bobzy Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 5 minutes ago, DCJonah said: There's not much he could have done formation wise yesterday. But he didn't have to start Veretout as a winger and we could have played with more intensity, closing them down quicker. I think overall he's been far too negative here, its the major concern I have regarding his future here. I swear "far too negative" just gets banded about for effect - we started pretty well against Liverpool and keeping the ball is part of this. There is wrong at all with building up possession to attack. If we wanted to play counter-attacking football (for example, the way Leicester do) we'd need to have genuine width and real pace up top. We have none of this. I don't understand what is negative about playing a formation that most of the league plays. If his instruction involved telling Gil/Veretout not to get into the box, then fair enough. But outside of that, what is negative? We haven't once setup with a Tony Pulis 5-5-0 formation - but he's been praised for his work elsewhere and touted as someone we should have brought in. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjenkins Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Of all the parties who are to blame for this mess we are in, I think Garde's portion is very, very small. However, as he's very unlikely to still be our manager next season I'm not sure it matters much anyway. Playing Veretout on the wing was a strange move yesterday, but generally I think we've been getting better under Garde despite being prone to the odd lapse (yesterday, Norwich away etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevpants Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Can't we put players who have given up or are not willing to try on some kind of performance management? I know we can't sack them outright without buying out their contract but if we demonstrated several months of reviews of poor performance and the efforts the club made to help the player only for them to consistently underachieve. Written warnings etc. That's grounds for dismissal in any employment court in the land. Basically just take the approach you take with bad staff, manage them out. I suppose it's different when you are looking for a transfer fee but to be fair most of our players bar a handful are almost worthless. Each passing month costs more in wasted wages than will be recouped in any transfer fees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwj Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 21 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: we are going down without 7 wins (possibly even with them) so heck yes he might as well .. better than going for 0- 0 and losing 6-0 .. we might have forgiven him had we gone 9 up top with rush keeper and shipped 6 as at least it meant we went for it I keep seeing Fat Sam being slated , but his team came back from 2-0 against world champions Liverpool last week , our team shipped 4 more goals I'm not slating Fat Sam, I'm just saying Remi has been using the same tactics you could reliably expect the "Premiership experience" managers to be using in the same situation. And Fat Sam has had the benefit of buying most of our transfer targets last month, so make of that what you will... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 22 minutes ago, bobzy said: I swear "far too negative" just gets banded about for effect - we started pretty well against Liverpool and keeping the ball is part of this. There is wrong at all with building up possession to attack. If we wanted to play counter-attacking football (for example, the way Leicester do) we'd need to have genuine width and real pace up top. We have none of this. I don't understand what is negative about playing a formation that most of the league plays. If his instruction involved telling Gil/Veretout not to get into the box, then fair enough. But outside of that, what is negative? We haven't once setup with a Tony Pulis 5-5-0 formation - but he's been praised for his work elsewhere and touted as someone we should have brought in. In terms of yesterday I don't think there's much he could have done. However I didn't see Veretout or Bacuna getting into attacking positions or getting forward much to offer real support to Gabby and Gil. We also didn't close them down quickly at all. In terms of the rest of his time here, I think there's been games where he could have made more attacking subs or picked attacking players to try and win games but he seemed to be too concerned with not losing than going for the points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 (edited) 11 minutes ago, mwj said: I'm not slating Fat Sam, I'm just saying Remi has been using the same tactics you could reliably expect the "Premiership experience" managers to be using in the same situation. And Fat Sam has had the benefit of buying most of our transfer targets last month, so make of that what you will... that they turned out to also be Fat Sam's transfer targets suggests that with future targets we wont be playing stylish football next season but Kone was always going to Sunderland far as I'm aware they bid before we did ( did we even bid for him ? I thought Sane was our target who we made bids for ?) Edited February 15, 2016 by tonyh29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blasterpocket68 Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 I'm going to get some flack here But i belevie we would of been better off keeping Sherwood rather than made the Garde appointment . I really believe we would of amassed more points and still of had chance of survival.Yes he would have continued to make some mistakes but he could inspire the team and go for the throat in games. I really do not think we would be any worse off than today, I recon we would possibly be around 5/ 7 points better off. So still a chance of survival if and buts I know! Ill go and hide behind the sette and wait for the barrage of abuse ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post gilbertoAVFC Posted February 15, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted February 15, 2016 In all honesty "Premier League experience" is largely a total myth. Your friends in the media are far more important than your tactical knowledge in modern Premier League management. It's how Redknapp, Sherwood, etc. have robbed a living. If some lard arse like Martin Samuel starts slagging off Garde saying he is out of his depth and he should go back to Ligue 1 he'll soon be defending Allardici after his team have gone on the exact same run of form. Players will buy into it. Their egos are so large if they are given any hint of a reason to disrespect their manager by the media, they will probably take it. As far as I can see a lot of Villa players don't respect Garde nearly enough and I'd hazard a guess that if he was some lad's lad like Sherwood we wouldn't be having this issue. Of course though because Garde is much more of an introverted figure and an outsider, he doesn't get the respect Sherwood did. Players are thick as planks, as exemplified by Yarp last night. A lot of them will buy into anything the media writes about managers. See: Ferdinand/Rooney wanting Redknapp as England manager. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 37 minutes ago, bobzy said: I swear "far too negative" just gets banded about for effect - we started pretty well against Liverpool and keeping the ball is part of this. There is wrong at all with building up possession to attack. If we wanted to play counter-attacking football (for example, the way Leicester do) we'd need to have genuine width and real pace up top. We have none of this. I don't understand what is negative about playing a formation that most of the league plays. If his instruction involved telling Gil/Veretout not to get into the box, then fair enough. But outside of that, what is negative? We haven't once setup with a Tony Pulis 5-5-0 formation - but he's been praised for his work elsewhere and touted as someone we should have brought in. Just because it's an opinion you don't agree with doesn't mean it's only being said "for effect". You're right there is nothing wrong with building up possession for attack, but aimlessly keeping the ball coupled with a snails pace tempo so the opponent always has loads of time to get players back is negative. As is the fact we never get players in the box which is on-going problem, suggesting a tactical instruction, and is picked up by commentators in almost every game. There is obviously more to a play style than just a formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 23 minutes ago, Blasterpocket68 said: I'm going to get some flack here But i belevie we would of been better off keeping Sherwood rather than made the Garde appointment . I really believe we would of amassed more points and still of had chance of survival.Yes he would have continued to make some mistakes but he could inspire the team and go for the throat in games. I really do not think we would be any worse off than today, I recon we would possibly be around 5/ 7 points better off. So still a chance of survival if and buts I know! Ill go and hide behind the sette and wait for the barrage of abuse ! Just wow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodytom Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 8 minutes ago, Eric said: Just wow... Well, tbh, it's not a massive call he is making. Garde has hardly shown that he's far far better than sherwood, if at all. Change something, and things don't get better soon, you've changed the wrong thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reivax_Villa Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 No way would we have been beaten 6-0 at home under sherwood.. no way. The players do not want to play for Remi and the worrying thing is that Remi is not the issue, its our infrastructure and ownership. Things will get worse until we have a new ownership. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwj Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 No way would we have been beaten 6-0 at home under sherwood.. no way. The players do not want to play for Remi and the worrying thing is that Remi is not the issue, its our infrastructure and ownership. Things will get worse until we have a new ownership. Southampton 6-1. **** Sherwood. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboyangel Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 3 minutes ago, mwj said: Southampton 6-1. **** Sherwood. but at least we scored Garde is a manager, Sherwood was a wannabe manager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, mwj said: Yes he is conservative, but what other option does he have? a - Play 4-2-4 with all guns blazing and a strikeforce of Grealish - Sinclair - Ayew - Traore (most of which are injured, suspended), ship a bunch of goals and hope we jag 7 wins of 4-3 and 5-4? b - Play 4-5-1, 4-4-1-1, bore the opposition to death and try to grind out a some wins ala Pulis / Allardyce The reality is its been option c - play 4-5-1 conservative and STILL ship a bunch of goals but honestly, what is meant to do? He's already dropped Richardson, Hutton, Sanchez, Guzan and Sinclair... you realise we have to actually field 11 players right? Well why apologise for option C being enacted, he has to make changes, playing with more aggression, pace and options going forward is not going to deliver anything worse than what Garde has 'delivered' thus far. Edited February 15, 2016 by Dr_Pangloss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 1 hour ago, Blasterpocket68 said: I'm going to get some flack here But i belevie we would of been better off keeping Sherwood rather than made the Garde appointment . I really believe we would of amassed more points and still of had chance of survival.Yes he would have continued to make some mistakes but he could inspire the team and go for the throat in games. I really do not think we would be any worse off than today, I recon we would possibly be around 5/ 7 points better off. So still a chance of survival if and buts I know! Ill go and hide behind the sette and wait for the barrage of abuse ! flack 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 flack x20. Whether Garde is good enough is open to debate. But this stuff about Sherwood being a better pick is nonsense. Have people forgotten where we were in the table? 'He'd inspire the players!' Yeah, just like he did in the fricking FA Cup Final. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodytom Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 18 minutes ago, theboyangel said: Garde is a manager Up for debate as it stands. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 1 hour ago, penguin said: Just because it's an opinion you don't agree with doesn't mean it's only being said "for effect". You're right there is nothing wrong with building up possession for attack, but aimlessly keeping the ball coupled with a snails pace tempo so the opponent always has loads of time to get players back is negative. As is the fact we never get players in the box which is on-going problem, suggesting a tactical instruction, and is picked up by commentators in almost every game. There is obviously more to a play style than just a formation. The lack of players we push forward is a joke. And its something that can be fixed with a simple managerial instruction. Sherwood was able to do it with just a half time talk before he officially managed a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwj Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Well why apologise for option C being enacted, he has to make changes, playing with more aggression, pace and options going forward is not going to deliver anything worse than what Garde has 'delivered' thus far. Sounds great Arrigo Sacchi, show me a lineup (of players that were available yesterday) that does that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts