Vive_La_Villa

You want the players to produce things they're not capable of, is basically what you're saying.

Which is fine. We all want better players at Villa. The players we currently have aren't good enough to take us to where we all want the club to be.

But that's a completely different discussion than our performance yesterday.

They do lack the basics of passing too often though. That can be frustrating. Plus that fresh air short by Weimann. Come on....

Maybe it does come down to serious lack of quality. I suppose what do you expect when teams have a few players that cost more than our whole team.

True. It isn't. Apologies.

To get us back on topic, I thought Lambert set us out with a game plan yesterday and whilst it wasn't pretty, it wasn't far off being successful. If Richardson puts away his chance then it could have been different.

Like I said in the match thread, I think we played well enough to have beaten man city if they put in a poor performance. But, imo, they'd have beaten the majority of teams in the league playing like they did yesterday and unfortunately that's too good for us.

I think Lambert's plan was a good one yesterday.

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

They really didn't play "very poorly". At all.

Both Pellegrini and Kompany, for example, have said that's the best they've played so far this season.

Maybe because they've had quite a poor start to the season in terms of performances. They are hardly going to say it was easy are they?

They were very complacent in my opinion.

To keep it about Lambert - I have no issue with how we set up.

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.

Ok they left it late but they played very poorly. It's almost like they thought they could just turn up and it almost cost them two points.

City play like that against a better team they will lose.

When I say easy I mean they were able to win in 2nd gear.

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".

It's a figure of speech mate. Id be worried if we had literally had a team of boys out there.

Boys against men implies that we were beaten by the physicality of the opposition, not their ability.

Id say there was an element of that when it came to 50/50 challenges. They were more powerful then us even on an off day.

12th

Joey Barton is pure scum. Suarez got rightly got a lot of criticism for biting but he just reacted like a petulant child. Barton on the other hand is just a nasty individual.

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".

It's a figure of speech mate. Id be worried if we had literally had a team of boys out there.

I don't think the players are capable of playing any other way

I don't buy that, we have added Senderos, Cissokho, Cleverley, Richardson and Sanchez and resurrected the Villa careers of Hutton and Bent so unless Lambert goes out and only gets players that can play this low possession, low shots on target, backs to the wall football then the problem lies not with the players but with the methods employed.

Well something ain't right. After two years in charge we have no real identity of how we play. Is counter attack all we are about?

I don't think the players are capable of playing any other way

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.

So far this season is no better than last season, in fact looking purely at statistics it could be considered slightly worse. We have 10 points from our first 7 games and a -5 goal difference whereas last season we had a +1 goal difference. The only positive is that we are currently 1 place higher in the league. Our next 2 games against Everton and QPR (2 teams languishing in or around the relegation zone) will hopefully give an indication on whether the current team assembled by Lambert is capable of actually playing football, scoring some goals and putting some points on the board.

I think we do look stronger at the back though.

Hopefully the return of Benteke can make a difference up front.

Based on what, the fact that we have just conceded 8 goals in 3 games or the fact that we have a -5 goal difference after 7 games?

Just from generally watching the games. Yes the last three games wernt the best but we managed 3 clean sheets in 4 games prior to that. Did we manage 3 clean sheets all last season?

Yes, we managed 3 clean sheets in our first 10 games last season.

Fair enough. It was still refreshing to see though.

So far this season is no better than last season, in fact looking purely at statistics it could be considered slightly worse. We have 10 points from our first 7 games and a -5 goal difference whereas last season we had a +1 goal difference. The only positive is that we are currently 1 place higher in the league. Our next 2 games against Everton and QPR (2 teams languishing in or around the relegation zone) will hopefully give an indication on whether the current team assembled by Lambert is capable of actually playing football, scoring some goals and putting some points on the board.

I agree with most of that.

Also, if West Ham win today (they are 1-0 up at present) we'll be 10th and we were 10th at the same stage last season. Although we're scoring less and conceding more!

Agreed. I know we have just played Arsenal, Chelsea and Man City but last season, in the corresponding fixtures, we scored a total of 5 goals against these teams and conceded 6 and managed to secure 3 points. This season we have scored 0 and conceded 8 and have 0 points from it.

But then we lost to Stoke, Newcastle and drew to Liverpool. You're post shows that some fans are quick to point out who we are playing to justify the poor results.

So far this season is no better than last season, in fact looking purely at statistics it could be considered slightly worse. We have 10 points from our first 7 games and a -5 goal difference whereas last season we had a +1 goal difference. The only positive is that we are currently 1 place higher in the league. Our next 2 games against Everton and QPR (2 teams languishing in or around the relegation zone) will hopefully give an indication on whether the current team assembled by Lambert is capable of actually playing football, scoring some goals and putting some points on the board.

I'm guessing that the first 4 games of the season have been written off then?

Guess what you like. Did you write off the games in which we achieved our first 10 points last season or did you look at the accumulative effect of games where we hardly have any shots on goal or decent possession resulting in not many points being achieved?

As I said earlier, I think we did well in our first 4 games this season, we certainly played football, scored some goals and put some points on the board that is for sure. The last 3 games we were completely outclassed. That is my opinion.

I agree. We didn't help ourselves either by constantly giving the ball back.

There is 6 or 7 teams that will eventual leave the rest behind. We could potentially finish anywhere from 20th to 8th such is the gap in quality of this league.

I think we'll be ok but it won't be pretty. Would be nice to have our Captain back thoigh.

So far this season is no better than last season, in fact looking purely at statistics it could be considered slightly worse. We have 10 points from our first 7 games and a -5 goal difference whereas last season we had a +1 goal difference. The only positive is that we are currently 1 place higher in the league. Our next 2 games against Everton and QPR (2 teams languishing in or around the relegation zone) will hopefully give an indication on whether the current team assembled by Lambert is capable of actually playing football, scoring some goals and putting some points on the board.

I think we do look stronger at the back though.

Hopefully the return of Benteke can make a difference up front.

Based on what, the fact that we have just conceded 8 goals in 3 games or the fact that we have a -5 goal difference after 7 games?

Just from generally watching the games. Yes the last three games wernt the best but we managed 3 clean sheets in 4 games prior to that. Did we manage 3 clean sheets all last season?

West Ham have done good business this Summer.

So far this season is no better than last season, in fact looking purely at statistics it could be considered slightly worse. We have 10 points from our first 7 games and a -5 goal difference whereas last season we had a +1 goal difference. The only positive is that we are currently 1 place higher in the league. Our next 2 games against Everton and QPR (2 teams languishing in or around the relegation zone) will hopefully give an indication on whether the current team assembled by Lambert is capable of actually playing football, scoring some goals and putting some points on the board.

I think we do look stronger at the back though.

Hopefully the return of Benteke can make a difference up front.

After a whole day of drinking at a wedding I went and knocked back a bottle of scotch in one go. Ridiculous behaviour. Surprised I'm still alive.

For me he runs into dead ends and loses the ball, takes one touch to many and plays 50/50 balls to our players, he also does this in areas that hurt us.

He needs to stay with us to develop into a player who uses his undoubted on the ball skills, if he goes to a top 6 team his ability to lose the ball in dangerous areas will kill his career.

I think he will leave us and end up never achieving his full potential.

Or maybe a better manager could help him improve his game? He was told to play a different way for England and it worked. For us he is expected to do too much because of the lack of quality around him. IMO of course.

Anyone else getting more and more worried we are going to lose him for nothing.

I think it's inevitable. He is too good for us to be honest.

Atletico Madrid proved last year there is still hope with the right man in charge.

Really hope they do it again.

I don't understand why we can't have a conversation about why we can't string a few passes together without it being seen as moaning or having a dig at the manager.

I think 3 years in its fair enough to voice concerns over issues that have been evident from day 1.

It's got the potential to get better but its a definite concern.

Apparently it's not an issue because we are playing top 6 teams and we have not been relegated yet.

I'm genuinely interested to know what the issue is with keeping the ball and why we can't do it.

Our wins against Stoke, Newcastle, Hull and Liverpool all came with us having less possession. If we can win games without needing the ball as much as the opponent, why is it an issue? Or is it more to do with how "entertaining" we play?

It's an issue because Premier League players should be capable of keeping the ball. Let's see how many points we pick up this season when our possession is less than 40% in a game. Will be interesting reading.

Why?

Win vs Stoke 38%

Draw vs Newcastle 40%

Win vs Hull 45%

Win vs Liverpool 26%

You don't need to have spent more time with the football during 90 minutes than the opponent to win a football game, we have shown so far this season that we can win games with less possession, hence why I do not understand why there is an issue with it so far this season.

As I said let's see over the whole season. No you don't need possession to win games but it obviously helps. Even if it's possession that goes nowhere for 5 or 10 minutes. Passing around at the back. Going forwards, backwards. Pretty boring stuff I admit.

But that boring 5, 10 minutes of aimless possession is time City or any opponent hasn't got the ball so can't do any damage.

It's pretty basic stuff.

But City have the calibre of player that can put pressure on a team and take the ball even if you don't want them to have it, whilst we do not have the calibre of player that can keep the ball from the sort of player they have.

Football really isn't as simple as "keeping the ball so the opponent can't score" unfortunately, to be honest I'm glad it isn't.

And, if we're saying "over the whole season", why are people moaning already? Especially when we've started well.

Who's moaning? I'm having a discussion about something I think is an issue. You are disagreeing. It doesn't have to always be moaning when critical about the team.

I agree it probably is because of the quality of Man City's pressing. But in our last 2 games I lost count of the amount of killer passes that are attempted that simply aren't on.

When Chelsea and City are in the same situation they don't attempt the pass. They just pass it backwards and wait until a pass is on.

As I said. Basic stuff.

Is that yet another comfortable home win for Chelsea I see today.

Maybe "having a go" at Stamford Bridge isn't as easy as it sounds, Chelsea are probably that good this season.

I actually disagree with having a go against big teams. You get a spanking. My issue is not how we set up. It's the lack of composure and the constant need to attack a million miles an hour as soon as we get the ball.

I can't get my head around it.

I don't understand why we can't have a conversation about why we can't string a few passes together without it being seen as moaning or having a dig at the manager.

I think 3 years in its fair enough to voice concerns over issues that have been evident from day 1.

It's got the potential to get better but its a definite concern.

Apparently it's not an issue because we are playing top 6 teams and we have not been relegated yet.

I'm genuinely interested to know what the issue is with keeping the ball and why we can't do it.

Our wins against Stoke, Newcastle, Hull and Liverpool all came with us having less possession. If we can win games without needing the ball as much as the opponent, why is it an issue? Or is it more to do with how "entertaining" we play?

It's an issue because Premier League players should be capable of keeping the ball. Let's see how many points we pick up this season when our possession is less than 40% in a game. Will be interesting reading.

Why?

Win vs Stoke 38%

Draw vs Newcastle 40%

Win vs Hull 45%

Win vs Liverpool 26%

You don't need to have spent more time with the football during 90 minutes than the opponent to win a football game, we have shown so far this season that we can win games with less possession, hence why I do not understand why there is an issue with it so far this season.

As I said let's see over the whole season. No you don't need possession to win games but it obviously helps. Even if it's possession that goes nowhere for 5 or 10 minutes. Passing around at the back. Going forwards, backwards. Pretty boring stuff I admit.

But that boring 5, 10 minutes of aimless possession is time City or any opponent hasn't got the ball so can't do any damage.

It's pretty basic stuff.

I don't understand why we can't have a conversation about why we can't string a few passes together without it being seen as moaning or having a dig at the manager.

I think 3 years in its fair enough to voice concerns over issues that have been evident from day 1.

It's got the potential to get better but its a definite concern.

Apparently it's not an issue because we are playing top 6 teams and we have not been relegated yet.

I'm genuinely interested to know what the issue is with keeping the ball and why we can't do it.

Our wins against Stoke, Newcastle, Hull and Liverpool all came with us having less possession. If we can win games without needing the ball as much as the opponent, why is it an issue? Or is it more to do with how "entertaining" we play?

It's an issue because Premier League players should be capable of keeping the ball. Let's see how many points we pick up this season when our possession is less than 40% in a game. Will be interesting reading.