Steve Bruce

[AvfcRigo82]

15 hours ago, mikeyp102 said:

If they were all consistent they wouldn't be playing for us. The likes of Kodjia, Ayew can be awesome on their day and would be at higher clubs in the prem if consistent 

Careful what you wish for....  

[AvfcRigo82]

9 hours ago, TheStagMan said:

I still cannot understand how our players cannot be at least as fit as other championship teams. How can this be allowed to happen? What the hell do they do at Bodymoor Heath? Sit around and play call of duty?

I heard it was Fifa 16...     and they couldn't win on that either!

[Vive_La_Villa]

Credit to Bruce for singling out Westwood for public praise. A player clearly devoid of all confidence but played his heart out. 

[Vive_La_Villa]

12 hours ago, TRO said:

Perhaps they are, they just didn't look as fit as the Blues to me....thats just my take on it.

I think we have improved .....but we seemed to allow them to clatter us on Sunday.

I think the occasion and crowd gave Blues players that extra adrenaline. I expect the reverse at home. 

[TrentVilla]

1 hour ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Credit to Bruce for singling out Westwood for public praise. A player clearly devoid of all confidence but played his heart out. 

Irrespective of if people agree with him or not it is good man management. 

[TRO]

On 10/31/2016 at 10:22, VillaCas said:

I dont agree entirely - Bruce seems to know his preferred starting XI and has them working in a clear shape and with clear tactics. We did not have this under RDM

We have been more lucky - I won't trot out the old 'you make your own luck' but I think it's more likely that things will go your way when you have a clear plan than when you don't

Early days and to win me over Bruce will need to do more than turn us into a team of 10-men-behind-the-ball spoilers but so far at least we have some sort of base from which to operate

He might know what his preferred team is from what he has available....( I agree with the shape and tactics)

but,I don't think he knows his best team yet and why would he, with form fluctuations, suspensions and injuries he is unable to see how all of them respond in a match.

He has already said he is picking the team with balls from a bag, perhaps a bit tongue in cheek, but I think he was alluding to the fact its all a bit new and a bit soon.

what he has done in such a short space is amazing....not great on the eye, but neither was the results (before he came) and the league tables.

I can't think of anything more depressing than conceding in the last 5 minutes and resulting in dropped points....so despite the fact that there is much to do in so many area's...Its a 9 from me.

Edited November 1, 2016 by TRO

[TRO]

12 hours ago, MikeMcKenna said:

Fitness does seem to be an issue. However IMO confidence is a bigger one. That comes with results and players always find plenty of energy when their heads are up. 

Its not one thing with us Mike its many factors and it takes time to rectify them all.

I agree with your points

The danger is on a forum.....you mention one as an example and all sorts of conclusions are derived.

• Its not the most important
• There are many other things
• da di da di da

long way to go.....but we are doing great as a start.

UTV

[TRO]

2 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

Irrespective of if people agree with him or not it is good man management. 

Spot on

[Villarocker]

I think Elphick may struggle to get his place back with Bruce as manager. Chester has been the better defender of the two so far this season and Bruce will like Baker as he is a player in the same mould as himself - in terms of putting his head in where it hurts for the good of the team. Is it coincidence that we haven't conceded goals so easily since Bruce has been in charge? 

[villalad21]

On 30.10.2016 at 18:27, markavfc40 said:

To offer up some context here Steve Bruce arrived just over three weeks ago into a team that had won one game in 12 this season and a club as a whole with 4 wins in 50 odd games. You don't turn that around overnight.

What you do is try to get a foundation in place and then build from that. You make yourself difficult to beat, you try to string a run of positive results together and off the back of that confidence starts to be restored.

In four games under Bruce we are yet to lose. In those four games we have won two on the spin for the first time in 18 months. Won away for the first time in 14 months. Managed to see out games when teams are putting us under pressure in the final minutes something that had become a major issue. All these things will now improve confidence and stand us in good stead going forward.

For as much as I dislike Sha I have to acknowledge they started the game today in 7th place with a win seeing them go 5th having lost once at home this season. Also despite the fact I would love to say otherwise it has rarely been an easy game at their place for us as there is a mentality amongst them that they see themselves as underdogs to us means they almost always give everything. In the end we came out with a draw having restricted them to three shots on target. It is another point for us to build on.

I am sure this isn't the way Bruce ultimately wants us to play but, as mentioned above, he had a number of issues to overcome and he has now given us something to build on. I expect to see us improve as an attacking force over the coming months and certainly with one or two centre midfield additions in January. For now though securing points is all that matters and restoring some confidence. On both those fronts I am so far happy.

Again this is not my point, and you obviously fail to see that. All i am doing is critizising sunday's performance. It was not GOOD enough. The way Steve Bruce set up the team on sunday was embarrasing. And on another day Birmingham would finish off their chances and probably scored 2 or 3 goals and we would lose the game. You need to look behind a result to truely reflect if it was a good performance or a bad one. 

And the reality is. Birmingham were not clinical on that day, if they had been we would lose the game and then you wouldn't say we were "hard" to beat. All you do is to draw conclusion from the result, but, yes we played truely horrific and were VERY lucky too get a point.

[VillaCas]

12 hours ago, MikeMcKenna said:

Fitness does seem to be an issue. However IMO confidence is a bigger one. That comes with results and players always find plenty of energy when their heads are up. 

Confidence is a problem but the biggest problem we have is lack of options and creativity in midfield - that can't be sorted properly until January

Until then Bruce will try and make us compact, solid and hard to break down

If we can keep picking points up between now and January, then bring in a couple of decent midfielders, you will see a big upswing in confidence and we can start to play with a bit more swagger.

There is no lack of fitness! We're as fit as the next team but five years of decline has infected the whole club.

PS  For those who keep mentioning this massive fitness issue that we supposedly have, could you name the players on Sunday who you thought looked like they were struggling?

[darrenm]

10 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Again this is not my point, and you obviously fail to see that. All i am doing is critizising sunday's performance. It was not GOOD enough. The way Steve Bruce set up the team on sunday was embarrasing. And on another day Birmingham would finish off their chances and probably scored 2 or 3 goals and we would lose the game. You need to look behind a result to truely reflect if it was a good performance or a bad one. 

And the reality is. Birmingham were not clinical on that day, if they had been we would lose the game and then you wouldn't say we were "hard" to beat. All you do is to draw conclusion from the result, but, yes we played truely horrific and were VERY lucky too get a point.

Way over the top. People don't seem to get nuance these days.

The performance was not embarrassing and it wasn't truly horrific.

It was below par and it could have gone better.

Save the absolutes for when they're required, otherwise every argument gets diluted.

[Vive_La_Villa]

3 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

Irrespective of if people agree with him or not it is good man management. 

Totally agree. 

Ive never rated Westwood highly but we all know that he is a better player than what we are seeing right now. 

Edited November 1, 2016 by Vive_La_Villa

[TrentVilla]

21 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Again this is not my point, and you obviously fail to see that. All i am doing is critizising sunday's performance. It was not GOOD enough. The way Steve Bruce set up the team on sunday was embarrasing. And on another day Birmingham would finish off their chances and probably scored 2 or 3 goals and we would lose the game. You need to look behind a result to truely reflect if it was a good performance or a bad one. 

And the reality is. Birmingham were not clinical on that day, if they had been we would lose the game and then you wouldn't say we were "hard" to beat. All you do is to draw conclusion from the result, but, yes we played truely horrific and were VERY lucky too get a point.

Why is it 'on another day' scenario's only ever apply in one direction?

On another day their keeper would have been sent off, on another day Gardner makes the tackle, on another day the deflection takes their shot wide, on another day one of our half chances falls differently and we get a 2nd.

On another day lots of things can happen, what matters is the day and what actually happens.

You can say Birmingham weren't clinical and you can say our strikers had a bit of a quiet day.

We weren't great but weren't horrific, I didn't really think we were lucky to get a point I thought we were good value for it and it was a fair result.

 

[VillaCas]

20 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Again this is not my point, and you obviously fail to see that. All i am doing is critizising sunday's performance. It was not GOOD enough. The way Steve Bruce set up the team on sunday was embarrasing. And on another day Birmingham would finish off their chances and probably scored 2 or 3 goals and we would lose the game. You need to look behind a result to truely reflect if it was a good performance or a bad one. 

And the reality is. Birmingham were not clinical on that day, if they had been we would lose the game and then you wouldn't say we were "hard" to beat. All you do is to draw conclusion from the result, but, yes we played truely horrific and were VERY lucky too get a point.

