srsmithusa

Not true. In fact, its utter nonsense. Is it? I don't remember playing much worse under mcleish, houllier or MON. Just to be clear, the post did not limit the statement to today. In fact, "brand of football" in my mind, at least, is a more broad term implying intent to play a certain way. Do you think Lambert set out the best selection at his disposal, if his goal had been a 0-0 draw? Pretty baffling players selection for "brand of football." Previous managers did appear to set out teams to do nothing but destroy the match into a 0-0 waste. So yes, IMO the post was utter nonsense. Given the horrible performance and a bit of passion, an overstatement is understandable, but the comment itself, IMO, utter nonsense. Thank-you for the opportunity to clarify. Also, to be clear, the performance today was totally horrid.

Not true. In fact, its utter nonsense.

Gentlemen, "veiled". Thank-you.

For me you've just described the delph of old. I think he has cut a lot of this kind of thing out of his game, he now uses his little Cruyff like turns and keeps the ball close to him and distributes it nicely. I hope you're right. Surely the coaching staff can see anything I can, and has been working on it. If it doesnt get better, as you think is happening, he will never be the great we hope for. Let's watch him closely at Craven Cottage and compare notes then.

Thanks for adding to the run..... Oh and thank me for doing the same.

Only because somebody said they had heard nothing negative for several pages.... Agree he's been a consistent top performer and wednesday's goal was brilliant, but.... I wish he would learn closer control. To go by the first man he pushes the ball 8-10 yards and has to nip it from a defender to go anther 8-10 yards, where he does it again. He ends up giving himself hospital balls over and over again. Needs to push the ball 4-6 yards rather than 8-10. Fewer close challenges, fewer injuries, fewer bookings on the stretch, better possession, better able to get his head up and pick a good pass.

Some say that basing tactics on the other team is wrong, you should decide your best game and play it. Good theory, employed by dynamic power house clubs that would win most of the time no matter what because of an abundance of talent, and clubs that lose a lot. Fulham have a choice. Attack at home, or try to stop the bleeding by settling for a boring draw after a really bad run and instill a bit of confidence that "we can get something from the game." The first may be attractive to the new manager, but I think after wednesday they will realized the latter is their better option So, they'll drop back and defend and make us beat them with precision and ball movement rather than on a break. Given that. We should go back to 4-3-3 Guzan Bacuna vlaar clark. Luna. ( baker if vlaar not ready) KEA. Westy Delph Albrighton kozak gabby Weimann for albrighton makes sense, but i would give marc a shot playing more as a wing and putting in crosses for kozak at near post and gabby making far post run. Whether PL goes with weimann or albrighton look for the other to sub on with benteke at about 60 minutes. Win for us, but final score depends on when we get the first. If we get it early 3-0 final. If we get it late, 2-0

I took leviramseys trillion trillion divided by the attandance at our last 3 home matches, subtracted hairy hands accuracy rating and divided by the square root of Man city and come up with 9th place. Margin of error is +/- 8

unable watch this one, can someone tell me about Gabby's goal, what happened to big ron? What positioning adjustments were made becuase he was out?

Team announced, Guzan, Bacuna, Vlaar, Clark, Baker, Luna, El Ahmadi, Westwood, Delph, Agbonlahor, Kozak.

Team not announced. I wouldnt be surprised at something unexpected, but cant see that as at all possible. Plus its too early for team sheet

Thanks Isa, I agree the opposition started with these adjustments last season, and you are right it didn't make Benteke "give up" then, and should not now... but to me, it does look like that's what he's doing, are you seeing something different? I also agree that being unable to retain possession under pressure is often at least, a lack of ability and for some that may be the problem, but not necessarily the only possible explanation. I think for some it's confidence, experience, vision, and a lack of clear options.

umm, Rotterdam, I thought he was more in the holding midfielder row, sit in front of and protect the back 4, that kind of thing. In which case, picking the killer ball "key pass" is not really his primary responsibility. His job is to disrupt their play in the middle and keep possession with the ball moving about. The chart above looks like he did that pretty well. The main difference between the two, from the chart was that Westwood tended to "stay home" a bit more and Ki ventured outside his "zone" a bit more. That usually happens when a player can trust that someone will back in and cover his responsibilities when he is out roaming.

I foolishly and naively hope that all villa fans could agree on a few basics. (I know, completely unrealistic) But, here goes. 1) The end of last season saw us playing something much more attractive than we have been (much of the time at least) playing this season. 2) The points are better, but the performances are frustrating and painful. I'm bored of quarrelling over the cup being half empty or half full, I'm more interested in why we could play more pleasingly and excitingly last spring than we can now. What changed? Why were we fun to watch at the end of last season and regularly painful to watch this season? My guess: The opposition adjusted in 2 ways. 1) Physically clam down on Benteke. Hit him in the back early and often. He gets frustrated and gives up. 2) Close down quickly on our midfielders. They are young and get nervous and hit poor passes to nobody in particular. Those two adjustments have worked. I do like Lambert and I do think he will get it sorted, but I don't think that just giving them time and encouragement will be effective. The solutions lie with an effective team of coaches. The coaches fixed the CK problem last year (finally) but they need to do it again with these problems.

AVTuco. Off topic, I know, but I gotta say I love your name and Avatar. Brilliant movie. Can I just call you "the ugly" for short?

I would think sacking him now to be a complete, unmitigated disaster. He makes errors, like every human being I've ever met. But he is moving us in the right direction.

Agreed. It's a pleasure to have a conversation. I agree that Vlaar has stepped up. And I agree I would like to see more movement and passing. The next question then, in my mind is, what's missing from the midfield personnel we have? I think Westwood needs time and confidence and could develop.

I don't need your condescention thanks I tend to focus on the big picture and the long term - generally I think in those terms we are looking good and only an idiot could claim that the trend is not an improving one Game by game and in the short term I can see plenty of negatives around individual players and around particular games, but I tend not to focus too much on that It seems to me that your whole exsitance here is built on anti-Lambert negativity and I can understand that as he gradually turns things round that threatens your position Ha, ha. You acuse me of being condescending and then imply that that i'm an idiot. In the above highlighted text you've just described the 'Blue Sky' argument perfectly. Your third point is post on poster and i will let the mods deal with it. Pot. Kettle. Morpheus, if I may ask. What do you see as the solution to our problems? For what it's worth, I do see many distressing negatives, but I also see some of the positives that you label as "blue sky" and others have labelled as "papering over the cracks." I truly would like to hear what, in your view, is the solution to the deficiencies on the pitch. Actually a very decent question. My 'Blue Sky' comments were mainly directed at those who post without any objectivity. For example quote where we are positioned at the moment without recognising that our football has been awful to watch and that we have indeed been fortunate on occasion to get the results that we have. I have also seen the same posters post in such a way that our current mid table position is going to be definitive for the rest of the season when the same argument was rubbished last season by those very same posters. I have been accused on here of posting in exactly the opposite way of 'Blue Sky' but actually taking all of my posts in context those who have read then properly and without bias will have seen that i have commended the manager when he has done well and indeed praised several of the players including most recently Kozak and Vlaar so those accusations are misguided, ill-informed and for the most part, just ignorant. You asked for my solutions. I think we should have spent less on numbers and more on quality and maybe not alienated all those that the manager did until such time that those players purchased were up to speed with the Premiership and we could have then replaced the remaining players of the bomb squad . I do think change was needed. There's no doubt about that but it should have been more gradual and less of a shock which very nearly got us relegated. Our present style of football has been dire and although the results don't show that some of the stats do and i cannot see us being successful playing the way we are at the moment. You only have to look at what type of football gains more success and it isn't hoof. Of course the manager shouldn't take all of the blame for that as he has had a limited budget to play with but i will say it again it is his allocation of that budget which worries me the most and a lack of technical ability in the players he has purchased apart from Benteke.t Thanks for re-posting. Not sure why I missed it. But I am pleasantly surprised by your response. Not really unreasonable at all in my opinion. My only real disagreement, and it's just emphasis not black and white, IMO. I do think Lambert is doing one thing right in trying to build the team and that is not paying silly money for young talent and hope they become something special. I'm not sure i would use the phrase that he has gone for quantity rather than quaity, but I think I understand what you are getting at with that. But I think any player is a risk. Some great names are signed and never really come good for inability to adjust to the league, the speed, injury, too big to try, etc. I think the clear strategy of the club is that all players are a risk, so don't spend big amounts on those risks. Sometimes you get a great payoff. But when you lose on an investment, at least it's not as big a loss. I liked MON as a player manager but I think he spent silly money on his risks and created the financial problems we're still paying for. (not completely his fault. somebody let him... or trusted him... that it was the right way.) Surely there's got to be a compromise where you pay small sums for yet unproven talent AND occaisionally risk larger sums of money when the talent is proven in the league. As far as keeping some of them longer until the youngsters came good, makes some sense in the short term on the pitch, I'll give you that. But I think the wage bill for player that showed up when they felt like it was a problem that needed to be cut out swift and clean. I have no patience for players that can't be bothered, whether they are named Bent or Benteke, or Ireland. I may be the only one who thinks this, but I'd rather watch a player work holes in his socks with moderate skill than be half-arsed and score a hat-trick. Of course, we'd all rather him do both. Thanks for your reply. I'm one of those that reads lots of posts, but rarely pay much attention to who posts them unless I think it brilliant or maddening. So, I'll admit I had not seen the posts where you praised players. Sorry. Again, not trying to be a difficult, but I was more interested in what you would change "on the pitch" do I assume you would like an approach that emphasized possession and movement of the ball, and less long ball? If so, I agree, but I think our tactics are dictated by the abilities of the playing staff. So in that case, it does go back to the deals we have or have not made for players. Do I understand you reasonbly well?

I would have a long talk with Benteke. I would either see fire in his eyes or sit him on the bench until I did. Formation depends on whether we play the match with him or without.

Morpheus, not sure what happened, I was posting on your reply and then it said edit. I assume you or someone deleted it? I would like to know what you see as the solution to our clear problems on the pitch. Again, I want to be clear. I see signs of positives mixed with some clear negatives and I suspect that the solutions I see are different, but I would like to know.

I don't need your condescention thanks I tend to focus on the big picture and the long term - generally I think in those terms we are looking good and only an idiot could claim that the trend is not an improving one Game by game and in the short term I can see plenty of negatives around individual players and around particular games, but I tend not to focus too much on that It seems to me that your whole exsitance here is built on anti-Lambert negativity and I can understand that as he gradually turns things round that threatens your position Ha, ha. You acuse me of being condescending and then imply that that i'm an idiot. In the above highlighted text you've just described the 'Blue Sky' argument perfectly. Your third point is post on poster and i will let the mods deal with it. Pot. Kettle. Morpheus, if I may ask. What do you see as the solution to our problems? For what it's worth, I do see many distressing negatives, but I also see some of the positives that you label as "blue sky" and others have labelled as "papering over the cracks." I truly would like to hear what, in your view, is the solution to the deficiencies on the pitch.

I think the 4-3-3 has worked very well at times, but no more. There's not enough width to put in crosses. When Luna or Bacuna push forward to give some width, they get caught chasing back from behind. Both of the last 2 weeks, we looked better when we shifted to the 4-4-2 Also with the 4-3-3 we continuously go long to Benteke, but every center half in the league knows it. Today, the referee decided not to call much upper body or in the back. I'm hoping that the reason Benteke looked like he just wasnt up for it today, is because, too few crosses, constant beating in the back, and no calls in his favor. There are ways to overcome this. Even ways to get the referee to call the match differently. (By player reactions after the contact) The next biggest problem was that both teams passed to the guy in the yellow shirt far too often.

Guzan Lowton, Vlaar, Clark, Luna (if fit) Westwood, el Ahmadi Weimann Delph Agbonlahor Benteke If Luna not fit, Baker in the Middle with Clark moving out left. If needing more goals, bring on Tonev, with El Ahmadi coming off and Delph dropping deeper If needing more defense, bring on Sylla for Gabby or Andi and drop him back to DM, going to 4-3-1-2

Thanks terrytini for your post above. Personally, I'm very tired of every positive viewpoint being accused of "papering over the cracks". We'll all agree that papering over the cracks is a bad idea, but I think tearing the building down over a crack is also a bad idea. I am confident that many of the "wrecking ball crew" sincerely love the club and want us to improve (while I suspect that a few are blues linked or just wind up artists). Cracks and weaknesses exist. Several were on clear display during the WBA match, but Lambert's were not on display. Every manager gambles on players they hope will be great. Every manager loses many of those gambles. Several of our starters had nightmares, but a nightmare now and then does not mean a terrible investment or player. (Rooney has had a fair few). Neither does a player that never really develops mean a terrible manager. (Ferguson had quite a few) I know we aren't supposed to negatively label other posters with differing views. But personally, I would like a similar rule for owners, club officials, managers, players, and anyone else (other than the opposition and the referees of course Everyone, including Bacuna knows that his "pass" to Baker was a terrible mistake. I would rather discuss why he did that. Lack of concentration? Poor vision? Just badly mis-hit? Did he expect a central midfielder backing in there? To me those are good questions. Discussing whether he's a good buy or will ever be great, is all conjecture, if's and but's and somebody is tearing the building down while somebody else is papering over the cracks. It gets old, or maybe that's just me.

How often do your dreams come true? Haha, hard to tell! Usually my dreams are abstract... but recently, i dreamed one or two times about my ex girlfriends and they've unexpectedly called me next day, after a couple years of silence... Well, that kills it then. You are cursed.