Jump to content

fruitvilla

Established Member
  • Posts

    2,031
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by fruitvilla

  1. 1 minute ago, pintpotvilla said:

    Have you really watched Watkins shot? Patricio was absolutely nowhere need it! Konsa 2 misses were just as glaring as Wolves misses and of course they cleared off the line from Ollie at the end.

    All in all a fair result

    It's funny how people can see the match very differently.

  2. I must have watched a different match.

    I would have liked to vote Coady for Villa's man of the match. But a little more seriously ... 

    Martinez ... excellent ... I don't like the way we bring out the ball from goal kick though.
    Elmo ... had a really good game 
    Konsa ... Solid 
    Mings ... Man of the match for me
    Targett ...  solid game ... Neto made him look slow on the break
    McGinn ... not a bad game
    Luiz ... OK but not back in form yet
    Sanson ... good game
    Traore ...  I thought he was a lot better than most here  ... seemed more defensively minded in this game
    Trez ... He was OK
    Watkins ...  excellent

    Barkley ...  impact player but almost the wrong sort ... that back pass  ugh.

    What I have noticed is Villa gives the opposition a lot of space. Villa don't seem to pressure the opposition like they do us.

    • Like 1
  3. 20 minutes ago, will87 said:

    A 68-game unbeaten run at home in the Premier League spanning almost 4 years, now immediately followed by 5 consecutive home defeats, incredible.

    The universe is fundamentally chaotic, there are patterns in that chaos but is chaotic.

  4. 1 hour ago, Zatman said:

    He cost us the goal that lost us the game

    So yes he is the reason we lost 

    Conversely, to win a game you have to get at least one goal.

    Logically that goal cost us a draw. A nil-nil draw against Sheffield.

  5. 2 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

    Looking at his conversation rate he could have had more. I remember he should have had a couple against Burnley at home. 

    Ollie's is 21%, could do better. Even Barkley's is 15% (and Jack's 25%). So all could do better. 

    Kane's 19% .... Bale is at a meagre 21%

    So if a player manages to get a shot away every minute and has a 5% conversion rate that's some 4 goals every match

    But it terms of conversation Emi and Tyrone win. ;) 

    • Like 1
  6. I was intrigued by El Ghazi's stats ... pasted data off the BBC website into an excel spreadsheet.  ... Hid data for less than 480 minutes of play and the results are:

     
    Rank Name goals Goals
    / 90 min
    total shots goal conversion shot accuracy
    tottenham
    Carlos Vinícius
     
    9
    1.02 24 38% 63%
    chelsea
    Olivier Giroud
     
    11
    0.93 33 33% 61%
    liverpool
    Diogo Jota
     
    9
    0.84 28 32% 71%
    liverpool
    Mohamed Salah
     
    24
    0.74 81 30% 64%
    everton
    Dominic Calvert-Lewin
     
    18
    0.73 63 29% 68%
    tottenham
    Gareth Bale
     
    8
    0.72 38 21% 45%
    chelsea
    Tammy Abraham
     
    12
    0.71 41 29% 51%
    man unt
    Bruno Fernandes
     
    22
    0.65 86 26% 63%
    villa
    Anwar El Ghazi
     
    7
    0.64 38 18% 63%
    tottenham
    Harry Kane
     
    17
    0.63 89 19% 47%
    leicester
    Jamie Vardy
     
    14
    0.6 48 29% 60%
    tottenham
    Son Heung-Min
     
    17
    0.57 51 33% 71%
    sheffield
    Billy Sharp
     
    5
    0.56 12 42% 67%
    arsenal
    Alexandre Lacazette
     
    11
    0.56 38 29% 68%
    arsenal
    Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang
     
    13
    0.54 50 26% 54%
    man unt
    Marcus Rashford
     
    18
    0.53 69 26% 74%
    man city
    Ilkay Gündogan
     
    13
    0.54 35 37% 54%
    man unt
    Daniel James
     
    5
    0.53 15 33% 80%
    leeds
    Patrick Bamford
     
    13
    0.52 69 19% 54%
    west ham
    Sébastien Haller
     
    7
    0.52 30 23% 53%
    man unt
    Edinson Cavani
     
    7
    0.5 27 26% 56%
    liverpool
    Takumi Minamino
     
    4
    0.48 12 33% 75%
    crys pal
    Wilfried Zaha
     
    9
    0.48 30 30% 50%
    villa
    Ollie Watkins
     
    12
    0.48 58 21% 62%
     
    The results are ranked in terms of goals per 90 min of play. While it is questionable that if Anwar's play time was doubled his goal count would double, his productivity in terms of goals cannot be questioned. Past performance is no guarantee of future performance. Data accurate as of yesterday. Jack was at 0.3 goals/90 min
     
    • Like 1
  7. OK. Here's my take:

    Positives ... the defense played really well.  Mings MOTM for me.  Elmo did fine, as did Konsa and Targett. Targett's enthusiasm [euphemism] was great. 

    The attack was OK; nice El Ghazi goal, Watkins assist. But not too much else. El Ghazi would have been my second choice. Traore I think gets too much stick, in my opinion. Tracked back nicely but had trouble going forward and finding a player to pass to when he was marked closely.

    Midfield, I felt Villa still struggled a bit. Nakamba was solid, I don't quite get the MOTM hype, but that's me. I did not see the great "visionary" passes forward. But that could be as much the players around him not making the "visionary  runs". McGinn, I thought was OK, stronger than previous matches I have seen, but I got the sense he occasionally played his teammates into to trouble. 

    Sanson ... an encouraging Cameo

    Dean ...  well he was Dean (in a good way)

    Not a great game, but not bad either.

  8. 1 minute ago, chrisp65 said:

    No, that doesn’t work.

    The U.S. had dirt cheap oil in the 60’s and the 70’s but the shock of the Arab states getting their shit together sufficiently to get OPEC driving the oil price still massively impacted the western economies and those they trade with.

    Oil needs to replaced. Not sourced from elsewhere. For politics and for the just plain common sense saving the planet reasons.

    I don't understand the logic here ... getting oil from an alternative source, like friendly neighbour, does not work as a replacement for Middle East oil?

    I understand the US may want to avoid doing that ... but as a stop gap measure it works.

  9. 1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said:

    Bingo. 

    It's not that we need to stop using cars - we just need to stop using disposable cars - there's no reason why a car shouldn't last twenty years.

    Make it out of concrete it will last 150 years

    God I am in a waggish mood today.

    • Haha 1
  10. 8 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

    The good thing when politicians do something hard-to-defend is that the attempts to defend them are usually pretty amusing:

     

    "This is probably the best thing he could do for the state right now"

     The wag in me wants to say the best thing he could do is stay there.

    • Like 1
  11. 2 hours ago, Brumerican said:

     

    Yep ... thanks ... a much better visualization, I thought.

    Note how the description of what we see as gravity does not involve any quantum phenomena. This of course is likely to change at some point in time. 

    Now of course whether the future descriptions of gravity will involve quantum mechanics, a variation of Bohmian mechanics or something completely different is a question; I don't know I will see an answer in my lifetime. But we do know there is something not quite right with our standard model and something has to give.

    Again thanks

    • Thanks 1
  12. 25 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

    Even if you are running a power station on fossil fuel surely it is a more efficient way to generate energy to run a car than every car having a series of petrol explosions under the hood, pumping noxious gases out the back?

    I suspect a coal/oil power stations are marginally more fuel efficient. So if we factor in the transmission losses and the small inefficiencies in an electrical vehicle then I don't see any big gain there if any. The CO2 emissions will be similar but the coal fly ash won't be without its challenges depending on the coal source. The noxious emissions from vehicles continue to be reduced.

    Don't get me wrong, I am all in favour of electric cars, I am just concerned as we can quickly move away from fossil fuels.

    25 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

    The interesting thing about electric cars is their potential use as power storage for the grid. The cars are charged at night during periods of low demand but most cars are not used most days and can remain plugged in. That means undriven cars parked in people’s garages (or potentially even at people’s offices) can be used to discharge power back into the grid during the daytime when power is at its highest demand.

    Yep storage is one advantage that electric cars may provide. But I would be pissed if the batteries were drained before a long trip. 

    Speaking of storage cryo storage (I might have come across it on VT even) seems interesting.

    Highview Power Cryogenic Energy Storage System - Trailer - YouTube

     

×
×
  • Create New...
Â