It's far too early yet to have an informed view on Bruce one way or the other.  Luck plays a huge part in football and most games turn on one or two incidents or missed chances

Bruce's fans will point to four games unbeaten and start to invest that with meaning "solid", "organised" etc, etc.  If one or two incidents had not gone our way and Bruce had say two wins and two defeats so far, critics would be saying "no better than RDM" etc etc.  In truth, we can only start to make proper judgements when we have a much larger sample of games to look at

To me we do look better organised, keener and hard to break down (this is viewed through the lens of 8 pts from 12 mind), but I would be disappointed if we were still employing this style of play against the likes of SHA in six months time. 

The performance Sunday wasn't what we want to see (it wasn't 'horrific' either) but lets assume for a moment that Bruce knows what he is doing, it does make sense to establish a base of a few decent result to breed confidence and hopefully improve over the coming months

I wasn't a fan of Bruce and was against his appointment but now he is here I'm reserving judgement for a while yet

[TrentVilla]

12 minutes ago, VillaCas said:

I wasn't a fan of Bruce and was against his appointment but now he is here I'm reserving judgement for a while yet

Be gone with your reason and patience, we don't want your sort around here...

 

[TRO]

2 hours ago, VillaCas said:

Confidence is a problem but the biggest problem we have is lack of options and creativity in midfield - that can't be sorted properly until January

Until then Bruce will try and make us compact, solid and hard to break down

If we can keep picking points up between now and January, then bring in a couple of decent midfielders, you will see a big upswing in confidence and we can start to play with a bit more swagger.

There is no lack of fitness! We're as fit as the next team but five years of decline has infected the whole club.

PS  For those who keep mentioning this massive fitness issue that we supposedly have, could you name the players on Sunday who you thought looked like they were struggling?

I for one have commented on it and I only repeat myself, when you continue to raise it in opposition.

1. It is not a massive fitness issue( your words).....It was raised as I think they looked fitter than us and they did IMO ....my point has also been endorsed by the manager.....in the context of a generalisation....no specific game.

2. To select individuals other than Gabby,could be misleading and render criticism of them,when it was meant as an observation and genralisation....The Blues as a team looked fitter to me, so I guess I mean most of them.

3.I believe after c 50 minutes we were struggling to contain their physical presence.....its debatable what you put that down to, because i don't think they are technically better players than ours.....but I can't measure that either  to support my point. 

Edited November 1, 2016 by TRO

[DCJonah]

5 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

Irrespective of if people agree with him or not it is good man management. 

As long as it is just man management and not because he genuinely believes westwood will be a key player for us. 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

5 hours ago, villalad21 said:

Again this is not my point, and you obviously fail to see that. All i am doing is critizising sunday's performance. It was not GOOD enough. The way Steve Bruce set up the team on sunday was embarrasing. And on another day Birmingham would finish off their chances and probably scored 2 or 3 goals and we would lose the game. You need to look behind a result to truely reflect if it was a good performance or a bad one. 

And the reality is. Birmingham were not clinical on that day, if they had been we would lose the game and then you wouldn't say we were "hard" to beat. All you do is to draw conclusion from the result, but, yes we played truely horrific and were VERY lucky too get a point.

What if Kodjia had buried his header? Didn't he also flash a shot wide? I can't remember much now, I watched the game from between my fingers as usual. Does your hypothetical scenario discussion only work one way? 

We were hard to beat, pretty much proven in this case by the fact that they didn't beat us. They had 3 shots on target? Our game plan was shattered early on with the Adomah injury, Kodjia and Ayew didn't perform, we came away with a point.

I don't see anything embarrassing about it, we set up exactly the same way against Reading and Fulham and will probably do the same against Blackburn, so maybe it's just not for you? 

[sheepyvillian]

23 hours ago, mikeyp102 said:

What has that got to do with anything? We got relegated last season as one of the worst teams in premier league history. We started this season with a new manager and pretty much new squad. That said manager didn't have us organised and had to leave. So here we are now with another new manager. He is unbeaten in 4 games. Yes it wasn't a pretty performance, but that was to be expected, especially when our game plan with a quick counter went out the window eay doors with Adomah going off.

The pioneers of competitive football and you ask me ,what has history and tradition got to do with anything ? Dear me .