Jump to content

Steve Bruce


Demitri_C

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Even the people who might intimate that sentiment, can't help but be happy when we win because it's the team we support.

Again, if you believe that then fine.

I don't. And I think posts in this thread suggest as much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

I'm not really sure I get your point, I don't think anyone expected us to smash Barnsley. I think some have said despite the positive result that our performance wasn't actually that good, I certainly think the score flattered us.

I think people expected us to be doing better than we are this season, I think that is a reasonable belief.

As for taking rough with smooth, I don't really think anyone needs to be told that and I don't think anyone thinks we've a Devine right to anything. I do think people think with our squad we should be taking games to teams like Barnsley rather than hitting them on the break.

As for being positive in life, same, but I see very little positive in Steve Bruce's time at the club to date other than some of the players he has signed. It's just a shame he seems so incapable of getting the best from them.

Yesterday was a big improvement on previous games but the concern for me is yet again the rule of thumb is Kodjia plays we win and if he doesn't we don't. After 11 months Bruce seems to have  nothing to reduce this reliance.

Kodija staying fit and not suspended will decide our promotion fate and also Bruce's job. 

Edited by Vive_La_Villa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blandy said:

If a player is comfortable in possession, then he's comfortable in possession - that is nothing to do with the manager. It's innate. However, I do agree that if the tactics are hoofball and the coaching is all about playing it long or whatever, then that's another matter. Our problem is IMO all about coaching and about tactics, not about the other aspects of managing. Bruce is fine at buying and selling, and dealing with players - they seem to respect him and all the rest. I really think that we need to be more than one dimensional, more than "give it to so and so to chase after and they'll maybe do something". The coaching needs to be working more on interplay, particularly between the midfield and forwards and between forwards. More pas and move, more give and get, triangles and all that kind of creative stuff. We defend pretty well, set plays are OK. Control of the game is where we lack, because despite the abilities of the players, for whatever reason they're too prone to giving the ball away, either by "passing" for people to chase after, or because of lack of understanding and movement, and lack of a cohesive template - where people know what to do and where to go, and when.

Defence is ok, with 2 up top our strikers looked dangerous, but our midfield just looks a complete mess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blandy said:

If a player is comfortable in possession, then he's comfortable in possession - that is nothing to do with the manager. It's innate. However, I do agree that if the tactics are hoofball and the coaching is all about playing it long or whatever, then that's another matter. Our problem is IMO all about coaching and about tactics, not about the other aspects of managing. Bruce is fine at buying and selling, and dealing with players - they seem to respect him and all the rest. I really think that we need to be more than one dimensional, more than "give it to so and so to chase after and they'll maybe do something". The coaching needs to be working more on interplay, particularly between the midfield and forwards and between forwards. More pas and move, more give and get, triangles and all that kind of creative stuff. We defend pretty well, set plays are OK. Control of the game is where we lack, because despite the abilities of the players, for whatever reason they're too prone to giving the ball away, either by "passing" for people to chase after, or because of lack of understanding and movement, and lack of a cohesive template - where people know what to do and where to go, and when.

Pete

There is nothing wrong in criticising things.....but fans/ posters need to be specific in what it is they are unhappy with......otherwise it seems personal.

some things are not right.....but some things are......they need to be seperated in the interests of accuracy.

your post is balanced.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Eastie said:

Not too worried about possession - hull  dominated possession and lost 5-0  at derby a few days ago - it's all  about goals . 

Its fair not to get too hung up about possession....and you are right its all about scoring and not conceding......but to dismiss possession out of hand is a mistake too.

its a factor thats always good to be proficient at.....but not the be all and end all.

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Eastie said:

Whelan and jedinak are not matic and fellaini ;) 

No they are not and quite right to point that out....but I already did.

but we are not in the premiership.....I was highlighting the principle not the specific.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TRO said:

I still think Whelan and Jedinak( when fit) can play in a 4-2-3-1 formation....when the time is right.

interesting how Man U have Fellani and Matic as 2 holding players in todays game at home.....yes they are more complete players, but the principle is still employed.

some think it s negative or defensive, but in fact when you are in the ascendency they come forward.....also ball winners start the attack, paradoxically.

I for one would not baulk at the option.

Mmmm. I would hazard a guess that there are few if any teams in the Championship that have the same quality of player as Everton to warrant Villa playing two defensive midfielders.

If you also consider the results gained by Villa with more offensive players I would absolutely hate to see Bruce return to a more pragmatic approach against opposition that do not warrant that type of respect.

It was that approach which caused 'hysteria' in the first place.

 

Edited by striker
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, macandally said:

I think you were watching a different game?

We didn't manage to string together more than five passes, were disjointed and were very fortunate with two punts over the top into channels.  Usually, this was the ball of choice as we were not in a position to play through the thirds.

Barnsley worked the ball better, faster and through better positions and the possession stats favoured them right through till the last 15-20 minutes.  That was probably the only time we looked "in control" but even then Ugbo had two gilt edged chances to score.

You seem to be attempting to match the performance to the result!

What some of us can see is that if you makes this squad a team and get them on the front foot, we will blow teams away.  Unfortunately Bruce doesn't seem to see that and therefore,  some of us want better than flukes results.  We want consistent results!

Its common for us all to be watching a different game.....same game, different interpretations, is what it really is.

There were frailties still on display, no doubt, but in terms of increments, improvement it was....for sure, you make some valid points about team cohesion, it will come.

you seem to be matching the faults to the performance and begrudgingly accepting the result.

I think Bruce see's what you see.....getting the team on the front foot is what he is working towards....it might be taking longer than we all want including me....and its fair to say he is no Pepe or Jose.

of course everyone of us including Steve Bruce wants consistency.....thats the holy grail.

but to call that result a fluke is miserly at best....it was well worked and we forced them in to those errors.

but thanks for your post.....it was interesting.

Edited by TRO
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TrentVilla said:

I'm not really sure I get your point, I don't think anyone expected us to smash Barnsley. I think some have said despite the positive result that our performance wasn't actually that good, I certainly think the score flattered us.

I think people expected us to be doing better than we are this season, I think that is a reasonable belief.

As for taking rough with smooth, I don't really think anyone needs to be told that and I don't think anyone thinks we've a Devine right to anything. I do think people think with our squad we should be taking games to teams like Barnsley rather than hitting them on the break.

As for being positive in life, same, but I see very little positive in Steve Bruce's time at the club to date other than some of the players he has signed. It's just a shame he seems so incapable of getting the best from them.

Yesterday was a big improvement on previous games but the concern for me is yet again the rule of thumb is Kodjia plays we win and if he doesn't we don't. After 11 months Bruce seems to have done nothing to reduce this reliance.

Trent if you read the original post I was responding directly to a poster who said promotion chasing teams should smash Barnsley. That was the only reasoning behind my post about looking back and seeing that actually promotion chasing teams didn't smash Barnsley. I thought the post was based on unrealistic expectations.

Perhaps the original reason behind my post has got lost in the depths! 

He has reduced the reliance on Jedinak though who we were not able to win without. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, TRO said:

No they are not and quite right to point that out....but I already did.

but we are not in the premiership.....I was highlighting the principle not the specific.

Or  let's play 3 up top as it worked for Barca :) 

i sense a spring in your step today tro that suggests you have maybe switched your backing back to Bruce , the 2 times you have vented your anger at him we have gone on to win well next game - keep up the good work :)

Edited by Eastie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, sidcow said:

This is a ridiculous comment. There has not been a single post where anyone is gutted or upset or even mildly annoyed we won. 

People are just pointing out that the performance was still not entirely convincing and that they are not convinced we have turned a corner. 

Who is saying we have turned a corner?.....its just one good result and despite some of the comments a well fought win....with a few fortunate moments......to make up for the missing ones against Middlesbrough and Hull.

We all know we need to sustain these results.....fingers crossed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TRO said:

Who is saying we have turned a corner?.....its just one good result and despite some of the comments a well fought win....with a few fortunate moments......to make up for the missing ones against Middlesbrough and Hull.

We all know we need to sustain these results.....fingers crossed.

We hope we have turned a corner although we have been in this position several times and it's turned sour - let's hope this time it's the real deal - not before time . 

Edited by Eastie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Eastie said:

Or  let's play 3 up top as it worked for Barca :) 

i sense a spring in your step today tro that suggests you have maybe switched your backing back to Bruce , the 2 times you have vented your anger at him we have gone on to win well next game - keep up the good work :)

I have never wanted him to go, but its a results business and unconditional support is not me......we have to win.

I have never been as convinced as some of his degree of influence on the game good or bad.....that is not saying he has no influence, for those who want to twist my words....thst would be absurd.....but i think it is overplayed.

I believe form , belief has a decent part to play too....players learning to play with each other, how long does that take and getting the right blend.

my point was, and you are entitled to manipulate it if you choose to...is better managers than Steve Bruce choose to play 2 holding players.....so disagree with the notion, but don't blame the manager as a dinasaur if he does......because the managers with big reputations do it.

get my point.

:)

 

 

 

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TRO said:

I have never been as convinced as some of his degree of influence on the game good or bad.....that is not saying he has no influence, for those who want to twist my words....thst would be absurd.....but i think it is overplayed.

I believe form , belief has a decent part to play too....players learning to play with each other, how long does that take and getting the right blend.

my point was, and you are entitled to manipulate it if you choose to...is better managers than Steve Bruce choose to play 2 holding players.....so disagree with the notion, but don't blame the manager as a dinasaur if he does......because the managers with big reputations do it.

get my point.

 

 

 

There are some fixtures I feel 2 holding players are merited mainly away from home , I would prefer us to play on the front foot at home though and we have several creative players to try and break down teams , I wouldn't want to stifle the creative side at the expense of 2 holding midfielders at home C

many teams will come to villa and invite us to break them down and sit deep - Everton had  a lot of flair in their team at united and that helped give united space to play . 

The vast number of teams that visit villa park will not  play  that way and will need to broken down . , as always tro I get your point :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â