead shouting at the police outside the away end pre-match about winning wars, when even the semen that created his father wouldn't have existed at the time?!Brits abroad.... FFS!
As a minor point for all those young lads who’ve started throwing beer whenever we score….fuck off you immature little dickheads.
Quote from: olaftab on December 11, 2024, 03:40:17 PMA couple observations on last night. Everything at the stadium was efficient and orderly.I hope they never allow drinks into seats at Villa Park. Most people got unwanted soaking by beer being thrown into the air after every goal. It was horrible from 3rd minute onwards. Not pleasant.The buses after the match were super efficient. Leipzig fans were very good, knowledgeable and friendly. Public transport everywhere was good.People chucking beer about are absolute vermin. I'd love to go to more Villa away games, but unfortunately I always end up pissed off with the set of absolute twats I usually find myself saddled with in the immediate vicinity. Coke-addled tossers flapping their podgy hands at opposition fans, mostly.
I've always fancied watching us in a European game away but that kind of of nonsense puts me off. It's not everyone obviously but some just go long to get as drunk as humanly possible. You're best off doing an away freindly, they're probably a bit more civilised. Bohemians and Shamrock Rovers a few years back were great.
Quote from: Clampy on December 11, 2024, 07:01:09 PMI've always fancied watching us in a European game away but that kind of of nonsense puts me off. It's not everyone obviously but some just go long to get as drunk as humanly possible. You're best off doing an away freindly, they're probably a bit more civilised. Bohemians and Shamrock Rovers a few years back were great.Just go into the home end, you get to enjoy the game with normal people, avoiding coke snorting pint chuckers.** Depending on the home fans
Quote from: Olneythelonely on December 11, 2024, 07:06:37 PMQuote from: Clampy on December 11, 2024, 07:01:09 PMI've always fancied watching us in a European game away but that kind of of nonsense puts me off. It's not everyone obviously but some just go long to get as drunk as humanly possible. You're best off doing an away freindly, they're probably a bit more civilised. Bohemians and Shamrock Rovers a few years back were great.Just go into the home end, you get to enjoy the game with normal people, avoiding coke snorting pint chuckers.** Depending on the home fansYeah but you can't jump up and dance when the Villa score which is surely the point of it all.
Quote from: rooboy316 on December 11, 2024, 09:29:10 AMQuote from: Percy McCarthy on December 11, 2024, 06:45:13 AM^^ Have you told lies before?Shall we say you ‘mis-spoke’? Or would that make it hard for you to deflect?How about this.. If we were on opposite sides of the Watkins/Duran debate, and I said ‘I prefer Watkins because he has scored more goals than Duran this season’ despite the fact that I know he hasn’t, what would you call that? Whatever word you choose to describe someone who would do that, we’ll go with it.I don’t have a horse in this race either way, and this is clearly a crusade that means enough to you to bring it up several times. However, since semantics are involved:a) that’s a false equivalence. The hypothetical Watkins debate is about number of goals, so clearly that’s a narrow quantitative metric with a clear answer. The debate is about which back 4 makes the better unit/team, not about which back 4 has conceded fewer goals.b) While fewer goals usually means better defence, and statistics can paint a good picture, this isn’t some conclusive, objective, incontrovertible truth that you make it out to be. There’s a lot more to consider, especially if you’re going to make it a purely statistical argument.c) the sample sizes you’ve used are decent, but not large enough to account for skews such as individual clangers etcd) correlation is not causation. Your back 4 may have contributed to a tighter defence which concedes fewer goals, but that doesn’t imply causation in its entirety. Quality of opposition, our set up in those games, how well the midfield screened them, how well Emi played etc all contribute, amongst other a whole bunch of other things.e) if it’s going to be part of a wider discussion about our best team, we also have to consider how that back 4 impacts our attack, not just a stat about goals conceded. f) the beauty of football is that, unlike baseball, there are a whole lot of qualitative lenses through which holistic judgements need to be made, as opposed to a singular quantitative metric, even if that metric does play an important role in making said judgementMy wholehearted apologies to the rest of the site for drawing this argument out even further…I was just about to say all that
Quote from: Percy McCarthy on December 11, 2024, 06:45:13 AM^^ Have you told lies before?Shall we say you ‘mis-spoke’? Or would that make it hard for you to deflect?How about this.. If we were on opposite sides of the Watkins/Duran debate, and I said ‘I prefer Watkins because he has scored more goals than Duran this season’ despite the fact that I know he hasn’t, what would you call that? Whatever word you choose to describe someone who would do that, we’ll go with it.I don’t have a horse in this race either way, and this is clearly a crusade that means enough to you to bring it up several times. However, since semantics are involved:a) that’s a false equivalence. The hypothetical Watkins debate is about number of goals, so clearly that’s a narrow quantitative metric with a clear answer. The debate is about which back 4 makes the better unit/team, not about which back 4 has conceded fewer goals.b) While fewer goals usually means better defence, and statistics can paint a good picture, this isn’t some conclusive, objective, incontrovertible truth that you make it out to be. There’s a lot more to consider, especially if you’re going to make it a purely statistical argument.c) the sample sizes you’ve used are decent, but not large enough to account for skews such as individual clangers etcd) correlation is not causation. Your back 4 may have contributed to a tighter defence which concedes fewer goals, but that doesn’t imply causation in its entirety. Quality of opposition, our set up in those games, how well the midfield screened them, how well Emi played etc all contribute, amongst other a whole bunch of other things.e) if it’s going to be part of a wider discussion about our best team, we also have to consider how that back 4 impacts our attack, not just a stat about goals conceded. f) the beauty of football is that, unlike baseball, there are a whole lot of qualitative lenses through which holistic judgements need to be made, as opposed to a singular quantitative metric, even if that metric does play an important role in making said judgementMy wholehearted apologies to the rest of the site for drawing this argument out even further…
^^ Have you told lies before?Shall we say you ‘mis-spoke’? Or would that make it hard for you to deflect?How about this.. If we were on opposite sides of the Watkins/Duran debate, and I said ‘I prefer Watkins because he has scored more goals than Duran this season’ despite the fact that I know he hasn’t, what would you call that? Whatever word you choose to describe someone who would do that, we’ll go with it.
Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.
Author
Topic: RB Leipzig vs Aston Villa post match thread. (Read 13941 times)
