Roberto Di Matteo

[markavfc40]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

Well, I have always believed attack is the best form of defence, but its easier said than done to be that intense for 90 minutes.....every team will have their moments in a game and we have to be capable of nullifying that threat or containing the opposition while we get a second wind.

I think we could be closer as you say depends if the coaches can get them to improve on the basics.....because that is all I think it is.

Watched West Ham, who have been playing well under Billic last season....They too need to go back to basics, organisationally they were awful.

Sometimes Mark, In an effort to entertain, they forget the fundamentals of the game....its not rocket science, we sometimes make it that way.

Sometimes we all have to go back to basics in all our jobs, no matter how much we know....if results are not forthcoming.

Ps We all want the team to play football ( and that final 25 minutes was great, just like times of old), but you "have to win the right to play football".....as the saying goes.

I agree with much of what you say here but I do genuinely believe that these players, played to the strengths of the squad, aren't that far away.

I think when analysing how we are playing that we as fans do also need to realise that these players are still getting to know each others games. On numerous occasions this season I have seen misplaced passes as a player as received the ball and then passed it into an area that he thought the other player would move into and they haven't. Likewise we have seen some miscommunication between the defence and keeper and amongst the defenders. It is to be expected though I guess with so many new players under a new manager and coaching staff.

The manager can help that bedding in period along though by sticking to a formation and way of playing rather than chopping and changing. I think he actually had it right at the start of the season and had he stuck to that we'd be fine now. Switching to 5-3-2 though has done us no favours as it doesn't play to the strengths of this squad and it needs to stop.

Edited September 26, 2016 by markavfc40

[TRO]

2 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

I agree with much of what you say here but I do genuinely believe that these players, played to the strengths of the squad, aren't that far away.

I think when analysing how we are playing that we as fans do also need to realise that these players are still getting to know each others games. On numerous occasions this season I have seen misplaced passes as a player as received the ball and then passed it into an area that he thought the other player would move into and they haven't. Likewise we have seen some miscommunication between the defence and keeper and amongst the defenders. It is to be expected though I guess with so many new players under a new manager and coaching staff.

The manager can help that bedding in period along though by sticking to a formation and way of playing rather than chopping and changing. I think he actually had it right at the start of the season and he he stuck to that we'd be fine now. Switching to 5-3-2 though has done us no favours as it doesn't play to the strengths of this squad and it needs to stop.

I cannot disagree with that.

I do not have the answers, wish I did.....We just have to keep working on trying find the blend that gives us results.

i see things I am not happy with, but equally see things I am....the 64 million dollar question is how much does all these suggestions contribute to the lack of points.....or how long does gelling take.........wished I knew.

The problem with changes when you are not winning is ,if you do, its wrong and if you don't and stick with a settled side it's wrong.

I just happen to think some of the basics are not being done.

 

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, TrentVilla said:

Then that for me comes back to the manager and his summer transfer activity, I don't think he addressed the lack of quality in central midfield as I said throughout the summer. 

But we are where we are.... so in terms of the squad at his disposal, while its limited in this area I still think he has options. For instance he could play Jedinak and Tishbola with Grealish in front of them in a variation of 4-3-3 it doesn't have to be three sitting midfielders. 

It isn't about dealing with the threat of opposition its more about providing a balance to effectively control and close out games something we've been horrific at for some time.

In terms of who sits out wide... in a 4-3-3 I think McCormack is fine coming in from the left, he was very effective at this during his time at Leeds. I don't like Kodija outwide, I think he is wasted and Grealish just isn't a winger in my view certainly not on the left.

For me Kodija would be the main man and main focal point in the middle and build around him. McCormack and Ayew as your options on the left, Grealish and Adomah your options on the right. McCormack or Grealish could also be your third central option in front of two more traditional midfielders.

That to me would be the way to get the best out of the players at his disposal and give us a little more in midfield than we've had to date.

I think we can still play on the front foot with this approach and take the game to people but have a more solid base from which to do so.

Agree with most of this but playing width and then selecting Kodjia over Gestede is daft IMO.  I think we should be narrower (as I said earlier) - our players don't beat their men down the outside anyway.  Sit Ayew and McCormack behind Kodjia then Grealish behind those guys.  Almost an attacking diamond ahead of a back 4 and "sitting" 2 midfielders.

[TRO]

There are lots of good points on here being made.

i would be interested to know what the manager thinks.....not in a nebulous sense....but a feasible footballing sense.

However,just because he is the manager, he doesn't necessarily have a monopoly on the answers, even though we would prefer he did.

Edited September 26, 2016 by TRO

[terrytini]

9 minutes ago, TRO said:

There are lots of good points on here being made.

i would be interested to know what the manager thinks.....not in a nebulous sense....but a feasible footballing sense.

However,just because he is the manager, he doesn't necessarily have a monopoly on the answers, even though we would prefer he did.

I think the very fact that reasonably knowledgeable  Posters - and who are probably fairly typical fans -  have over the last few pages all agreed that if we can get the tactics 'right' we should be okay, but have all disagreed - with sound alternatives - on what those tactics should be, illustrates perfectly that there is no monopoly on such answers, and also lends merit to the idea that he should be given the time to get that 'right', rather than be labelled clueless or similar.

Which neatly takes me back to my main request of him - I don't overly mind which way you choose (but agree with Mark, we weren't far away against Forest so why change ) but choose one and drill it into them.  I don't think, with the players we have, the actual system will matter too much, as long as they are all happy with it and know their roles.

[terrytini]

Fascinating comments by Sir Brian in the programme on Saturday (well they were to me as I had never heard them before) that Ron Saunders used to leave Gray and Little out of most the training, instead drilling the other 9 to be able to properly compete, and hold their own, against 11.  The thinking being if they do that we had 2 guys to add to it who would score all the goals.  In a way, we aren't to different - we have 3 or 4 very talented guys who, given the right platform, should get us what we want.  It is the solidity and seamlessness of that platform as much as anything we need improving also.

[BOF]

4 minutes ago, terrytini said:

I think the very fact that reasonably knowledgeable  Posters - and who are probably fairly typical fans -  have over the last few pages all agreed that if we can get the tactics 'right' we should be okay, but have all disagreed - with sound alternatives - on what those tactics should be, illustrates perfectly that there is no monopoly on such answers, and also lends merit to the idea that he should be given the time to get that 'right', rather than be labelled clueless or similar.

Which neatly takes me back to my main request of him - I don't overly mind which way you choose (but agree with Mark, we weren't far away against Forest so why change ) but choose one and drill it into them.  I don't think, with the players we have, the actual system will matter too much, as long as they are all happy with it and know their roles.

The fact he is changing it like this would at the very least lend itself to @TrentVilla's assertion that Di Matteo may not have a plan.  Managers should have a philosophy and they should buy and coach appropriately in order to put that philosophy onto the pitch.  Perhaps the most worrying thing is that RDM could (I stress 'could') be accused of a similar scattergun approach to finding a solution as Sherwood was.  Now I'm not at that level of accusation yet, because he has been hampered by key injuries (De Laet being the big one) necessitating personnel and arguably formational changes.  But other posters could and probably would level that accusation at him.

[srsmithusa]

On 9/23/2016 at 18:03, perchman said:

Hello, first proper post. Figured here's as good a place as any (I have introduced myself in the welcome thread)

The only thing that worries me is looking across and seeing inaction in the dugout, it just brings back too many horrid memories. I'll never forget seeing Wilkins sat there almost looking on with bemused joy at the 11 headless chickens during some of our games last season, sat there thinking what an easy pay check.

If RDM isnt the sort to show a lot of passion in the technical area, some one needs to be. I just don't see any passion from the dugout, how can there not be, I watch my sons under 11's and nearly pass out from the adrenaline rush. I just don't get how you can profess to care and not even show it....a bit..... and I'm very disappointed in Steve C for this.

 

Maybe I'm the geezer that's been cheated on too many times and I'm looking for the next lie, but something isn't right in that dug out.

 

 

I think it's more fun  and entertaining to see a frantic "passionate" leader on the bench, I'm not sure it's always the best.  Like, for example, if your team is lacking confidence and self-believe... being up yelling and gesticulating and "coaching" can feed the desperation and confirm the self doubts.  "he thinks we can't even decide when to make a run..."

So, bottom line I don't care if the manager gesticulates, sits on his hands, or stands on his head, or sips an adult beverage in the skybox.... just win.

[srsmithusa]

28 minutes ago, BOF said:

The fact he is changing it like this would at the very least lend itself to @TrentVilla's assertion that Di Matteo may not have a plan.  Managers should have a philosophy and they should buy and coach appropriately in order to put that philosophy onto the pitch.  Perhaps the most worrying thing is that RDM could (I stress 'could') be accused of a similar scattergun approach to finding a solution as Sherwood was.  Now I'm not at that level of accusation yet, because he has been hampered by key injuries (De Laet being the big one) necessitating personnel and arguably formational changes.  But other posters could and probably would level that accusation at him.

one other possibility is rooted in the observation that it seems clear that whatever "master plan" is, it involved another midfielder, apparently one that could do a better job linking to the attack.  But given the market, he was not able to get that across the line.  The right guys were not interested or affordable, and none of the "might be OK" candidates were worth the gamble.  So, now he's trying to adapt the plan to make it work in the absence of a key cog.  That takes time.  It's a matter of adjusting personnel, roles, and the "plan" to find a combination that will work in the interim.   

[TRO]

1 hour ago, terrytini said:

Fascinating comments by Sir Brian in the programme on Saturday (well they were to me as I had never heard them before) that Ron Saunders used to leave Gray and Little out of most the training, instead drilling the other 9 to be able to properly compete, and hold their own, against 11.  The thinking being if they do that we had 2 guys to add to it who would score all the goals.  In a way, we aren't to different - we have 3 or 4 very talented guys who, given the right platform, should get us what we want.  It is the solidity and seamlessness of that platform as much as anything we need improving also.

Interesting

[TRO]

15 hours ago, BOF said:

The fact he is changing it like this would at the very least lend itself to @TrentVilla's assertion that Di Matteo may not have a plan.  Managers should have a philosophy and they should buy and coach appropriately in order to put that philosophy onto the pitch.  Perhaps the most worrying thing is that RDM could (I stress 'could') be accused of a similar scattergun approach to finding a solution as Sherwood was.  Now I'm not at that level of accusation yet, because he has been hampered by key injuries (De Laet being the big one) necessitating personnel and arguably formational changes.  But other posters could and probably would level that accusation at him.

Like you say "could" and who am I to argue either way.

It brings me to a point already raised on here.... communication.

I understand there is a seperate argument for keeping your own councel.....but when you are not winning the manager needs to reach out to the fanbase to let them know he has a plan or a structure or something or other, that does not leave them believing we are waiting for divine intervention....it can have a leveling effect on the frustration.

I used to listen to Bobby Robson after a game and he left me in no uncertain terms he knew exactly what was going on despite the result and if there was flaws and errors he would say so without incriminating the individual.

They have given the instructions, in some cases only they know the errors.

Edited September 27, 2016 by TRO

[mikeyp102]

As a variant of the 424, the 4231 would work fairly well. 

Tish and Jedinak in the middle. Kodjia as the focal up front with three of  the four (Grealish, McCormack, Ayew and Adamoh) behind. Then you have Rudi to come off the bench

[A38villan]

3 hours ago, bobzy said:

Agree with most of this but playing width and then selecting Kodjia over Gestede is daft IMO.  I think we should be narrower (as I said earlier) - our players don't beat their men down the outside anyway.  Sit Ayew and McCormack behind Kodjia then Grealish behind those guys.  Almost an attacking diamond ahead of a back 4 and "sitting" 2 midfielders.

This!

[Farlz]

Quote

Roberto Di Matteo is facing two crucial games this week as he bids to save his job at Aston Villa.

Di Matteo’s future has been plunged into doubt after a difficult start to the season and he is under pressure to win one of their forthcoming away games, at Barnsley and Preston, to avoid being dismissed by the Championship club. 

Villa spent over £50 million on new signings over the summer to build a squad capable of challenging for promotion but new owner Tony Xia is growing increasingly concerned by results.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/09/26/roberto-di-matteo-facing-two-games-to-save-his-job-at-aston-vill/

[KSV]

Wow lots of reports about the two games. Must of been a leak. I hope RDM can get two wins and kick on. I like him and I don't want another manager. But if he can't get a few wins in the next two games.. something is seroously wrong. New team yes.. but even New teams with great players can get results. 

[bannedfromHandV]

2 minutes ago, KSV said:

Wow lots of reports about the two games. Must of been a leak. I hope RDM can get two wins and kick on. I like him and I don't want another manager. But if he can't get a few wins in the next two games.. something is seroously wrong. New team yes.. but even New teams with great players can get results. 

If he can get a few wins from just two games then I suspect he'll have managed something never before done

[il_serpente]

I was wondering the same thing.   I haven't seen any indication that his job is in danger.   I wonder if one or more journos have decided that most managers who have gone winless so many games, particularly with that kind of spending, would be in trouble so therefore RDM must be a game or two away from the sack.   Once one goes with it they all follow and it's suddenly accepted as fact.   I would be really surprised if Dr. Tony pulls the trigger this early in the season.   Hasn't he already referenced a two-year plan to go up?

[briny_ear]

2 hours ago, il_serpente said:

I would be really surprised if Dr. Tony pulls the trigger this early in the season.   Hasn't he already referenced a two-year plan to go up?

Maybe he doesn't see 9 points from 9 games as a satisfactory start even for a two-year plan.

I would agree with him in that.

[MrDuck]

Somehow I can't see Tony being too patient... wouldn't surprise me if RDM was gone sooner rather than later.

[Grasshopper]

To all who are saying "all we need is a win to get us going" "we're gonna hammer someone soon"

If you dont set up, have the balls or tactics to go out and get a win. YOU WONT WIN.