Philosopher

It was a bit behind Trez, an awkward one to take.

What a pass from Jack though!

Traoré and Ramsey i say!

Conor has not done much, but Trez has been poor. Hook them both i say.

That goal was too easy for West Ham.

Not the time for that Tyrone!

Conor time?

Dougie is looking tidy.

Well his set pieces are looking on point tonight.

We do need a set piece taker though. But one that contributes in open play as well.

Conor is still a passenger. If his set pieces don't produce, what does he bring?

What a goal!

We are lacking height, but hitting balls long. We are lacking creativity also. Time to step up Conor.

This is not the game for Conor. It was so obvious as well.

We can't afford a to let a team with 5 6ft plus players set pieces around the box.

Exactly what I said we have to avoid.

Depends how he plays! If he is playing dangerous set pieces, scoring and or assisting, regardless of the result he will get praise. If he is anonymous and get subbed of before the 70th minute he will righty get panned regardless of the result. I see what you're saying though and agree he does seem next in line for everyone's favourite scapegoat!

I should also add that West Hams weakness defensively is down the flanks. There are a few ways of exploiting this. Play with Traore up top with Watkins. Have them look to get in behind the West Ham wing backs, and draw out the wide CB. Or play the 4 2 3 1 and get the number 10 to go wide and support the winger on the ball and get Watkins to look to get in behind the WB's, with the wingers quickly getting forward to support Watkins and create overloads down the flanks. This is our normal method of building attacks primarily down our left. In the first scenario Hourihane would be perfect for the left side of a midfield diamond with Jack behind the front 2. Trezguet would have to be the man to make way. In the second scenario Traore comes in for Barkley and we stick to the same formation we have been using. Clearly this scenario is the most likely. However if we get a lead switching to the first scenario would be great for the counter attack and having an extra body in midfield to win second balls. We can't really sit back and look to hit them on the break as they are A; unlikely to commit bodies forward (unless we get a lead), and B; such a threat on crosses and set pieces. We can't let them win corners, long throws, and free kicks around our box, and sitting back invites them into those positions where they can win dangerous set pieces. I was listening to Villa Talks podcast and James Rushden was advocating sitting back and hitting them on the counter. I see this at best as the two teams cancelling each other out. He questioned why we look to get on the front foot and attack teams at home. He forgets that that is how Dean Smith likes his teams to play. This also loses sight of the fact Jack would be even more effective if we have more ball in the opposition half. It also ignores that if we want to improve we have to have more about us then dangerous counter attacks. We need to be good enough to dominate games against the bottom half teams in our league. We need to be able to beat the weaker counter attacking teams and park the bus sides. It's the next step in our teams evolution.

Conor starting would lower our chances of winning this winnable game. West Ham are a big physical side, Conor is not big and certainly not physical. West Ham are strong on set pieces both offensively and defensively. So while Conor would certainly provide good set piece delivery, The threat our 2 big men would pose to West hams 6 big men is rather low. Against West ham the focus would be to win second balls as we don't have a big man to put in the middle of the park to compete with Soucek and Rice. Nakamba would actually be a better alternative to Conor. Against West Ham we will need to not over commit bodies forward, while looking to retain possession and keep ball out of our defensive third as much as possible. We will need to be patient and creative to break down what is quite a stubborn West Ham defence. If we are being defensive then Nakamba is the man to come in. If we are being offensive the Traore is the man to come in. Everyone is bigging up Conor's performances against Sheffield United and Fulham however they are 2 of the worst teams in the league, and Fulham were atrocious in the first 3 or 4 games of the season before they brought in a number of players on deadline day. So while I agree that Conor should be next in line, as he did absolutely nothing wrong to find himself on the bench, he simply isn't the best choice to start this game.

I just think he needs to improve in terms of how to dictate with the ball and control the build up. He also needs to fine tune his positioning so he is always there to a; screen the defense an not let runners get behind him. B always be available to receive to an easy pass. It's fine tuning because his game is well rounded.

Well we did give them the claret and blue colours after they beat us in a friendly.

I'd say we have to be very careful to not give free kicks away in our defensive third, and avoid giving them corners. West Ham have good delivery and usually have 5 guys on the pitch over 6 foot. That's the main danger. After that if Antonio starts Mings and Konsa are in for a fight. If we can deal with those threats we will get a draw at least.

We will need to be very creative, but also responsible at the back if we are to beat West ham. Antonio holds the ball so well but also has the pace to get in behind. If they start with Haller, Fornals, and Bowen we should be able to get away with the higher line we used against Brighton, as none of those are quicker than Mings and Konsa. So I'd fancy our chances. If Antonio starts we will have a hard game that could go either way. This will tell us more about how we good we are without Barkley, than the Brighton game where all of our attackers (except el-ghazi) played Internationals, and McGinn, Luiz, and Hourihane also played 3 Internationals.

If Ward-Prowse was a villa player McGinn would struggle to be first choice. For me he should be up there with Declan Rice in terms of standing in the England squad. Fine player. For me our issues at home stem from not ever really having control in the middle of the park. This is partly to do with style of our current midfield 3. Luiz is more of a cross between and traditional defensive midfielder and deep lying playmaker. I'd like to see him try to dictate things from deep, but he doesn't really do that. McGinn is action man but his touch and passing aren't reliable enough to dictate play. Barkley is very attack minded always looks to get forward quickly, which is good but not going to help establish control. Ward-Prowse is a tenacious controller in the middle, and his set piece delivery is fantastic. He is the perfect example of what we are missing in middle. Our 4-2-3-1 would be better with him instead of McGinn. And our 4-3-3 would be better with him instead of Barkley. Not saying he is better than them, just offers something they don't. As you can tell I'd love him in our squad. Not realistic though.

It's not so much his engine, it's more his lack of pace, strength and aggression. Technique wise he is a good player. Good shooting and passing, set piece, just no physicality. Engine wise he.puts inn work but his powers of recovery aren't so good so he struggles with two games a week.