Cjay

19 hours ago, A'Villan said:

I have to say, that's an impressive analysis for someone who didn't watch the game and is relying on statistics to paint a picture of the game.

It wasn't our best outing. Stoke had all the play in the first half and once they went up sat back for a solid 30 minutes until we equalised, only pressing our player on the ball when they reached the final third. So you can imagine that it is pretty difficult to break down a team of Stoke's quality when they are sitting so deep. It meant that space was harder to find, but we managed some okay chances.

Here is 10 minutes of highlights if you are further interested in what transpired:

 

Made some good chances tbf, largely thanks to Bolasie picking the ball up running and dragging players out of position then linking with others. 

Can see your defensive issues, passing out from the back, runners not being tracked especially Joe Allen on a few occasions and he was also picking up the spaces between midfield and defence, probably where Grealish would have been in your side. 

On one occasion Hutton has the ball and you can see him put his arms out as if to say "wheres my options". 

Not easy to score against Stoke when they score first tbf so you did well. 

But can see through the middle the options were limited imo, Abraham having to drop deep to get involved.

Bielsa asked about Villa.

"It’s the last rival we haven’t played against. It’s a team with a very significant offensive strength. They are good in the collective play and they are good with their individual players. They also have many good players. If we take into account these aspects, they have very similar aspects to West Bromwich".

Are Villa a serious promotion rival?

"The important thing for this competition is who is getting promoted and who is struggling to get promoted. As it is a long competition, and as you have many possibilities because you have six teams able to go up, any conclusion will be a premature one.

I see every time I’m asked the same question in a different way, but unfortunately I can’t give you a different answer. Imagine if I had to give you an answer with a level of certainty in the answer. For any lucid observer it would be an act of irresponsibility. We only played half of the games. If you ask me if Villa has players to get promoted, my answer is yes. Do they have the structure to go up? Yes. Do they have a brilliant head coach? Of course. You have more than six teams with good players, good head coach and good structure.

We are sure among all these teams with the capacity for promotion, they won’t give the answer observers expect. We can’t draw conclusions now, we have to wait until the end. That’s why it’s very difficult to give a serious answer".

38 minutes ago, A'Villan said:

I'm not trying to take a shot at your optimism for the sake of it when I say that we dominated Stoke in the 2nd half and that I think 2 very poor efforts from our full backs has seen us concede two goals that otherwise wouldn't have been. Yes Stoke were very much on top of us early in the first half, so there was some balance in who had control of the game.

Our build up play was actually quite impressive considering there was no Grealish. If you like your stats then we had 57% possession, 500 odd passes and a pass completion rate of 80%.

Stoke are no mugs. They have Ince, Berahino, Williams, Shawcross, Butland, McClean and Allen all who can be very impressive on their day.

I imagine Bielsa will have taken some notes about how we played against Stoke without Grealish but I still think we're in for a heavily contested game.

Fair enough mate you can give a balanced view of the game (from a Villa perspective) i can only look at stats.

I do like my stats 

Thats true, but for example 300 of those passes (roughly) were Elmo, Tuenzebe, Chester, Hourihane and Whelan, yet only 4 of those, 1 from Whelan and 3 from Hourihane ended in a shot. From looking at the stats you put in 34 crosses, only 5 were accurate.

Just my reading of it but it would seem to me you were lacking ideas, lots of passing for passings sake, then getting frustrated and crossing the ball? Maybe im wrong. 

Stoke are no mugs as you say, there squad is probably the best in the league, but there mid table for a reason, there own stats reflect that, not just positions and points. They were able to have more shots against you then they have had since Birmingham beat them back in October, and your shots against them was the same as Ipswich managed at Stoke. 

Imo there is a clear evidence of a lack of ideas especially through the middle without Grealish, think thats reflected in the stats, the amount of crosses and the lack of shots despite as you say the passing numbers. 

That being said you have a tall forward line, so the crossing is less then ideal, but a cross is a good opportunity to regain possession and counter, so every cloud. 

1 hour ago, AvfcRigo82 said:

You expecting a heavy defeat then?  

No no i'll post after the match regardless of the result 

Then i have to move on to Blackburn  

2 hours ago, Lerner's Driver said:

Sweet of you to show an interest. Do you think that interest will ever disappear altogether? We'd be sorry to see you go.

Will be rid of me after the match dont worry

26 minutes ago, Made In Aston said:

Cjay, i don't know why you are so concerned with our CEO. Shouldn't you be concentrating on your own... Unless you are a villa fan now

Nothing against Villa, dont mind seeing you doing well aslong as it isnt at our expense 

Not concerned about our Managing Director, i dont trust a word he says

I'm at peace with this.

Looks a good signing especially for this level, fair play thats 1 big deficiency seemingly sorted.

On the money side, i would hold off the bragging till you know whats going to happen lol, you just never know what will happen, start bragging now, you dont go up, lose half a team, then youd look silly. 

16 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

I always prefer to judge a person based on what I know of him, rather than others' opinion of him. So far, I think he is just what we need.

Fair point, if we believed Boro on Orta you'd have thought wed appointed Pol Pot, he isnt perfect but could be a hell of a lot worse. (Victor obviously not Pot) 

4 hours ago, Dave-R said:

Well all the Investment that was brought into Liverpool got Liverpool plenty of expensive new players, that money didn't just miraculously show up, Purslow was the man to bring it in. I don't think the owners at the time had the money to bring in the signing they did, in fact wasn't that when Torres got sold to Chelsea for 52 million??

Purslow was appointed managing director of Liverpool Football Club in June 2009, with a priority to renegotiate the £350m loan the club had outstanding with RBS and to assume overall management of the club until a new permanent CEO could be appointed. Three months into his tenure, a team headed by Purslow negotiated an £80 million 4 year shirt sponsorship deal with Standard charted bank.

No I don't think that it's rubbish either, Purslow does find business, he has obviously been finding investment at villa, apart from our owners, Purslow investment finding would of relaxed FFP.

 Liverpool fans won't like Purslow because he voted for the sale of the club. What fans don't remember is the owners were unpopular and hicks tried to block the sale by removing Purslow and Ian ayre from the board and hicks installing his son in there place.

I don't think Purslow is a snake, I think he is a very smart individual who knows the back channels, knows how to get things done and his removal from Liverpool was because of two unpopular owners who didn't like that he and Ian Ayres had voted for the sale of the club to the NESV group.

 

I bow to your knowledge mate becausei really dont know, only what I've been told and read a bit.

Seems the issue Liverpool fans have is they believe that Purslow gets credit for something he had little to do with, RBS and another creditor were pulling the strings. 

He himself was exposed in an email slagging off the potential new owners offer "bottom of the barrel" etc, but then at a fans group meeting he was slagging off his bosses (the old owners who employed him) saying they had no money and stuff.

He is also rumoured to have been responsible for various "leaks" from the top of the club to the press that were apparently less then helpful and interfered in areas he was no way qualified, he isn't a football man, sacking managers and player sales is well above his knowledge.

Finally Fernando Torres claims he was set up to look like a traitor, a leak about the transfer request which many Liverpool fans believe was Purslow, done to save face as Purslow had told Torres and the fans key players wouldn't be sold pre takeover, 3 months after completion Mascherano and Torres were sold.

Imo Purslow clearly has a financial mind and thats good for you, but he shouldn't be allowed to get to powerful, thats what happened at Liverpool and he was at least partially responsible for that mess.

Thinking about it, could the reason Purslow is so confident you are clear of FFP is because he is trying to bring in outside sponsorship to counter ffp? 

If thats his job he has to sound confident and thats the sort of thing he has done before.

19 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Their new owners was the best thing that has happens to them in years. 

I don’t trust him. But he comes across as a saint compared to the last bloke. 

 

Personally i know diddly squat about it.

As far as owners and their people go imo there is their truth, the fans truth, the worst case scenario and then the actual truth is somewhere in the middle. 

Don't trust anything we are told by our owners and probably never will.

Liverpool fan friend of mine doesnt trust this guy one bit , says not to believe a word he says.

A snake , smart enough to position himself with the right people at the right time but never lets the truth get in the way of what he says. Asset stripped them, voted in favour of the sale to the new owners (his job had been to find investment) but only after being exposed as a stooge for the old owners, but slagged them all off in the press and interfered in parts of the club like player transfers and managers that were nothing to do with him. 

Basically, if he is in charge of the day to day running of the club dont take his word for it, he is good at sounding like an honest and stand up guy, but that is often far from the truth. 

you've probably heard all this anyways lol 

Should be really interesting, we are very strong at the back and decent going forward, not great atm but we always score (apart from Boro). 

You are very strong going forward but dodgy at the back and almost always concede. 

Potentially we are the best attacking side in the league imo, averaged nearly 3 goals per game start of the season, that kind of dried up when Hernandez got injured before Boro then Bamford and Roofe joined him vs Millwall. 

Havent really got that goal scoring back which is a worry. 

But with Bamford back and young Jack Clarke now seemingly established there is every chance we could find that scoring form again hopefully.

Plus Pablo creates a goal scoring chance 3 times a game on average.

I dont think you can stop us scoring, Its highly unlikely we will you.

But i think our defence is more likely to cope better with your attack then the other way around. 

We have only conceded more then 1 goal 4 times this season, you've done that just under Dean Smith 5 times.

On that basis i think we have a great chance (i hope).

26 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I don’t care who we play Jack is way to good for this league so we need him in the team ASAP.  He is the equivalent of Leeds losing Hernandez. In that time they managed something like 2 wins in 10.

He is crucial for us. 

Something like that yeah.

But it wasnt so much not creating, which is what Hernandez does better then anyone in the league since he arrived. 

It was not scoring, just couldn't finish chances. 

We averaged 15 shots per game without him, but without Bamford and Roofe we just couldn't finish.

Cost us many points those games.

44 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Good spot.

We can only hope we have someone ready to come in, OR a tweak in system.

I don't think we can be judged off of last performance though as conditions were horrendous and everyone seemed a bit off.

We are not a one man team anymore but Jack is certainly a vital cog.

We need someone who can replicate his play.

 

Maybe Lansbury? 

Conditions were horrible tbf but they arent going to be unique this time of year, i doubt they'll be much better on Sunday. 

Was quite a big dip for you, didnt see the game but Stoke seemed the more threatening if stats are believed. 

You still have a very good front line, but without the main link man gives us hope, plus he seems your best player for retaining possession, could be vital in transition.

I'm hopeful.

I do wonder if Grealish isnt available could that be the deciding factor?

Understand that we arent as negative as Stoke but also this season we have been far more stingy when it comes to conceding shooting chances.

We are the only side who concede on average less then 10 shots per game, whereas Stoke on average concede more shots per game (12.4) then they do have shots (11.7 with only 3 of those on target per game average).

Without Grealish they had more shots, conceded less shots.

Maybe without Jack winning free kicks, dragging defenders out of position, finding the Wingers and strikers, you struggle to create as much?

The Stoke game saw you concede quite a few more shots then usual on average and create less.

Perhaps for us that could be the key.

Were the Manchester United board seen licking windows recently?

Who in there right mind thinks.

"We need to sack this multi league and European title winning manager, we need to replace him with a leader, a strong character, someone not afraid to make the big decisions, a man who can turn it all around . . . . A man who can get us relegated, we need Ole Gunnar Solskjaer". 

19 hours ago, Shropshire Lad said:

But on the flip side, surely the defence could also get better and conceding won’t be so much of a problem. We actually have a slightly lower goals conceded rate under Smith than we did before he arrived (1.667 per game pre Smith, compared to 1.4 per game since his first game). So while it might not look like it, the defence has improved, at least statistically speaking. And again, it has faced what most would say has been a sterner test.

In fact, just for a further look, if you discount the Forest game, which I think we can all agree was an extreme aberration, that goals conceded ratio becomes one a game under Smith and would put us as one of the better defensive records since Smith’s arrival.

This doesn’t mean there isn’t an issue that needs addressing ASAP, just that it’s not entirely accurate to conclude the defence under Smith is hopeless (admittedly not your description).

Fair points.

The Forest game was bizarre and probably would never happen again, clinical from Forest tbf.

I think from his time at Brentford you will improve to an extent not necessarily because Smith is a good coach defensively, but because the style will protect the defence better. 

Having more possession, playing on the front foot, winning the ball high up the pitch. 

If the opposition havent got the ball, they cant shoot.

Its gone to poo for Brentford now but under Smith they averaged the 2nd least shots per game conceded, we are 1st by quite a distance actually.

So imo your probably seeing with the improvement a style based defensive improvement rather then an actual defensive improvement if that makes sense.

2 hours ago, TRO said:

I think you make some good points....I don't want to agree, due to the rivalry, but I do.

We have some issues and ones that have left us short....but bear in mind we didn't know if we had a football club in July, so preparation was not commensurate with our Motto.

My personal opinion is we still have much work to do on the defensive side of our game and that also impact on Midfield.....I don't think we are balanced in terms of quality, I think the offensive side is much more competent than the defensive side,just my opinion.

I think we are having teams with not much more than brawn, negating us, it concerns me.....not only are we conceding too many goals, we are conceding poor quality ones, we are simply too easy to score against.

We can beat any team in this league, but sadly, they can equally take points of us.....to challenge that must stop.

I accept the January Argument....we need to see What Dean can do....its not nailed on....we have to wait and see.

I am looking forward to the game with you and I think it will be a fine game......congrats on picking up 15 points in your last 5, looking forward to when we can.

 

Thanks.

Glad someone sees my point, it wasnt a wind up or a trolling, was just an opinion based on what ive read here and on social media and what ive seen when watching you.

Can understand it to an extent, you went from staring disaster in the face to having minted owners and a decent manager who the fans can get behind.

Think you're right, broadly speaking if you cant stop conceding then you probably wont get promoted imo.

There will come a time when the goals dry up, there will come a time when you wont be able to score 2 3 4 a game, you may only get 1 and have to hold on to it. It happened to WBA and thats where they fell down. 

They were only scoring 1 a game or even nothing, Blackburn, Hull, Derby etc they all took something of WBA because goals dried up and they just couldn't not concede.

January could fix it but as you say that depends on what happens, or if Dean can set you up well defensively, its not a strength of his.

If you can fix the defence and learn to win ugly then absolutely play offs is definitely possible, top 2 to but its a huge ask.

We havent played that well truth be told, not been poor but not our best. But winning when you dont play great is a pre requisite for promotion, so who knows.

I look forward to the game to, should be a good game, hope we get a decent ref, not to picky not to lenient and hope it doesnt pish it down and make the pitch impossible to play good football on.

16 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

It seems to be that the pre-requisite to be a Leeds fan posting on here to post like a total prat and to invent narratives vis-a-vis our expectations for the season. Very few, and I mean, very few on here have 'expected' a top two finish

I provided an example of my point and a scan through  your forum shows that it is a view shared by quite a few and has been called out by other Villa fans calling for caution.

Not all, but not limited to "a few either". 

I invented nothing, the "prat" thing is your view which your entitled to.

3 hours ago, The_Rev said:

 

This is the table since Smith took over. Norwich's run has been insane, ours is pretty good considering the calibre of the opposition, we've played a lot of promotion rivals and a lot of teams in form. We get some 'softer' fixtures next month and everybody above us still has to come to Villa Park. Automatic is still possible. 

Think that table does highlight the issue with "easier runs" and "lesser teams".

We all do it, look at fixtures and see the big names in the top 6 and think "wow thats a hard game, thankgod we have 15th, 16th etc coming up give us a chance to get some easier points". 

But that table shows that for example 15th placed Preston are in better form over a long run of games then 3rd placed WBA or 13th placed QPR are in better form then 4th placed Sheffield United.

You can extend that to 12 games and they both move up 1, QPR are 5th and Preston are 3rd.

Think thats the problem with just looking at the table, very quickly context can be lost.

Wigan were top 3 or 4 at home when we beat them, Blades were 2nd in the form table over the previous 10 games or so when we played them. 

Or your win against Boro, they were what 2nd when you played them? Few more weeks in there current form they could be 8th 9th 10th, people will stop saying "wow Villa battered Boro" and start saying "so what Boro are crap and midtable".

12 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

We were far the better v WBA. All they had was a big lump out wide to Barnes. Bad finishing, should have had 4 and still were robbed in injury time. Played on the counter against us but were never really looked consistently dangerous.

Forgot Forest, they were OK, not as good as Stoke though. First team in six matches where a point was a fair result.

Norwich limping past poor opponents, they'll fall away.

Key thing for me is, it looks like there's a spot there for someone who wants to go on a good run. If we beat you, which we won't without Grealish, I'll be getting very carried away as I've got you penciled in for one automatic promotion spot. And us beating you means there's 1st to go for.

If you close down our center halves, you'll probably score a couple.

You were better then WBA, should have won that day, was very impressed with your attacking play. Bit surprised WBA were so willing to share possession, didnt expect that.

Stoke are odd, we played them 1st of the season and battered them. I think they appointed the wrong manager, Rowett is a negative manager from the school of Bruce, Pulis etc. With there squad if they had appointed someone like Smith, Bielsa, someone more positive then they would be top 2. But good players tend to show in the end regardless, so they will probably rise up.

Agree on Norwich, you cant keep relying on late goals, that wont sustain a promotion push.

Still very open, theres 9 or 10 teams like yourself who if they could string 7 8 wins together then anything is possible.

YEP is reporting that Grealish may be out vs us? 

I'm not so sure, Bolasie, Abraham and Kodjia are a big, powerful, pacey front line who with service will score goals, i worry about your attacking play especially with our own defensive issues player wise.

At the same time Smith doesnt seem to play a proper holding midfielder, its usually a good ball player like Woods or Hourihane who can pick the ball up deep and start you on your way. Its great going forward but it leaves you very open going the other way.

I expect a similar game plan as there was vs Sheffield United. 

Selective pressing, occasionally dropping off when you have the ball in unthreatening areas, allowing less able ball players to have the ball while man marking the more threatening players all game.

Its a tactic Bielsa has famously used vs Barcelona and Manchester United.

Be an interesting tactical battle imo between Smith and Bielsa.

43 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

Didn't have Grealish for half a season last year. Lost in the playoff final. With the handicap of Steve Bruce as well.

Keen to see how good Leeds are because you lot must be confident of going up. Not been impressed with Boro, Derby, West Brom or Norwich. Stoke the best team we've played so far for me, and Sheff U look alright every time I see them.

With your squad this shouldn't even be a conversation, you should be top 6 at least and probably top 2 or 3.

Bruce not fixing your defence was bizarre.

I'm not confident of anything, 15 years of crap have taught me to expect the worst.

WBA were the best side we have played, there gameplan was unique to us apparently, havent replicated it.

Sheffield United were decent, but lack that bit of individual quality imo.

Derby, Forest,Norwich, wasnt impressed by any of them but Norwich clearly have something about them.

Boro are Boro and id hate them to go up.

We are grinding out results which is vital, but it would be nice to find our early season form again where we blew teams away.

38 minutes ago, Shropshire Lad said:

The word delusion popping up again I see.

Not seeing the arrogance either. Maybe you can highlight some examples. People have time and time again stressed how difficult it will be to play catch up. But that’s the task we face. The possibility is being debated in a realistic, sober manner.

I also don’t see the relevance of the two penalties meaning you would have collected more points in the same fixtures. So what? We can play that game too - if touchdowns weren’t allowed at the Hawthorns we’d have more points than you from those same fixtures. 

And we had plenty of injuries last season, Terry, Grealish, Kodjia all out for months. Think we’re due some luck on the injury front.

I dont know how to directly quote a bit of a post but.

"You only have to look at the mediocre sides above us to know that if Dean Smith had been at the helm since the start of the season then nobody would be above us. With so many points still to play for teams like Norwich, Leeds, Albion etc will be found out and the cream will rise to the top"

Thats one example, its extreme but there have been others similar.

Two penalties for you got you 2 points i meant, slightly irrelevant on reflection, sometimes your lucky sometimes you arent.

The injury point was about how it seems expected we will struggle when injuries hit which is a common rhetoric it seems our rivals use,  or we will burn out and are "no Wolves or Cardiff" which I'm fed up of reading.

It isnt all of your fans as you say, most are pretty realistic but some like in the quote above are getting way ahead of themselves imo.

Nothing is decided yet but imo there is a bit of arrogance and delusion creeping in from some Villa fans who seem to think that January will fix everything and Smith is Pep and you will march to the top because you are far superior.

Dean Smith sides arent good defensively, it was Brentfords issue under him, they conceded a lot of goals.

And yes he has had a great start and a hard run of games but the fact remains that in the same games vs the same opponents we have picked up a point more and without 2 penalties it would be 3 points more.

Read that people are bemoaning the loss of Grealish for the draw yesterday.

How about losing Grealish, Abraham and Kodjia for 6 games? Because thats the equivalent of what happened to us in September with Roofe, Bamford and Hernandez.

You very well may catch the top 2, but a few of your fans should calm down imo.

Smith is a considerable improvement on Bruce and had he started the season you would be challenging for top 2.

But that doesnt mean you would be top like some seem to think and running away with the league.

Its going to take a drastic improvement for you to get top 2 now, not impossible but the sides above you arent crap or mediocre like some seem to think.

And yes i do realise the irony of a Leeds fan saying some are arrogant 

Really looking forward to the game.