bobzy

It's been pretty much widely publicised that Westwood played as the holding midfielder in our central trio. No-one has stated Delph is an attacking midfielder (what were you saying about myths?) but it's pretty evident from, y'know, watching Aston Villa that Delph plays in a more advanced position than Westwood and, most people would agree, is a more attacking player. Also, no-one is stating that Westwood is a world class player. He's a consistent performer with a good pass on him and is the player who, personally, makes me feel most at ease when the ball is played into him. I'll end this discussion as we're likely to go round in circles but, again, he's first name on the teamsheet in midfield for me.

He started 8 and came on as a sub in 6 so technically he has 4 in 14 but if you take his total minutes (782) and divide that by 90, it works out at 4 goals in 8.6 games. I think that's misleading then. Minutes to goals is a good stat to use but converting that to games makes no sense. Apart from the fact that it's much easier to digest, of course... But then a goals to games stat exists, creating your own one from a different set of stats seems pretty useless. In what you class as 8 games he's actually played against 14 different teams in 14 different games. It's not really that useless as it demonstrates a different point. You could have a striker come on for the final 5 minutes in 10 games and score 2 goals. He'd have scored 2 in 10 games, but also have a strike rate of one goal every 25 minutes.

In what way is Delph a "much better and more important player" then? Also, better technically?! Edit: This is another thing that seems to get levelled at Westwood - "it's easy to play safe passes and keep possession" and, yet, one of the major problems for Aston Villa? Keeping possession! I'd much rather have Westwood playing it safe and retaining the ball - especially in the position that he's been played in. Delph (and I like him) has a much better engine and drives forward with the ball but, given this advanced movement and positioning, does absolutely sod all with the ball. His end product is so, so poor. Against Newcastle he made two good breaks and; a] Completely underhit a pass out to Richardson which allowed Gouffran to easily cover plus b] took an absolutely garbage touch which resulted in Williamson getting sent off. We need to have a risky midfielder, I have no problem with this, but Westwood is so much more consistent and so much more composed. It's similar to how Carrick was criminally underrated in a Utd side that was dominant. If you're not flashy, you get overlooked.

He started 8 and came on as a sub in 6 so technically he has 4 in 14 but if you take his total minutes (782) and divide that by 90, it works out at 4 goals in 8.6 games. I think that's misleading then. Minutes to goals is a good stat to use but converting that to games makes no sense. Apart from the fact that it's much easier to digest, of course...

Last season, Westwood (the weak, defensive midfielder) scored 3 and assisted 2. Delph (the attacking, much better midfielder) scored 3 and assisted 2. The amount of stick Westwood is getting for "not creating enough" is crazy. It all depends on the formation we'll now play (Richardson looks good after all), but if we have a midfield 3 it should be Sanchez defensive midfielder with Westwood and Delph in front of him. Give him more room away from defensive duties and I'm sure we'll see a good player. He's the most gifted player in our team in terms of technique - perhaps Joe Cole aside.

There will always be pressure on any player who makes the step up. That's part and parcel of top-flight football and something he must deal with. I don't get this 'cotton wool' mentality surrounding our academy players, I really don't. My main concern is our fans. If you don't produce, you get slated. Hopefully with Grealish it'll be different (I think it will be, to be fair) but he really needs time. There's a huge expectation with him - and I mean expectation, rather than hope.

Was an absolute nailed on yellow mate. Probably the easiest yellow card to give in the entire world

Who do we have? Grealish comes to mind. Cole if he could play 90 minutes week in week out. Kozak and Benteke can't come back soon enough. There's quite a lot of pressure on this kid; and your post is also based on about 30 minutes of Premier League football. Hell of a mantle

Poor form dude

Interesting view - nowhere near MOM for me. He played well enough and drove on from midfield but his end product is so, so inconsistent. The ball he played through for Richardson when we had a great counter attack going was criminally underhit and, similarly, the touch he took when Williamson got sent off was absolute garbage. Needs to improve on these things for sure, but he's got a great engine on him and is certainly our true link between defence and attack.

There's no difference between a really tame shot that the keeper saves (Riviere's effort that Guzan stopped) or a screamer that goes narrowly wide (Janmaat's effort). The lack of creativity/cutting edge is a concern, but I wouldn't get too hung up on "shots on target".

Your post: S***.

Delph breaks really well (just often lacks end product; which will improve). I think it's a good trio, I really do.

So why should he rely on other players to come back?? He should be doing it REGARDLESS of who he is playing with. Again, another fan who sticks up for him no matter what.. Isn't the point moreso that he'd prosper from being alongside a player who wins headers and can hold the ball up allowing Gabby to run in behind? Not sure how he "does this REGARDLESS" when that big striker simply isn't with him.

Newcastle looked good against Man City and Cabella looks a signing. I honestly think this was a good result rather than them being "there for the taking".

He didn't use his strength to hold the ball up though. He just used it to give away ridiculous fouls. He had no interest in holding the ball up. That's just a lie. He held the ball up on a couple of occasions and was overly strong against Janmaat on one. He ran into the channels (at one point drew 4 Newcastle defenders to him to win a throw) and made a great run for his headed opportunity. He's not the best striker in the world or even at the club, but he has things that no-one else in our squad has including giving us an outlet for counter attacking.

In fairness, it's only 2 games. The thing I like the most about his performances, though, are how considered he's been. The major problem with Hutton previously was his rashness on the ball/in challenges. Seems to have cut that out and has been superb these first 2 games.

We didn't lose at home... LAMBERT OUT!! **** pathetic. No shots on target at home???? Not a bad game but fans pay to see better than this The players not finishing doesn't = Lambert's fault. The two strikers he's signed getting long term injures doesn't = Lambert's fault. We're 4 points better off from these two games than we were last season (lost at Stoke, lost at home to Newcastle) and have kept 2 clean sheets. You don't the like the guy and you'll berate him at every single opportunity. It's pathetic and **** tiring.

We didn't lose at home... LAMBERT OUT!! **** pathetic.

Irrespective of whether or not people feel he's good enough, he's the only option up top that has the strength to hold the ball up and to run at defenders. Should've done better with his header having got the run on Coloccini, mind.

Same - he was very impressive again today. Top signing.

His passing and heading was impressive but he passed the ball backwards to the defence far too often. He'll be a good signing though, I'm pretty sure of that.

Disagree, got into good positions fairly often but just chose the wrong option.

He brought another down from out the sky like he did against Newcastle last season. The guy has an absolutely superb first touch. As I've said before in this thread, he's the first name on the teamsheet in midfield for me.

Terrific first half from this lad.