barry'sboots

Of course it could happen that way. I was purely setting out what I would have like to have seen with 20-25 minutes left. I have talked about games this season but there were also a number of times last season where we lost leads in the last 20 minutes or so through being too open (a 4-4-2 with Stan and Barry) IMO. Of course some people may want to stick with a 4-4-2 or, like MON arguably, start dropping strikers back into the midfield and moving midfielders around. I would probably always prefer to see a specialist "battler" coming on at that stage.

And your claim to footballing fame is? He is very knowledgeable fyi. I would have thought a discussion forum, which I think is what VT is, would be the perfect place for hypothetical scenarios? I certainly haven't said this (not sure whether I am the accused or not). We were deservedly up and, as someone pointed out earlier, could have and maybe should have been up by more - definite penalty, JC could have scored and you could argue that Brad should have saved their goals. So it was a great performance. All I am saying is that we came into the last 20 minutes leading by the odd goal and I would have preferred it if MON had shut down the CM by adding in NRC and going 4-5-1. He didn't and I felt that they were able to cut through us a couple of times and, on another day, might have scored an equaliser. I feel that this was what happened against Citeh when they introduced Ireland and, if MON had responded to that by closing down the CM, we might have held on that night.

I said earlier that I thought Stan had played really well but I question whether this trait of always slowing the pace down can be a negative when we play poorer teams that defend in numbers and where we are looking to use our pace through speedy counterattacking to get at these sides before they re-organise. One of my mates, who is a very keen footballer and does scout for Luton, remarked about this when he came to the Pompey game. I would argue that 4-5-1 is not always defensive, particularly when it becomes 4-3-3 and if there is someone like Sidders with a good engine bursting to support the 1 knowing that there are still 2 CM'ers left behind him. Of course the teams quoted will often break down sides later on as the others tire from chasing the ball at the feet of better players. I don't think we would necessarily suffer this as we showed with 4-5-1 at Plop. I suspect if you looked at the stats for the last 20 mins or so Chelski would have had the lions share of possession and territory with our 4-4-2 as well. I am not even saying that this would have changed if we had gone 4-5-1 but I think that they would have found it more difficult to carve open our CM with an extra body in there and it might have released Ash and Jimmy more to support, preferably, Gabby.

Well thank God MON is manager and you're not. We just deservedly beat the favourites to win the league, and still you're not happy. MON got everything right on saturday. Would you still be saying this if Anelka and Deco had scored when they were clean through? Of course this is hypothetical but we could have drawn or lost on Saturday. Do you think he got everything right against Citeh or Blackburn or Wigan? No-one ever gets everything right, as far as I am aware, but admittedly MON is doing good things. Doesn't mean we can't improve. You obviously disagree but don't assume I am not happy - I couldn't stop grinning all weekend, especially speaking to best mate who is a Cheslki fan.

Just to change the topic of the thread slightly, it is clear that Chelski have some really good players - first touch and passing etc is excellent - but four things struck me about them on Saturday. - their balance looks poor with the diamond and no right sided midfielder. Deco drifts in and leaves Bosingwa isolated. - Frank Lampard doesn't look half the player in a 4-4-2 when he has more "defensive" responsibilities and you take away the goals - Ivanovic looked really poor - crap first touch - and a bit chunky for a professional footballer. - Cech has lost what made him the best and is probably now a bottom half Premier League keeper. Certainly not in the same class as Given + some others. I think Ancelotti has got his work cut out if he is going to get anywhere in the CL. Possibles for Premier League as Man U look weaker. I wouldn't mind an outside bet on Arsenal if they can keep their first team fit. I would personally switch back to 4-3-3 asap.

I think the dugouts at OT look a little bit stupid? I don't think they show class or ambition. Defo status quo in this area for me.

We kinda did switch to 4-5-1. Gabby went out right and Milner moved in for the last 10/15 or so. Also, switching to 4-5-1 doesn't neccessarily close out the game. IMO, it allows the opposing team to sit higher up the pitch which doesn't always "relieve the pressure". I think MON got it right, as the result, not speculation, proves. Look, I am as happy as the next Villa fan about this result but I think a CM three of Stan, NRC and Sidders with Gab up top would have been more secure - NRC was fresh for a start and is a better harrier than the other two (and Milner for that matter) IMO and Gabby up top on his own is better than JC or Emil on their own, again, IMO. As I said previously, I also thought that we should have done this against Citeh to counter the Stephen Ireland effect and we might have held on there and been two points better off and beaten three Big 5 sides. I also disagree that a 4-5-1 necessarily invites teams on. If played with the right players it can push the opposition back as it frees up the wingers somewhat from defensive duties and can push the opposition FBs back. I think it would have been really useful here as Deco was starting to drift inside and give them a CM three. It was a hard last 15 minutes or so to watch and my nails and throat are definitely not what they were before the game. I would guess that, on possession/territory stats for the last 20 mins, Chelski had the lion's share - certainly how it felt from where I sat - and as such we were pushed back anyway. Of course both this and my view for Citeh are speculation and we will never know but I am just expressing my view as to what I would have done for the last 20 minutes or so to make it harder for Chelski. As I said, they have some quality players and did carve us open a couple of times down the centre with Deco and Anelka squandering chances that, if they had been Gabby or Ash in the same situation, I would have been quite disappointed about. I don't want to take away the positives of another Big 4 win but I am just stating that there are a couple of tactical things that I would have done differently from MON. I am just debating points around the Villa's play and can assure you that I want the same thing as you but might have different views as to how we should look to achieve them.

Have to agree that Stan proved on Saturday that he can play in a 4-4-2. My only negative comment is that I would have liked MON to have switched to a 4-5-1 with 20-25 mins left to close out the game. I still thought Stan looked a bit leggy (but he was entitled to after the hard work he had put in!) and we were starting to get cut open a bit by Chelski - who have the ability to do this with Lampard, Deco and Anelka - and I would have loved to have seen a bit more bit in CM with NRC's presence. I think Carew had become quite ineffective in there by that point anyway and NRC would have been a significantly more productive sub than Emil, leaving Gab up top to keep to keep Terry and Carvalho on full alert. I also thought with 15 mins or so left Delph for Ash might have been on the cards to give us a bit more energy and have a go at Ivanovic who lloked really poor and unfit for a top footballer. Now we have a squad, I wish MON would use it a bit more. Also would have given Ash and JC a rest and kept bench players happy.

I would have picked my MOTM out of Collins, Warnock and Gabby. I didn't think Chelsea looked as good playing their diamond. I think they have too mant CM'ers and are squeezing them in but do not have good balance. This is also killing Lampard's goal threat and exposing him somewhat. Essien, Lampard and Drogba are made for 4-5-1 IMO. I still thought that they have some great individuals and showed some sublime touches - Drogba's lay offs off the outside of his foot are amazing and always find their target. Great performance though and, if we play like that we should challenge for the European places this season. My one negative would have been that I thought MON was poor with his bench again. I would have brought NRC on for the last 20 minutes, leaving Gabby up front on his own, to shut down the space in CM and close the game out. We got there though, although my nails are now very short.

Can't be that simple. You say with Barry yes yet we only won 2 of 15 with that CM duo at the back end of last season?

Agreed Jon. Equally not a strong enough or large enough sample to conclude that these are the best two, certainly when the only other central pairing to have been given a chance is Stan and Delph and that is clearly not going to work, at least in the short term, from the evidence to date.

Didn't they play together in the Blackburn loss and Citeh draw?

I know that you are just responding to Kiwivillan's remark, but quoting a home win against Pompey is hardly a ringing endorsement of a team selection when that team arguably has its sights set on CL qualification. This is made even less appropriate by the fact that, IMO, Pompey probably matched us in that game with the exception of a silly foul by Belhadj and a great solo effort by Gabby. This is a bit like saying forget the crap run at the end of last season with Gareth and Stan in the CM positions because we did manage to beat Hull at home in those 15 games, even though again they pressed us hard for the last 20 minutes of that game without any real threat up front.

Couldn't resist responding to this. Do you not think that Nigel played the DCM well in the season before last when it was often NRC and Barry in CM? IMO, if we had bought Luke Young the season before we did instead of allowing him to go to Boro (so he could play that season and Olly could have played CB) and a cheap transitional RM like, say Gary O'Neill, we would have been close to the big 4 that season and defo finished above Everton. My argument for not playing Stan in a 4-4-2 is not based upon his abilities but more the fact that he tires after 60 minutes afterwhich we tend to get overrun in CM and concede late goals (numerous games last season including West Ham H, Man U A, Stoke H and Rapid Vienna this season plus arguably Blackburn). I feel that MON should either replace him with, say, NRC at that point or supplement him with another CM and switch to 4-5-1. I believe it would be hard for even the most ardent Stan fan to argue against this?

