barry'sboots

Agree completely with this. 4-5-1 for me. Friedel Luke/Beye --- Collins --- Dunne --- Warnock Marc --- Sidders --- NRC --- Delph --- Ash Gab JC as impact sub if needed. Wouldn't be the worst thing if Gab pulled out right and JC started in place of Marc but I would like him to get a chance at some point, unless we are playing really well but the game is still tight. We should have enough in that side to beat the hammers.

We should try and get them all converted to Downing and let him serve the suspensions. Be interesting to see how the squad comes in to play now. I just hope that if people come in and play well then they stay in and are not benched as soon as the suspension is ended?

I'll do my best. Critical - another bizarre formation for the front 6 (from listening to it on the radio) where the players seemingly don't know where they are playing and are getting in each others way. Positives - a great performance from the two CB's and little Brad. Defence now sorted! If MON wants to play 4-5-1 he has the CM's to do this without squeezing Jimmy inside. He just seems desperate to find a place in the side for one of either JC or Emile. JC is not playing well and Emile needs to play in a 4-4-2 IMO or his best assets are wasted?

Only listened on the radio but it did sound like another poor performance from the front six. Sounds like they were set up poorly though by MON, certainly for the first half, with Jimmy pushed inside and Gab out wide. I think Gabby is the only one of our strikers, except maybe the Fonz, who can play up top on his own. Heskey needs a second striker playing off him. Would have liked to have seen Delph come on for a striker and make it 4-5-1. Give him a chance for a bit of marauding. Not sure either of the big men are adding a lot at the minute. Congrats to Guzan and the two CBs.

I would have sex with Anne Widecombe for £20k per week so this is a no brainer. Of course, I would do the decent thing like Agent Ridgewell and ensure that I helped out the Villa in every derby game and oversaw the continual decline of the Scum.

You have pointed out every single tactical mistake you think MON has made after every game and claimed that without those mistakes villa would be top of the league. If that's not you thinking you know better than i don't know what is. There is no point having a debate because you think you know more than the currnet manager and that's crazy talk. I don't think I have said that we would be top of the league. Clearly, the discussion is hypothetical and there is no way I could say that and if I have I apologise. What I think I said, and should have if I didn't, is that I think, had we selected different teams in three of the games and made tactical substitutions in one or two others, then I believe that we could be top of the league and still in Europe. Implicitly, I suppose that I am saying that I know better than MON but we all say this when we have a different view to those in power. I'm sure that you have different views to Gordon Brown but that doesn't make you a better Prime Minister or mean that you are likely to be governing the country in the foreseeable future. There are no right or wrongs in such subjective matters, just opinions and some of mine happen to be different to MON's. I would find it surprising if there is anybody out there who agrees with everything MON does?

Maybe we should be pm'ing this but I don't think what I said i.e. "I would have liked to see an extra man in the CM to shore things up - Martin obviously didn't and got away with it IMO - we could have drawn/lost that if Deco and/or Anelka had their shooting boots on in the last half hour." does fit in to your first category. Firstly, I did qualify it with the IMO but also I do feel like we were under the cosh in that last 30 minutes, certainly my finger nails and throat that night were telling me so, and, in many respects, got away with it. This is despite, as I said earlier, being the better side for 30 minutes. Coincidentally, and back to the main topic of the thread, this was very much the same in a number of games last season where we were ahead and let a lead slip in the last 30 minutes (West Ham h, Stoke h, Man U a) with the difference this season probably being a stronger defence and, in this case, Chelsea not fully taking adavntage.

Blandy, thanks for that response. I am not sure what you are saying here? You say that there was poor team selection but then say you are unsure. I think we need someone more aggressive/energetic/robust in CM against the likes of Blackburn (and Bolton and Stoke etc when those games come). IMO, if you want to keep Stan in there then this dictates a 4-5-1, which had worked perfectly in Plop and well against Blues, with an impact sub/change to win the match - the two away games before. Hardly rocket science at the time. He had one fit striker, Gabby, so used 4-5-1 and it worked well away from home. As soon as JC was fit/Emile arrived he discarded it? I agree that Gabby, Ash and Jimmy have become much more flexible and are interchangeable and I do like to see this. It worked well for Utd in the Rooney/Ronaldo/Giggs era and I think it will work well for us. This for me is different to the 4-5-1 though where MON has tried getting JC to drop in and help out in CM e.g. against. For me, we do not have the forwards to do this at the minute and, if he wants an extra body in there then I believe he should be getting NRC/Craig or Fabian on the pitch. I do agree with this. But we are a top 8 side and should not be losing many. I think we could have lost less games which would be fantastic? This thread, for me, is about discussing whether we can become a top 4 side and what we need to do to get there and whether MON can take us there. Sorry, I must seem really argumentative but this doesn't concern me at this stage. My point was that not all of the big teams deserved to lose against the poorer teams but you will get bad luck some days and I can accpet that and expect it ocassionally - that was not the story of the Wigan, Blackburn or Wolves games though? We had significantly less possession against Plop but them relatively comfortable. When I referred to domination I meant in terms of chances. I think the way that we are set up, with pacy forward(s)/wingers means that we will probably have less possession most of the time, even if we play 4-5-1, if we are trying to release them quickly. I am talking about using 4-5-1 in selective circumstances: - away against aggressive bullying teams like Stoke, Bolton and Blackburn, very good teams or teams that also play 4-5-1. - at home when we are in the lead and the CM is starting to tire. I think we deserved to beat Chelski and played the better football. Indeed we should have been 3-1 up (or more) against 10 men coming in to the last 30 minutes. What I was saying is that we could have drawn/lost because they had a number of chances in the last 30 minutes. What really annoys me about this post and a number of Big John's is that you are both saying that none of us can express an opinion that is different to MON's without being arrogant and deluded. I thought this was the whole purpose of a discussion forum on football? Football is massively subjective and not one of us will agree on everything I suspect. But to say that we can't express our own opinions on the game as none of us can know better than MON is wrong IMO. I do think I am student of the game and love discussing it. Sometimes I will change my views or look at things differently when shown the error of my ways. Maybe I do think I could do a better job than certain managers some of the time but more likely the fact that I am sitting on my arse typing this to you whilst MON is doing it and earning £'000'000's of pounds shows that I am not. I don't think this should stop me posting my thoughts on my team on a Villa discussion site though?

Shit. That's ruined my season then. I thought MON was on here looking at my posts. Of course I'm aware of that! I am just trying to have a discussion on a discussion forum and struggling to find anyone who will come back and argue in favour of MON's decisions who can say anything more than "Do you think you know better than a premier league manager?". I am looking for someone to argue convincingly that we are correct to play a 4-4-2 in away games and to only substitute JC for Emile. Please Big John, show me the light. Well maybe you start by pointing out the weaknesses in my argument or criticisms of MOn's tactics as I have said above. You tell me why MON's team selections and tactics were right for Wigan, Blackburn and Wolves. You tell me why he would have been wrong to make a substitution against Citeh and put, say NRC, in to prevent Ireland from pulling the strings. Then maybe we can have a debate about football. I might not change your mind and you may not change mine but it could be interesting, just try it, eh?

