OutByEaster? Posted April 17, 2017 Moderator Share Posted April 17, 2017 Just now, Eastie said: That's our own fault for movIng the game Maybe so - but it did happen. I was there. Today's line up is massively affected by us having played 48 hours ago - to suggest that this line up means Bruce doesn't know what he wants to do after six months is silly - this is a freakish occurrence in terms of fixtures and a reaction to that. He's picked a decent line up from the players he thinks are able to play a full game today. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted April 17, 2017 Moderator Share Posted April 17, 2017 1 minute ago, av1 said: Jack hasn't played for weeks, its a bold move to expect Jack alone to provide all our creativity. But if Hourihane and Lansbury aren't up to playing two games in three days - what else are we going to do? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: Maybe so - but it did happen. I was there. Today's line up is massively affected by us having played 48 hours ago - to suggest that this line up means Bruce doesn't know what he wants to do after six months is silly - this is a freakish occurrence in terms of fixtures and a reaction to that. He's picked a decent line up from the players he thinks are able to play a full game today. Can't agree with that - why would hourihane and Lansbury not be up to 2 games in 3 days? They are both in their prime - other clubs do it . This used to be a regular thing at Easter and xmas with games thick and fast and 2 games in 3 days shouldn't be too much for a professional player their age. i think it's a poor line up and far too negative . i like Bruce but he in constantly changing his mind on formations and personnel and we need a settled team knowing how they are playing to get anywhere . Edited April 17, 2017 by Eastie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New_Jersey_Villa Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 Gardner in the starting lineup "I want my mommy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 7 minutes ago, av1 said: Jack hasn't played for weeks, its a bold move to expect Jack alone to provide all our creativity. If the 5 end up playing as a back 5 rather than pushing the wing backs up we're going to look awful, add to that Gardner needs to hold the ball there's every danger we're going to look shit and completely disjointed and Jack will be part of it but the reaction on here will be like he's the cause of it 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troglodyte Posted April 17, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted April 17, 2017 I don't get the fuss over the line-up. We clearly need to make some changes due to the schedule, and I think it makes sense. We go three at the back, as we're away from home. We have wing-backs who can provide options and are happy going forward, but have a three centre backs and Jedi (plus Gardner, at times) to cover. Grealish can create through the middle and Gardner, while I'm not his biggest fan, is a decent passer of the ball. Yes it's not the most creative line-up but given the circumstances I don't think it's necessarily too negative at all. For me, the key is how Grealish will operate. He could be rusty but he could be raring to go. If he can find pockets in the middle then we should do well, but he could also go missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrytini Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 25 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: He's admitting that they can't put in 90 minutes of running twice in three days. These changes are about playing on Saturday and Monday, not about quality - I think that's absolutely glaringly obvious. Also I will guess he wants a last look at Gardner to see if he has any merits whatsoever. Im disappointed to see Lansbury and Hourihane left out as I think they are beginning to gel really well, but can see sense in the other regard that he already knows what they can do next year, but has little faith - I think - in their backups. At least I hope that's the thinking ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 3 minutes ago, villa4europe said: If the 5 end up playing as a back 5 rather than pushing the wing backs up we're going to look awful, add to that Gardner needs to hold the ball there's every danger we're going to look shit and completely disjointed and Jack will be part of it but the reaction on here will be like he's the cause of it Yep I can see the forwards having little or no service and it all going tits up quickly and Bruce changing the formation pretty quickly again . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 (edited) Are we back to changing the formation every game again Edited April 17, 2017 by AshVilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilko154 Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 I'm not a fan of the team or formation but you can understand why Bruce has done it. Its the second game in two days... had we played Friday as the rest of the league did we could potentially have played the same team. It will be interesting to see what Grealish, Kodjia and Hogan look like together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 23 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: Jedinak and Gardner are in there to defend and to get the ball to Grealish I think. We're all counter attack today. If that were the case we should play Adomah, as Grealish doesn't have the pace for counter attacking and cuts in/out too much, meaning we lose that counter advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts