Steve Bruce

[dont_do_it_doug.]

16 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

But the more successful teams, over the course of a season average more possession. They control the game more, hence the consistent results. There are other examples of the opposite but usually it's not the case. 

There's quite a few examples actually, it's nowhere near as rare as people think. I've already cited Burnley of last season and been told they were an anomaly, which doesn't ring true seeing as they've done it twice.

In season 13/14 they had 49% placing them 15th in the league for possession. They finished 2nd.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

How about Villa under Martin O'Neill? Unfortunately I can only go back to 09/10 as that is when Whoscored started collecting the data. 

In season 2009/10 we finished 6th, as everyone knows. Possibly our best season under him, at least to my mind.

We were 12th in the league for possession, with 48.5%.

[DCJonah]

55 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

There's quite a few examples actually, it's nowhere near as rare as people think. I've already cited Burnley of last season and been told they were an anomaly, which doesn't ring true seeing as they've done it twice.

In season 13/14 they had 49% placing them 15th in the league for possession. They finished 2nd.

I'm not saying it's the only thing and it's the key to success. But i do think it has an impact more often than not. 

I also couldn't give a shit, as long as we're successful long term it doesn't matter to me. 

[sne]

2 hours ago, a m ole said:

it's not the same thing though, is it? People are complaining that not having possession will lead to losses while we've won 15 from a possible 18 points and sit top of the form table. Bruce was complaining when performances were leading to the polar opposite results (with more possession)

 

So people are complaining in the wrong way.

Perhaps if they complained in a more attractive way?

Edit: It's supposed to have a winky smiley but my Phone won't let me 

Edited April 4, 2017 by sne

[blandy]

2 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

How about Villa under Martin O'Neill? Unfortunately I can only go back to 09/10 as that is when Whoscored started collecting the data. 

In season 2009/10 we finished 6th, as everyone knows. Possibly our best season under him, at least to my mind.

We were 12th in the league for possession, with 48.5%.

I think, perhaps inadvertently, that is an example of what people who have concerns over the current approach/style are getting at.

Looking to the future, the club will not be successful if the team cannot keep hold of the ball better, create sustained pressure on well organised opponents and have the ability to BOTH play on the break and also control games via a more patient version of football.

MO'N's teams have always been restricted by a glass ceiling imposed by the one dimensional nature of his style of football. It's kind of a one trick shot - you can suprise somebody once and do really well if you get lucky, but you cannot consistently be at the top playing break away football.

I'm accepting of the way things are going right now, it's a big job turning the club round and things appear to be getting better, rather than worse as has been the case for the past few years. So that's all good.

If we want to go up, performances will need to be better than they've been this season. Better ball retention, better passing, more intelligent play is necessary. And that kind of style needs to be embedded in the club, otherwise coming back down again is a higher likelihood.

all IMO, of course

 

[TRO]

15 hours ago, NottingVilla said:

This season is even more damning....

Of the top 10 teams in the league, 9 are in the top 10 for possession also. 

So its undeniable we need to improve in that respect. 

However I would suspect Bruce knows this. I also suspect especially with him alluding to fitness issues before he came in that he is 'blagging' it at the moment. He/I know we aren't a good team, just making the best of what we've got. Which is a bit concerning for promotion next season if not spending $$$.

No one as I understand is arguing with the point" we need to improve"......the team and the manager probably agrees.

Most teams have got issues they need to improve, if you look for them.

where we differ is some of us accept transition and the imperfections that come with that........some want perfect eye catching football from day one.

Thats where we are at odds.

I think you will find the argument actually centres around expectation and what is reasonable in the time scale.

[Godders]

6 minutes ago, blandy said:

I think, perhaps inadvertently, that is an example of what people who have concerns over the current approach/style are getting at.

Looking to the future, the club will not be successful if the team cannot keep hold of the ball better, create sustained pressure on well organised opponents and have the ability to BOTH play on the break and also control games via a more patient version of football.

MO'N's teams have always been restricted by a glass ceiling imposed by the one dimensional nature of his style of football. It's kind of a one trick shot - you can suprise somebody once and do really well if you get lucky, but you cannot consistently be at the top playing break away football.

I'm accepting of the way things are going right now, it's a big job turning the club round and things appear to be getting better, rather than worse as has been the case for the past few years. So that's all good.

If we want to go up, performances will need to be better than they've been this season. Better ball retention, better passing, more intelligent play is necessary. And that kind of style needs to be embedded in the club, otherwise coming back down again is a higher likelihood.

all IMO, of course

 

MON's glass ceiling with us was 6th in the Premier League and a spot in Europe. If that's what one dimensional, counter-attacking football gets you, then I, for one, am all for it.

Only then would we need to worry about whether or not it's good enough to get us into the top 4/Champions League.

[bobzy]

2 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

There's quite a few examples actually, it's nowhere near as rare as people think. I've already cited Burnley of last season and been told they were an anomaly, which doesn't ring true seeing as they've done it twice.

In season 13/14 they had 49% placing them 15th in the league for possession. They finished 2nd.

I don't agree with the possession argument per say, but...

...we're currently 19th in the Championship for "most possession".  The teams below us are:
Birmingham - 18th in the league
Preston - 8th in the league
Burton Albion - 19th in the league
Cardiff - 14th in the league
Rotherham - 24th in the league

The top 6 teams in terms of possession?
Fulham - 6th in the league
Reading - 4th in the league
Huddersfield - 3rd in the league
Newcastle - 1st in the league
Sheff Wed - 7th in the league
Norwich - 9th in the league

There's absolutely a link between having more of the ball and doing better over the course of a season.  It's not the be all and end all, it means nothing as an individual statistic (Leicester won the Premier League with the 3rd worst possession stats last season) but it is an indicator of the success a team may have.

[carewjust4u]

Didn't Leicester win the premier league with no possession? Extremity I know, but how many "pretty" teams outside the top 4/5 have scaled those heights.

[markavfc40]

30 minutes ago, blandy said:

I think, perhaps inadvertently, that is an example of what people who have concerns over the current approach/style are getting at.

Looking to the future, the club will not be successful if the team cannot keep hold of the ball better, create sustained pressure on well organised opponents and have the ability to BOTH play on the break and also control games via a more patient version of football.

MO'N's teams have always been restricted by a glass ceiling imposed by the one dimensional nature of his style of football. It's kind of a one trick shot - you can suprise somebody once and do really well if you get lucky, but you cannot consistently be at the top playing break away football.

I'm accepting of the way things are going right now, it's a big job turning the club round and things appear to be getting better, rather than worse as has been the case for the past few years. So that's all good.

If we want to go up, performances will need to be better than they've been this season. Better ball retention, better passing, more intelligent play is necessary. And that kind of style needs to be embedded in the club, otherwise coming back down again is a higher likelihood.

all IMO, of course

 

Pete in terms of what we achieved under O’Neill I am not so sure a style of play where we retained the ball much better would have gotten us much better results/higher up the league. Regardless of whether the players we had at that time could have adapted to a more possession based style or he could have spent the money he did on different players he never had enough to go toe to toe with the likes of Man Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal etc.

It wasn’t the style of football that held us back from going higher it was the simple fact that a 70mill net spend in four years whilst a fair whack of money, and whilst some was undoubtedly wasted, it was never enough to break the established top 4 of the time and fend off a Man City who were just starting to spend silly money around that time. We’d have been overachieving to go any higher.

I think bringing this up to date going into next season we are the established big fish in this league then. We should, given the time Bruce will have been here, given that almost all of the squad will have been together at least 7 months, given they will have all had a pre season together , dominate a lot of games next season something that we have seen pretty much zero of this season. The extenuating circumstances of so many players in and out, two different managers, numerous coaching staff etc giving a lack of continuity and a chance to establish a pattern of play and partnerships on the pitch won’t wash next season. I will expect far better performances alongside positive results.

Edited April 4, 2017 by markavfc40

[TRO]

40 minutes ago, blandy said:

I think, perhaps inadvertently, that is an example of what people who have concerns over the current approach/style are getting at.

Looking to the future, the club will not be successful if the team cannot keep hold of the ball better, create sustained pressure on well organised opponents and have the ability to BOTH play on the break and also control games via a more patient version of football.

MO'N's teams have always been restricted by a glass ceiling imposed by the one dimensional nature of his style of football. It's kind of a one trick shot - you can suprise somebody once and do really well if you get lucky, but you cannot consistently be at the top playing break away football.

I'm accepting of the way things are going right now, it's a big job turning the club round and things appear to be getting better, rather than worse as has been the case for the past few years. So that's all good.

If we want to go up, performances will need to be better than they've been this season. Better ball retention, better passing, more intelligent play is necessary. And that kind of style needs to be embedded in the club, otherwise coming back down again is a higher likelihood.

all IMO, of course

 

I think is difficult to argue against that and I would be surprised if the manager argued with it too.

I aborted my season ticket in the last season of Mon due to the style of football and never renewed until Monday this week ready for next season.so it seems ironic that I am empathising with more attractive football on this occasion.

so why, have I defended Steve Bruce with his current offerings and why have I renewed when the football is not too dissimilar to O,Neills except for individual quality.

1. Martin O'Neill was there 4 years and spent over 100 million gross in the process.....in contrast Steve Bruce has had one window and not completed a season.That suggests to me , the former was by design, the latter is not complete and is in transition of a building job.....so it's possibly temporary.

2. We have just presided over 7 odd years of demise.....its clearly not that easy to play eye catching football and at the same time create the necessary resilience to sustain good results, on the back of such necessary rectification.

I believe it's merely a means to an end now and not the desired style.

I am not convinced in the same degree that this style of football sits comfortable with Steve Bruce as I think it did with MON.

When Steve is someway in to his rebuilding I think it will change......but bear this in mind, when a manager finds a way of winning games I.e Mourinho/Graham Taylor/Pulis/Saunders.

It takes some doing to convince them to drop all their theories/ Philosophies and completely change.....so its more likely to get a kinda hybrid version with SB.

but we will see.

Edited April 4, 2017 by TRO

[TRO]

22 minutes ago, Godders said:

MON's glass ceiling with us was 6th in the Premier League and a spot in Europe. If that's what one dimensional, counter-attacking football gets you, then I, for one, am all for it.

Only then would we need to worry about whether or not it's good enough to get us into the top 4/Champions League.

You say that now......but at the time , many fans thought it was unconvincing football.

On reflection, it seems like we should have been happy with it.

 

[a m ole]

1 hour ago, sne said:

So people are complaining in the wrong way.

Perhaps if they complained in a more attractive way?

Edit: It's supposed to have a winky smiley but my Phone won't let me 

Well Bruce complaining gets results, fans complaining does not 

[sne]

14 minutes ago, a m ole said:

Well Bruce complaining gets results, fans complaining does not 

Oh I don't know.

We got rid of Lerner

[TRO]

5 hours ago, sne said:

So Bruce has repeatedly complained about our performances and have been unhappy or even outraged about the way we play.

But when fans has issues with the same thing they are whining, moaning and complaining for the sake of it?

 

But surely his complaining is part and parcel of getting his points over to the team, it's what he is working on and I guess he lets them know, when they do not follow instructions......thats part of the work in progress element.

We are moaning, when he is already trying to put right the very points some of us are moaning about.

that is tantamount to frustration for all concerned.

[TRO]

7 minutes ago, sne said:

Oh I don't know.

We got rid of Lerner

I have no issue with fans complaining about poor spectacle football.

If he had been with us c 4 seasons, I would join in with you.

The repair job is so deep, he has other priorities like winning games and securing results.

The cherry will go on the cake, but it's just come out of the oven.

[villa89]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

If we want to go up, performances will need to be better than they've been this season. Better ball retention, better passing, more intelligent play is necessary. And that kind of style needs to be embedded in the club, otherwise coming back down again is a higher likelihood.

all IMO, of course

I think you can get promoted playing 'poor' football, i.e. without being good at keeping the ball, and I think we will give it a good go next season doing just that. As for staying in the premier league, again you can stay up playing counter attacking football but I think Bruce gets found out tactically at the higher level and to an extent in the championship too. It will be the quality of our squad that will get us promoted (if we go up) not the tactical nous of our manager. And if we go up I don't expect Bruce to last too long in the job.

Edited April 4, 2017 by villa89

[TRO]

2 hours ago, villa89 said:

I think you can get promoted playing 'poor' football, i.e. without being good at keeping the ball, and I think we will give it a good go next season doing just that. As for staying in the premier league, again you can stay up playing counter attacking football but I think Bruce gets found out tactically at the higher level and to an extent in the championship too. It will be the quality of our squad that will get us promoted (if we go up) not the tactical nous of our manager. And if we go up I don't expect Bruce to last too long in the job.

In relation to tactics......no size fits all.

In the main it is governed by the strength of your squad and subsequently proposed team.

personally, I think tactics in football is over hyped......not dismissing it, but not as important as some will have you believe.

I don't think Steve Bruce is particularly good or bad at it.....but who signs and develops these players who are going to get us up......who is responsible for this quality you talk about?

I think if Steve Bruce gets us up ,his position will be strengthened, not weakened.

Edited April 4, 2017 by TRO

[blandy]

1 hour ago, markavfc40 said:

Pete in terms of what we achieved under O’Neill I am not so sure a style of play where we retained the ball much better would have gotten us much better results/higher up the league. Regardless of whether the players we had at that time could have adapted to a more possession based style or he could have spent the money he did on different players he never had enough to go toe to toe with the likes of Man Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal etc.

I disagree, I think we were unable to get enough points at home because we didn't have the type of game to break down well organised opponents who just sat back. We were often better away where there was more onus on opponents to attack us, and thus leave themselves vulnerable to being caught on the break - but that's kind of by the by - it's completely hypothetical and everyone looks at football differently.

My feeling is that for a given league the probability is that a (our) club will not be successful if the team cannot keep hold of the ball well, create sustained pressure when the opponents are well coached and organised.  That teams that are bluntly "better on the ball" are more likely to prosper. The best combination is good players and and a style of football that doesn't depend upon one or two players doing something outstanding to win.

At the moment take Kodj away and Villa are stuffed (as we saw) as far as being able to score goes. That's got to change if we are to have a hope over a longer period. It takes time and Bruce has done reasonably well. He knows and has said things need to improve regarding use of the ball and such like, so I think fans saying the same is entirely reasonable.

He's bought well, got rid of a few that needed to go and started to get a good team spirit, fans are starting to identify much more with the team and the players again, after having been let down over the past couple of seasons in a big way. There are many positive signs, but for me the style of football is not (yet) one of them. 

[Demitri_C]

2 hours ago, blandy said:

I think, perhaps inadvertently, that is an example of what people who have concerns over the current approach/style are getting at.

Looking to the future, the club will not be successful if the team cannot keep hold of the ball better, create sustained pressure on well organised opponents and have the ability to BOTH play on the break and also control games via a more patient version of football.

MO'N's teams have always been restricted by a glass ceiling imposed by the one dimensional nature of his style of football. It's kind of a one trick shot - you can suprise somebody once and do really well if you get lucky, but you cannot consistently be at the top playing break away football.

I'm accepting of the way things are going right now, it's a big job turning the club round and things appear to be getting better, rather than worse as has been the case for the past few years. So that's all good.

If we want to go up, performances will need to be better than they've been this season. Better ball retention, better passing, more intelligent play is necessary. And that kind of style needs to be embedded in the club, otherwise coming back down again is a higher likelihood.

all IMO, of course

 

That's the thing Pete not many times this season I have thought, fan we are playing superb yet we are just winning games. 

This team has potential to be great if they step up