Stevo985 Posted October 23, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted October 23, 2017 18 minutes ago, rodders0223 said: It wouldn't have been quite so edgey had RDL's header went in, or the countless times we overhit a pass when Fulham over commited in the last 10, rushed a clearanceor just booted the ball when a touch and a bit of calmness would have sufficed. You cannot blame Bruce for that. Well exactly. All the comments about us inviting Fulham on because we went defensive, yet it was still us who looked the more likely to score another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 9 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: Well exactly. All the comments about us inviting Fulham on because we went defensive, yet it was still us who looked the more likely to score another. Well, except for the spectacular point blank save by Johnstone, of course iI’ll easily admit that some critics of Bruce clutch at times, but his supporters claiming he has not shown a tendency to be too defensive, or too conservative in MANY instances, are clinging to blind denial. I was just enjoying the win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 23, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted October 23, 2017 4 minutes ago, srsmithusa said: Well, except for the spectacular point blank save by Johnstone, of course That save was before we went defensive wasn't it? 4 minutes ago, srsmithusa said: iI’ll easily admit that some critics of Bruce clutch at times, but his supporters claiming he has not shown a tendency to be too defensive, or too conservative in MANY instances, are clinging to blind denial. Has anybody said that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 11 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: That save was before we went defensive wasn't it? Has anybody said that? Well actually you just posted that we are not sitting too defensive we are being forced to sit back. As if we (and our manager) have no choice how we play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 23, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted October 23, 2017 6 minutes ago, srsmithusa said: Well actually you just posted that we are not sitting too defensive we are being forced to sit back. As if we (and our manager) have no choice how we play. No I didn't. I said the complete opposite. I said we weren't being forced to sit back on saturday. We were choosing to play defensively in a situation where we needed to. And it worked. What USUALLY happens, imo, is that we regress and end up sitting really really deep and inviting pressure on to us. And the manager absolutely takes blame for that. I don't think he WANTS us to play defensively a lot of the time, but the style of football he has bred means that it happens whether we want it to or not. Saturday was the exception. We chose to play defensively in a situation that justified it and it worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave J Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 17 hours ago, briny_ear said: So when they lose or draw it’s down to the failings of the players rather than any failings by Steve Bruce? Or does the logic not work in reverse? With respect what I mean is that whilst we are looking far from a cohesive and joined up unit - we have people who are capable of moments of instinctive play that could result in a goal - these moments are not coached they are an inate aspect of this person who has become a professional footballer imo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GREAT_BEARD_OF_ZEUS Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 3 hours ago, Raver50032 said: I thought we played quite well overall, but the bit in bold is a little bit jingoistic for me. Before we really got going, Fulham had two clear cut chances to score in the first 19 minutes. ~Very happy with the win, and overall showing on this occasion. Wasn't impressed with Bjarnasson, but enjoyed De Laat's cameo (and nearly scored) and I thought Davis did well - big unit, but he played quite mobile at times. I can't grumble, so won't. But we should have been 2 goals down after 20 minutes considering our start. Another day, that would have been a 5-3 game and DVD worthy. Jingoistic?? Don't agree Raver. We did play high intensity, pressing football and it didn't allow them to settle into their usual passing game, certainly not to the extent which they are capable of. Granted they created a couple of chances, but certainly not before we did. And I'd argue the 2-1 result substantiates the claim that it worked a treat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeilS Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 9 hours ago, Stevo985 said: Surprised at the negative reaction to us shutting the game down late in the second half. Well, I would be surprised, but then this is VillaTalk. It worked perfectly. Fulham didn't create much after that and in fact we still looked more likely to score than them. I have no problem with the manager going defensive at the end of a game against a good side to ensure a victory. There were a few shouts of get into them coming from the Holte. I was saying to my Dad at the time, that the team have been instructed to maintain their shape, chasing out after the ball would leave us a bit more exposed. Keep the shape and compact and make them pass through you. As you say, I cannot remember Johnstone being tested once in the final few minutes. There were a few unnecessary hacked clearances which could have been dealt with better, and maybe ran the clock better. Other than that it appeared a professional job seeing the game out, against a team unbeaten in four and good at scoring late goals. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 3 hours ago, srsmithusa said: Well, except for the spectacular point blank save by Johnstone, of course iI’ll easily admit that some critics of Bruce clutch at times, but his supporters claiming he has not shown a tendency to be too defensive, or too conservative in MANY instances, are clinging to blind denial. I was just enjoying the win. What you seem to be alluding to is exaggeration on both sides. If so, I think you might be on to something there. He has shown a tendency for a defensive approach, sometimes right, sometimes wrong. i think the more wins we get he will get more confidence in keeping his job and relax a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 We're arguably the biggest club in the division, and evidently, one of the richest. So surely when we play at home ,we should always set out to play on the front foot ,regardless of the opposition. I can't imagine the likes of ,say ,Leeds setting out to play defensively against Fulham, who maybe are a decent side ,but that's all they are . Teams should be coming to Villa park with no alternative but to play defensively, not the other way round . Yes we got the three points ,but I'd prefer us to get them in a more emphatic manner . ,but hey ,what do I know ? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, sheepyvillian said: We're arguably the biggest club in the division, and evidently, one of the richest. So surely when we play at home ,we should always set out to play on the front foot ,regardless of the opposition. I can't imagine the likes of ,say ,Leeds setting out to play defensively against Fulham, who maybe are a decent side ,but that's all they are . Teams should be coming to Villa park with no alternative but to play defensively, not the other way round . Yes we got the three points ,but I'd prefer us to get them in a more emphatic manner . ,but hey ,what do I know ? I guess we all want to play and win the way you describe. I remember leaving the victoria ground Stoke in 1981.... I heard 2 stoke fans chatting in front of me ,and one said " they won't win the league, playing like that,they are very ordinary" referring to Villa......how wrong they was. the thing is we all see a game differently depending on what we look for. We would all like to play like Man City.....but we haven't the players to play like that. Or the money to buy them. I appreciate SB can play too defensively, its frustrating, but its his call he will live or die by it. John Gregory was fairly defensive too.....MON relied on the counter, hence the success away from home, but not so formidable at home.....that was frustrating too, particularly for season ticket holders, who only go to home games. back to today...... I think the more weeks we spend in the top six, the more likely to see a more offensive tendency. fingers crossed. Edited October 23, 2017 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrytini Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 I think he is too defensive overall - he has even said that he decided consciously to set out "not to lose rather than to Win" (although he has also said he wont do that now, but since he said it we played Wolves and....)...............and I think - and most near me said - on Saturday he needlessly invited pressure on when Fulham looked like they might crumble if we had continue to push - had they scored he would've rightly taken flack. I think that was why there was criticism - it wasn't as if Fulham were building a head of steam a la Man United under Fergie (in which case some 'battening down') might have made sense - it was more like we surrendered some initiative........and it seemed pre-planned, especially given his pre-match comments whereas the way the game was actually unfolding it maybe wasn't necessary. On the other hand it worked, and the whole debate is actually far nicer to have than the usual "should he be sacked or not" debate IMO as it is just a nice typical football debate -I don't think it needs people saying "typical VT" or it being a pro v anti Bruce debate myself. As regards whether he is too defensive in these situations - as opposed to overall - although I personally disagreed with his approach for the last quarter on Saturday its an area where I'm more than happy to concede I don't really have a clue - I've seen enough Managers do it through the years and I would imagine its done because they have the evidence to show that for every late goal comeback, there are 10 times where the lead is successfully kept. I would say I have far less issue with the idea of 'shutting up shop' in the final 15/20 minutes than I do with beginning the game with the intention of doing so, which we have done too often for my liking. I'm more intrigued - and was more bothered - by the pressing game being switched off after we went 1-0 up as it was working so well - when we switched it back on again (because they had equalised) we were far more effective again. So - for me- each time we went in front there was a noticeable application of the handbrake -and we've seen it before - Preston last year being the most striking example - and it continues to baffle me. We definitely IMO look a far far better side when we are more positive - not 'gung ho', not all out attack -( I have no problem with defending well and compactly as we do). We have done since he came, yet he never allows it for a whole game. I remain convinced he is a decent Manager who is needlessly restricting himself and the Team (of course current results don't indicate an issue I am talking overall) because of that and its the one question Id love to ask him....................I can only guess my comment earlier would be the answer, that the approach works.....its what he's always done, Managers always stick with their preferred 'way'. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave J Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 11 minutes ago, TRO said: I guess we all want to play and win the way you describe. I remember leaving the victoria ground Stoke in 1981.... I heard 2 stoke fans chatting in front of me ,and one said " they won't win the league, playing like that,they are very ordinary" referring to Villa......how wrong they was. the thing is we all see a different game, depending on what we look for. We would all like to play like Man City.....but we haven't the players to play like that. Or the money to buy them. I appreciate SB can play too defensively, its frustrating, but its his call he will live or die by it. John Gregory was fairly defensive too.....MON relied on the counter, hence the success away from home, but not so formidable at home.....that was frustrating too, particularly for season ticket holders, who only go to home games. back to today...... I think the more weeks we spend in the top six, the more likely to see a more offensive tendency. fingers crossed. I think that would happen despite Bruce being in charge not because of him being in charge. Winning games does breed momentum and confidence and players will naturally show more exuberence in themselves. you may or may not agree with my assessment - but I don’t see Bruce taking of the handbrake - for me it’s not his DNA imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) 16 minutes ago, terrytini said: I think he is too defensive overall - he has even said that he decided consciously to set out "not to lose rather than to Win" (although he has also said he wont do that now, but since he said it we played Wolves and....)...............and I think - and most near me said - on Saturday he needlessly invited pressure on when Fulham looked like they might crumble if we had continue to push - had they scored he would've rightly taken flack. I think that was why there was criticism - it wasn't as if Fulham were building a head of steam a la Man United under Fergie (in which case some 'battening down') might have made sense - it was more like we surrendered some initiative........and it seemed pre-planned, especially given his pre-match comments whereas the way the game was actually unfolding it maybe wasn't necessary. On the other hand it worked, and the whole debate is actually far nicer to have than the usual "should he be sacked or not" debate IMO as it is just a nice typical football debate -I don't think it needs people saying "typical VT" or it being a pro v anti Bruce debate myself. As regards whether he is too defensive in these situations - as opposed to overall - although I personally disagreed with his approach for the last quarter on Saturday its an area where I'm more than happy to concede I don't really have a clue - I've seen enough Managers do it through the years and I would imagine its done because they have the evidence to show that for every late goal comeback, there are 10 times where the lead is successfully kept. I would say I have far less issue with the idea of 'shutting up shop' in the final 15/20 minutes than I do with beginning the game with the intention of doing so, which we have done too often for my liking. I'm more intrigued - and was more bothered - by the pressing game being switched off after we went 1-0 up as it was working so well - when we switched it back on again (because they had equalised) we were far more effective again. So - for me- each time we went in front there was a noticeable application of the handbrake -and we've seen it before - Preston last year being the most striking example - and it continues to baffle me. We definitely IMO look a far far better side when we are more positive - not 'gung ho', not all out attack -( I have no problem with defending well and compactly as we do). We have done since he came, yet he never allows it for a whole game. I remain convinced he is a decent Manager who is needlessly restricting himself and the Team (of course current results don't indicate an issue I am talking overall) because of that and its the one question Id love to ask him....................I can only guess my comment earlier would be the answer, that the approach works.....its what he's always done, Managers always stick with their preferred 'way'. Terry, i have no problem with all of that.....and yes i too would like to see what you allude to. but let me for a minute, offer a slightly alternative view. Personally, i thought Fulham kept the ball very well and at times had us chasing the ball, that can have the effect of zapping your energy.....we were hitting a few long balls and that ultimately had an effect on Kodjia's energy levels too....in fact at the end he could n't make the runs. I think we ran out of steam and had to resort to what we did.He seen some with their legs gone and acted upon it. We worked so much harder than in the Wolves game and in the last 10/ 15 it showed. I too would welcome the chance to see us letting the ball do the work. Edited October 23, 2017 by TRO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 17 minutes ago, Dave J said: I think that would happen despite Bruce being in charge not because of him being in charge. Winning games does breed momentum and confidence and players will naturally show more exuberence in themselves. you may or may not agree with my assessment - but I don’t see Bruce taking of the handbrake - for me it’s not his DNA imo Dave....I am not nonchalantly defending SB and i know what you are edging towards and i largely agree.I agree he is defence first. but i also think confidence works with managers too.....If we get more wins, his confidence will grow with his team, don't forget this game of ours is brittle. Reading /Sheff Wed/Middlesborough.....who would have thought them down below after last season. however, i do have difficulty, with criticising him After a defeat and denying him any credit after a win.....thats like heads you lose tails you lose. i understand you will never be a fan of his.....i won't change that and i am not trying. just want you to enjoy your team again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 We went out to win under Ron Saunders ,the emphasis may of been on the counter - attack ,but it was a counter attack with guile and confidence . I never missed a game in that title winning season , and I distinctly remember it being one exciting ride . Cowans, Shaw , Morley and big Peter ,nothing negative about that side . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave J Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 2 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said: We went out to win under Ron Saunders ,the emphasis may of been on the counter - attack ,but it was a counter attack with guile and confidence . I never missed a game in that title winning season , and I distinctly remember it being one exciting ride . Cowans, Shaw , Morley and big Peter ,nothing negative about that side . Omg did you really have to bring this up and upset me? I didn’t do every game - but most of them. good times indeed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vreitti Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 Shutting up shop once we go ahead, may work from time to time, but I just can't see it gaining us promotion. It's still a cowardly approach, and as many have already alluded, it's the only way Bruce knows. For me it's still not good enough, not with the players at his disposal. We need to be more proactive. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 2 hours ago, TRO said: What you seem to be alluding to is exaggeration on both sides. If so, I think you might be on to something there. He has shown a tendency for a defensive approach, sometimes right, sometimes wrong. i think the more wins we get he will get more confidence in keeping his job and relax a bit. You got it. There is significant exaggeration on both sides (basically everybody but me ) But I would expand that his defensive approach in a match has been too common IMO of course. But is also in keeping with a trend of being overly conservative in many other decisions as well. But I've listed many, multiple times so I'll not waste your time again right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 2 hours ago, sheepyvillian said: We went out to win under Ron Saunders ,the emphasis may of been on the counter - attack ,but it was a counter attack with guile and confidence . I never missed a game in that title winning season , and I distinctly remember it being one exciting ride . Cowans, Shaw , Morley and big Peter ,nothing negative about that side . Me too....never missed a game....but we were dogged as well as equipped to score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts