Jump to content

AV82

Established Member
  • Posts

    3,735
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by AV82

  1. 1 hour ago, TRO said:

    Had the other players busied themselves to get a few challenges in, as opposed to conveniently standing off and watching him....his frustration and red mist, may not have happened.

    I think John McGinn is more the victim, not the assailant....in a roundabout way.

    You're reaching there mate.

  2. 10 hours ago, TRO said:

    He is far from a dimwit.....more of a warrior, which the others could emulate, and maybe he wouldn't have to do it all on his own.

    He seemed to get the support of the Villa Park crowd too.

    The outcome was regrettable, but in a certain way, they deserved it, for their robust and aggressive challenges....unfortunately, due to a possible lack of practice, we are not very good at it, and get carded, more regular than most teams.

    I find it laughable, that we have the 3rd worst yellow card record this season.....We wouldn't hurt a fly.

     

    I'd love to agree with you but the simple fact is we're now without our captain and one of our few CM options for the next 3 games because of a mindless challenge.

  3. Can we all agree that it's a challenge that is at least open to interpretation and could warrant a sending off depending on how you understand and enforce the rules. That for me is what the issue is. Don't give the ref the opportunity to pull a red by making such a foolish challenge.

    • Like 2
  4. 11 minutes ago, DJBOB said:

    I don’t see how anyone would take away anything from the first half except, “Just got by.”

    I’ve seen this team under Unai completely outplay champions league and title winners. We were absent two players (Kamara and Diego Carlos) from the team that faced City and Arsenal yet set the team up like wee were Sheffield playing the invincibles. It was completely mind boggling. 

    We must've watched a different game, friend. There's nothing wrong with playing deep and direct in one half while you try to figure out what the oppositions game plan is. We had multiple attacks on the break where if not for one block or overhit cross we at the very least test the keeper and then the perception of the first half is entirely different. It was a tentative first half with a lot riding on it.

    • Like 1
  5. 3 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

    It was the formation, and the performance within it.

    My concern is Unai thinks the legs have gone and that's why he played that way.

    You don't go at City only to stand off Spurs.

    Concerning.

    I don't see how either playing Cash in midfield (who has more legs than any other player in the squad) or having Pau push up into midfield to supplement our attack with his passing range means we're playing this naive, 'pls don't lose' way. I just don't see it. That's even before we talk about who we'd have played in midfield instead. How we were set up and how we were playing was working just fine until a freak cross and a mistake by Konsa.

  6. I'd have liked to have seen how he'd have done in the 2nd half if we hadn't shat the bed. He wasn't great but Tottenham defended brilliantly and we just couldn't create a clear cut chance when we were on the break.

  7. 5 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

    Back 4 - probably Konsa and then moreno due to less attacking RB

    tielemans mcginn Luiz Bailey 

    watkins diaby

     although he’s been poor it balances out the team better imo 

    Cool. So in your example Konsa theoretically could've passed to Moreno, Pau, Cash, Tielemans, McGinn, Douglas and Bailey (7).

    During our actual game, based on the formation you're using as a stick to beat Emery with, Konsa had Digne, Pau, Lenglet, Cash, Tielemans, McGinn, Bailey and Douglas (8) to pass to. Even if you remove Tielemans, who I'm including because he was the one who actually 'received' the ball, it's still even. Could you please explain to my monkey brain how your formation prevents that second goal?

  8. 8 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

    sIt’s not about personnel, it’s where they’re positioned. A flat back 5 crowds the back line so there’s less space to pass into when playing out from the back. If you watch it again, using your own words, you’ll see the amount of times we both struggled and gave it away, or hoofed it due to a lack of options. 

    You've lost me. So playing a 2 man defence of Tielemans and Diaby is better than your perceived 5atb because there'd be more options in midfield? In the game Konsa technically had 4 other defenders and 5 midfielders to pass to and it's still not enough?

    Another silly assumption is that our 'hoofing it' means we had a lack of options. We were intentionally playing direct, and it was working. We broke through multiple times, I recall at least 3 identical attacks with Watkins on the ball, Tielemans to his left and Bailey to his right and each time the attack broke down because of brilliant defending by Tottenham. On another day we pick a better pass and rip the net out.

  9. Personally I think we should play a 3-5-2 when the opposition GK has the ball, 3-4-1-1 when their RB is taking a throw-in, 1-4-5 when we have the ball (Steve Bruce line of thinking classic) and a 5-5-5 when we're 1-0 up to protect the lead. Anything other than the above and we're throwing the game away.

    • Like 1
  10. 2 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

    True, I also just don't see who we could have used in Ramsey's role today if we stuck with the usual formation.  I think of the different options and none of them fill me with confidence.

    I was happy to see Pau on the ball in midfield, I thought it was a great idea. That, and our 'formation' is not the reason we lost today.

  11. 7 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

    That was in the 2nd half already 2 down iirc

    setup was entirely the problem. Even the 2nd goal was caused by Konsa not having options due to how congested it was 

    Torres was often in midfield during the first half. Watch it back.

    As for Konsa - how about the option of booting it? It's ridiculous to assume one less 'defender' (I don't agree we were playing a flat back 5) would've given Konsa more options. There's more to a match than the formation you're assuming we played. Oh and by the way the player he passed to was Tielemans. Based on your criticism you 're expecting Emery to field a player in addition to our 5 'defenders', McGinn, Douglas and Tielemans just so Konsa would have someone to pass to. What? 🤣

  12. 2 minutes ago, mykeyb said:

    Except it was 0-0 at half time. Konsa gifting them a second and McGinn getting sent off was probably more costly

    Not to mention the actual goal that broke the deadlock, and probably made our players sh*t themselves because of all the unnecessary pressure surrounding this game, is one of the best crosses I think I've ever seen. Especially from an unassuming CM I've hardly heard of. It was undefendable.

  13. I couldn't care less if it is a stone wall red or not. Going in like that you're asking for trouble. I imagine he was trying inject a bit of bite into the game and our team/fans but that was poorly timed and reckless. I hope he gets a bollocking because he has no-one to blame but himself.

  14. I thought we played well in the first half and if not for some brilliant defending I could've seen us getting a goal. Tottenham, to their credit, were cutting out our passes at just the right time when we were on the break. The difference then came from a world class cross, I haven't seen many better in my years watching football - our CBs are maybe 2 or 3 meters apart and their guy stuck the ball right between them, and a calamitous mistake. After that and a stupidly rash challenge from McGinn it was chaos and we fell apart.

    The gameplan, which I entrust to Emery, was working just fine so he takes no blame for me. Not to mention the only half decent attacking player on the bench at his disposal was a woefully out of form Diaby. The players and a well oiled opposing side were our undoing today, not Emery.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...
Â