Dean Smith

[villalad21]

When you have a giant like Vestergaard attacking set pieces you put your tallest defender on him, telling him to man mark him. Simple as that.

[briny_ear]

47 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

He was on about over the top criticism. I mean, people calling for Smiths head after 2 defeats. It beggars belief. Yes there was plenty to fault in those two defeats, the same way there was plenty to admire about our 4 victories, but let's keep things in perspective. I firmly believe we're in capable hands and, for me, the future looks bright. 

Don't think anyone is calling for Smith's head? 

It's important though to be clear about his current limitations as a manager. Some believe he will overcome these, some don't. That's probably the debate you are picking up and it doesn't strike me as wildly over the top to have a discussion about this.

[MotoMkali]

1 hour ago, villalad21 said:

When you have a giant like Vestergaard attacking set pieces you put your tallest defender on him, telling him to man mark him. Simple as that.

Then it becomes a 60/40 battle in favour vestegaard. If the zonal marking was done right I.e konsa 2 yards back or maybe mings and Konsa swapped position then it would have been more likely for us to win it. We just got our positioning wrong because we set up like we were defending a corner but because it is that much closer konsa didn't have enough time to take a step or 2 back to win the header that was the issue. 

[onmeedson]

My big issue with zonal marking is it gives the option of leaving it to somebody else, how often do you see two centre half's standing with their arms down, saying that was your job. It was so easy with man marking you knew who to pick up. Any decent attacking giant is heading for the small guy to make his advantage even greater. Why leave decisions in the  grey area when you can nominate in the dressing room.

[weedman]

The problem with man marking set pieces is its relatively easy for an attacking team to set up to block a defender if they're chasing an attacker. A little bit of movement and suddenly attacker has gone one way round a crowd of players and defender has to go the other way and, oh look another attacker happens to be standing there and defender has to divert, meaning the man they are marking is now in acres of space for a free header. 

Zonal marking, or a mix of both, as we do is definately better. All the top teams do it this way for a reason. We just did it badly, the zones were clearly wrong and McGinn, who's job is really as a disruptor in there didn't disrupt anything. Zonal marking isn't the problem, our execution was the problem 

[sheepyvillian]

21 hours ago, briny_ear said:

Don't think anyone is calling for Smith's head? 

It's important though to be clear about his current limitations as a manager. Some believe he will overcome these, some don't. That's probably the debate you are picking up and it doesn't strike me as wildly over the top to have a discussion about this.

I have no issue with criticism of the manager. It's just the manner of  criticism that sometimes irks me. 

I love that connection I feel with Deano. He's one of us, so of course we sometimes feel a little reluctant to fault him, but that doesn't mean we are blind to his faults. The club hasn't felt this healthy for years and the manager has to be given credit for that. It's not about him, he's all about the club, so who better to trust? We're a project in the making and there's still a way to go, but I'm fairly confident we have the right man at the helm 

Edited November 4, 2020 by sheepyvillian

[Vive_La_Villa]

4 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Zonal marking is great if you know what you're doing. I'd argue the best defensive teams I've seen used zonal marking. 

Exactly. All the top teams use zonal marking and the majority of the times it works.  Correct me if I’m wrong but I think that’s the first goal we have conceded from a set piece since project restart? 

Edited November 3, 2020 by Vive_La_Villa

[TRO]

1 hour ago, weedman said:

The problem with man marking set pieces is its relatively easy for an attacking team to set up to block a defender if they're chasing an attacker. A little bit of movement and suddenly attacker has gone one way round a crowd of players and defender has to go the other way and, oh look another attacker happens to be standing there and defender has to divert, meaning the man they are marking is now in acres of space for a free header. 

Zonal marking, or a mix of both, as we do is definately better. All the top teams do it this way for a reason. We just did it badly, the zones were clearly wrong and McGinn, who's job is really as a disruptor in there didn't disrupt anything. Zonal marking isn't the problem, our execution was the problem 

quite right

all systems have their merits and their drawbacks....but as above, its how you execute it.

most of our problems in defending is player application.

 

[TRO]

40 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Exactly. All the top teams use zonal marking and the majority of the times it works.  Correct me if I’m wrong but I think that’s the first goal we have conceded from a set piece since project restart? 

then added another 2.

[Vive_La_Villa]

8 hours ago, TRO said:

then added another 2.

Sorry I meant from an indirect set piece.

Can’t recall any others? 

[A'Villan]

15 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Zonal marking is great if you know what you're doing. I'd argue the best defensive teams I've seen used zonal marking. 

Agreed, the best defensive outfits have a cohesive approach to nullifying opposition attacks through positional awareness and nous, instead of just following a man.

Rarely will teams use strictly zonal or man marking though. It will depend on the tactics and dimensions of any given contest. Opposition team dynamic determines the approach.

 

[onmeedson]

Top teams use it because they have the top players, ours defence have ball watchers.

[TRO]

19 hours ago, TRO said:

quite right

all systems have their merits and their drawbacks....but as above, its how you execute it.

most of our problems in defending is player application.

 

 

8 hours ago, A'Villan said:

Agreed, the best defensive outfits have a cohesive approach to nullifying opposition attacks through positional awareness and nous, instead of just following a man.

Rarely will teams use strictly zonal or man marking though. It will depend on the tactics and dimensions of any given contest. Opposition team dynamic determines the approach.

 

I agree.

but if we are following a man, we need to get closer and let them know at times we are there......If you stand off or don't get close enough, you are inviting the opponent to steal the initiative....and thats what we did in the last 2 games.....and they took it.

Edited November 4, 2020 by TRO

[TRO]

1 hour ago, onmeedson said:

Top teams use it because they have the top players, ours defence have ball watchers.

but I think we showed in Lockdown, we don't have to be as benevolent as we are......I still think we are lacking players with a natural nose to bite, but we can do better than what we are with what we have got.

something is not quite in kilter, when the players think one thing and the manager thinks another at halftime, in terms of why we are losing......they all need to be on the same page.

[weedman]

On 04/11/2020 at 10:29, onmeedson said:

Top teams use it because they have the top players, ours defence have ball watchers.

I mean haven't we only conceded 1 goal from an indirect free kick since lockdown v1.0? It's only been a problem in 1 match out of the last 10, I don't think that's cause to write off everything we've been doing and throw the defenders onto the scrap heap over it

[Adam2003]

On 04/11/2020 at 06:32, TRO said:

 

I agree.

but if we are following a man, we need to get closer and let them know at times we are there......If you stand off or don't get close enough, you are inviting the opponent to steal the initiative....and thats what we did in the last 2 games.....and they took it.

Delicate balance with modern reffing though - Douglas Luiz got too close to Walcott and that’s what really won Southampton the game when JWP popped in the resulting free kick.

[TRO]

2 hours ago, Adam2003 said:

Delicate balance with modern reffing though - Douglas Luiz got too close to Walcott and that’s what really won Southampton the game when JWP popped in the resulting free kick.

My interpretation was, he just slung his body at it.....it was not what i would call a skillful attempt at stopping him, but a lazy, clumsy attempt.

when i say get close, that is not what i am refering to.....,fouling or bad tackling is not my idea of skilful defending.....watch clips of Paul McGrath, thats defending......albeit at its highest.

[ZL-]

I found some fairly interesting graphs on Villa's playstyle this season so far

 

It seems there is a concerted effort to almost bypass our midfield looking at this first graph. This of course makes sense for predominantly counter attacking ream but it worries me how extreme our lack of possession in midfield is and I believe that Leeds and Southampton were games which were predominatly won by their teams midfield press.

The second graph is far more comforting showing how clinical we are when we do attack and the third graph has us in good company as a similar profile to City, Chelsea and somewhat Liverpool. Showing we are good at creating chances through passing but not typically through the traditional wideman (which I wouldn't categorise JG as).

It might be a tad reactionary but the first graph has made me question whether this midfield composition has legs at the moment, whilst it's a style that has on the whole worked for us bypassing the midfield, I feel there will be games this season the just pass to Jack on break tactic will lose effectiveness and we should be able to rely upon our midfield to control possession and slowly create chances that way. Individually I believe Barkley, Luiz and McGinn have the quality for that but it makes me wonder if Dean has them on specific orders to release the ball immediately?

 

[thunderball]

On 03/11/2020 at 21:37, sheepyvillian said:

I have no issue with criticism of the manager. It's just the manner of  criticism that sometimes irks me. 

I love that connection I feel with Deano. He's one of us, so of course we sometimes feel a little reluctant to fault him, but that doesn't mean we are blind to his faults. The club hasn't felt this healthy for years and the manager has to be given credit for that. It's not about him, he's all about the club, so who better to trust? We're a project in the making and there's still a way to go, but I'm fairly confident we have the right man at the helm 

I am not sure there are calls for his sacking, but the manner of the two defeats does raise the spectre of maybe we havent progressed as much as we had hoped and therefore the questions on his medium term remain. Yes he is one of us, but we all want success and with our ownership and commitment shown, it would be a shame to let sentiment get in the way of real progress. 

I am sure we would all be delighted if he succeeded, but the two most recent defeats show the real technical and tactical ability of teams under very progressive managers, in fact despite Leicesters defeat to us their display against Leeds has shown just how good a coach and tactician Rogers is too. As nice a chap as Smith is, I am not as convinced of him as I am of the likes of Bielsa and Hassenhuttl for example, even Graham Potter is building something at Brighton. 

Smith needs time and after the post lockdown run, deserves it, but the stakes get higher with every pound spent, he need to demonstrate real progress and momentum and cannot afford to underwhelm. With all this good will, emerging talent, gelling of the team, investment with promise of more, I just hope we dont under deliver, everyone needs to remain invested in the project.

Edited November 5, 2020 by thunderball

[villalad21]

27 minutes ago, thunderball said:

I am not sure there are calls for his sacking, but the manner of the two defeats does raise the spectre of maybe we havent progressed as much as we had hoped and therefore the questions on his medium term remain. Yes he is one of us, but we all want success and with our ownership and commitment shown, it would be a shame to let sentiment get in the way of real progress. 

I am sure we would all be delighted if he succeeded, but the two most recent defeats show the real technical and tactical ability of teams under very progressive managers, in fact despite Leicesters defeat to us their display against Leeds has shown just how good a coach and tactician Rogers is too. As nice a chap as Smith is, I am not as convinced of him as I am of the likes of Bielsa and Hassenhuttl for example, even Graham Potter is building something at Brighton. 

Smith needs time and after the post lockdown run, deserves it, but the stakes get higher with every pound spent, he need to demonstrate real progress and momentum and cannot afford to underwhelm. With all this good will, emerging talent, gelling of the team, investment with promise of more, I just hope we dont under deliver, everyone needs to remain invested in the project.

For this season mid table will be acceptable but it won't be for long at the rate the owners are spending.

He does seem to have created a good culture around the club. It does seem like a happy camp but i still don't seem him being able to take us to the next level.

He is a coach not a manager and i believe we need a strong manager. Someone like Ralph. Dean can set up a team to how he wants them to play but when his pre game tactics ain't working he does look a bit clueless. Which is mainly why i think he barely makes any subs. He has a starting 11 in his head and i don't think he wants to distrupt the flow of that team by making a lot of changes mid game.

He has always been like that. Reactive, not pro active.