tom_avfc

I genuinely thought there were two red cards in that incident. I'm not sure how a referee can look at Hause forearm smashing a guy in the face and not think its a red card. Its the sort of challenge that if it happened to us we'd be screaming for the red card and when the VAR check was going on I was pretty sure it would get upgraded to the red.

Konsa was unlucky but the guy is through on goal and once a foul is given there's no way that its not a red card. To be honest for a referee to give that foul and not send the player off is pretty poor as well.

I thought that he got the bookings involved in the challenge on Nakamba right as well to be honest (although McGinn was unfortunate) as well as the stupid melee afterwards. The annoying thing about that decision is that he should have played the advantage as we were on a dangerous break.

22 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think it's easy to pick on the throw ins - the whole "we are Stoke" thing and the sort of "basic" feel to it - but it's hard to ignore that we are a threat from them, they create chaos and they're hard to defend. West Ham are big, organised and strong from set pieces and they looked really uncomfortable from our long throws yesterday. It might not be pretty or progressive or whatever, but it's a a big weapon for us.

 

Given that until this season we seemed to give the ball away from our throw ins a high proportion of the time I don't have much issue with a long throw into the box. It creates a problem for the oppositions defence. I've never really got the hatred for long throws as a tactic. Teams lump corners into the box every game and nobody bats an eyelid. If you you have a player who can reach the penalty area from throw ins I'm not sure its too dissimilar to corners.

Having said that, Bailey didn't seem to have the distance on his throws so I'm not sure why we don't just use Cash from both sides if we want to utilise long throws.

48 minutes ago, Danishlad said:

When we sold Grealish all we had to do was buy a replacement. We didn’t. We bought two wide right players (Bailey and Buendia)

When we already had Traore.

And we bought  Ings when we already had a first choice in Watkins.

also we got Tuanzebe in when we had 3 central defenders already.

Now it seems the squad is very unbalanced and unhappy. And Smith is trying to please everyone. 
It seems like we are trying to build a new bomb squad  to me.

 

When you say "all we had to do" was replace Grealish I think you're underestimating the difficulty of doing this for a team in our position. We lost one of the top performers in the league and were never going to be able to replace him with one player like for like.

As it is I think the only thing that I agree with in your analysis is that signing Ings was a bit of an odd move. Yes, we needed another striker but given the season that Watkins had last year I'm not convinced we needed to spend the money we did on Danny Ings.

However, the rest of what you've put I don't agree with. You need four centre backs to get through a season playing 4 at the back so we signed Tuanzebe as back up. Buendia and Bailey don't strike me as players that are purely right wingers and I don't see much issue with their signings.

In reality we've been hampered by a load of injuries meaning we've had to play a 5 at the back for large parts of the season. When we do go into our preferred formation we end up with a choice between Ashley Young or one of the kids in central midfield along with players like Nakamba who would be expected to be fringe players this season purely because of the number of injuries.

I think its hard to comment too much on the team shape and tactics as we have never had a chance to see Smith's first team for this season.

Noticeably quiet on this thread. Thought he was completely ineffective today and never looked like creating much.

The comparisons to Grealish and the statements that we’re still a one man team just with Bailey instead of Grealish may have been a bit premature.

I’m sure he’ll improve on today but the anointment of him as our new Messiah was a good example of the knee jerk reactions people make. 

Just now, smg said:

Nakamba had a great game today, sadly a large proportion of fans have decided he is shit and all the positive contributions are ignored if he does one bad pass. Pathetic 

“If he does one bad pass”? He pretty much  gives the ball away every time he gets it and does it in pretty dangerous positions a lot of the time.

Yes, he runs around a lot and wins the ball back but when you can’t pass a ball 5 yards to a teammate it’s pretty pointless.

He benefits from the Birkir Bjarnasson trait of running around like a headless chicken a lot so people think he’s having a great game.

The downgrade from Douglas Luiz to Nakamba is the biggest downgrade in our squad from first team to backup other than Martinez to Jed Steer.

Just now, poitier said:

Even if his performances haven't been particularly good lately, him and Konsa is undoubtedly our best CB pairing by a country mile. It doesn't help anyone to keep chopping and changing the central defence, and to drop him with so many other changes today was bizarre.

Yeah to play Hause ahead of Mings when both are fit is Smith’s worst decision in his time at Villa for me.

We had a fantastic defensive record last season and haven’t played with our regular back four from last season once this season. I find that completely baffling.

4 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

Just watching Dean Smith in denial. Quibbling with refereeing decisions and fantasising about the quality of our performance. 
 

“A very tight match” and we played with “passion, enthusiasm, quality, and energy”. 
 

Wowsa.

For what it’s worth I thought it was a pretty tight match too up to the red card. They scored with two long range strikes.

Their keeper made a stunning save from Watkins’ header and the red card obviously made it difficult for us.

The games we’ve wasted playing the stupid 5 at the back and odd decisions such as ever starting Hause ahead of Mings when both are fit are far more of an issue for me than that overall performance today.

People seriously believe we have a top 10 squad with this guy playing as many minutes as he has this season?

Also people seriously believe Newcastle would pay £15 million for him? 

2 minutes ago, hippo said:

Yes. But they can make such a change as the replacements they have on the bench are of an equal quality. Where is Nakamba for Luiz down grades the 11 on the pitch.

So the choice for DS is a bit more complex. Does he bring on a fresher lower quality player - or stay with the better player.

For me in the wolves match - we were well on top. It hadn't been a particularly hard game. In any case what does resting a player for 20 minutes really gain you in such circumstances.

I guess you run the risk of picking up injuries by playing players into the ground. If bringing Nakamba on for 20 minutes means Douglas Luiz doesn’t pick up an injury that puts him out for weeks/ months then it may be better in the long run.

I’m happy to trust the sports scientists and the manager with all the information available to them rather than some bloke on a forum who thinks everybody should be able to play 90 minutes every game to be honest.

On 28/10/2021 at 09:46, Indigo said:

Whatever about his Villa career, I just feel for the guy and hope he can turn it around. To go from a good player for Brugge to the point he got the move, to failing to even make their match-day squad when he's still only in his mid 20s is worrying but best case scenario he's just finding his feet slowly after the injury.

I’d say he’s done well to be able to play football again whatever the level. He was very slow to get to grips with the Premier League but any chance he had of making it at Villa was unfortunately taken away by that ridiculous Ben Mee challenge.

2 minutes ago, TRO said:

I said many quarters....like you I thought it was ambitious, but I seem to recall muttering from the club itself....even the media picked up on it, like I say as soon as the season started it evaporated.

Anybody going into the season expecting Europe was always setting themselves up for disappointment to be honest. I think there were a few interviews with players where they talked briefly about aiming for Europe. I think that's just the standard setting of high goals rather than where the club realistically thought it should be this season. 

As it stands we're 4/5 points off the European places. With players coming back to fitness if we can get a couple of wins on the board quickly then the mood can quickly shift. 

1 minute ago, VillaFaninLondon said:

Of course we have to make the change. I don’t know why they’d wait that long if we were doing that badly.

 

This squad is good enough for an 8th-10th placed finish in all honesty. Smith may get away with finishing a couple of places below that, but anything below that and surely he’s a goner.

I keep reading this about the squad being good for an 8th - 10th placed finish and I'm not really sure where it comes from. There's a genuine 5 teams that we were never going to finish above this season - Man United, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man City and Leicester. You then get to West Ham and Spurs who are another 2 that I would say there was next to no chance of us finishing above. Arsenal and Everton both finished above us last season also and neither lost their one outstanding player like Villa did. That's 9 teams now that I'd expect to finish above us going into the season. Wolves are an interesting one in that they fell apart last season after losing Raul Jimenez last season and if he comes back into form then they're a completely different proposition to last season. 

I just don't get how people are saying this squad is an 8th - 10th placed squad in this league. To me it's a squad that could finish anywhere between 9th and 13th and I'd consider that to be a decent season given that we made more money in player sales than in purchases in the summer and lost our best player in the process ( a player that is near on impossible to replace).

I do think that Smith is likely to be a bit of a victim of his own success last season. Finishing 11th was well above what I'd have anticipated last season and has people dreaming of European football when in reality the squad is still a bit threadbare once we pick up an injury or two. I think we're on the right track and the demand for instant success is something that I'd have thought would have been put into perspective by the few years we spent outside the Premier League. 

1 hour ago, nick76 said:

Yes, don’t listen to BS social media rumours that are mostly made up.

Feels like there’s a rumour on every thread since Friday night. Weirdly there’s then half a dozen people ready to believe anything they read also.

2 hours ago, hippo said:

Just an alternative viewpoint giving a bit of context. 

I never saw him as a bargain. Always looked a tall order.

It hasn't altered the way I support the club. I still brought my season ticket and watch as many games as I can.

I'm sure there must be players we've signed that you've thought...".hmmmm can't see that working out. "

Why did you think “can’t see that working out” with this particular signing?

As for whether he’ll be any good for us I don’t see how anybody can tell. He’s hardly played any football so to form an opinion on him is pretty difficult other than to say it would be nice if he was fit once in a while.

He got booed pretty much everywhere when he played for us. Probably comes from the number of times he’s fouled every game. Easier to blame it on him diving then to acknowledge that your defenders aren’t good enough to stop him fairly. 

2 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Do we? 

Who? 

The best I can see with 4-3-3 starting tonight and last week is el ghazi - ings - Buendia and Buendia isn't an out and out RW and is playing poorly, could move Watkins out left but he isn't a LW, could play young left but he is no longer a LW could play el ghazi RW but he's been poor there last couple of times

Injuries are driving the formation, nothing more 

Agree with this. I would say that I still think a 4-3-3 would suit us more than this system that hasn’t worked for a few weeks now.

However you can guarantee that had players like El Ghazi started and we’d lost Smith would be getting stick for playing him.

1 minute ago, VillaFaninLondon said:

He took over a team that was underachieving with billionaire owners who if promoted would haver very high levels of investment. 

 

I don't rate him and I don't think his achievements are at all worthy given the net spend.

 

He hasn't once instilled a style of play into this team and again tonight he's decide to play long ball and 5 at the back.

 

His time is up IMO and I hope the owners really go for a top quality manager who can get the best out of a talented squad. 

He’s been a very good manager for us who will rightly come under pressure if results and performances don’t improve.

I fear that the top quality manager that you’re after may not be tempted by the project at Villa and the “talented squad” that to me still looks paper thin.

The half hadn’t ended. The ref blew his whistle to stop the game for the VAR check and not for halftime. Not quite sure why we played 2 minutes extra injury time but he didn’t blow for half time.

Wasn’t a penalty for me though.

1 minute ago, VillaFaninLondon said:

I'm sorry but it's true. Worst performance I've seen from any Villa manager in a decade and that includes under shite managers like Lambert, McLeish, Garde and Sherwood.

 

He was out of his depth without Grealish last season and he is again this season. The defence last season was clearly Terry's work not Smith's as there have been no personnel changes there.

 

He's a nice guy but a very poor manager, the reason behind his successes have been he's taken over Villa at a very favourable time. If he'd managed under Lerner he wouldn't have lasted a year. 

So everything positive was somebody else’s work and everything crap is his doing? I get it.

Terrible last 10 minutes at wolves and terrible game tonight I completely agree.

Awful manager? Nah I’m not having it. I’m sure 14th in the championship was the most favourable time to take over a struggling team. To then take that team to the premier league that season, keep them up, reach a cup final and push on to mid table doesn’t scream out awful manager to me.

1 minute ago, VillaFaninLondon said:

Genuinely has to go now, he's taking us backwards.

 

Awful manager.

Awful manager who’s taken us from the bottom half of the Championship to mid table in the Premier League?!

Yes it’s been crap tonight, painfully crap. But this kind of attitude pisses me off more than the crap served up today.

I get it it’s football so everything has to be instant success but I have no time for comments like this.

2 minutes ago, hippo said:

I really think it's trying to be to clever by half. Totally get your Point about injury. And yes we should have a better backup than Nkamba. But we don't so Luiz plays more ?

Yes sports science has moved on since the 70s. But not so much that it warrants removing a key player , when we have no able deputy in a game we were strolling.

 

 

I guess it just comes to how much you trust our medical department. If they don't think he has any more minutes in him than what he's played there then I'm not sure I'd want Smith to just leave him on regardless.

To me the glaring issue in it all is that the squad that everyone was saying was much more rounded still has Nakamba as the first defensive midfield option off the bench. As we discovered last season if you have no options from the bench then it becomes very difficult to maintain form and gives other teams far more chance to change the game than we have.

4 hours ago, ozvillafan said:

It was a weird one.

Originally, somebody other than Mings lined up to take the free kick, then left it for Mings. That's taken some time already.

Then Mings steps forward and walks past the stationary ball by about 3 yards while barking out instructions for the next 10 seconds or so to the rest of the team.

The ref is unimpressed and takes this as an obvious time wasting effort and produces a yellow card.

I really think if he stayed behind the ball and did the same, he would have been fine.

I also find the reaction to someone getting a yellow card for time wasting to be a bit odd. In the ground there was a lot of "how stupid can you be?" and "that's always a yellow card" when in fact it seems to be pretty random when a referee decides to book a player for wasting time or not.

For a case in point I thought the moment when he threw the ball over the keepers head as he went to take a goal kick was more stupid and probably more of a yellow card. 

It frustrates me when a ref can't give basic yellow cards for cynical fouls which stop a counter attack but manages to find his card to book a player at the first sign of time wasting particularly when he allows other players to waste more time.

1 minute ago, hippo said:

Seriously ????

You honestly think that's a valid reason ? 

In the 70s sat/weds/sat week in week out 11 players 1 sub.

In any case I'd prefer a jaded Luiz to a fresh Nkamba.

 

Sports science has moved on a long way from the 70's. As was mentioned above the majority of players who had travelled to South America for the internationals didn't even play at all over the weekend.

I too would prefer a half fit Luiz to Nakamba but that is more of an issue with the squad at the moment than the substitution being made. If bringing Luiz off for 20 minutes when we were leading a game at home has avoided him picking up an injury then its worth it. The fact that the players we have to bring on aren't good enough doesn't mean that the decision to take Luiz off isn't for the best if that was how long are medical staff recommended he play for.