Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Think Hourihane definitely could help us in certain matches, but then we would need to have a "horses for courses" mentality - which is not really Smith's style. Anyway good to see our loans doing well - will mean we get some value when they transfer out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tomaszk said:

You've got McGinn and Hourihane pinned at the same level?

It depends on what your criteria is. McGinn gives a much better all round effect on the team but Hourihane gives you more in terms of output and tangible effects - goals, assists etc.

Hourihane would be ideal for a team managed by Bruce, a team that doesn't want to sieze the initiative, contain the opposition, where the midfielders just fill space really and the defence deals with the balls in to box, while still offering that threat in terms of nicking a goal with a long range shot or providing an assist with a pinpoint delivery from a set piece.

McGinn on the other hand is better for playing all other styles. Better presser, better in duels, more mobile, better ball carrier and probably a better passer under pressure, all in all a better footballer. If it was a one on one style game that you play with your mate in you back garden McGinn would destroy Hourihane. Hourihane on the other hand would easily outdo McGinn in a dead-ball competition.

For Villa, there is no doubt that McGinn is the far superior choice with how we set up and want to play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I know he has MANY detractors on here but, having seen the last dozen matches, I really don't see how he wouldn't have been a good player to have available at the moment.

If nothing else, his ability from free kicks and corners would have at least made us a threat from those positions. We are comically bad without him at set pieces.

He might be a 7 in terms of ability but it's 7 every week. Barkley is probably capable of 10 but it's 10 one week and 2s and 3s for the other 14 games. Ramsey too young/lightweight, McGinn really struggling. Luiz could be used differently.

I think letting him go on loan was a mistake. Same with Guilbert who would have been an upgrade on Elmo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter
4 minutes ago, jackbauer24 said:

I know he has MANY detractors on here but, having seen the last dozen matches, I really don't see how he wouldn't have been a good player to have available at the moment.

If nothing else, his ability from free kicks and corners would have at least made us a threat from those positions. We are comically bad without him at set pieces.

He might be a 7 in terms of ability but it's 7 every week. Barkley is probably capable of 10 but it's 10 one week and 2s and 3s for the other 14 games. Ramsey too young/lightweight, McGinn really struggling. Luiz could be used differently.

I think letting him go on loan was a mistake. Same with Guilbert who would have been an upgrade on Elmo.

Hourihane was not a 7/10 every week for us.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jackbauer24 said:

I know he has MANY detractors on here but, having seen the last dozen matches, I really don't see how he wouldn't have been a good player to have available at the moment.

If nothing else, his ability from free kicks and corners would have at least made us a threat from those positions. We are comically bad without him at set pieces.

He might be a 7 in terms of ability but it's 7 every week. Barkley is probably capable of 10 but it's 10 one week and 2s and 3s for the other 14 games. Ramsey too young/lightweight, McGinn really struggling. Luiz could be used differently.

I think letting him go on loan was a mistake. Same with Guilbert who would have been an upgrade on Elmo.

For reasons only known to Connor, the effort just wasn't there for us most of the time. He has ability of course but just didn't apply himself for us when the going was tough. Too often anonymous when given the chance, of which he had many. It's great he's doing well now but the reason he's doing it for them and not us is down to him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jackbauer24 said:

I know he has MANY detractors on here but, having seen the last dozen matches, I really don't see how he wouldn't have been a good player to have available at the moment.

If nothing else, his ability from free kicks and corners would have at least made us a threat from those positions. We are comically bad without him at set pieces.

He might be a 7 in terms of ability but it's 7 every week. Barkley is probably capable of 10 but it's 10 one week and 2s and 3s for the other 14 games. Ramsey too young/lightweight, McGinn really struggling. Luiz could be used differently.

I think letting him go on loan was a mistake. Same with Guilbert who would have been an upgrade on Elmo.

I think he could have given the team something.  He showed that against Fulham. Set Pieces, the odd goal etc 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

For good or bad from what I can gather Hourihane is playing for Swansea exactly the same way that he played for us, that is his all round game is pretty average, but his goals and assist record is very good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, birdman said:

For reasons only known to Connor, the effort just wasn't there for us most of the time. He has ability of course but just didn't apply himself for us when the going was tough. Too often anonymous when given the chance, of which he had many. It's great he's doing well now but the reason he's doing it for them and not us is down to him.

I don’t think lack of effort is ever something that he could be accused of. Lack of pace, strength or even ability at times would be fair but he always gave his all for us

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter
4 hours ago, jackbauer24 said:

I know he has MANY detractors on here but, having seen the last dozen matches, I really don't see how he wouldn't have been a good player to have available at the moment.

If nothing else, his ability from free kicks and corners would have at least made us a threat from those positions. We are comically bad without him at set pieces.

He might be a 7 in terms of ability but it's 7 every week. Barkley is probably capable of 10 but it's 10 one week and 2s and 3s for the other 14 games. Ramsey too young/lightweight, McGinn really struggling. Luiz could be used differently.

I think letting him go on loan was a mistake. Same with Guilbert who would have been an upgrade on Elmo.

So are you saying that amongst 25 professional players on the books, many Internationals.....We can't cross a ball with any effect, without Conor?

what an indictment on the team.

I always thought, it was one of the easier things to do as a Pro footballer?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TRO said:

So are you saying that amongst 25 professional players on the books, many Internationals.....We can't cross a ball with any effect, without Conor?

what an indictment on the team.

I always thought, it was one of the easier things to do as a Pro footballer?

This is one of my pet hates watching professional football. Not just villa, but all sides. How many times do we see a corner hit the first man? Extremely frustrating to watch.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
4 minutes ago, Mjvilla said:

This is one of my pet hates watching professional football. Not just villa, but all sides. How many times do we see a corner hit the first man? Extremely frustrating to watch.

I agree.

taking a corner, should be a fairly easy thing to do, for a Pro.

unfortunately for us...Jacob Murphy takes a mean dead ball, like Conor Hourihane.....but in a 25 man squad are we saying we don't have one decent one.....Targett seems the best to me, he should take the role, vacated by Conor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mole86 said:

I don’t think lack of effort is ever something that he could be accused of. Lack of pace, strength or even ability at times would be fair but he always gave his all for us

I didn't see it like that... on occasion perhaps. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter

I am not jumping on the bandwagon, because he has scored a few goals in the lower league, but i think he was played too deep for us.He is not a combative midfielder and i think some folk appraised him as one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TRO said:

I am not jumping on the bandwagon, because he has scored a few goals in the lower league, but i think he was played too deep for us.He is not a combative midfielder and i think some folk appraised him as one.

He was given plenty of chances in plenty of positions/roles.

In games against poor sides he did a job, sometimes. Against anyone decent, he failed over and over and over again. Any sort of tough opposition and Hourihane shat it.

We rightly never switched formation to accommodate or build around him, he simply wasn't worth it. I do however think he'd have struggled to be quite as bad as Barkley in his last few.

Glad he's scoring in the Championship, might mean we get more money for him when he moves on.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter

He was neat and tidy, excellent finisher, but he struggled way too often for us. He is limited by his lack of mobility/strength, and inability to run with the ball.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13/03/2021 at 23:56, Mjvilla said:

This is one of my pet hates watching professional football. Not just villa, but all sides. How many times do we see a corner hit the first man? Extremely frustrating to watch.

Because if you loop it, it is incredibly easy to defend. You need to hit it low, hard and with pace. That means sometimes it hits the first man but if it beats the first man you are more likely to score. How many times should konsa have scored from ste pieces in the last 5 games? 4? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MotoMkali said:

Because if you loop it, it is incredibly easy to defend. You need to hit it low, hard and with pace. That means sometimes it hits the first man but if it beats the first man you are more likely to score. How many times should konsa have scored from ste pieces in the last 5 games? 4? 

I understand that it is more likely to hit the first man for those reasons. But the regularity with which it happens, across premier league football is higher than should be for elite footballers, in my opinion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â