Houlston Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 (edited) So they play a massive five more long balls per game but twice as many short passes. Why is that from thisisanfield.com? Not sure how recent that is. Whoscored has them down for 65 per game and us as 69. Still nearly twice as many short passes too. Edited January 15, 2014 by Houlston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limvillian Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Why don't we try and get laudrup? They have a higher long ball percentage than us, thoughts?Sure about that? Sorry not percentage but higher per game. http://www.thisisanfield.com/wp-content/uploads/VillaStats.png Absolutely massive difference between the 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Haha why's it matter what the difference is? So its OK for them to do it but not us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limvillian Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 (edited) Haha why's it matter what the difference is? So its OK for them to do it but not us? No there is an absolutely massive difference between highest long ball ratio and a higher amount of long balls played if you cannot see that it is pointless debating with you. The reason Swansea play more long balls than us is because they generally have more than double our posession .we have the highest longball ratio in the league BTW. Edited January 15, 2014 by limvillian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Haha why's it matter what the difference is? So its OK for them to do it but not us? Because they don't do it as much as us? Especially as a percentage which is what you originally brought up to prove some sort of point about Lambert over Laudrup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Why don't we try and get laudrup? They have a higher long ball percentage than us, thoughts? Sure about that? Sorry not percentage but higher per game.http://www.thisisanfield.com/wp-content/uploads/VillaStats.png Can't really believe you actually chose to publish those totally abysmal Villa stats, even if you thought you were proving a point (which in fact you weren't). As someone else mentioned, stats without a time reference are more or less useless, but, whatever period these cover, we are best keeping quiet about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Haha why's it matter what the difference is? So its OK for them to do it but not us? No there is an absolutely massive difference between highest long ball ratio and a higher amount of long balls played if you cannot see that it is pointless debating with you. The reason Swansea play more long balls than us is because they generally have more than double our posession .we have the highest longball ratio in the league BTW. I just said they've played more long balls, which they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laursen&Mellberg Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 (edited) Fergie signed a fair few duds to be honest, he spent more on nani and Anderson than our entire squad! The difference is that he could afford to carry those players. If he had to rebuild a squad in 2 seasons on £40 mil then I'd say he'd struggle. Spurs spent more on saldado and lamela than our squad who have contributed next to nothing. I'm sure people don't understand the magnitude of the job. And how did they get the money in the kitty for those outrageous signings (Saldado and Lamela)? From the astro-sale of a former 'young and hungry' player they had swiped from a lower league team. I'm not saying Madrid will be coming in for Matty Lowton anytime soon, but my point is Lambert's transfer policy is certainly correct. I'm sure that nobody more than he would love to compliment that with some more experienced (read expensive) heads. But unfortunately in 2007 instead of buying Bale (or KP Boateng, or Kaboul) as they did, we bought NRC, Harewood and Zat Knight. This is why Lerner's purse strings are wickedly taut. Saying that, the next year they spent £9million (9!!) on Sir Alan Hutton, so .... Edited January 15, 2014 by Laursen&Mellberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Haha why's it matter what the difference is? So its OK for them to do it but not us? Because they don't do it as much as us? Especially as a percentage which is what you originally brought up to prove some sort of point about Lambert over Laudrup. And I corrected myself to say they've played more long balls, which they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limvillian Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Haha why's it matter what the difference is? So its OK for them to do it but not us? No there is an absolutely massive difference between highest long ball ratio and a higher amount of long balls played if you cannot see that it is pointless debating with you. The reason Swansea play more long balls than us is because they generally have more than double our posession .we have the highest longball ratio in the league BTW. I just said they've played more long balls, which they have. Reread the quote you said higher long ball percentage which is not correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Haha why's it matter what the difference is? So its OK for them to do it but not us? Because they don't do it as much as us? Especially as a percentage which is what you originally brought up to prove some sort of point about Lambert over Laudrup. And I corrected myself to say they've played more long balls, which they have. Well only according to some link at thisisanfield, whoscored which I think that was previously taken from has them down as playing less. The whole point was pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Why don't we try and get laudrup? They have a higher long ball percentage than us, thoughts?Sure about that? Sorry not percentage but higher per game.http://www.thisisanfield.com/wp-content/uploads/VillaStats.png Can't really believe you actually chose to publish those totally abysmal Villa stats, even if you thought you were proving a point (which in fact you weren't). As someone else mentioned, stats without a time reference are more or less useless, but, whatever period these cover, we are best keeping quiet about them. Calm down, I'm not trying to prove a point, its a fact. I don't care about these stats like some of you do but the actual article is a good one. Even a Liverpool fan is a lot more positive about villa than some of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Haha why's it matter what the difference is? So its OK for them to do it but not us?No there is an absolutely massive difference between highest long ball ratio and a higher amount of long balls played if you cannot see that it is pointless debating with you. The reason Swansea play more long balls than us is because they generally have more than double our posession .we have the highest longball ratio in the league BTW. I just said they've played more long balls, which they have. Reread the quote you said higher long ball percentage which is not correct. Once again, like I've already said I corrected myself straight away. We're all human, we all make mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I'm not trying to prove a point, its a fact. I don't care about these stats like some of you Not sure it is a fact and you brought it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I'm not trying to prove a point, its a fact. I don't care about these stats like some of you Not sure it is a fact and you brought it up. This conversation is pointless, just like this thread. Carry on believing you fact that back up your point. I'll stick to supporting what our manager is trying to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Think this is classed as a Lolcano Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panto_Villan Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 (edited) I'm not really sure anyone cares any more at this point. (in reference to the above exchange being a literal volcano of lols, at least) Edited January 15, 2014 by Panto_Villan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Fergie signed a fair few duds to be honest, he spent more on nani and Anderson than our entire squad! The difference is that he could afford to carry those players. If he had to rebuild a squad in 2 seasons on £40 mil then I'd say he'd struggle. Spurs spent more on saldado and lamela than our squad who have contributed next to nothing. I'm sure people don't understand the magnitude of the job. And how did they get the money in the kitty for those outrageous signings (Saldado and Lamela)? From the astro-sale of a former 'young and hungry' player they had swiped from a lower league team. I'm not saying Madrid will be coming in for Matty Lowton anytime soon, but my point is Lambert's transfer policy is certainly correct. I'm sure that nobody more than he would love to compliment that with some more experienced (read expensive) heads. But unfortunately in 2007 instead of buying Bale (or KP Boateng, or Kaboul) as they did, we bought NRC, Harewood and Zat Knight. This is why Lerner's purse strings are wickedly taut. Saying that, the next year they spent £9million (9!!) on Sir Alan Hutton, so .... We've actually made quite a bit of money from sales ourselves, only it's gone to offsetting losses and not improving the team. All that money came from players who cost around the £10m mark, ie Young, Downing and Milner. Benteke would be a similar story. Nobody is ever going to offer us big money for any of our lower league dross like Lowton or Westwood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laursen&Mellberg Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 We wouldn't get penny one for either of those two (Lowton or Westwood) right now, you're right. But would Liverpool have got a packet of crisps for Lucas in his first or second seasons? Fergie let 'dross' like Rossi, Pogba and Forlan go too, among others. I doubt Westwood will ever play like Paul Pogba's currently playing, but we might yet see him in an England shirt one day. I believe they'll come good, or at least good enough to get the paltry £5million (for both!) we spent on them back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Just watching the fifth goal for city, where dzeko goes in front of the defender and meets the ball at the near post. Despite all their money and class players.....some of the stuff that gets them success, is just the basics. We can't get the simplest of things right. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts