rjshare

well - looks like we arent going there to defend with that midfield!

i find it a bit ironic that a team that is so predictible in their play (i'm talking about us) can be so hard to predict scores for. this could easily be 3 or 4 nil either way and neither would be particularly surprising. both managers could do with going through - mon because it will keep deflecting attention away from our generally pi55 poor play, and grant because it will give him a good start as manager and a boost to morale at the club, but at the same time both managers can justifiably come out and say that the league is far more important and that going out isnt a disaster.

well we sure as f*ck didnt deserve to win seeing as we had one attempt on goal over the 90 minutes and that was shinned over the line from 6 inches out via the post and two defenders. we had about 10 corners in the first half and the one we scored from ws the only one that young didnt put inch perfect on crouch's head. if football were boxing we would have lost by a unanimous points decision based on possession, passes completed, efforts on goal etc. The defender used his arm to push it of the line, Gabby should have just stood there and appealed, the lad would/should have been sent off! We lacked forward options when on the break, if we had some on form strikers the game would have been high scoring as Spurs defended so far up the pitch. The goal spurs scored should have been disallowed and thats a fact, just watch him dip his arm into it. Football is based on goals not fancy passes in your own half. oh is it? sorry i didnt realise that - i'm new to the game - i have only been watching it for the last 35 years. in that case i totally agree, lets lull the opposition into a false sense of security by playing absoloutly w*nk for 80 minutes of the game and then try and nick a jammy goal or blame the ref for not gifting us a winner or giving a 50/50 decision to the other team once in a while. the spurs goal WAS GIVEN AND THAT IS A FACT. i'm afraid that "it should have been disallowed" is actually an opinion - your opinion. my opinion is that it wasnt handball and therefore was a ligitimate goal. my opinion is also that we were lucky to get anything from the match and that spurs were the better team. spurs didnt make many fancy passes in their own half from what i saw. the second half was played almost exclusively in our half, with them in possession which means that despite the fact we were at home against a team considered our equal we were actually camped in our own box defending with our backs to the wall for half of the game. our first effort on goal was after 10 minutes when gabby scored. our second was in the 92nd minute. sidwell did miscue one horribly in between but i'd sooner call that a misplaced pass as it was so embarassing. pass my the paste please, i've just spotted another crack that needs papering over... They are not considered our equal, they are our equal, after all their goal was given and the final score was 1-1, despite opinions on how bad we played. if we are their eqaul because we drew with them then hull are as good as man city, the blues are as good as liverpool and we must be better than chelsea. i would say that the league table is a better indicator than the result of one game and right now we are three points and three places behind spurs. after a third of the season, that would translate to a gap of 9 points come may - and if we are that close to them i would be surprised after yesterdays showing. its pointless arguing with your logic as far as i can see because you just dont want to accept - or genuinely fail to see - that in footballing terms we were nowwhere near them yesterday. if you want to judge everything by the scoreline then fine, keep your head buried in the sand, but as was the case last season, when the lucky points run out we risk going into freefall again.

well we sure as f*ck didnt deserve to win seeing as we had one attempt on goal over the 90 minutes and that was shinned over the line from 6 inches out via the post and two defenders. we had about 10 corners in the first half and the one we scored from ws the only one that young didnt put inch perfect on crouch's head. if football were boxing we would have lost by a unanimous points decision based on possession, passes completed, efforts on goal etc. The defender used his arm to push it of the line, Gabby should have just stood there and appealed, the lad would/should have been sent off! We lacked forward options when on the break, if we had some on form strikers the game would have been high scoring as Spurs defended so far up the pitch. The goal spurs scored should have been disallowed and thats a fact, just watch him dip his arm into it. Football is based on goals not fancy passes in your own half. oh is it? sorry i didnt realise that - i'm new to the game - i have only been watching it for the last 35 years. in that case i totally agree, lets lull the opposition into a false sense of security by playing absoloutly w*nk for 80 minutes of the game and then try and nick a jammy goal or blame the ref for not gifting us a winner or giving a 50/50 decision to the other team once in a while. the spurs goal WAS GIVEN AND THAT IS A FACT. i'm afraid that "it should have been disallowed" is actually an opinion - your opinion. my opinion is that it wasnt handball and therefore was a ligitimate goal. my opinion is also that we were lucky to get anything from the match and that spurs were the better team. spurs didnt make many fancy passes in their own half from what i saw. the second half was played almost exclusively in our half, with them in possession which means that despite the fact we were at home against a team considered our equal we were actually camped in our own box defending with our backs to the wall for half of the game. our first effort on goal was after 10 minutes when gabby scored. our second was in the 92nd minute. sidwell did miscue one horribly in between but i'd sooner call that a misplaced pass as it was so embarassing. pass my the paste please, i've just spotted another crack that needs papering over...

well we sure as f*ck didnt deserve to win seeing as we had one attempt on goal over the 90 minutes and that was shinned over the line from 6 inches out via the post and two defenders. we had about 10 corners in the first half and the one we scored from ws the only one that young didnt put inch perfect on crouch's head. if football were boxing we would have lost by a unanimous points decision based on possession, passes completed, efforts on goal etc.

its my ball and i'm taking it home... why did you wait until your last ever post on here to write something worth reading? i hope you come back someday because its good to argue about views on football - we're blokes (mostly) and thats what we do...

very lucky to get a point after a second half that was played entirely in our half. i cant see us clicking to be honest because we look like a rudderless ship. there is no obvious style of play that we are trying to acheive as far as i can see. as far hammering hull, well, hammering bolton last week didnt do us any good today so i am not overly optimistic. as for downing - i am so looking forward to seeing him play too, but i want him to come in slowly and into games we are winning, not throw him into the lions den and expect him to dig us out of holes as has been a little bit the case with delph.

"playing bad and winning is the sign of a good team". or a lucky one... ...and when your luck runs our you can go three months with only one win.

does that mean that hull are on a par with man city then?

I think Spurs will finish 3rd. They look better than Arsenal. Have that fighting spirit that Arsenal lacks. Still think we might fight all the way to the end for the 4th. spurs look too much of a kevin keegan side to go the distance in the league in my opinion. arsnal are going to miss van persie for sure but i think they are a more balanced side than spurs and will finish higher. wenger is used to being up there whereas arry has never been and that counts for a lot at the sharp end of the season.

jezus, i'd be spewing if i were you not to have taken all three points! much as i dislike old 'arry, he has got you playing well, moving the ball around quickly and always creating openings unlike our predictable one pace long ball rubbish. we will get enough results over a season playing that way for it to be deemed relatively successful but i would much rather be watching a team playing the way spurs are at the moment every week.

we played pretty well for the first half because we dictated the pace and hassled them out of the game, but the second half we were taken to the cleaners. spurs moved the ball quickly on the ground - hopefully mon was taking note of it and might try something similar in training on monday morning. it definately feels like a point won after that second half and the fact remains that we cant take games to the oppostion - our game is all based about being reactive to the other teams way of playing. best game i have seen cuellar play for us and i thought heskey actually saved the game for us because he gave us some threat in the closing stages which we hadnt had since the start of the second half. special mentions for friedel also because he couldnt do anything about the goal and was pretty faultless for the rest of the game and beye who was solid if not spectacular.

Being alone doesn't frighten me 'Mr_Dogg.' I do think that Milner although being a good player, is nowhere near being better than that. I would like to see us adopt a diamond formation because that is were i believe we will gain most success and there is no room in there for a James Milner, who in my opinion neither creates enough where he is playing at the moment or indeed, in my favoured diamond formation. Sorry you think that is being silly, but it is my humble opinion. i would have thought that a diamond midfield would have been the absolute ideal formation for james milner. he can get forward, defend, run all day and come inside when needed. what attribute do you consider milner doesnt have that would be required for someone playing in one of the wide positions in a diamond formation? at the moment he is the 'in' player that everyone is talking about after getting a bit of exposure at international level - just like barry was a couple of years ago, and whilst there is perhaps a bit of bandwagon jumping and over-stating his abilities coming from some people i really do think that just deliberately going against the flow without really giving any evidence to back up your thoughts comes accross as being a bit "look at me - i'm different" style posting for effect.

:notworthy: man, you got to get out!

so, anyone interested in giving a few match reactions and ratings then, or shall we bicker like schoolgirls all evening? warnock mom for us again today - i think he is class and probably the best signing mon has made in his time at villa.

The greatest goal of his career was scored in shit weather. how i wish i had been the bloke with the brolly!

personally i think the last thing that we should do is put on anyone who is inexperienced or not fully fit. it does no good - you cant throw delph on and expect him to turn the game around. you SHOULD bring him on against bolton at home when you are three goals up to give him experience, but its putting far too much pressure on the wrong players to ask them to go out and get a result. mon should give them the hair drier treatment fergie style and then ask anybody who saw the first half what he should do tactically because there is not one single person who saw that who cant see where the problems lie - except him.

sorry mate but that is the most cockish comment of the day so far. we let a goal in and suddenly its disgusting and disgraceful? there is still over an hour to play...

lets not panic yet eh chaps?

if you want something positive to cling to, warnock is looking good again so far.

that was gash defending from a set piece. deep cross from left wing onto the edge of the six yard box, dunne up against two forwards, friedel came to punch and never got there, ball drops into an empty net. never ceases to amaze me how a player can head a ball above a keepers hands.

on the commentary i had on, trevor francis siad something interesting (for once) - he said that carew obviously knew both knight and cahill from when they were at the villa and also knew that he was better than both of them. cahill is the one that is supposed to be their top player so he deliberately went up against him for every challenge - and won most of them which totally put us on top psychologically.

well, for once we did have everyone playing in their natural positions, meaning two full backs on the pitch supporting their respective wingers. as a result, the wingers were more creative because they were doing less defending, creating more chances for carew, who thrived on the service and played his best game of the season. i know you were only having a laugh, but many a true word and all that...

Cahill what, you mean the long term future of the england defence? nawwww, stoppit now!

they did well - much improved on petrov-sidwell. sidwell had a good game but did his usual daft things like heading over the north stand from the edge of the six yard box and hitting the post from a penalty rebound with the whole goal to aim at. nrc looked good too - you could tell he hasnt played for a while and was a bit off the pace at times but as a partnership they were very effective.