Henri Lansbury

[TRO]

I understand from the comments made that Lansbury had a good game.

great.

but in order to start rearranging the midfield, it had to be maintained.

consistency is key.

our opinions are up and down like a fiddlers elbow on players, due to their inconsistencies.

I would like to think we have found / stumbled across another player, but

[rodders0223]

He did look decent, he does have a really nice pass on him which we have saw since the day he got here.

Saying that, it really is hard to judge at this point as Swansea were dropping off and more than willing to let us have the ball in deep areas. It was a very comfortable situation for someone with Lansbury's skill set and faults.
I think he will get the nod over Whelan now if he can stay fit but I am not sure he is ever going to be the answer.

Even the foul, like the one against Boro back in the day...he made it because he cannot run just like Whelan. 30 yards from their goal when he is fresh on the pitch and he's making cynical fouls says it all to me about his mobility.

[eholm]

51 minutes ago, A'Villan said:

Have been saying since Bruce was at the helm that I want to see Lansbury included in an attacking setup. That said, I only really see a place for him with a midfield 3.

And even then he would not replace Grealish or McGinn and not mobile enough to be the deep lier. We have, IMO, 2/3 players for one midfield position as JG and JM are nailed on. I think Lansbury probably covers those two as and when required. If DS gets a more physical DCM then Hourihane reverts back to that more advanced CM position. 

So frustrating that we have a number of CMs yet only 2 have the qualities we really need. 

[Zatman]

After Jack he might be best passer in the midfield. Maybe he could pop into the defensive position and Hourihane replaces Whelan 

[A'Villan]

2 minutes ago, eholm said:

And even then he would not replace Grealish or McGinn and not mobile enough to be the deep lier. We have, IMO, 2/3 players for one midfield position as JG and JM are nailed on. I think Lansbury probably covers those two as and when required. If DS gets a more physical DCM then Hourihane reverts back to that more advanced CM position. 

So frustrating that we have a number of CMs yet only 2 have the qualities we really need. 

Agree for the most part. While I don't see HL displacing CH, I personally wouldn't mind seeing how HL goes in a setup like:

GK

Back Four

McGinn

RW Lansbury Grealish LW

Abraham

 

[eholm]

Interesting suggestion mate. Would we lose something though if JM has to be more defensively disciplined in regards to the surging forward runs he makes in the No.8 role? 

[eholm]

21 minutes ago, Zatman said:

After Jack he might be best passer in the midfield. Maybe he could pop into the defensive position and Hourihane replaces Whelan 

Agree on the passing comment, however, my concern would be his mobility in that deeper role in regards to covering the central area that JG and JM vacate to attack; especially when we are hit on the counter. Would he have the legs to stop the opposing midfield runners. 

[Johnnyp]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

I understand from the comments made that Lansbury had a good game.

great.

but in order to start rearranging the midfield, it had to be maintained.

consistency is key.

our opinions are up and down like a fiddlers elbow on players, due to their inconsistencies.

I would like to think we have found / stumbled across another player, but

I just worry with lansbury that it's one good game then niggling injury, then back, out again for a good while. Has he even had say 6-7 games consecutively in a villa shirt ? Didn't seem to be the case when he was at forest.

[A'Villan]

1 hour ago, eholm said:

Interesting suggestion mate. Would we lose something though if JM has to be more defensively disciplined in regards to the surging forward runs he makes in the No.8 role? 

It's interesting to note. CH has 5 goals, 6 assists. JM has 2 goals, 6 assists. JG has 2 goals, 4 assists. From the position they play, you would have thought the order reversed.

Even Whelan has a goal and 2 assists, in two-thirds the playing time. BB has 2 goals in half the playing time. So it just goes to show every midfielder's getting forward.

While I see what you are saying about McGinn surging forward, I think Lansbury is also quite able to pass and move with runs that are purposeful.

This would also mean that McGinn can reserve energy for his tenacity in hustling our opponents out of possession, forcing errors and winning contests.

I also think McGinn has a decent enough delivery on him to be the one playing passes from deep. Whereas GW, CH and BB lack this quality.

[sir_gary_cahill]

I thought he was excellent yesterday when he came on, dominated the midfield, his range of passing is excellent, he should start against Wigan in my opinion, very good footballer. McGinn-Hourihane-Lansbury should be the midfield against Wigan in my opinion 

[AvfcRigo82]

1 hour ago, Johnnyp said:

I just worry with lansbury that it's one good game then niggling injury, then back, out again for a good while. Has he even had say 6-7 games consecutively in a villa shirt ? Didn't seem to be the case when he was at forest.

I can't recall he has.

Wikipedia has him as playing 29 games for Villa.

These must all be sub appearances as I can't ever remember him even starting a game for us, let alone play 29 games.

[Johnnyp]

46 minutes ago, AvfcRigo82 said:

I can't recall he has.

Wikipedia has him as playing 29 games for Villa.

These must all be sub appearances as I can't ever remember him even starting a game for us, let alone play 29 games.

And 145 games in 5 years at forest. Must be just the last 2 years he's got troubled with injury.

[TRO]

2 hours ago, A'Villan said:

It's interesting to note. CH has 5 goals, 6 assists. JM has 2 goals, 6 assists. JG has 2 goals, 4 assists. From the position they play, you would have thought the order reversed.

Even Whelan has a goal and 2 assists, in two-thirds the playing time. BB has 2 goals in half the playing time. So it just goes to show every midfielder's getting forward.

While I see what you are saying about McGinn surging forward, I think Lansbury is also quite able to pass and move with runs that are purposeful.

This would also mean that McGinn can reserve energy for his tenacity in hustling our opponents out of possession, forcing errors and winning contests.

I also think McGinn has a decent enough delivery on him to be the one playing passes from deep. Whereas GW, CH and BB lack this quality.

We can all glean different things, from situations.

I am thinking right now, maybe we have deployed so many players to defend in the past, because individually they couldn't  cope.

It seems strange that we have gone from a defensive style to an offensive style and the goals have reflected accordingly.

[TRO]

3 hours ago, rodders0223 said:

He did look decent, he does have a really nice pass on him which we have saw since the day he got here.

Saying that, it really is hard to judge at this point as Swansea were dropping off and more than willing to let us have the ball in deep areas. It was a very comfortable situation for someone with Lansbury's skill set and faults.
I think he will get the nod over Whelan now if he can stay fit but I am not sure he is ever going to be the answer.

Even the foul, like the one against Boro back in the day...he made it because he cannot run just like Whelan. 30 yards from their goal when he is fresh on the pitch and he's making cynical fouls says it all to me about his mobility.

I was talking to a forest fan, who described him as a luxury player.

I thought to myself, yeah..... we have a squad full of them.

[sheepyvillian]

20 hours ago, AvfcRigo82 said:

I can't recall he has.

Wikipedia has him as playing 29 games for Villa.

These must all be sub appearances as I can't ever remember him even starting a game for us, let alone play 29 games.

That's how inconspicuous he's been, that you haven't even noticed he was on the pitch. 

We need more than 20 minute cameos. Consistency is the key if we are to achieve anything this season. 

[omariqy]

Lansbury is a much better footballer than Hourihane, BB and Whelan. The issue is that he does seem to go missing sometimes. However, he thrives in a team that are dominating the ball. Maybe it could work.

[TRO]

18 minutes ago, omariqy said:

Lansbury is a much better footballer than Hourihane, BB and Whelan. The issue is that he does seem to go missing sometimes. However, he thrives in a team that are dominating the ball. Maybe it could work.

What about when we are not dominating the ball, what then?

We have to get players in who can work as well OFF the ball as on it.

Teams don't always get their own way, in a game....its inevitable......you have to have players who can deal with that and grind stuff out.

[Lord Willard]

People are moaning about this lack of mobility but remember when everyone thought Jedinak was the dogs bollocks

[Stevo985]

On 05/01/2019 at 18:59, OutByEaster? said:

I see a lot of people today comparing him to Whelan because he replaced him as a sub, I think the direct comparison can be a bit misleading - we went with a midfield two today which doesn't suit Whelan at all - when we go back to a three, I think Lansbury is our most natural replacement for Grealish and should be starting games in midfield next to McGinn  - Hourihane should be the defensive one and we can then put Whelan and Bjarnason on the bench. 

I thought he was good today, he's good on the ball, he was playing good passes, showed good energy - there was a bit of a reckless lunge at the end which can be an issue with him, but I think in Grealish's absence he's exactly what we've missed. 

Was going to say similar. 

I don't see Lansbury and Whelan as a comparison. A midfield 3 of McGinn, Hourihane and Lansbury (assuming the first two are forward and Lansbury deep) is pretty weak to be honest. Would add to our defensive misery.

I suppose McGinn deep and Lansbury further forward could work. I'm not sure about Hourihane in the deep role either. That's been tried a few times and I'm not convinced.

[TRO]

9 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Was going to say similar. 

I don't see Lansbury and Whelan as a comparison. A midfield 3 of McGinn, Hourihane and Lansbury (assuming the first two are forward and Lansbury deep) is pretty weak to be honest. Would add to our defensive misery.

I suppose McGinn deep and Lansbury further forward could work. I'm not sure about Hourihane in the deep role either. That's been tried a few times and I'm not convinced.

For me we have a drought of midfielders who can play without the ball and provide stability.....of course they need to be competent on it too.

The midfielders in the squad are very samey....jed and whelan are too old, too slow.

We need reinforcements there as well as defence.

Edited January 7, 2019 by TRO