I agree with you wholeheartedly on Sidders and I think that is part of the reason why Barry and De Jong struggled to get into the game so much. I can also see your point with a NRC and Sidders pairing of lack of retention. However, I don't think we will ever be a side that dominates possession unless MON buys a different type of CM or Downing and Delph come through and do that job. I think, particularly given the wingers that we have, that a CM pairing of NRC and Sidders - win the ball and get it out wide quickly - could work, as it did in pre-season. I think they are well worth a shot, certainly for the last 30 mins when Stan's legs have gone? I think Stan's ball retention and constant turning backwards can often lose us the initiative in a fast break which is our best chance of scoring. Sidwell worked really well with Harper at Reading, who, IMO, is a poor man's NRC and not the sort of controlling footballer you talk of. Admittedly, my favourite CM pairing in recent years was the Barry and NRC duo - pace, energy, tackling of NRC plus maturity and guile of Barry - and if we had a RM that season I think we would have been challenging the top 4 and certainly finishing above Everton. Maybe NRC and Downing when fit if we are gonna play 4-4-2?

I think your first paragraph is very valid and good way of expressing things as I see them. I am interested by what you mean by your send point?

I am really hoping that MON returns to the 4-5-1 for this game. We beat them at VP two seasons ago with Luke dropping in to sit on Makalele and stifling their game. Don't think any of our current forwards could do this? Having said this, I think that Ancelotti might now be playing 4-4-2?? Should be a good game anyhow.

Which is quite strange, as he has been comfortably our best midfielder for the last nine months. Therein lies the issue highlighted by this post I guess. Half of the respondents to this poll - who think he can't play in a 4-4-2 - would appear to disagree with you and half probably think you are correct. It is amazing how views can be so polarised for one player!

Sorry pal, but you had better go back and read my post on the "where art thou Fabian?" thread. I said that I thought Sidders had a really good first half but didn't look as good second half as he was having to drop deep more to help the tiring Petrov. And that's the "truth". I think you will struggle to find too many posts on here with me praising Stan overly for his performances over the past 9 months. As for your choice as to who played well in Monday night's game that is obviously for you to make your own assessment. I don't disagree that Ash was disappointing after the De Jong tackle, although I think he still probably carried our most potent threat along with Gabs. I do think MON was wrong to take Ash off and replace him with NRC on the RW - I personally would have pulled Gab back to RW and put NRC in CM to go 4-5-1, allowing Sidders to get up in support of Heskey (alternatively Jimmy could have stayed on the RW and Heskey back to LW) - as I think we looked unbalanced after this.

Sorry Bickster but you can see from the poll that half the respondents do not think that Stan can play DCM in a 4-4-2. My criticism is based not around a hypothetical scenario as you state but on what actually happened in the second half following Mark Hughes bringing on Ireland. I thought he found acres of space because Stan was trotting back and not picking him up. I made that clear in my post - this is not me inventing scenarios. There are a number of responses on here that say Stan played well last night. I didn't think he did particularly - and there are again a number on here that would agree with that view. I thought Sidwell was a better performer, having an excellent game in the first half but having to drop in more second half as Stan tired/Ireland got in behind him thus nullifying his attacking/work further up the park (as often happened with Barry at the end of last season). This is not just based on my assessment of his performance in each game, but I think results over the last 9 months also substantiate this. - we were poor for the last 15 games of last season which, IMO, was down to MON not picking the right formation in certain games (Liverpool A, Chelsea H, Everton H) and not subbing Stan/supplementing him to go 4-5-1 in the last 30 mins when he could hardly walk (Stoke H, West Ham H, Hull H, Man U A etc..) - we were poor in pre-season until Stan got injured BUT much better when he went off and NRC stepped in - turning around the Atlante game, beating Porto comfortably and holding off Juventus whilst also performing very well by all accounts. - Stan walks straight back in to a the Wigan game and we are very poor and overrun in CM. - 4-5-1 produces good results against Plop. - Stan back in 4-4-2 against Rapid Vienna and we cannot close the game out, ultimately lucky not to lose on the night with all their late chances. - 4-5-1 wins against Fulham and Blues - 4-4-2 against Pompey produces an unconvincing win (IMO) against relegation fodder - 4-4-2 produces a loss to Blackburn - 4-4-2 admittedly gets a decent draw against wealthy Citeh but I believe we were in a position to have won this I am not blaming Stan and do believe he has an important part to play. I blame MON for not playing 4-5-1 when it is needed, not trying others in a 4-4-2 and/or not subbing Stan when he tires or supplementing him to go 4-5-1 at that point. But, also, I do not think he is the star player that many seem to think he is. His ball retention is good but equally he always turns back and this slows us down, particularly when much of our game is about using the pace of Gab and Ash for a fast break. I do not see a range of passing that many imply, in fact I don't think his distribution is any better than the much maligned NRC on the basis of this season's displays. He certainly doesn't have the energy to go box to box or track back when he is caught up field. I have seen very little evidence from the pro Stan lobby other than the comments that he was player of the season last year or he is our best player. Why?

How does that work. Where is the balance??

He seems to divide opinion massively. 50:50 almost with those who support him saying he was our best midfielder and those who don't thinking he is our worst. Bizarre??

I thought Citeh played into our hands yesterday with a CM pairing of De Jong and Barry in the first half. Low energy pairing ideal for Sidwell to get stuck into and not too taxing for Stan. If I were Hughes I would have gone 4-5-1 and stuck Ireland in there and that would have been a different proposition but he has too many strikers to only play one up top! They were the better side though second half with Ireland added to Barry and he constantly found space in behind the, by that stage, trotting back 10 yards off play Petrov. This meant that Sidwell had to drop in and support and lost the initiative inviting the opposition on as we did so often in the last 15 games of last season, Wigan, Rapid Vienna and Blackburn. For me, he doesn't have the energy to play this role, or any role in a 4-4-2 for that matter. I would have introduced NRC (either for Stan or Carew and switched to a 4-5-1) to snuff out Ireland and think we would have gone on to win the game from there. You only have to see the difference that the energy of Wilson Palacios (IMO no better a player than NRC - not a great passer or prolific scorer) makes to the Spurs team in CM and my Spurs supporting mates rate him as Arry's best piece of business. I know that this will split the board but thought a poll would be interesting.

I completely agree. I thought they played into our hands with the lack of pace/energy/drive in the De Jong/Barry partnership reminiscent of our Stan/Barry partnership of last season and easy for Stan and Sidwell to cover. Ireland changed the game and found loads of space because he moves and Stan doesn't - I would have stuck with 4-4-2 probably but replaced Stan with NRC who would have done a job on Ireland IMO. As for Ash's injury, that was the time to go 4-3-3 IMO and get Gab out wide right. Bringing NRC on to the RW was not very clever IMO and meant we were unbalanced. This would have left us with pace on both sides and allowed Sidwell the freedom to join Heskey. Too much to ask for MON to try and bring on players in to a familiar position or change a formation during a game??

Commentators said no energy in the middle of the park and no desire to win the ball. What does MON expect with Stan in a 4-4-2. He must have the memory of a goldfish. This keeps happening and he keeps persisting. I am not frustrated with the result per se but the fact that I know that there is something that could have been done about it and it wasn't. Ditto Wigan. With the squad we have and the opening games played we should be up there on 15-16 points. All the sides played, with the exception of Plop and possibly Fulham (although their away form is usually poor) will be bottom half. MON is ruining it for me with his love of Petrov and his inability to use our only high energy CM properly. If he doesn't like him he should have got rid in the summer and replaced with equivalent type of player that he rates more highly. Heskey and Carew should NEVER play as a pair. I feel for Heskey - MON is making him look stupid by not using him correctly. Used properly as he was at Wigan or by Capello he could be an asset to us IMO. His bizarre formations, playing people out of position and inability to make appropriate subs are killing us. Surely, he has to go back to the successful 4-5-1 with NRC in the next 3 or 4 tough games?? If he starts with Stan and Delph in a 4-4-2 in any of these I will be calling for him to go along with some others.