Big_John_10 Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Without Gabby to provide pace and creativity, I'm far from convinced they are capable of more than what was offered today. I thought we looked decent going forward against west brom, we didn't even try to really play football today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avflife Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Blaming the fixtures for the result, yhyh how do you explain the 29% possession and 1 shot on target throughout the whole of the match, bore off Lambert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo69 Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Without Gabby to provide pace and creativity, I'm far from convinced they are capable of more than what was offered today. I thought we looked decent going forward against west brom, we didn't even try to really play football today. I don't think you can blame the formation for that. We finished forth playing 532 once. If used properly it can work as an attacking threat. For me the problem is the lack of quality in the middle. They can't pass it around and there is no really strength. The players are just not good enough at times, doesn't matter what the formation is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffy Biro Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Why change it? I just don't understand it everton were there for the taking there after an absolutely mauling but nah we'll just go 3-5-2 with two target men and play the most horrendous negative hoofball possible. Just starting to win me over again with how we've played and then we go and do that, FFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bunnski Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 The players were obviously tired in the second half. When we got even more tired in the second half we just couldnt push up the pitch far enough to mount any decent attacks. Everton barely got a sniff except for two quality goals. We deserved a point and its bad luck.that we lost Vlaar. Save the knives for another day 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 I don't think you can say we deserved a point with the statistics we had and the way we played 2nd half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwan Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 They were tired because they had to run end to end on the pitch because they defended the majority of the game. I didn't see Everton tiring and they only had one extra day. It was shit idea and tactics from the start 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bunnski Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 I don't think you can say we deserved a point with the statistics we had and the way we played 2nd half. How many clear cut chances did Everton have? We defended brilliantly and for that we deserved a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avflife Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Should of started with a 4-1-2-1-2 formation, Sylla, Westwood, Delph, Bacuna, Weimann and Benteke. Why he even thinks Holt will contribute anything to the side is beyond me, he just eats the majority of the balti pies that are meant to be for homes games at VP, wonder why there is never any left Everton created practically nothing expect for the two goals they scored, we deserved at least a point. Last thing going to say as I'm to pissed off to keep debating against the obvious, Lambert should take some blame for today's defeat by deciding 'to park the bus' for the whole of the second-half instead of blaming the 'fixture pile-up'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmarsha_926 Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 We have played 3 of the top 5 in our last 4 games and took 4 points, Nothing wrong with that Wait till after our next 4 games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 I don't think you can say we deserved a point with the statistics we had and the way we played 2nd half. How many clear cut chances did Everton have? We defended brilliantly and for that we deserved a point. Play percentage, low-possession football and you will tire and conceed. Not just in one game but over a season. Everton deserved the win as they were the only team trying to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 We have played 3 of the top 5 in our last 4 games and took 4 points, Nothing wrong with that Wait till after our next 4 games I would argee with you but the memories of a lucky 0-0 bore draw v blunderland and the defeat v palace still burn in my mind. You just dont know what to expect from this Villa side. I wouldn't be suprised if we beat United at Old Trafford in a months time, yet we could easily lose at home versus West Ham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Yes we played better against West Brom, but Everton are a better side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Cognisant of the fact that Lambert prefer the likes of Holt instead of Albrighton really show what type of football Lambert stands for. And it won't pay off in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Prefers them to who exactly? If Gabby had been fit I doubt either would've played much part today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Prefers them to who exactly? If Gabby had been fit I doubt either would've played much part today. Prefers them to who exactly? If Gabby had been fit I doubt either would've played much part today. Prefers them to who exactly? If Gabby had been fit I doubt either would've played much part today. Prefers them to who exactly? If Gabby had been fit I doubt either would've played much part today. I think Albrighton could do Gabbys role pretty decent, how would we know if we don't even give the kid a chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MessiWillSignForVilla Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Albrighton's a winger, and not very good one at that, he'd be awful up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 (edited) Albrighton's a winger, and not very good one at that, he'd be awful up front. It's not like we're playing 3 centre forwards in the 4-3-3 system. When we have the ball, yes they have the freedom to roam inside, but they also at times cuts in out wide with success. Edited February 1, 2014 by villalad21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MessiWillSignForVilla Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Albrighton's a winger, and not very good one at that, he'd be awful up front. It's not like we're playing 3 centre forwards in the 4-3-3 system. When we have the ball, yes they have the freedom to roam inside, but they also at times cuts in out wide with sucsess. The way we've been playing recently has been with two up front, with Weimann behind the strikers (which incidentally I feel is our best set up), Gabby's role in that is to just bomb past the defence when we counter and keep the opposition on their toes. Albrighton has nowhere near the pace required to make that effective. Even with 433, Gabby and Weimann still aren't wingers really, and again Gabby's main weapon in this tactic is his pace breaking through the middle, and his sudden finding of dribbling and crossing ability. Albrighton isn't fast enough to hang off the shoulder like Gabby, he doesn't have enough in his locker to beat a man - his main "trick" seems to be knock it past and chase, which he is again, not fast enough, or strong enough, to do - and although his crosses look pretty, they rarely beat the first man. He doesn't have the ability Gabby has, nor physical aspects of his game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Albrighton's a winger, and not very good one at that, he'd be awful up front. It's not like we're playing 3 centre forwards in the 4-3-3 system. When we have the ball, yes they have the freedom to roam inside, but they also at times cuts in out wide with sucsess. The way we've been playing recently has been with two up front, with Weimann behind the strikers (which incidentally I feel is our best set up), Gabby's role in that is to just bomb past the defence when we counter and keep the opposition on their toes. Albrighton has nowhere near the pace required to make that effective. Even with 433, Gabby and Weimann still aren't wingers really, and again Gabby's main weapon in this tactic is his pace breaking through the middle, and his sudden finding of dribbling and crossing ability. Albrighton isn't fast enough to hang off the shoulder like Gabby, he doesn't have enough in his locker to beat a man - his main "trick" seems to be knock it past and chase, which he is again, not fast enough, or strong enough, to do - and although his crosses look pretty, they rarely beat the first man. He doesn't have the ability Gabby has, nor physical aspects of his game. And then, when Gabby is out, its best to revert the tactics and play hoofball football right? You obviosly have a point when comparing the offensive abilities to the two players, but i don't agree with the formation change and the Holt usage. Playing Albrighton, probably wouldnt be as effective, but it's for sure would have been way better than what we saw today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts