Keinan Davis

[TRO]

On 03/06/2020 at 21:41, sir_gary_cahill said:

I think it is important to be flexible and be able to change the formation accordingly to suit the players that the manager selects

 

On 03/06/2020 at 21:32, villalad21 said:

Dean is a 4-3-3 man. He changed it because our midfield was shot.

With McGinn back i can't see him going for anything other than 4-3-3

Nothing wrong with 4-3-3........but you have to have the right type of players to play it.

In our halcyon days under Ron saunders....we played that system.

The significant bits for me was.....we played with one winger and let him drift from flank to flank where he could get most purchase.

In midifield we had a good mix......Des Bremner was the main ball winner, with a durocell battery, for his industry, he never stopped running and harrying and would start attacks by turning the ball over.....Sid Cowans was the technician, who could play the front players in with deft passes and intelligent link play, who also had a unique way of ball winning too to support Des......Dennis was the organiser and he could carry the ball in to the opponents danger zones, laying the ball off late so Tony Morley, didn't have to run the length of the pitch....his work was condensed in to short and concise bursts that hurt the opposition.....it then usually got played to Gary Shaw, who made it his business not to get caught on the ball and conducted his work concisely and precisely.

My point is....they were all noticably different, but contributed to make the whole.

They all had the attributes required to cover the requirements of a complete team.

Currently, we have too many samey players, so certain jobs, don't get done.....not necessarily bad players, too much the same in style.

back on topic.....Keinan is our Peter Withe, but he must be able to find a way to stay fit and start to score goals......getting and staying fit is his first objective and then when he has done that, work on his finishing.

Edited June 5, 2020 by TRO

[sir_gary_cahill]

4 minutes ago, TRO said:

 

Nothing wrong with 4-3-3........but you have to have the right type of players to play it.

In our halcyon days under Ron saunders....we played that system.

The significant bits for me was.....we played with one winger and let him drift from flank to flank where he could get most purchase.

In midifield we had a good mix......Des Bremner was the main ball winner, with a durocell battery, for his industry, he never stopped running and harrying and would start attacks by turning the ball over.....Sid Cowans was the technician, who could play the front players in with deft paases and intelligent link play, who also had a unique way of ball winning too to support Des......Dennis was the organiser and he could carry the ball in to the opponents danger zones, laying the ball off late so Tony Morley, didn't have to run the length of the pitch....his work was condensed in to short and concise bursts that hurt the opposition.....it then usually got played to Gary Shaw, who made it his business not to get caught on the ball and conducted his work concisely and precisely.

My point is....they were all noticably different, but contributed to make the whole.

They all had the attributes required to cover the requirements of a complete team.

Currently, we have too many samey players, so certain jobs, don't get done.....not necessarily bad players, too much the same in style.

back on topic.....Keinan is our Peter Withe, but he must be able to find a way to stay fit and start to score goals......getting and staying fit is his first objective and then when he has done that, work on his finishing.

I watched the European Cup final from 1982 against Bayern Munich, we were under the cosh for long periods and Spink produced a masterclass. It was a flukey goal by Withe, to say we were lucky to win that match is an understatement. On another day, we could’ve lost by 5 or 6. Now, I know it was only one match and that’s all I have to go on. We’ve never been synonymous with free flowing attacking football, it’s just not our style. Under MON, we played counter attacking football to suit the quick players we had like Agbonlahor and Ashley Young, that worked for a while then MON left and it was downhill from then on. We now have an opportunity to build the side around Grealish, I hope that we stick with Smith whatever happens. We’re one or 2 players away from having a very good side I think, we’ve shown this season that apart the Manchester City match at Villa Park when we lost 6-1, we can compete with the best in this league

[Follyfoot]

1 hour ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

I watched the European Cup final from 1982 against Bayern Munich, we were under the cosh for long periods and Spink produced a masterclass. It was a flukey goal by Withe, to say we were lucky to win that match is an understatement. On another day, we could’ve lost by 5 or 6. Now, I know it was only one match and that’s all I have to go on. We’ve never been synonymous with free flowing attacking football, it’s just not our style. Under MON, we played counter attacking football to suit the quick players we had like Agbonlahor and Ashley Young, that worked for a while then MON left and it was downhill from then on. We now have an opportunity to build the side around Grealish, I hope that we stick with Smith whatever happens. We’re one or 2 players away from having a very good side I think, we’ve shown this season that apart the Manchester City match at Villa Park when we lost 6-1, we can compete with the best in this league

Apart from the 76/77 side, especially at home. If we went 1-0 down there was never any panic because you knew what was coming 

Edited June 4, 2020 by Follyfoot

[TRO]

5 hours ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

I watched the European Cup final from 1982 against Bayern Munich, we were under the cosh for long periods and Spink produced a masterclass. It was a flukey goal by Withe, to say we were lucky to win that match is an understatement. On another day, we could’ve lost by 5 or 6. Now, I know it was only one match and that’s all I have to go on. We’ve never been synonymous with free flowing attacking football, it’s just not our style. Under MON, we played counter attacking football to suit the quick players we had like Agbonlahor and Ashley Young, that worked for a while then MON left and it was downhill from then on. We now have an opportunity to build the side around Grealish, I hope that we stick with Smith whatever happens. We’re one or 2 players away from having a very good side I think, we’ve shown this season that apart the Manchester City match at Villa Park when we lost 6-1, we can compete with the best in this league

It wasn't a flukey goal by withe.....it was a bobble and it hit his shin......but the name of the game is to score.....we did, they didn't.....that happens to teams with drive, will and determination, thats what it gives you, that edge.

The journey to that final was arduous, no other way of describing it.....it was their  job to score, just like it was Man Citys job to score 6 like they did and we allowed them to.......at the time, Bayern was in a similar category to Man City.....villa in those days was difficult to beat, hence the score, yes we was lucky, but also you have to make your own luck.....we was nuisance value, when we wasn't on top of our game.....now we are benevolent when we are not on top of our game......that is the difference.....and today its not always easily recognised.

you are right, we have never been synonymous with free flowing attacking football, it usually costs a lot of money and most of our teams have been built with thrift involved.....if you don't get it right, it leaves you too open.

most of our best players, have been modest purchases, we have never been known for success with expensive signings....thats been our way.....its why we have been short on building TEAMS.....Ron Built a team, from modest signings and it worked, because they knew that it took different types of players, with similar character, to form a team.

The Man City game was not a one off.....we were shocking against Southampton and Leicester.....and many times in the season, we were in a position to win and lost.

We have much to do to be the side we all want......but its doable, with the right approach.

 

Edited June 4, 2020 by TRO

[sir_gary_cahill]

5 minutes ago, TRO said:

It wasn't a flukey goal by withe.....it was a bobble and it hit his shin......but the name of the game is to score.....we did, they didn't.....that happens to teams with drive, will and determination, thats what it gives you, that edge.

The journey to that final was arduous, no other way of describing it.....it was their  job to score, just like it was Man Citys job to score 6 like they did and we allowed them to.......at the time, Bayern was in a similar category to Man City.....villa in those days was difficult to beat, hence the score, yes we was lucky, but also you have to make your own luck.....we was nuisance value, when we wasn't on top of our game.....now we are benevolent when we are not on top of our game......that is the difference.....and today its not always easily recognised.

you are right, we have never been synonymous with free flowing attacking football, it usually costs a lot of money and most of our teams have been built with thrift involved.

most of our best players, have been modest purchases, we have never been known for success with expensive signings....thats been our way.....its why we have been short on building TEAMS.....Ron Built a team, from modest signings and it worked, because they knew that it took different types of players, with similar character, to form a team.

The Man City game was not a one off.....we were shocking against Southampton and Leicester.....and many times, we were in a position to win and lost.

We have much to do to be the side we all want......but its doable, with the right approach.

 

I think you are right, a goal is a goal whether it’s from one yard or fifty, it was a committed display from our side but Bayern Munich were on top for large periods. It’s just not our style to play free flowing attacking football I don’t think, never has been.

Thanks for giving your opinion, I always value it. I hope that the Man City match was a one off, they were exceptional on the day, sometimes you just have to hold your hand up and say you were beaten by the better side on the day. 
 

Every match in the Premier League is a difficult match, there is no such thing as an easy match in this league. 

I agree that we have much to do to be the side that we all want but with Grealish, we always have a chance against anyone

Darren Bent was an expensive signing and he was a success for the first 4 months anyway, he kept us up, that’s what he was bought for

[TRO]

14 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

I think you are right, a goal is a goal whether it’s from one yard or fifty, it was a committed display from our side but Bayern Munich were on top for large periods. It’s just not our style to play free flowing attacking football I don’t think, never has been.

Thanks for giving your opinion, I always value it. I hope that the Man City match was a one off, they were exceptional on the day, sometimes you just have to hold your hand up and say you were beaten by the better side on the day. 
 

Every match in the Premier League is a difficult match, there is no such thing as an easy match in this league. 

I agree that we have much to do to be the side that we all want but with Grealish, we always have a chance against anyone

Darren Bent was an expensive signing and he was a success for the first 4 months anyway, he kept us up, that’s what he was bought for

I believe, we showed more resillence at Wembley, than at Villa Park.....that is my take on the difference......we made them work, for what they got at Wembley, at Villa park, it was handed to them.

Its easy to be exceptional when the opposition allow you to be.

Edited June 4, 2020 by TRO

[sir_gary_cahill]

Just now, TRO said:

I believe, we showed more resillence at Wembley, than at Villa Park.....that is my take on the difference.

Its easy to be exceptional when the opposition allow you to be.

Yes, I think you are right, we rose to the occasion at Wembley but were beaten by the better side on the day. We probably won’t have that opportunity again for quite some time, it was a great day out, did you go to the Carabao Cup final TRO?

[TRO]

21 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

Yes, I think you are right, we rose to the occasion at Wembley but were beaten by the better side on the day. We probably won’t have that opportunity again for quite some time, it was a great day out, did you go to the Carabao Cup final TRO?

No.....watched it on the box.

they are the better team, full stop, not just on the day....but Man Utd was the better team, before we beat them at Wembley, difference was the approach and application....from the manager and players.

...I have been to many finals, inc the European cup final....but I am a bit begruding of this current team... .I am not convinced by them at all......I think Jack is exceptional, but the rest are an imbalance for me.

by not going, I allowed my Son and Grandson to go, which meant a lot to me.

I still love Villa and am still a season ticket holder, but not convinced by the balance or character of the team.....I will be happy to sing from the roof tops when I am convinced, they have the balance right.

 

Edited June 4, 2020 by TRO

[sir_gary_cahill]

8 minutes ago, TRO said:

No.....watched it on the box.

they are the better team, full stop, not just on the day....but Man Utd was the better team, before we beat them at Wembley, difference was the approach and application....from the manager and players.

...I have been to many finals, inc the European cup final....but I am a bit begruding of this team... .I am not convinced by them at all......I think Jack is exceptional, but the rest are an imbalance for me.

by not going, I allowed my Son and Grandson to go, which meant a lot to me.

I still love Villa and am still a season ticket holder, but not convinced by the balance of the team.....I will be happy to sing from the roof tops when I am convinced, they have the balance right.

 

I think Grealish is that good that when he is in the team, we have a chance against pretty much anyone, he is that important to our team. What do you think of McGinn? 

I think that we’re close to having a very good side, we just need to add one or two quality players to the existing squad

Did we deserve to win 1994 against Manchester United at Wembley? Is that when you’re referring to? 

Will you start going to the matches again? 

[TRO]

33 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

I think Grealish is that good that when he is in the team, we have a chance against pretty much anyone, he is that important to our team. What do you think of McGinn? 

I think that we’re close to having a very good side, we just need to add one or two quality players to the existing squad

Did we deserve to win 1994 against Manchester United at Wembley? Is that when you’re referring to? 

Will you start going to the matches again? 

• McGinn is a big miss and has the ability to turn the ball over, which we have been missing badly.
• not just quality players, the right type of players.
• yes, we more than deserved to win, we tactically out thought them...and our finishing was clinical.
• I have never stopped going to matches.....except away games, i don't go to them anymore.

ps we better get back on topic.

Edited June 4, 2020 by TRO

[sir_gary_cahill]

22 minutes ago, TRO said:

• McGinn is a big miss and has the ability to turn the ball over, which we have been missing badly.
• not just quality players, the right type of players.
• yes, we more than deserved to win, we tactically out thought them...and our finishing was clinical.
• I have never stopped going to matches.....except away games, i don't go to them anymore.

ps we better get back on topic.

I think you are correct, what do you think of Keinan Davis? Do you think he will make it here?

[TRO]

3 hours ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

I think you are correct, what do you think of Keinan Davis? Do you think he will make it here?

I really don't know.

[OutByEaster?]

13 hours ago, TRO said:

Nothing wrong with 4-3-3........but you have to have the right type of players to play it.

In our halcyon days under Ron saunders....we played that system.

Saunders was a 4-4-2 man wasn't he? Withe and Shaw up top.

 

[gurru991]

14 hours ago, TRO said:

 

Nothing wrong with 4-3-3........but you have to have the right type of players to play it.

 

 

I realize that managers have their favourite formations but I always felt that initially the formation should be based on the players you possess. Then bring in the right players to play the formation you favour. Too many managers stubbornly force a system onto a team that don't have the capability of playing it.

[TRO]

13 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

Saunders was a 4-4-2 man wasn't he? Withe and Shaw up top.

 

No.......because Morley was a part of the front 3....he was an out and out winger, not a midfielder.

He played further forward than todays wingers....but its down to interpretation.

Imo it was 4-3-3

we also have to appreciate, formations morph during a game and respond to the demands of the game.

but a good question for the old un's

Edited June 5, 2020 by TRO

[TRO]

6 hours ago, gurru991 said:

I realize that managers have their favourite formations but I always felt that initially the formation should be based on the players you possess. Then bring in the right players to play the formation you favour. Too many managers stubbornly force a system onto a team that don't have the capability of playing it.

You are right.

 But ,Many teams are in transition in the eyes of their managers, so improvisation has to be employed.....its these situations of incomplete teams that makes it tricky to set formations of a managers choice.

its one of the reasons, i feel that others ,like owners and  DoF's do not have the same feel for a prospective new recruit like a manager has.....they have one eye on resale value, before how they fit in to a team pattern.

[TRO]

20 hours ago, Follyfoot said:

Apart from the 76/77 side, especially at home. If we went 1-0 down there was never any panic because you knew what was coming 

you're stealing my thunder ( only joking)

I used to say we went 1-0 up and the game was all over at Villa park, such was the control we had on the game.

The 76/77 was great to watch, a swashbuckling team, that scored goals for fun, some fans thought it the best.......The 80/81 side had more defensive competence, hence the title & European cup.

[Nigel]

Surely this is the longest he has been fit for!

[sne]

1 hour ago, Nigel said:

Surely this is the longest he has been fit for!

He had that 18 game run in the Championship where he started most of them and scored 2 back in 17/18

[Follyfoot]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

you're stealing my thunder ( only joking)

I used to say we went 1-0 up and the game was all over at Villa park, such was the control we had on the game.

The 76/77 was great to watch, a swashbuckling team, that scored goals for fun, some fans thought it the best.......The 80/81 side had more defensive competence, hence the title & European cup.

Just a pleasure to have witnessed them, that night game against Liverpool. We always stood on the old Witton bank and that night there was a woman close to us screaming 'come of Kevin (Keegan) sort it out' as they flew in, my Mum turned round and said to her 'I don't think he can help you tonight love' I think Clements got nutmegged a couple of minutes later  The other game I remember standing vividly on that terrace was Millwall in the cup for very different reasons