DCJonah Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 1 minute ago, PaulC said: I wonder if RDM would have done any worse than Bruce if he was still managing the club I think he might have done. We played decent stuff and created lots of chances in most of those games. We had massive midfield issues and it would have been interesting to see what would have been done in January. Also kodjia was still settling in those early games. Again would have been interesting to see RDMs attacking football with an inform kodjia. Hindsight is wonderful because at the time I fully agreed with getting rid. But have to say I regret it a bit now. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 I keep hearing Bruce spouting that the players can't handle playing at villa and it's overwhelming. Anyone buying this? I can understand with some players but majority should not be fazed. I mean after all we are hardly Man Utd or arsenal. I know the atmosphere at home can be heavy at times, but I just can't grasp how shit people turn out once they put the claret and blue shirt on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 1 minute ago, DCJonah said: I think he might have done. We played decent stuff and created lots of chances in most of those games. We had massive midfield issues and it would have been interesting to see what would have been done in January. Also kodjia was still settling in those early games. Again would have been interesting to see RDMs attacking football with an inform kodjia. Hindsight is wonderful because at the time I fully agreed with getting rid. But have to say I regret it a bit now. Yes he was having to pick Gary Gardner who has now been cast aside by Bruce. Bruce has a better squad now but I feel RDM would have done more with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upper north stander Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 9 minutes ago, PaulC said: I wonder if RDM would have done any worse than Bruce if he was still managing the club I don't think he would of........ I'd have sherwood back over both of them though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted August 17, 2017 Author Share Posted August 17, 2017 Now this interesting, and I must admit I am suprised at this Quote Aston Villa's shots on target, possession, long balls: The stats behind Steve Bruce's worrying start to the season Aston Villa have got off to a terrible start in the Championship in terms of results. Villa have just one point from three matches with a home draw against Hull City followed by defeats at Cardiff City at Reading. Here we take a closer look at the match stats: Long balls Are Villa really the long ball side that fans are proclaiming them to be? The simple answer is no. When it comes to 'sending it long', Villa are nowhere near to being one of the worst culprits. In fact, they are one of the least likely teams to play long ball football, based on the stats so far. You see, Villa actually only hit 61 long passes on average per game, that may seem a lot, it's not. Only Norwich and Fulham have hit less long balls than Villa have. 21 teams in the league have hit more long balls than Villa, Bolton are top of the tree with 90. Steve Bruce Joint league-leaders Wolves have hit 81 long balls, yet they are being hailed for their silky football. If anything, Villa are the victims of the long ball game, the stats show that they have been on the receiving end of 81 long balls per game Crosses Aston Villa crosses per game 25 Aston Villa crosses per game The truth is that Villa are trying to play football, they are averaging 25 crosses every game, that is more than any other team in the league. Things are falling down in the final third, the holding of the ball isn't good enough, nor is the strikers getting on the end of these crosses that are clearly being created. Shots In terms of shots, Villa have certainly been shy with attempts on target. They have had just 32 shots on target, compare that to 60 by Milwall. Aston Villa boss Steve Bruce said this when asked about Arsenal's Jack Wilshere It's also worth noting that Wolves have had less with 30 shots, they are joint top and have a 100% record so far. Possession Aston Villa possession 48.9% The average possession per game Villa aren't controlling games so far, strange considering the influx of new midfielders. You only have to look at the average possession of 48.9% to see that the team are not dominating games. That said, they aren't that near the bottom of the rankings for possession, they are in 16th place. Second from bottom are Cardiff, and we all know where they are in the league. Let's take a look for a minute at the game between Villa and Cardiff, a 3-0 whitewash as history remembers it. Villa dominated the play with 65% of possession! They had 7 corners to Cardiff's 4, made 432 passes to Cardiff's 234. They hit less long balls and had a passing accuracy of 76.4%. They had less shots than Cardiff, but made 33 crosses compared to 17. Not only did they dominate play, they passed Cardiff off the pitch and peppered them with crosses. They just need the goals to come and the players to be more clinical. To conclude The stats of course only tell a certain side of the story, Villa haven't been good enough, that much is abundantly clear. They are however, very far removed from being the long-ball stone age side that the Championship remembers so fondly from the 90s and 00s. Of course, the only stats that Steve Bruce will be interested in come Saturday are the ones that show Villa scoring more goals than Norwich! Not as long ball as we think we are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 3 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Now this interesting, and I must admit I am suprised at this Not as long ball as we think we are I like using stats. But any stats trying to defend those last two games are clearly being used in a bias way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted August 17, 2017 Author Share Posted August 17, 2017 Just now, DCJonah said: I like using stats. But any stats trying to defend those last two games are clearly being used in a bias way. The article does suggest we havent been good enough though, its not defending Bruce its more that we are not as long ball as we think in comparison to other teams I thought the defence would be solid but we are already on -4 which is pathetic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 1 minute ago, Demitri_C said: The article does suggest we havent been good enough though, its not defending Bruce its more that we are not as long ball as we think in comparison to other teams I thought the defence would be solid but we are already on -4 which is pathetic I'm not someone who complains about long ball, I criticise Hogan a lot for his inability to keep the ball and hold it up. But that article suggests we did well because we put a lot of crosses in. But it doesn't take into account the quality of those crosses. So while the stats might be high it's not really a positive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 Bruce's "tactic" of keeping ten men behind the ball until the opportunity arises to get it down the wing and whack it across in the air to a striker who actually needs the ball at his feet in a kick and hope style, is the reason we're in the sh*te. Wollaston is trying to use stats to make Bruce's style look like an asset, instead of the crap football that we've watched match after match. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted August 17, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted August 17, 2017 19 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said: I keep hearing Bruce spouting that the players can't handle playing at villa and it's overwhelming. Anyone buying this? I can understand with some players but majority should not be fazed. I mean after all we are hardly Man Utd or arsenal. I know the atmosphere at home can be heavy at times, but I just can't grasp how shit people turn out once they put the claret and blue shirt on. It's possible that some of our players may feel daunted by playing for a club with huge expectations which in turn may have a negative effect on performances. I just wish whenever Bruce says this, the reporter would ask Bruce if this is also true of him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted August 17, 2017 Author Share Posted August 17, 2017 3 minutes ago, DCJonah said: I'm not someone who complains about long ball, I criticise Hogan a lot for his inability to keep the ball and hold it up. But that article suggests we did well because we put a lot of crosses in. But it doesn't take into account the quality of those crosses. So while the stats might be high it's not really a positive. Completely agree about the crossing, the crossing at times has been diabolical. I am thinking we might need to play Hogan in the number 10 role behind kod when he returns to get more involved as a number 11 up top he is very ineffective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 20 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said: I keep hearing Bruce spouting that the players can't handle playing at villa and it's overwhelming. Anyone buying this? I can understand with some players but majority should not be fazed. I mean after all we are hardly Man Utd or arsenal. I know the atmosphere at home can be heavy at times, but I just can't grasp how shit people turn out once they put the claret and blue shirt on. seems like another excuse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 Our tempo and movement on and off the ball is too slow. Most pf our shorter passes are to players standing still and/or already closed down by our opponents. Most of our longer passes are made in panic rather than because someone has made a run opening up space for himself or a teammate. I blame most of this on us lacking any form of basic play or tactical framework. Our players almost always have to stop, control the ball, look up to see where their teammates are and then try and make the pass. Where as with team who have done their work on the training ground all this is automatic and they know what runs their team mates will make. I have no idea what Bruce and Calderwood are doing in training and in the pre-match meetings. But the only think I can think of is that they are just not up to the task at hand. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrytini Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 (edited) Well there's a million holes in that article. Just as one example - of course we hit fewer long balls than other sides if we have the ball less often overall !! I don't need stats to tell me what I see with my own eyes. Which is, time after time after time against Reading for example I'd count 6,,7, 8, 9, 10 and more passes for them. Once we had the ball anout 3 was the maximum for most the game, before it'd be hit up the pitch. ( whether far enough to be a long ball I've no idea). In any event there's nothing right or wrong with long ball, and nothing inherently right or wrong with a possession game. Our problem is whatever our system is it's incoherent, focused on caution, and produces goals all to infrequently. Edited August 17, 2017 by terrytini 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrytini Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 And I simply can't believe we have to put up with it for yet more games. Especially after the utter codswallop he's been spouting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 Some good points being made about the quality of the crossing, the cautious negative approach that leads to so few shots, and the lack of quality of the coaching on a day to day basis. One thing we can be sure of is that Calderwood's coaching will be the same today as it's been since he joined us. Nothing will change because Bruce is convinced that he's right, and just needs the players to man up to get a result! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 5 minutes ago, villabromsgrove said: Some good points being made about the quality of the crossing, the cautious negative approach that leads to so few shots, and the lack of quality of the coaching on a day to day basis. One thing we can be sure of is that Calderwood's coaching will be the same today as it's been since he joined us. Nothing will change because Bruce is convinced that he's right, and just needs the players to man up to get a result! Things won't change while Bruce is here - he's too old school - I guess we will have to wait a bit longer and slip further off the pace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted August 17, 2017 Author Share Posted August 17, 2017 I completely agree, but I hope the fans will get behind the team. If he has to be given more time we should at least get behind the lads. We simply cannot afford another defeat Saturday. Having a toxic Villa Park will not help anyone, as when that happens it usually results in another pathetic display. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted August 17, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted August 17, 2017 44 minutes ago, villabromsgrove said: Bruce's "tactic" of keeping ten men behind the ball until the opportunity arises to get it down the wing and whack it across in the air to a striker who actually needs the ball at his feet in a kick and hope style, is the reason we're in the sh*te. Wollaston is trying to use stats to make Bruce's style look like an asset, instead of the crap football that we've watched match after match. We are entirely that one dimensional, then when the other team sets out to nullify the ball wide and stop the cross, Hutton/the RB/LB starts to look like our most attacking threat. It's just because that's where they are leaving us with the ball because they need to leave that space to kill the one dimensional attack of ours, and they are safe in the knowledge that we will do **** all with the possession. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted August 17, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted August 17, 2017 I've always said we're less long ball than people make out. It's just the stereotype for Bruce that people go to. But that doesn't then mean we're playing good football. We're still utterly shit. And I maintain we WERE long ball against Reading. We couldn't string two passes together. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts