Dean Smith

[handsworthvilla]

10 hours ago, MrBlack said:

 

Back to football,  what is your view on the fact whoscored seems to think we're the best defensive team in the league, taking all defensive stats into account as well as goals conceded?

I think this is the key point in tomaskz argument - its very easy to look at 4 losses and say we are a shambles defensively - but when you actually put the results to one side and examine what happened in the games (statistically) we have been unlucky. 

Its the classic thing that pundits do that really frustrates me. A team scores a scrappy last minute equaliser from a corner and all the pundits immediately after the game talk about how they've got such fight, spirit and never say die attitude. If that scrappy shot had've been cleared off the line and the team end up losing - would the pundits be saying the same thing? No, they'd be highlighting all the reasons why they lost and how poor they were. The whole post-match narrative gets changed based on moments of luck - you very rarely get informed commentary about how teams have actually performed over 90 minutes - the commentary is always so biased based on the result. 

Obviously over a 38 game season the results are informed by the performances, and there is little point in talking about being lucky/unlucky when you have a sample size of 38 results. But over short spells of games it is perfectly reasonable to not just take the results at face value. 

[Dave-R]

13 hours ago, TRO said:

I'm talking about the ability to stop the opposition, is that so hard to understand.....baring a Var call it could have been a draw.....did you not notice the challenges going in, or is that too much for you to comprehend....Brighton did well to keep a vibrant Southampton, relatively quiet.....If you can't see the virtues, of that, no point talking.

Quite frankly, I don't know what you are rambling on about at times....whats West Brom and Burnley got to do with it?.....I was talking about this game, not their season.

I was pin pointing a feature of both teams games.....not their whole full compliment.

I've never seen a fan with such Red for embarrasment.....I was talking about defending and you go off on a tangent waffling about anything and everything that bears no relation.

I think you need to go on the Graham Norton show and get the " Chair" 

You do make me laugh at times TRO, good post I enjoyed it.

[Dave-R]

2 minutes ago, handsworthvilla said:

I think this is the key point in tomaskz argument - its very easy to look at 4 losses and say we are a shambles defensively - but when you actually put the results to one side and examine what happened in the games (statistically) we have been unlucky. 

Its the classic thing that pundits do that really frustrates me. A team scores a scrappy last minute equaliser from a corner and all the pundits immediately after the game talk about how they've got such fight, spirit and never say die attitude. If that scrappy shot had've been cleared off the line and the team end up losing - would the pundits be saying the same thing? No, they'd be highlighting all the reasons why they lost and how poor they were. The whole post-match narrative gets changed based on moments of luck - you very rarely get informed commentary about how teams have actually performed over 90 minutes - the commentary is always so biased based on the result. 

Obviously over a 38 game season the results are informed by the performances, and there is little point in talking about being lucky/unlucky when you have a sample size of 38 results. But over short spells of games it is perfectly reasonable to not just take the results at face value. 

It's a case of not stopping the required amount of goals going in and not making the most of our shots that were on target and turning them into goals.

As others have said many a time it's the fine margines and making the most count where its needed.

The WestHam loss may of been a much different a game if we had of kept just one of there goals out and kept it a draw up till a certain point. We seal our Own defeat when we keep letting more goal in than we should be, that we should be making count everything we throw at a goal and we are not. There is always a fair bit of luck involved in games, however when we can only turn one shot into a goal out of a game weve had what 16 shots on target it does look like weve had the worst luck out there doesnt it but in reality weve been our own worst enemy.

I know after WestHam the pundits and media had been saying how Lucky WestHam were, that they had been battered. We had given them Londoners a good whopping, just not where it counted which was a shame.

I for one think Watkins best is yet to come at villa and were a while off seeing it, if we had been seeing Watkins best then I'm certain hed have more goals than he does now. In front of goal, the finished product from many our stars who had a go at scoring and failed to convert, should of been better. If we can be better in the future at scoring more than the opposition does then were on the right track.

I also think we would of had a much different game if Barkley had of played against WH, we was missing a key player and its hurting us abit.

 

[TRO]

11 hours ago, MrBlack said:

Minor grammatical point...Paragraphs work just as well as a bullet point when the bullet point is more than a sentence long. Putting paragraphs into a bullet is probably passive aggressive because it's an incorrect use of the tool. 

Back to football,  what is your view on the fact whoscored seems to think we're the best defensive team in the league, taking all defensive stats into account as well as goals conceded?

I am not trying to enter in to a world of pedantics on Grammar, its enough to deal with on Football.....I use bullets points to be concise and as debatable topics.....I am not a expert on Grammar and don't profess to be, I write in a manner thats easy for the recipient to grasp the point.....maybe ,I am struggling with some.

The second point....Depends on which part you want to discuss.....The first 4 games or the last 5....the contrast is markedly different and if you put them both together the cumulative will show less concern.

The point is The Liverpool game and the Arsenal game have no bearing on the last 2 games......rounding the results together will undoubtedly show a favourable picture.....seperate them and judge each game on its merits, shows a different picture again.

Look, this is no big deal.....if you think everything is fine, thats your view, I am not saying its wrong, I just don't agree.....Right now I think we have defensive issues.

[TRO]

13 hours ago, WallisFrizz said:

I don’t think our defending has declined over the past few games I just think we defensively flattered to deceive in the first four games:

10 man Sheff Utd who had backs to the wall

Fulham who were dreadful.

Liverpool- we conceded 2

Leicester- without Jamie Vardy and one of the least creative sides in the prem this season.

 

Its a different slant on things....but well worth considering....a valid opinion IMV

[villalad21]

Dean Smith has always been a "you score 3 we score 4 type of manager"

When you play that high line and bombing players forward you need a general at a back. A Van Dijk. Someone who reads the game well and anticipate danger.

We don't have that. Playing this way, unless you have world class players all over the pitch you will lose more than you'll win. We have a really decent team but Smith needs to adapt and tweak his system, it's what the best coaches do.

 

Edited December 9, 2020 by villalad21

[TRO]

11 hours ago, Tomaszk said:

Plenty of tales for that chair.

I agree.

Other teams concede goals as well.

And yet as tom_avfc says...

Bang on.

We played OK v Brighton but conceded a screamer and had a dodgy VAR call against us. Saints were OK against Brighton but conceded zero screamers and had dodgy VAR call in their favour. We lost 2-1, they won 2-1, fine margins, we go again.

Frustrating but we'll have some go our way if we continue to play the way we have been overall. We can defend better, but right now we should also be scoring more purely on the balance of play.

Is there work to do? Christ yes. We can improve at everything. Loads of holes in our squad, in our play, especially defensively.

I'm taking performances for what they were. Not saying oh we lost, we were crap and don't defend as well as XYZ. Other teams lose games as well. 

Blocking the trolls really improves this site. One in particular has been a scourge for a long time and is spreading a ridiculous amount of negativity.

Guarantee you have more times than villalad21 has.

Thanks, some of your comments, is all I was seeking, your admission, that we can defend better....maybe it was a reluctant call, due to all the other unnecessary responses that go with it.

On the second highlighted point , be careful what you wish for.....just because he/I has a different view to you, don't be so holier than thou.....If you think folk are negative, don't read it.

If ,being prepared to discuss the resaons why we have conceded so many goals in the last 5 games, is negative, I suggest you have a very single dimensional view of the games....its not all sweets and candy.

judging by where I live and Where Villalad 21 lives....That is a pretty dull deduction.

you talk in previous posts of Passive-aggressiveness.....People who live in glass houses should refrain from throwing stones.

Edited December 9, 2020 by TRO

[TRO]

1 hour ago, Dave-R said:

You do make me laugh at times TRO, good post I enjoyed it.

some posters, bring me inspiration.....its not hard to muster.

Edited December 9, 2020 by TRO

[onmeedson]

We will be into the gypsy curse next and dean peeing on all the corner flags.

[TRO]

38 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Dean Smith has always been a "you score 3 we score 4 type of manager"

When you play that high line and bombing players forward you need a general at a back. A Van Dijk. Someone who reads the game well and anticipate danger.

We don't have that. Playing this way, unless you have world class players all over the pitch you will lose more than you'll win. We have a really decent team but Smith needs to adapt and tweak his system, it's what the best coaches do.

 

steady, you will be accused of wanting Smith out.

He has shown after lockdown, he can tighten us up.....and the first 4 games rendered 3 clean sheets, that was great.....He can do it.

we just need to get back to that scenario.

[villalad21]

5 minutes ago, TRO said:

steady, you will be accused of wanting Smith out.

He has shown after lockdown, he can tighten us up.....and the first 4 games rendered 3 clean sheets, that was great.....He can do it.

we just need to get back to that scenario.

He can do it but i don't think he want to do it.

[QldVilla]

I think some have been ignoring the elephant in the room, once or twice is unlucky, 4 losses out of 5 is a problem. There are defensive issues there and they are being exploited in games. For me we are too passive in defence at times and coaching staff need to find a solution.

[sharkyvilla]

7 minutes ago, TRO said:

steady, you will be accused of wanting Smith out.

He has shown after lockdown, he can tighten us up.....and the first 4 games rendered 3 clean sheets, that was great.....He can do it.

we just need to get back to that scenario.

Villalad accused of wanting Smith out  He has been trolling along those lines ever since he joined, the fact that someone agrees with him should send alarm bells. 

[Sulberto21]

2 hours ago, handsworthvilla said:

I think this is the key point in tomaskz argument - its very easy to look at 4 losses and say we are a shambles defensively - but when you actually put the results to one side and examine what happened in the games (statistically) we have been unlucky. 

Its the classic thing that pundits do that really frustrates me. A team scores a scrappy last minute equaliser from a corner and all the pundits immediately after the game talk about how they've got such fight, spirit and never say die attitude. If that scrappy shot had've been cleared off the line and the team end up losing - would the pundits be saying the same thing? No, they'd be highlighting all the reasons why they lost and how poor they were. The whole post-match narrative gets changed based on moments of luck - you very rarely get informed commentary about how teams have actually performed over 90 minutes - the commentary is always so biased based on the result. 

Obviously over a 38 game season the results are informed by the performances, and there is little point in talking about being lucky/unlucky when you have a sample size of 38 results. But over short spells of games it is perfectly reasonable to not just take the results at face value. 

I disagree with this, imo we have lost these games recently because of missed chances some of which have been sitters. Also we've been a little sloppier in our own box. But mainly the missed chances. We have to be more ruthless in front of goal. Only Leeds second half have outplayed us. Maybe Southampton first 30 minutes too. The rest we've been better than.

[Sam-AVFC]

11 minutes ago, QldVilla said:

I think some have been ignoring the elephant in the room, once or twice is unlucky, 4 losses out of 5 is a problem. There are defensive issues there and they are being exploited in games. For me we are too passive in defence at times and coaching staff need to find a solution.

Same way some people are ignoring we have the 6th best defence in the league.

[QldVilla]

2 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Same way some people are ignoring we have the 6th best defence in the league.

It’s easy to pull stats out to justify an opinion. We have played two games less than most teams, and I bet that stat doesn’t stand up in the stats for Villa’s past 5 games.

[sparrow1988]

2 minutes ago, QldVilla said:

I think some have been ignoring the elephant in the room, once or twice is unlucky, 4 losses out of 5 is a problem. There are defensive issues there and they are being exploited in games. For me we are too passive in defence at times and coaching staff need to find a solution.

We're a team aiming for mid-table. At least that's what I would have hoped at the start of the season given the players we have and have brought in. An unlucky run for a mid-table team is 4 losses from 5. A lucky run is the run we had at the start of the season. We're now roughly where we should be with a chance to move up the tabe due to the amount of games we have played. There are issues both in defence and attack. There always will be for a team like us and the stage that we are at.

What I see is an overall improvement from this season to last which but for a few cock-ups here and there, we could be higher up the table. We were a team that leaked goals early last season but scored plenty until that dismal run just before lockdown (when we didn't have a striker). After lockdown we became a team who were very hard to beat but had issues scoring goals. It was enough to keep us up. That type of football will only ever be enough to keep you up.

If you want to progress up the table you've got to strike a balance between the two - I see at least an attempt at this. It won't always work out but I can see that the coaching staff are looking for solutions to get us playing a balanced style. One where we're not leaking goals but also a threat to the other teams defence. It will take time to get this to work. It looks to me as if they are prioritising both ends of the pitch and it pays off somedays and other days - either due to individual mistakes or moments of magic from an opposition player - it doesn't.

[Sam-AVFC]

21 minutes ago, QldVilla said:

It’s easy to pull stats out to justify an opinion. We have played two games less than most teams, and I bet that stat doesn’t stand up in the stats for Villa’s past 5 games.

The stat I used was goals per game so how many games we have played is irrelevant. 

It is easy to just pull stats out to justify an opinion. The only reason I've done that though is because people seem to ignore the context in those games that we conceded very few shots and 9/10 times most of those goals wouldn't have gone in. They're just looking at the goals against stat, so I thought I'd clarify that we're pretty good on this front. 

Obviously it won't be the same the last 5 games. I'm not sure why these are more relevant than the 1st set of games though as we've not played any worse. I'll judge over the season as a whole as that's what the table is based on and for me it's a case of so far, so good with a couple of frustrations. 

Edited December 9, 2020 by Sam-AVFC

[Mjvilla]

18 hours ago, TRO said:

desperate response, when you run out of sensible things to say. I've probably got stuck in the turnstiles more time that you have been to Villa Park.

If you are happy conceding as many goals as we have in the last 4 defeats, fine......but don't keep denying them like some sort of unstoppable force has landed against us.

I have never seen you make one meaningful reference to the defending side of our game as if it just does'nt exist......Even the eplanalysis makes reference in their conclusion of the West Ham game that we need to defend better.....but Oh No!! not you, you know best don't you?

Lets just hope the lads rescue your argument against Wolves and score more than we concede.

What has this got to do with anything at all? Does it make you a Better fan? Does it mean you have a better understanding of football? Not even close.

I hear shouts from more travelled fans sat by me at games, hear chat from more travelled supporters (villa and non villa) at work and in general life and absolutely cringe at what they say. 

Going to villa park doesn't necessarily mean you have a better understanding or you're correct. Much like quoting managers from 40/50 years ago. They knew the game of their era inside out, no doubt. Today's game is very different. 

[villa89]

4 losses in the last 5 games, wouldn't really want to make that 5 of the last 6.