. It's amazing how someone who you describe as pig-headed and who you imply lacks a depth of football knowledge managed to get us to beat Chelsea and Liverpool. Presumably it was a fluke? It's also worth pointing out that Burnley have beaten Everton and Man Utd. Wigan have beaten Chelsea, Stoke have won at Spurs, various sides have beaten Liverpool - To dismiss these as "rubbish" and "poor" sides seems....I dunno.... Blandy, put the semantics to one side and look at the core of what Commander is saying. Do you think that MON put out the right sides to beat Wigan, Blackburn and Wolves? If you do, do you think he should have made changes to those sides during the game when it was clear that we weren't playing well? Do you think MON should have responded to Mark Hughes bringing on Stephen Ireland? Do you think MON should have responded in the Rapid Vienna game when we were 2-0 up but clearly getting pressed back and they were making chances? These are the games in which, IMO, MON's lack of flexibility/plan B was exposed. The Plop game was spot on - he has now built a strong squad that he used to play the 4-5-1 away from home that many had been craving for a long time and got the deserved result. The Chelski game was a great first 60 minutes and then we looked under the cosh. I would have liked to see an extra man in the CM to shore things up - Martin obviously didn't and got away with it IMO - we could have drawn/lost that if Deco and/or Anelka had their shooting boots on in the last half hour. Of course teams will have off days when things don't go right BUT that, for me, is when a manager really earns his corn by recognising where things aren't maybe working and trying to do something about it - changing formation, making a sub etc.. These, of course, won't always work but better, IMO, to try something and get a result some of the time than not to try and get the same poor performance for the rest of the game 100% of the time? The better managers will get it to work more often than the poorer ones! To MON's credit he even demonstrated that he is capable of doing this in the Blues game and it worked. I just wish he'd try this more often? And frankly, I don't care if the others didn't perform to the best of their ability or their managers got it wrong against lesser sides, I want the Villa to be up there capitalising on these errors. I think you are also confusing some matters with your comparison as it is not as simple as just saying they lost to poorer sides e.g. Spurs lost to Stoke but should have beaten them about 7-0 judging by the commentary as they dominated the game but just couldn't score. We haven't done that in our two losses or the Wolves game as far as I am aware?

Surely the time to discuss the manager going and all our problems is when things are going badly and we aren't meeting expectations. At the moment we are a bit inconsistent like most teams in the prem and certainly like all the teams we will be challenging a top 4 spot with. You seem to want to talk about our short comings after every single game regardless of the performance or the result. I completely disagree with this Big John. I think what you are describing there is known as complacency. To only discuss faults when things are going well, and you are maybe getting that bit of luck, means that you will not be prepared for when you do hit a bit of a blip or the faults start to become more prevalent causing a downward trend in performances. Forgive me because, as you have pointed out on several occasions, I am no premier league manager but I have to agree with TRO and say a healthy debate on our failings is really interesting from my perspective. I hope that MON, Robertson et all are also having the same debates internally and striving for solutions. Only a fool buries their head in the sand and does not consider weaknesses (or opportunities for improvement if you want to put a more positive spin on this). As I said earlier, I do think we have some problems at the minute and I want to air and discuss these and debate solutions with others that follow my club. However, there are also some very good things happening at Villa that do not get discussed as intently as I think most Villa fans are in agreement on these points and there is not too much to debate, so just to balance it up: - Gabby's great form and general improvement - rock solid defence with options/cover - good young keeper - great kids coming through plus the recent addition of Delph - all the good work Randy is doing to the ground/infrastructure - the league position certainly My perceived negativity (I think you, and some others, would perceive me that way) is borne out of frustration because I actually think MON has now built a squad that is not far off and can challenge the Big 4 and Citeh. I think if he had made a few tweaks then we could have been right up there. I think that, with that in mind, I am probably one of the most positive posters on here? But as I said above, I think it would be silly not to also recognise the weaknesses and strive for solutions that would correct them and make us an even better club.

I want to see NRC in there instead of Heskey/Delph. Best result of the season was against Plop. We played 4-5-1. Consistently poor performances since with 4-4-2? Everton are also likely to go 4-5-1 and I felt that we have given them too much space in the past when we have pitched up with a 4-4-2. I want to see another Liverpool performance - don't care about possession but lets defend solidly and make all the chances and come away with another 3-1 win.

For me -------------------- Brad II ------------------- Young ---- Collins ---- Cuellar ---- Warnock -------------------- NRC ----------------------- Albrighton --- Sidwell --- Gardner --- Delph -------------------- Gabby -------------------- Give Dunney and Stan a rest. Milly, Ash, JC, Emile completes the bench. Lets give the bench warmers a chance to show what they can do.

I think Given is the best in the Premier League at the minute. Also thing Jaskalaanen and Schwarzer, both obviously at unfashionable clubs, would push VdS and Reina for second spot.

IMO this was because we didn't use him properly and Citeh aren't either. Again, IMO, I would love to see Barry in a Plop type set up with a DCM (Mascherano/Essien type) plus an attacking CM (Gerrard or Lampard type) with GB as the playmaker (Alonso or Pirlo type). I think that this would be the optimal formation for Gareth.

