Vive_La_Villa

The better players you have, the more you will control the ball. You don't even need to set up to play possession football.

so it would follow then,that if you can't consistently keep the ball, you are not very good?

I think that's been the problem for a while.

But what I want to know is why can a newly promoted team like Swansea a few years back keep the ball against ANY opposition?

Edit: sick of hearing excuse that team we are playing against cost millions of pounds. We're not saying beat them. We're saying do the basics right.

Poor example to use. If you know anything about Swansea then you'd know the answer to that.

Give me an example of another team and I'll listen.

Why poor example?

How about Southampton and Everton?

[spoiler ]Then type what you want to spoil and close the tag with[/spoiler ]

Obviously without the space between 'spoiler' and ']', though.

Cheers mate. Now please everybody watch Gommorah.

Well now none of us ever have to watch it

At least wait until we talk about what happens in the final episode

How do you cover with the spoiler thing?

I still can't do it

Well now none of us ever have to watch it

At least wait until we talk about what happens in the final episode

How do you cover with the spoiler thing?

Gonna be all out war in the next episode. Was harsh the way Conte killed the kid though.

Does anybody watch Gommorah??

Yeah I do. Absolutely mindblowing TV. I've waited for years for something to match the wire and Soprano's. Breaking Bad, Boardwalk Empire and Games of thrones have come close. Gommorah beats all of those although as it's only one season in. Just wish there was someone to cheer for!

Glad I'm not the only one that feels this

Love it.

TRO people seem to think we are asking and expecting for Barcelona style possession. I couldn't care less what the stats say. All I want is for the team to be able to pass the ball more than five or six times without either a) giving the ball away, or feeling the need to lump it forward or in to the box. Is that much to ask of a Premier League team?

The better players you have, the more you will control the ball. You don't even need to set up to play possession football.

so it would follow then,that if you can't consistently keep the ball, you are not very good?

But what I want to know is why can a newly promoted team like Swansea a few years back keep the ball against ANY opposition?

Edit: sick of hearing excuse that team we are playing against cost millions of pounds. We're not saying beat them. We're saying do the basics right.

Does anybody watch Gommorah??

Nice to see Delph play well for his confidence but it won't help us get more money for him because the club is a joke.

Gomorrah is superb

I love puns

 

 

I don't actually think Randy is activley seeking a sale anymore - sure if someone rocks up with the goods he will sell - but I think its very much on the back burner. I think our future know is in the hands of Tom Fox - can he raise our revenue streams, and hire and fire the right managers ?

I'm convinced he still wants to sell but he just can't find a buyer. That's when the PR kicks in and we hear stories about him being "re-energised" etc. I don't buy it. We spent, what, £8m in the summer? If that's him getting the buzz for football back God help us if he ever gets fed up again.

 

 

 

Totally agree definately wants out! I would take no notice of the spin from Fox etc what's he going to say? 'Randy, oh yeah he really couldn't give a shit and wants away from the place as soon as some schmuck coughs up £200m'?

 

Agree with this. He defo want's out and has got Fox in to make us more attractive to potential buyers.  I can't believe Lerner bought a top 10 team, spent loads of money and turned them in to relegation candidates every season.  Now brings in Fox to help turn us back in to a top 10 team.

 

Madness.

 

N'Zog was replaced because he was gassing for air, he was knackered. The sub was wrong as he should have bought on Sanchez to tighten up the midfield.

 

 

That would have made far more sense as Bacuna is clearly not up to the job.

 

If we are honest Bacuna is a fairly average player really.  Had some good moments last year but I can't see him lasting at Villa.

I was suprised that run by N'Zog wasnt shown on Motd.  That was N'Zog right? My eyesight is terrible

 

 

I'm not knocking Pulis. If you went to the thread about him in other football, you'd see I've a lot of compliments to pay him. I just think it's ridiculous on the face of it to complain about Lambert's negativity in one breath, and then wish we were a Pulis side in another. 

 

And Palace weren't attacking last season, and they were pretty much the only team to have less possession than we did. 

 

Who said they wish we were a Pulis side? Somebody said comparing us to the old Stoke is rubbish and I said if have become the old Stoke it's not so bad because they generally finished mid-table and gave every team a game. 

 

 

But you also complained, just 2 pages ago, about how counter-attack is our only style of play, yet my point is that was Pulis's style of play as well. You can't simply praise Stoke's league positions without paying any attention to how they were achieved, especially if you're criticising that exact style of play. 

 

I asked the question of what our identity is after 2 years of Lambert in charge.  If it is in fact just counter attacking and we manage to safety finish mid-table with that style that's fine.  But for the past two seasons we haven't so you could argue it's just about working for us.  

As I'm mentioned many times my only problem is basic ball retention.  I just can't get my head around why they can't do it. 

 

 

 

While I won't deny that we've been quite defensive in the opening games (I'm pretty sure injuries and illness have played a large part in that), I think perceptions have been skewed somewhat by our ridiculous start which has seen has face all of last season's top 4 in 7 games, not to mention Stoke away which is always a tough fixture.

 

Accusations of us being "the new Stoke" are just rubbish though.

I am sorry but the old "excuses" of injury and illness are just a weak one.

 

even if you accept the illness one that was in one match against Arsenal. In terms of injuries, who exactly, Vlaar and Benteke - is lambert so dependent on these two players that if they are not available then its a certain loss?

 

As said previously in this and many other threads there has been "wait unit Okore is back" , is he back now?

 

Also you mention our "ridiculous" start - again a weak argument. You have to play all of the teams twice so that has no relevance at all. What about the loss to Orient was that due to the fact that like previous years we have played some of the top teams? Was the turgid display against Newcastle down to this, was the past two years awful football down to this, was the defeats to lower league sides down to this? ....... etc etc

 

No we are not the new Stoke, that is because they at least had a plan that threatened the other teams goal. They also had a good chance of finishing mid table.

 

Now we may see a massive performance increase in terms of threat and attacking ability, and let's hope we do, as we play the next few matches, but please lets not throw out frankly weak arguments if they do not.

 

But you have your views and while I respect them, I am struggling to see their validity based on the excuses line

 

 

Much as I like Lambert and have been supportive of him up until now - I am coming round to the viewpoint above - I don't really see much evidence of change - if there is a change we have become better at scrambling out narrow victories - we haven't actually improved as a football side. Of course we could really turn it on v Everton, QPR and I would forced to eat my words - but I don't see us winning both games - and I don't see us winning either game convincingly - Love to be wrong of course.

 

 

 

The only creativity yetserday came from the Zog. Delph Westwood and Cleverley were all very poor going forward. Probably becasue they were so knackered from defending?

 

Chasing the ball must be hard when you constantly give it back.  Some have said we couldn't keep possession because City are so good at pressing and we lack quality.  I'm not asking for killer passes and and creativity.  I'm talking about basic ball retention so you're not constantly pressing for the whole game.

Why are teams like Swansea and Southampton able to do this?  Are they so much better than us in terms of quality?

 

While I won't deny that we've been quite defensive in the opening games (I'm pretty sure injuries and illness have played a large part in that), I think perceptions have been skewed somewhat by our ridiculous start which has seen has face all of last season's top 4 in 7 games, not to mention Stoke away which is always a tough fixture.

 

Accusations of us being "the new Stoke" are just rubbish though.

people will grasp any stick mantis

 

And people will use any excuse to defend the manager. It works both ways mate. 

I'm not knocking Pulis. If you went to the thread about him in other football, you'd see I've a lot of compliments to pay him. I just think it's ridiculous on the face of it to complain about Lambert's negativity in one breath, and then wish we were a Pulis side in another. 

 

And Palace weren't attacking last season, and they were pretty much the only team to have less possession than we did. 

Who said they wish we were a Pulis side? Somebody said comparing us to the old Stoke is rubbish and I said if have become the old Stoke it's not so bad because they generally finished mid-table and gave every team a game. 

While I won't deny that we've been quite defensive in the opening games (I'm pretty sure injuries and illness have played a large part in that), I think perceptions have been skewed somewhat by our ridiculous start which has seen has face all of last season's top 4 in 7 games, not to mention Stoke away which is always a tough fixture.

Accusations of us being "the new Stoke" are just rubbish though.

I agree with this. I've watched Stoke a few times this season and they are capable of putting a few passes together without losing the ball.

So saying we are the new Stoke is rubbish.

I think the comparison was with the "old " Stoke. Mind you, they used to win at home more often than not, so that's bobbins, too

I know. Id actually be happy if we were the new old Stoke. Would normally mean a mid table finish.

While I won't deny that we've been quite defensive in the opening games (I'm pretty sure injuries and illness have played a large part in that), I think perceptions have been skewed somewhat by our ridiculous start which has seen has face all of last season's top 4 in 7 games, not to mention Stoke away which is always a tough fixture.

Accusations of us being "the new Stoke" are just rubbish though.

I agree with this. I've watched Stoke a few times this season and they are capable of putting a few passes together without losing the ball.

So saying we are the new Stoke is rubbish.

Ronaldo is the greatest athlete I've witnessed, I think.

Ronaldo is incredible. We were talking about this on the weekend and how players like Ronaldo and Bale have become what they are with sheer hard work. It hasn't just all been down to natural talent.

Then you have some one like Rooney who is incredibly gifted and I'm sure has also worked hard. But look at his physique compared to the other two. Makes you wonder how good could Rooney have been if worked as hard as Ronaldo.

Must say I thought I detected a rather alarming tendency to hoof the ball up field at every opportunity once Tekkers came on yesterday.

The whole team will need to re-learn how to play with him to get the best out of him.

Aye. I don't think it was coincidence that, shortly after coming on, we sat deep and looked to hoof/counter instead of keeping up the pressing in midfield.

I think it was a combination of tiredness and lack of football intelligence which is quite surprising to see considering they all Premier League players.

But to be fair the city players are on another level.

The last 3 games were boys against men though. I don't think those teams will have too many easier games all season. That is a worry but it's also a relief we managed 10 points before that.

I don't agree with that at all. I think they were a case of better players against lesser players. We lost based on ability, not because we weren't "men".

I honestly wonder if people watch the games sometimes.

If people think Man City won't have an easier game than yesterday's all season then they're just plain wrong.

well I'm plain wrong then as Man City will get a fair few easier games this season than that one. No way can you convince me that that will be Man City's easiest game of the season.

Who said it will be their easiest game?

You said it would be one of their easiest games this season.

Which is simply not true, IMO. They'll have plenty easier games than that.

They had to work hard to beat us.

I think they had to step it up a gear yes. The goal was looking inevitable though.

The last 3 games were boys against men though. I don't think those teams will have too many easier games all season. That is a worry but it's also a relief we managed 10 points before that.

I don't agree with that at all. I think they were a case of better players against lesser players. We lost based on ability, not because we weren't "men".

I honestly wonder if people watch the games sometimes.

If people think Man City won't have an easier game than yesterday's all season then they're just plain wrong.

well I'm plain wrong then as Man City will get a fair few easier games this season than that one. No way can you convince me that that will be Man City's easiest game of the season.

Who said it will be their easiest game? I said they made hard work of it. They did not play well and with a bit of quality we could have capitalised.

We did miss Gabby though.

Did you watch motd? They showed numerous examples of City's sloppiness. They play like that against a better team they will lose.

They might call it "sloppiness". I would call it "pressure".

Compared to our last 2 games (Arsenal not really a good example - half the side were ill) we really pressed them across the park. This forces errors - or "sloppiness" - and that's what we saw yesterday.

I do feel sorry for Lambert, though. He brought on 3 attacking players as second half substitutes....

... and, almost as soon as he did, the team decided to sit deep, stop pressing and hold on for a draw. That's what lost us the game.

They stopped pressing because they were absolutely shattered. It's not possible to press like that for 90 minutes.

But if they could string a few passes together when finally winning the ball back it might have helped.