Adama Traore

[DCJonah]

A great goal and an assist and its being analysed in depth to show it's a negative. I give up. 

[Butterfingers]

I think "detriment" is the wrong word.

We do loose something when Adama plays-Perhaps a bit of solidity in midfield/shape

What he does bring though, far outweighs any negatives.

He needs to start and if he only lasts 60mins then so be it. We need to go for it, take the lead for a change and then tighten up towards the end. No more throwing him on once we're behind-This only confirms that the manager thinks he can produce (he's played when we need a goal)

Lets go for these goals from the 1st minute, not wait until half time/60mins

[YGabbana]

A great goal and an assist and its being analysed in depth to show it's a negative. I give up. 

Some would rather see us battle for hard earned losses and draws.

1 win in 20.

[PompeyVillan]

Perhaps we should give him a free role? Play the entire system to allow Adama to do the minimum defending. Problem with that is that he's probably most effective on the counter attack.

It's difficult because we look toothless when he isn't on the pitch at the moment.

[Nigel]

Thats the only way you can play him PV. He really has no instinct to get back which ruins the shape of a team.

 

However why not play him now?

[Rob182]

A great goal and an assist and its being analysed in depth to show it's a negative. I give up. 

Some would rather see us battle for hard earned losses and draws.

1 win in 20.

Show me who would prefer that YGabbana. I'm intrigued to see who you're referring to here. Unless it's nonsense, grasped from the corner of your brain, of course.

A great goal and an assist and its being analysed in depth to show it's a negative. I give up. 

Analysed in depth!? Ha. Don't make me laugh Jonah. I've watched the goal 3 times. Once on a stream yesterday, and then once on the highlights this morning, with the third being the replay. I've hardly set up my 'Adama is shit and I must prove it' work-bench and slaved away to pull apart anything I can.

I've simply looked at the goal, his other crosses, and my memories of his other performances for us and Barca B, and decided that his crossing isn't great, by any stretch of the imagination. I've seen people say 'who crosses accurately all the time?', but Gil and Grealish cross MORE accurately than him, and I don't see people calling for them to start games as much as people are calling for Adama, so it's a fair discussion to have.

I've said before. I like Adama, and I want him to play, but (as I said in my 'oh so negative' post), maybe playing him upfront in a two, would make better use of his raw talent.

It's clear to everyone that we're going down, and I'd like nothing more than for us to tell Adama he's going nowhere and for him to be a force next get at Villa, firmly establishing himself in a new-look Villa. However, I feel that some people are a bit naive, thinking that he will rip apart Championship defences, whereas I don't think he will, unless we either play to his clear strengths (play him upfront or fill the opposition box with players) or if his crossing greatly improves.

Great goal aside, you can't genuinely tell me that you think he was aiming for Gil's outstretched left-boot with that cross? Can you?

[Dr_Pangloss]

57 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

The problem with Adama is that his crossing isn't very good. It's all good and well saying 'he always gets a cross in', but when his obvious talent is his pace, power and trickery, he's consistently going to get in the position to cross the ball. Unfortunately, his crossing really needs to improve.

As others have said, two of his crosses were massively over hit (over the whole opposition box), and even the one for the goal looped high over Gestede's head, but luckily for us, Gil was there to stretch his left leg out to meet it. When Gestede is the obvious target to aim for, even the cross for the goal can be considered as overhit, in my opinion.

I'm not meaning to criticise the build up to our goal. I've said before that I'm all for Adama playing more, but this is what me and others have seen all along - even though he HAS big positives, it's questionable at times, whether they outweigh his negatives.

I've watched back our goal from yesterday and I don't think he even turned his head to look in the box for who to cross to. He literally just swung his foot at it, knowing it would go in/around the box and that is presumably good enough. Now, if we start to load the box with at least 3 players whenever Adama has the ball, then great, his consistent-but-slightly-unpredictable crosses could definitely bag us some more goals. However, if he loses the ball, you would have Adama plus any players piling into the box, who then need to track back to protect our defence.

Either he needs to improve his crossing, or he needs to maybe play upfront with Ayew, where he can use his pace, power and skill to just get in shooting positions and do away with crossing to Gestede entirely.

'There's nothing to lose'.... Well, except another game. This time against our biggest relegation rivals.

Two great balls in yesterday, one assisting a goal, the other in a great area where a half decent forward would have scored. Two of his other crosses were poor. So 2 very good deliveries out of 4 isn't half bad, only world class wide players deliver great balls at a very high rate. 

This idea that he's a poor crosser is vastly, vastly overstated and the arguments that are still made against Traore are becoming increasing bizarre. After leaving three players for dead and whipping in a great ball for Gil he's questioned for not looking and just swinging his foot at the ball LOL. Seriously, just accept that this guy is not only a genuine threat to virtually everyone he plays against, but he can also deliver, he has barely played for us but has 2 assists and a goal. 

Edited January 3, 2016 by Dr_Pangloss

[KJT123]

From watching videos of his time at Barca, I actually thought his crossing would be a lot worse than it actually is. I was under the impression that he had bags of pace with zero final product, but from what I've seen of him for us and the reserves, his crossing is pretty good.

[Dr_Pangloss]

38 minutes ago, YGabbana said:

Some would rather see us battle for hard earned losses and draws.

1 win in 20.

That seems to be the logic. Rock bottom, 8 points, loads of under-performing players but some are still arguing against Traore's presence in the side because he might cost us at 'some' point, as if those playing ahead of him haven't cost us in some capacity all season.

[DCJonah]

46 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

Show me who would prefer that YGabbana. I'm intrigued to see who you're referring to here. Unless it's nonsense, grasped from the corner of your brain, of course.

 

Analysed in depth!? Ha. Don't make me laugh Jonah. I've watched the goal 3 times. Once on a stream yesterday, and then once on the highlights this morning, with the third being the replay. I've hardly set up my 'Adama is shit and I must prove it' work-bench and slaved away to pull apart anything I can.

I've simply looked at the goal, his other crosses, and my memories of his other performances for us and Barca B, and decided that his crossing isn't great, by any stretch of the imagination. I've seen people say 'who crosses accurately all the time?', but Gil and Grealish cross MORE accurately than him, and I don't see people calling for them to start games as much as people are calling for Adama, so it's a fair discussion to have.

I've said before. I like Adama, and I want him to play, but (as I said in my 'oh so negative' post), maybe playing him upfront in a two, would make better use of his raw talent.

It's clear to everyone that we're going down, and I'd like nothing more than for us to tell Adama he's going nowhere and for him to be a force next get at Villa, firmly establishing himself in a new-look Villa. However, I feel that some people are a bit naive, thinking that he will rip apart Championship defences, whereas I don't think he will, unless we either play to his clear strengths (play him upfront or fill the opposition box with players) or if his crossing greatly improves.

Great goal aside, you can't genuinely tell me that you think he was aiming for Gil's outstretched left-boot with that cross? Can you?

He crossed the ball into a dangerous area. The idea that he didn't have a clue and just swung his foot is an unbelievably negative view of it. It's ridiculous. 

Gil and Grealish cross with more accuracy? I can't remember the last time Grealish crossed a good ball in. Or the last time Gil did from open play. 

Some people are still naive eh? The same people who said he has the potential to do something positive and that's exactly what he did. 

You just seem dead against him. I've no idea how someone can watch that goal and then use it as a negative reason against the player. 

[YGabbana]

Far too much negativity in here, lets hope he isnt out for long.

[Rob182]

Yawn. I give up on you fellas with your blinkered views. Viewing others opinions as 'negative', when it's simply having a difference of opinion on the impact and tactical use of a young player.

You all realise we still lost the game?

Ie: Playing with Traore wasn't that much better than playing without Traore.

No doubt I'll be lumped in as one of the people 'arguing against Traore playing', even though all of my previous posts in this thread have said that I do want him to play.

You guys see what you want to see, unfortunately, so there's no discussion to be had.

[VillaCas]

Not a chance of Traore ever being a first-team regular in any half-way successful side.  He has no defensive instnct and so will constantly leave his full back exposed.  Whoever decided to spunk £9m on this bloke wants shooting.

I'd give him a go up the middle alongside Ayew or Gestede but its not really a proper plan

[DCJonah]

43 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

Yawn. I give up on you fellas with your blinkered views. Viewing others opinions as 'negative', when it's simply having a difference of opinion on the impact and tactical use of a young player.

You all realise we still lost the game?

Ie: Playing with Traore wasn't that much better than playing without Traore.

No doubt I'll be lumped in as one of the people 'arguing against Traore playing', even though all of my previous posts in this thread have said that I do want him to play.

You guys see what you want to see, unfortunately, so there's no discussion to be had.

How is it not negative? You've criticised him for assisting a goal. I mean its just laughable. Others have called him the most selfish player they've ever seen. Again laughable. 

I do realise we lost. Do you realise he created our only goal? Do you realise he didn't start? 

No ones said we will win every time he plays. We've said he has the potential to make positive things happen and the proof was there yesterday. He's a better option than most attacking players Garde has selected over him every time. 

 

[DCJonah]

Commentators and pundits said it was a good cross but Rob said its a negative and then claims others are blinkered. 

[VillaCas]

9 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

How is it not negative? You've criticised him for assisting a goal. I mean its just laughable. Others have called him the most selfish player they've ever seen. Again laughable. 

I do realise we lost. Do you realise he created our only goal? Do you realise he didn't start? 

No ones said we will win every time he plays. We've said he has the potential to make positive things happen and the proof was there yesterday. He's a better option than most attacking players Garde has selected over him every time. 

 

He is the most selfish player I've ever seen to be honest.   He would need a massive overhaul to his game to ever become a first team regular.  If he can't get in the Villa side then he has no chance anywhere decent

 

[DCJonah]

Well you're another one who doesn't seem to understand the definition of the word. 

He should be in the villa side. The fact he can't at the moment is mainly down to the negative approach of the manager. I'd be very surprised if he's not a regular starter from now till the end of the season. 

[Rob182]

You are blinkered Jonah. You, YGabbana and DrPangloss just seem intent on shooting anyone down that has a difference of opinion. Regurgitating this 'PeoPLe JuSt WaNT uS tO LoSE!!1!1!1111' bullshit. Whereas we just have a different opinion on a good, raw, young talent. We all want the same thing, which is for Villa to win, so I don't see why some people seem to think other fans want the opposite.

Jonah, as for saying I said 'it's a negative', you've obviously never heard of constructive criticism. In my post I said 'When Gestede is the obvious target to aim for, even the cross for the goal can be considered as overhit'. That's not THAT negative really, is it?

My point is clear for all to see. Yes, he'll blitz past players time after time, which is great. But when his accuracy to aim for a target in the box is sometimes questionable, it reduces the impact he could have. You've had a moan about me saying that he didn't look up when he crossed the ball, misquoting me to add effect, as you like to do. But if some of our biggest hopes are on using him, then I'd rather we play him to his strengths (as I've said before), and if his main trick is to get past a bunch of players, then literally put a ball 'somewhere' in the box, then it's not always going to land that close to one of our players. Not the way we play right now, only getting one or two players in the box. Mentioning him not looking before crossing the ball seemed like a fair observation to make (but no, of course, it isn't, as it's too negative right?)

In the same post, I even suggested how we need to set up the team to play to his strengths. But yes, you're right, I'm being overly negative about a player that I've said, numerous times, should be getting game time.

[sharkyvilla]

He's still only a teenager, for anyone to write him off as never going to be this or that is just plain wrong.  How many 19 year olds have what he has?  He can be whatever he wants to be.  I just hope he stays and develops at the Villa, even if we get relegated.  In fact a season as first-team regular in the Championship might be the best development for him.

[DCJonah]

It was too negative because he did look up. After knocking it past Wes Brown he looked up and then crossed the ball. Your so called constructive criticism has a go at him for something he actually did. If that's not negative then I don't know what is. 

 

And I'm blinkered? You can't even see what he did. And like I said the neutral commentator and neutral pundit on MOTD both said it was a good cross. But others are the blinkered ones. Yeah.

Edited January 3, 2016 by DCJonah