ChesterDad

Definitely worth a start - not expecting anything again from Watkins today, hoping but defo not expecting

For me Dougie is one of those players we will regret selling, but what can the club do? It’s clear he wants to go and can anyone blame him.

He hasn’t torn up any trees here, but I still think his star will shine somewhere 

5 hours ago, weedman said:

I mean it's not *just* about being a willing runner, that's just one part. It's, well it's all the other things I also said. If you think Archer is going to get a lot of success challenging 6 ft 5 burley premier league defenders for hopeful long punts forward then you must have been watching a different player to me.

Its not that he's not a good player, I really like him, but he plays on the shoulder most of the time. He can do other things too, but what makes him a potential PL player is that ability to get in behind and finish chances, a bit like Owen was. He could probably put in OK performances in our current team, but for all his faults Watkins isn't just a runner, his touch is off and his finishing is poor at the moment but he is capable of standing up to and almost bullying much bigger players. When he does that the ball can fall to our other players, when he holds up the ball it allows other players to make the 80 yard run forward to actually try and attack. 

Watkins at the moment can't beat a man, his touch is off and his finishing is poor, no argument from me, and if I were in charge I'd like to play Ings or Archer and set the team up to service them (runners off Ings, so the likes of Buendia Ramsey and Bailey, with a creative, defence minded base behind them in midfield, like Luiz and Kamara or McGinn, or quick movement and creative players behind Archer, so Coutinho, Buendia, McGinn with at least 1 runner behind them to pull the ball forward like Ramsey), but the fact is that Gerrard does not play that way. He needs someone up top who can do what Watkins does and hold the ball up because we just do not provide any service to whoever plays up front

There's no point being an excellent finisher if you never get the ball in dangerous positions in the first place, I'd like to see Archer play as much as anyone, but he'll just be bullied in our set up and we'll turn over possession more than we already do, although it could work if he were to play up front with Ings or Watkins, but that would mean changing our set up again which, let's be honest, Gerrard just isn't going to do

My main point here is that I don’t even think Watkins holds the ball up any where near as often as you allude too, most time the ball is played up to him, it bounces off him or he miss controls the ball or the defender has an easy take from him, to my mind he has been pretty ineffective for 90% of his time on the pitch so far.

With regards to Archer, clearly it would represent a gamble right now - but for me and what I have seen of him thus far, his technique is better than Watkins, he is mobile so can work the channels, he can as you rightly say, play on the shoulder and as for those 6.5 defenders go ahead let them clatter him and we’ll take the free kick and they take the yellow/reds.

To be truthful with you - I see very little value in starting him right now. Too many are harping back to his first season with us, in fairness he did well, but right now he looks a million miles from being that player.

Only time will tell if he can get back close to that form - one swallow doesn’t make a summer.

I’m not completely writing him off just now - I am prepared to see how he goes under a new manager, but I do have serious doubts tbh with you 

4 hours ago, weedman said:

We can all see his limitations but honestly he's being set up for failure by our "system". Gerrard clearly sees Ings as the better player hence him starting first game but Ings needs runners, he drops deep and plays one twos and little bits of pass and move football, Archer relies on service, through balls etc for him to get on the end of.

Our only method of attack is to have Mings or Emi lump the ball forward for the striker to either 1) challenge in the air against 2 or 3 much bigger and more physical defenders or 2) chase the ball down the line and hope to do something as there'll be no-one else in the opposition half by the time they get the ball. 

Ollie is good at holding the ball up under pressure, he's tenacious and hard working and if you're the only player in the opposition half up against 5 or 6 defenders that's the only way he's even getting a sniff of a chance. 

When Ings plays, for all his instincts, for all his history of goalscoring, for all his being in the right place at the right time how often do we say afterwards that we "barely realised he was on the pitch". He virtually never sees the ball because we have absolutely no plan on how to get it to him. 

As long as Gerrard is here Watkins simply has to start I'm afraid, Archer or Ings would just get marked out of the game and we'd just constantly turn over possession 

With all due respect I disagree - what is the point in a willing runner who essentially does feck all when he gets the ball, other than give it away?

Archer seems an equally mobile and willing runner, with a better touch - it feels somewhat of a no brainier to give him an opportunity ? 

5 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

That's exactly it isn't it. We don't actually create any chances, so at least Watkins is like 3% more likely to nick it off a defender by more effective pressing than Ings or Archer. 

In general I just think Ollie's confidence is totally and utterly shot, and he needs someone to come in and do the 'striker whisperer' thing that Sherwood did to Benteke. Currently he's carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders, and he's not the only one either. 

Whilst I agree that we don’t create many chances I don’t agree that Watkins is likely to score by nicking the ball from a defender - he just doesn’t  have that calmness in front of goal in my opinion.

whereas Archer who equally looks as mobile and energetic does have that look about him.

Can we really be any worse off ?

7 hours ago, Thug said:

Just two seasons ago he was playing brilliantly.

He never had a finishers touch, but he was playing very very well.

Earned himself an England call up.

 

Yes but that was two seasons ago and even then, many of us spotted concerns in his game.

I hope I am wrong and he gets back to some kind of form/confidence but even this is not good enough in the bigger picture imo 

Personally I find it very strange that so many write him off - if he had half the opportunities as Coutinho has, we would all be singing his praises. Anyone who has played the game, will know how difficult it can be knowing just how difficult it can be, knowing if the team don’t perform if most likely your neck on the chopping block.

Emi is easily our most gifted individual and some.

This said if Gerrard is here in Jan I’d be off like a shot tbh if I were him 

21 hours ago, Thug said:

I refuse to judge any player until we get a proper manager in charge

I don’t know why with due respect - the manager has nothing to do with him being not very good at football.

Watkins has the same touch as that fat bloke who used to play no 11

1 hour ago, ROTTERDAM1982 said:

Thats the kind of quality you want at VP?

Well put it like this - Bertie in my view is significantly better than Bailey - and can you tell me that Sanson is not worth a chance to show exactly how good or bad he is? Can he honestly be worse than McGinn, Ramsey at this current moment - in my view for what’s it’s worth I doubt it very much.

13 minutes ago, ROTTERDAM1982 said:

I'm always amazed at how you miss the point.

What alternatives were there last night?

Ings, no movement, no pace, or Archer, unconfirmed potential?

In place of?

Midfdield..   Dendonker/Sansom....in place of?

We are bereft of quality up front, and without Kamara , in midfield also. Tinkering around will not hide the fact that since Jack we win half as many games.The void has not been filled with Ings, Bailey or Emi, thats not Gerrards fault.

It’s totally his fault that we look bereft of ideas, cohesion, identity and so forth.

There is enough good players in this squad to be doing so much better than we are currently doing - Bertie and Morgan say hi 

6 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

He's been crap. but so has everyone under this shit manager.

Ings, Watkins, Coutinho, Buendia, Bailey, Ramsey should be a pretty formidable attack. But they all look crap.

That's not to absolve Coutinho of blame. But I still think there's hope we can get him remotely back to form if we had a good manager

Don’t think Emi can be included in this list tbh - he is the one little chink of light for me and should be the first name on the team sheet and go from there 

6 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

They will give him chelsea game and there is no chance in hell we are winning that or even getting anything 

Villa park is going to get toxic on sunday and that eill be end of him

It was just a bad choice from the get go - There is absolutely no connection between Gerrard and us, other than a massive pay check.

I knew from the moment he walked through the door - this would end badly. Rookie manager, no identity or affiliation to us ( and I have always believed this is something we would prefer in our managers) how could it have gone differently.

He might still come good in his career, but Villa park is not the place to be learning on the job.

He should have gone to a championship bottom half club and see if he could build a reputation first.

Got to go - the expensive project has failed 

2 hours ago, FLVillan said:

I think the problems with Coutinho are two-fold: 1. Mental and 2. Positional.

1. I think he's mentally weak in terms of his own confidence levels.  When he was his best at the Dippers, he was in a team that won most of the time, surrounded by other productive attackers.  He had no pressure to perform so he was relaxed and produced magical moments.  But when he's in a situation where his team is not performing and is low on confidence, he himself is affected by it.  Gerrard has repeatedly said that he needs to feel "loved" and I'm sure he is, yet that seems to have had little-to-no effect on his performances.  He looks sad to be honest. 

2. It's well-documented that his struggles at Barcelona started almost immediately because he was not ever going to be playing as a central player while they had Messi (and Iniesta).  Barcelona bought a number 10 and tried to turn him into a left-sided attacker.  His best years were as a number 10 and his best season since leaving the Dippers was when he played in that role for a season on loan at Bayern.  If he is ever going to recapture his old form he needs to be given a number 10 role.  However with the weakness of the current Villa midfield we cannot afford to play with a number 10, hence why he's played on the left.  

Do I feel sorry for him?  No.  But I do feel he is utterly wasted in his current role.  Unless there is a dramatic change to our system of play and personnel, we will never see the player he could be.....

I agree totally - however I honestly do not feel this should be at the expense of Buendia who is still on an upward trajectory in his career, whilst unfortunately Coutinho no longer is and should not be taking minutes off Emi imo 

1 minute ago, Mark_1989 said:

Nah Watkins just a bad footballer in general

I agree - weak technically, poor decision maker, very little footballing nous.

All round just not very good imo 

8 hours ago, TRO said:

In some aspects, I would say he was.....my point was Andy was effective, he was not renowned for his talent, his bravery, courage, willingness to win, desire, Brian Little was far more talented....were the prime hallmarks of his success.

We sometimes, over rate talent......talent on its own, is only half way there.....but some fans, harp on about it, as if its the be all and end all, and as long as its there, we are home and dry......and no we are not.....application is equally as important.

 

TRO - I do rate your opinion on all matters Villa - but I have no idea what you are saying here?

There is absolutely no way you can put Watkins in the same conversation as Andy Gray.

Gary Shaw, Peter Withe, Dion Dublin, Dean Saunders are all players I would be happy to see put in the same mould as Andy - but Watkins ? You are having a laugh surely? Watkins is average at best. Maybe Dean had what it takes to bring the best out of Watkins and get him playing above himself 

5 hours ago, brummybloke said:

Andy gray could hit a ball hard and head a ball hard. His bravery got him many goals.

Could Andy gray sprint passed players, dribbling the ball and cut inside before beating the keeper ? Nope is the honest answer. He was like shearer or shearer was like Andy gray. Known for finishing. Not for being a talented footballer ( clearly they both were but their talent was scoring and hold up play, talent now is mainly judged on other aspects of the game).

 

With all due respect how often does Watkins do the things you speak of successfully ? He might try but he is not very good at this imo.

Andy was brave, good in the air, had footballing nous, and his lay off’s were also very good, in todays climate, he would be worth around £80mill 

On 07/10/2022 at 11:37, TRO said:

He was right.....but then that drifts in to mentality and desire territory.....we all know they are talented.......but that has to translate in to results and performances on match day.

I am tired of listening to this player or that player has talent.......its not good, if you don't apply it, on match day.

How many players over the years, had modest talent.....but the effect on a game was gargantuan.

Andy Gray, once said to me....."I'm not that good you know, but every time I go out to play, I know, I'm going to score"........Thats because the "drive and desire"  he had made him that way.

I think Ollie is probably, more talented than Andy was......But the net effect, is not the same.

I suspect our manager, was the same.

TRO - please don’t take this personally, but are you serious in saying Watkins is more talented than Andy Gray was? 
how have you arrived at this conclusion - Watkins couldn’t trap a medicine ball and when it comes to bravery - well please.

You simply cannot compare Watkins in any aspect of the game

On 06/10/2022 at 22:24, Zatman said:

Because  Steven Gerrard is a clown

Absolutely - how on earth Bailey gets game time and Bertie gets shipped to a footballing wilderness is beyond comprehension for me.

On 04/10/2022 at 15:23, BOF said:

Based on league positions we've had the 3rd easiest schedule so far, which obviously hasn't translated into league position for us.  Looking at the other clubs, most sides with easier schedules are in the top half of the league so you could say they've made it count.  The exception is Leeds who, despite the 6th easiest schedule find themselves 12th. Not good, but not as bad as us.

On the flip side of that, Fulham who've had the 2nd toughest schedule so far (only Palace have had tougher) find themselves 8th in the league.

So yeah, when the schedule does turn we'll need to find some steel or we're in even more trouble than we're already in.

I do think we'll have enough, but the fact the ambition has fallen so low as to be even having this conversation tells us all we need to know.

Sure i agree, I think most of us feel this way too - but is it really enough ? Reported £6mill a year in salary plus a huge wedge on an over inflated coaching staff and between them they can’t get a tune out of quite a talented bunch of players. Added to this he lets one of our three most talented players go out on loan.

I really don’t think he has the foggiest idea of what to do - however I agree in that there are three sides worse than us and on this basis I feel we’ll be safe 

1 hour ago, TRO said:

Thanks.

but I don't think we are giving enough credit here to SG.

The start to the season has put us in a hole, no doubt about that and that first game is on SG for me.....and he is trying find a way out, against a back drop of injuries to key players...gradually, I think he is, but the price is spectacle, its dull......and he knows it.

I think he does have faith in Archer, but doesn't want to destroy his confidence in a team desperate for points.......I see that as having the lads well being at heart.....if we was flying like Arsenal, he would be playing.

Maybe another fault was not signing a striker in the summer.....but hindsight is an exact science.

I know, its a paradox, But I think, that is the case.....I think he rates him highly, but the Prem and the championship is a huge gap.

TRO - you are one of the most respected posters on VT but I just cannot agree with your evaluation of Gerrard - your like me, we’ve seen us win everything bar the Fa cup.

Gerrard is absolutely useless imo, yes he has suffered injuries to key players but he has shown us nothing to suggest that he has the foggiest idea of what he is doing.

He is as bad as Bruce and the football is very similar .

I’m afraid it’s all on him four square.

We are truly dreadful to watch - this is not turning itself around TRO - he has to go imo, we missed a massive opportunity after Dean was sacked to have got Eddie Howe.

Hindsight is wonderful but no way are we in a better position than when Dean was here - at least there was goodwill around the place 

45 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think we rely on Ollie as the long outlet ball.....Danny is not as athletic to deal with that, so we change and lose something........these two players have us caught between a rock and a hard place.....maybe as a hybrid, they would be ok, 

and to be fair, they are not, SG's buys......should he be getting more out of them, 64 million dollar question?......I guess most on here, think he should....but what if a next manager can't, either.....another pile of dough.

You make some good points here TRO and difficult to argue against - not that I have any desire to.

what I would like to add though is that there is more than enough ability in this squad to create chances for fun.

Also we have a kid chomping at the bit and gets 8 minutes against Bolton - this is all on him TRO and I don’t personally think he has the foggiest idea of what to do, and up to now he doesn’t seem to have much faith in Archer.

25 minutes ago, TRO said:

That was the point, that's what we need.....These "one hell of a players" is what we need, all over the pitch.

We sign Sanson, Newcastle sign Guimaraes...sure there is a difference in transfer fee.....but there lies a part of the problem.

We sign, substandard, and expect managers to bring them up to standard.....its not always possible.

Bertie is mercurial, like many wide players we have signed, Bailey too.......great one minute, dull the next.....this inconsistency is commensurate of where we are.

 

Again with the very greatest of respect is Sansom the best barometer here? Can you tell me if he is any good or not? 
I can’t TRO and I have followed us since 1975. Personally I think there is a player in there waiting to come out.

I believe we have signed some talented individuals in the past 12-18 months - I believe we have also signed a dud manager as well - which is why we are where we are imo 

3 minutes ago, TRO said:

Both not good enough for me.

The barometer for me is.....how fearful are the opposition of them?....How much fear does he instil?.....He seems to run up blind alleys, like most wingers we buy.

Its alright having tricks or flicks, but are they effective?

I don't for example, see the the same effectivenes, as say, Luis Diaz, or the same aggression in their game...with not too much difference in transfer fee.

We seem to look at tricks and flicks and not much else.......where's this pace, he is supposed to have?

Probably not the best barometer to use Diaz, he is one hell of a player.

Bertie I believe can offer more than flicks and step overs that lead to nothing.

see West Brom. I think that if he has a manager who has faith in him and is prepared to incorporate him into a system he could easily have defenders on the back foot, or force teams into doubling up and therefore potentially creating more space for others ? 

1 hour ago, Tom13 said:

I agree re Bertie, I'm his biggest fan. What makes you think he has an ego though, or is that cos of Butler?

Maybe I’m totally off base on this, but I feel there is a sense amongst supporters that he does have an ego - or just an over inflated opinion of his own worth to the team, probably not helped by his fathers input, might I suggest ?

6 minutes ago, Tom13 said:

Traore's decision making in the final third was in fact very good, nowhere near atrocious.

Bailey shows some lovely tight dribbling at times, and while I do think he may lack a bit in the decision making department, I'd wait until we have something resembling a team before judging him.

I can’t see Bailey cutting it in the prem, overstated view of his own worth and no where near as good as Bertie - absolute criminal decision to loan out Bertie and keep Bailey imo