Not what I am saying. Some of our wins stand out as great performances - Plop and Fulham, always in control and very comfortable wins and Blues was good tactics for that game. Citeh & Chelski I thought we dominated first half but let them get back in through their tactical changes/pressure and I would have liked MON to respond to this with changes to our set up. Wigan, Blackburn and Wolves I think he got it wrong but compounded this by not taking the opportunity to use his bench to shake it up a bit. Pompey was a dull game for me where we beat a poor side without ever looking good and, again, I would have liked to see a bit more imagination when we were 2-0 up.

I agree with this. Formation and substitutions are one component of a tactical approach, albeit a fairly major component IMO. But do you think that MON is right to persist with the 4-4-2 with JC for Emile being pretty much his only change when things aren't working? There is a debate to be had about tactics I think. I know Big John would like to restrict participation in this debate to the 20 or so premier league managers but I am guessing that would restrict many of us from expressing any views on our club on this site and leave it all to the posts saying "Isn't MON great" or "Should we sign XXXX in January" - not that stimulating for many of us??

Not what I'm saying. I'm giving my views on how I would like to see our team managed. Apologies, but i thought that was the purpose of a discussion forum?? If you think mine, or indeed TRO's, views are incorrect then feel free to explain why the constant strategy of 4-4-2 with a late subbing of JC for Emile is the holy footballing grail of tactical genius. Maybe then we can have a decent debate/discussion?

You make good points and tactically he isn't always right at all, but to say if tactically he weren't so stubborn we'd be top because don't forget we've picked up 7 points against Liverpool, Chelsea and Man City and that's not down to sheer luck! I thought the changes he made in the Blackburn game cost us the match. Apart from that I don't think tactically he's got too much wrong this year. Might say the Wigan game but none of the players seemed up for it, seemed a lack of belief, everyone that day was poor. Look at this season: - we had a great pre-season after Stan went off injured - turning around Atlante, beating Porto and Juventus - first game of the season he opens against Wigan with a 4-4-2 with Stan, who had just come back from injury, and a new 18 yo who will be very good I am sure. This was against a Wigan team playing 4-5-1 and with battlers aplenty. I felt sure from the kick off that we would get outmuscled in here and also how p'd off the CM that had got those victories in pre-season must have been. Any rhetoric about picking in form players was blown away by this selection. Again, no response at half time despite the problem being clear. - we then go away to Plop and perform admirably in a 4-5-1 followed by a comfortable home victory against Fulham with the same team. - in between he goes back to the team that got murdered by Wigan for the Rapid Vienna game. They do okay to get to 2-0 but it is clear that CM is starting to get overrun. Why no change - either fresh legs or 4-5-1? - he does okay away at Blues although NRC wouldn't have been the one that I subbed, but that's just personal preference. - we are then poor against Pompey with a 4-4-2 but manage to scrape a win due to a rash tackle by Belhadj and a bit of excellence from Gab - ditto Cardiff where we scrape a win - we are then away to Blackburn and put in a generally lacklustre performance with the 4-4-2. Again, his only sub is JC for EH. What about trying JC for NRC or FD to get hold of the ball in the middle? We know we can do well with the 4-5-1 away from home and JC is certainly not playing well enough to say we would be mad to leave him out? - against Citeh we do well to get our noses in front but they bring on Ireland who starts to dominate the game and MON fails to respond to nullify this. - nearly similar experience against Chelski where, but for poor finishing from Deco and Anelka, we could have drawn/lost a game we deserved to win but MON will not shore up that CM area. - for the Wolves game he goes away with the same side/set up that was so poor against Blackburn and they put in a similar performance with the only tactical change MON can make being the subbing of JC for Emile. I feel that there are a lot of points lost here where he could have responded to our performances and opponents initiatives more positively. I feel MON is too one dimensional and we are suffering as a result and the guys on the bench/in the squad must be going crazy. I am not looking for wholesale changes. I certainly wouldn't be look to change around a back 4, for example, that has really come together. It is minor tweaks: - 4-5-1 or minimum 4-4-2 with NRC in there against aggressive teams like Wigan and Blackburn that are gonna chase you down and not try to play football initially - subtler use of JC, say as an impact sub as against Blues, particularly given his poor form of late - changing the CM for the last 20 mins when we are starting to get overrun and Stan is tiring (I don't think even the most ardent Stan fan can disagree that he does, even if they will argue that he is having to do the work of two CM's hence he tires) and either subbing one of the two or switching to a 4-5-1 I just don't see any ideas coming from MON. I would prefer him to try something and maybe come a cropper occasionally than stick to the 4-4-2 with Emile for JC in the last 20 which I don't think necessarily works anyway?

That doesn't make a number of the points on this thread invalid. I haven't voted for MON to go because I think he has built a very good squad and is capable of getting good results, BUT I am still left massively frustrated by his inflexibility and lack of tactical awareness without which I believe we could be top of the table at present. I do, however, agree with many that I am not that sure who we would get in as a replacement that would do any better. Rafa makes the same mistakes, even SAF plays players in strange positions and Wenger still hasn't worked out that he needs a midfield enforcer. They are a frustrating bunch. Its just a good job that we are all far superior managers. Wouldn't you just love a crack at it and I'd only need £10k a week to accept the job!

Commander, you are very right IMO. The only thing I would disagree with is that I think he has put together a squad capable of breaking the top 4, certainly with a small tweak in the next window - Emile out, Huntelaar or Cole in. I would love to see MON learn from his mistakes and do it but I don't think he can - he didn't manage to after the end of last season.

I am not having a go at Emile, but he has to do something right with all the time he gets on the pitch. What I am criticising is MON's inability to try anything new when things aren't working. It was the same the last 15 games of last season - more of the same when he has options.

Tactics and substitutions. This will be the same as last season. There's little point beating Chelski if we can't beat relegation fodder tat like Wolves is there? Agreed. Another poor performance away from home with a 4-4-2 involving JC starting - who is just not on his game at the minute - following the same story against Blackburn. MON talks of rotation but he is paying it lip service only. We were crying out for the 4-5-1 that has given us such a good run of results away from home. If not from the start then after 45 mins JC for NRC/Delph/Gardner was the right move for me (would have much prefered it the other way round with JC as an impact sub for the last 20 mins if still deadlocked). Instead of this, MON shocked us all with his tactical genius and the substitution of JC for Emile. The other guys on the bench must be getting really fed up and be wondering how bad things have to be going for them to get a chance during a game.

The accusation that MON is dishonest is quite strong and not a little extraordinary. Care to back it up with some examples of what you count as his dishonesty? You have chosen to focus on one word and, as such, taken this out of context I think. I feel the same about MON - that he says a lot without really saying anything and never really gives us an insight into what he is looking to do with the Villa team, hence a lot of posters on here quoting brief snippets of MON and debating what he means e.g. recent posts on Downing, whether Milner will play centrally, no real comments on NRC - a particular frustration of mine - etc..

Don't really follow what you're getting at. Someone's started a thread on a premise which has been pretty comprehensively rebuffed by real life, some people have pointed that out, poster continues to try to make the same point in a less direct way, some people continue to explain, gently rib, or start to express exasperation. I don't see abuse here. Or was it ironical? Websites are getting the point where I'm starting to expect smileys to explain things, instead of words. You clearly haven't read the latter pages of the thread then because I have said over the last couple of posts that I think his performances are much improved (Citeh and Chelski) and accept that he can play in a 4-4-2. Although I still think he tends to tire towards the end, maybe because he has put so much in. I think if you looked at the games we have played 4-4-2 this season and the last 15 games of last season you would see a marked increase in the oppositions possession/territory and consequencially goals in the last quarter of the game. My latest thought was that, where we are up in games - Citeh, Chelsea and Rapid Vienna plus a number from the last 15 games of last season - I would be looking to shore things up by bringing on an extra body in CM and switching to 4-5-1. And this is what the posts above are referring to, I think. We know that we can play this formation well but the question has often been asked "can we break teams down playing this at home?" If we are ahead we do not need to, we can use the 4-5-1/4-3-3 to soak up pressure and break fast/counterattack with our pace out wide and up top as we do so well with this formation away from home.