Dean Smith

[A'Villan]

I think it's a bit of a misconception to say that under Smith we can't defend. We've kept a clean sheet in over a third of our fixtures under him so far.

We conceded just a single corner to QPR, kept their pass accuracy to under 70%, allowed them only 3 successful crosses and 3 successful dribbles all match. We had the same number of tackles as them, despite having one-third of the number of clearances, a clear indicator of us pressuring the ball both with and without possession. QPR played 95 long balls making up for nearly a third of their passes, another indicator of our pressing. Closing down is something we do a lot of under Smith. We won over 55% of duels.

Yes, the emphasis is on attack and pushing forward, which compromises the teams ability to have players behind the ball and ready to stifle an opposition threat. Yes, individual errors will be exposed more both on and off the ball, whether it be allowing an opponent too much time on the ball or over committing when we don't have it, or misplacing a pass or touch when we do have it. The way we are setup leaves the lines of defense to scramble back and also leaves space for the opposition to run into. So when error prone and using this tactic you can find yourself lacking composure and solidarity but also exposed by the space you've allowed the opposition by pushing forward by pressing without the ball and committing players forward with the ball. This is something we have seen at times under Smith which have cost us valuable points. I don't think it's trademark Smith to be poor defensively though.

With the right coaching and cohesion from the players on the pitch at any given time I think we can play the way Smith intends for us without being a guarantee to concede each fixture.

[A'Villan]

30 minutes ago, Zatman said:

I said at start of season(before Tammy joined) we have a really poor squad and play-offs would be a great season. Last manager short termism while it nearly got us up last season was always going to damage us long term

• 2 senior centre defenders and one is a kid(I dont include Jedinak as a centre back)
• signing aging players who arent up to it anymore Whelan, Jedinak, Elmo
• signing a goalkeeper and playing him in front of a shoddy defence was also criminal
• one senior left back at the club
• No back up for Jack
• too many loan signings

Fair enough. I disagree, in part. I see us as stronger this season than last. So if we nearly went up last season, why not this one?

• Terry was absent for a third of the season in 17/18. We had defenders like Samba, Elphick and Baker in the team.
• Grealish was absent even longer than Terry was, Josh Onomah played in his place, playing over two thirds of the season.
• Davis played over half the season for us. Now we Abraham, Kodjia and Hogan all ahead of him.
• Yes Snodgrass was great and Adomah scored 14, though Green was the backup. Now we have Bolasie, El Ghazi and Adomah. Improved. At least it should be.
• We now have McGinn who adds impetus and dynamic that previously wasn't there.

I agree the keeper situation is less than desirable and god knows why we opted to take that route. Apart from that though I see no reason why promotion was possible last season but unobtainable this season.

[Vive_La_Villa]

34 minutes ago, A'Villan said:

I think it's a bit of a misconception to say that under Smith we can't defend. We've kept a clean sheet in over a third of our fixtures under him so far.

We conceded just a single corner to QPR, kept their pass accuracy to under 70%, allowed them only 3 successful crosses and 3 successful dribbles all match. We had the same number of tackles as them, despite having one-third of the number of clearances, a clear indicator of us pressuring the ball both with and without possession. QPR played 95 long balls making up for nearly a third of their passes, another indicator of our pressing. Closing down is something we do a lot of under Smith. We won over 55% of duels.

Yes, the emphasis is on attack and pushing forward, which compromises the teams ability to have players behind the ball and ready to stifle an opposition threat. Yes, individual errors will be exposed more both on and off the ball, whether it be allowing an opponent too much time on the ball or over committing when we don't have it, or misplacing a pass or touch when we do have it. The way we are setup leaves the lines of defense to scramble back and also leaves space for the opposition to run into. So when error prone and using this tactic you can find yourself lacking composure and solidarity but also exposed by the space you've allowed the opposition by pushing forward by pressing without the ball and committing players forward with the ball. This is something we have seen at times under Smith which have cost us valuable points. I don't think it's trademark Smith to be poor defensively though.

With the right coaching and cohesion from the players on the pitch at any given time I think we can play the way Smith intends for us without being a guarantee to concede each fixture.

Good post. We will always be prone to be hit on the counter with the way we play. Even Peps great teams have always had the same problem.  It’s the price you pay when play in such an attacking high press style. The alternative is get bodies behind the ball like Bruce’s team and nick the odd goal. 

We are conceding too many and I think a pacey defensive midfielder could help. 

We also need to stop being so wasteful in dangerous positions. We could and should have scored a lot more than 2 goals today.  

[AshVilla]

Both of the QPR goals today were great finishes tbf.

I know you can't give them room to get the shots off but credit where its due some good goals.

[villan-scott]

6 hours ago, AshVilla said:

Both of the QPR goals today were great finishes tbf.

I know you can't give them room to get the shots off but credit where its due some good goals.

I made this point during the game yesterday. Every team we play somehow manages to seemingly score a worldy against us. So frustrating. 

[Demitri_C]

The only thing I will say about smith, good managers can win games even without their best players. He needs to find a winning formula without grealish as I think he will be leaving in the summer anyways as we are not going up as it stands.

I do accept though he has one hand tied behind his back with useless defenders like hutton Taylor and Elmo 

 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

QUESTION: If we had a fit squad (Taylor, Grealish, Tuanzebe) etc. would we have dropped the points we have over the past 2 or 3 games?

                      If we had adequate backup for those positions would we have dropped those points?

I think this should go some way in an honest evaluation.

Whilst the players missing may not have been spectacular, the balance of our team has been massively disrupted.

I get where people are coming from when they say "even with injuries we should be doing better" however it is simply not the same, OR fair currently.

I'm actually worried that people are going to start getting on Smiths back.

Also another "excuse" which applies to all teams I guess, let's be honest, our boys have looked absolutely knackered.

Let's remember a few of these lads are average at best players who have been playing out of their skins, and once the levels drop energy wise, they simply are not good enough to keep up with younger players.

I'm still going to give our regime time, with 12 break and a few new faces in, i'm confident we will see phase 2 of the rebuild take effect.

It's not just a new management team here remember, it's a new system being developed from top to bottom which has only had a couple of months!

I can imagine Dean Smith must be gutted deep down having to give interviews after the last couple of performances being one of us and knowing how we feel.

[hippo]

12 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

QUESTION: If we had a fit squad (Taylor, Grealish, Tuanzebe) etc. would we have dropped the points we have over the past 2 or 3 games?

                      If we had adequate backup for those positions would we have dropped those points?

I think this should go some way in an honest evaluation.

Whilst the players missing may not have been spectacular, the balance of our team has been massively disrupted.

I get where people are coming from when they say "even with injuries we should be doing better" however it is simply not the same, OR fair currently.

I'm actually worried that people are going to start getting on Smiths back.

Also another "excuse" which applies to all teams I guess, let's be honest, our boys have looked absolutely knackered.

Let's remember a few of these lads are average at best players who have been playing out of their skins, and once the levels drop energy wise, they simply are not good enough to keep up with younger players.

I'm still going to give our regime time, with 12 break and a few new faces in, i'm confident we will see phase 2 of the rebuild take effect.

It's not just a new management team here remember, it's a new system being developed from top to bottom which has only had a couple of months!

I can imagine Dean Smith must be gutted deep down having to give interviews after the last couple of performances being one of us and knowing how we feel.

Every team has injuries at this point in the season with the games coming thick and fast. Why do you think our injuries are not fair ? - As was pointed out a few posts back - We lost Grealish, Terry, Kjodia  for large parts of last season.  I remember Graham Taylor saying in an ideal word - your best first 11 is fit,  in form, you have a decent referee, and shots that hit the post - go in off the post - However you have to be prepared because most of the time it isn't like that.

 

Edited January 2, 2019 by hippo

[Stevo985]

11 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

QUESTION: If we had a fit squad (Taylor, Grealish, Tuanzebe) etc. would we have dropped the points we have over the past 2 or 3 games?

                      If we had adequate backup for those positions would we have dropped those points?

I think this should go some way in an honest evaluation.

Whilst the players missing may not have been spectacular, the balance of our team has been massively disrupted.

I get where people are coming from when they say "even with injuries we should be doing better" however it is simply not the same, OR fair currently.

I'm actually worried that people are going to start getting on Smiths back.

Also another "excuse" which applies to all teams I guess, let's be honest, our boys have looked absolutely knackered.

Let's remember a few of these lads are average at best players who have been playing out of their skins, and once the levels drop energy wise, they simply are not good enough to keep up with younger players.

I'm still going to give our regime time, with 12 break and a few new faces in, i'm confident we will see phase 2 of the rebuild take effect.

It's not just a new management team here remember, it's a new system being developed from top to bottom which has only had a couple of months!

I can imagine Dean Smith must be gutted deep down having to give interviews after the last couple of performances being one of us and knowing how we feel.

I know what you're saying, but all the talk when Grealish was out was about SMith being so good that we won't miss Grealish as much. The system is what makes us good so it won't matter if our best player is missing.

In reality I think we've missed him more than ever. He was out for a huge chunk of last season and we missed him less.

 

That's not really a criticism of Smith. Every team is going to miss their best player. And I don't think the fixture pile up has favoured us over christmas. The break we have now couldn't have come soon enough.

But things should have been better than the last couple of games. They have been pretty poor. We should be beating those teams if we have any hope of promotion.

I'm also not buying this narrative that our squad is crap or average. It's probably overrated, and it's definitely unbalanced given our lack of defenders. But it's good enough to be beating Preston and QPR even with the injuries.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

1 minute ago, hippo said:

Every team has injuries at this point in the season with the games coming thick and fast. Why do you think our injuries are not fair ? - As was pointed out a few posts back - We lost Grealish, Terry, Kjodia  for large parts of last season.  I remember Graham Taylor in an ideal word - your best first 11 is fit, you have a decent referee, and shots that hit the post - go in off the post - However you have to be prepared because most of the time it isn't like that.

 

I think it's a bit unfair because bar the first 11 the backups are very poor.

I say this mostly in reference to defensive/midfield positions as we can't really complain about attacking options, even with injuries.

Alot of these goals conceded come from some absolutely horrendous individual errors, passing and mistakes.

Can the manager truly be blamed for some of those things?

Quite literally, there are a couple of situations where if the player (Hutton or Elmo for example) did anything aside from what they did, the goals conceded would not have happened.

[KenjiOgiwara]

Hope he can improve our passing. Whether it's done by coaching or getting in new players, it has to happen. The reason we are missing Jack so much, is in my opinion cause the rest of the team is just absolutely dog shit at pass and move. The amount of times I've seen us pass into nothing or an opponent the last few matches is ridiculous. 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

I know what you're saying, but all the talk when Grealish was out was about SMith being so good that we won't miss Grealish as much. The system is what makes us good so it won't matter if our best player is missing.

In reality I think we've missed him more than ever. He was out for a huge chunk of last season and we missed him less.

 

That's not really a criticism of Smith. Every team is going to miss their best player. And I don't think the fixture pile up has favoured us over christmas. The break we have now couldn't have come soon enough.

But things should have been better than the last couple of games. They have been pretty poor. We should be beating those teams if we have any hope of promotion.

I'm also not buying this narrative that our squad is crap or average. It's probably overrated, and it's definitely unbalanced given our lack of defenders. But it's good enough to be beating Preston and QPR even with the injuries.

Again thought Stevo, i'll say again, I think people underestimate the difference Tuanzebe made.

He was athletic, and made driving runs connecting defense and attack. Which added impetus to us going forward.

He was also capable of keeping pace with the quickest forwards.

Taylor is bang average but helped us keep balance.

 

[hippo]

Just now, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

I think it's a bit unfair because bar the first 11 the backups are very poor.

I say this mostly in reference to defensive/midfield positions as we can't really complain about attacking options, even with injuries.

Alot of these goals conceded come from some absolutely horrendous individual errors, passing and mistakes.

Can the manager truly be blamed for some of those things?

Quite literally, there are a couple of situations where if the player (Hutton or Elmo for example) did anything aside from what they did, the goals conceded would not have happened.

on a 'one off' - no you can't blame the manager for individual errors. However the manager needs to put a system in place to minimise such errors and keep them to the absolute minimum. Ultimately the manager is accountable for results . I accept its early days for DS  - But you can't take him out of the equation   and say "ah well Hutton "   , "ah well elmohady" 

[Stevo985]

2 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Again thought Stevo, i'll say again, I think people underestimate the difference Tuanzebe made.

He was athletic, and made driving runs connecting defense and attack. Which added impetus to us going forward.

He was also capable of keeping pace with the quickest forwards.

Taylor is bang average but helped us keep balance.

 

We miss Tuanzebe because we don't have another CB. I don't think his impact going forward is as big as you say it is.

I also don't think we miss Taylor. We could plant a small shrub in the left back position and it would be as good as Neil Taylor. He is absolute toilet. If we're missing him then we have serious, serious problems.

[praisedmambo]

Some peeps were dreaming about a dip in form and are rubbing their hands in glee.

No context will satisfy them. No discussion either. They were against Dean Smith when we were nailing Derby and so on, so there is no point debating them.

[Stevo985]

2 minutes ago, praisedmambo said:

Some peeps were dreaming about a dip in form and are rubbing their hands in glee.

No context will satisfy them. No discussion either. They were against Dean Smith when we were nailing Derby and so on, so there is no point debating them.

It was the same with Bruce. a very small minority will be so against a manager that they celebrate Villa wins through gritted teeth and love it when we lose.

To be fair I haven't really noticed that happening with Smith yet, but I'm sure it will. It always does.

[DakotaVilla]

31 minutes ago, hippo said:

on a 'one off' - no you can't blame the manager for individual errors. However the manager needs to put a system in place to minimise such errors and keep them to the absolute minimum. Ultimately the manager is accountable for results . I accept its early days for DS  - But you can't take him out of the equation   and say "ah well Hutton "   , "ah well elmohady" 

So, with the players available, who else should he have played in those positions? 

The dinner lady?

[A'Villan]

21 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

QUESTION: If we had a fit squad (Taylor, Grealish, Tuanzebe) etc. would we have dropped the points we have over the past 2 or 3 games?

                      If we had adequate backup for those positions would we have dropped those points?

I think this should go some way in an honest evaluation.

Whilst the players missing may not have been spectacular, the balance of our team has been massively disrupted.

I get where people are coming from when they say "even with injuries we should be doing better" however it is simply not the same, OR fair currently.

I'm actually worried that people are going to start getting on Smiths back.

Also another "excuse" which applies to all teams I guess, let's be honest, our boys have looked absolutely knackered.

Let's remember a few of these lads are average at best players who have been playing out of their skins, and once the levels drop energy wise, they simply are not good enough to keep up with younger players.

I'm still going to give our regime time, with 12 break and a few new faces in, i'm confident we will see phase 2 of the rebuild take effect.

It's not just a new management team here remember, it's a new system being developed from top to bottom which has only had a couple of months!

I can imagine Dean Smith must be gutted deep down having to give interviews after the last couple of performances being one of us and knowing how we feel.

I hold a somewhat different take on things. To sum it up in a nutshell I think people underestimate how difficult it is to come out on top consistently in sport.

Even the absolute all time greats usually only win a handful of competitions. For example Lionel Messi has won four Champions League titles in the 15 years he has been involved in the competition. He has never brought home silverware with Argentina. Michael Jordan has six NBA titles from the 20 years he played in the competition.

Even the all time greats are walking away with the highest accolades less than a third of the time they try for one at the highest level.

We still drew and conceded 5 to Forest with Grealish and Tuanzebe in the side, Taylor too. While I agree with what you are saying about Tuanzebe's form and performances under Smith and the obvious quality that Grealish brings to the table. I think we have adequate backup in place. Most of our players, even fringe players, have either a respectable history in the Premier League or have been elite at Championship level. Even our arguably biggest liability is a 29 year old with over 100 PL performances to his name and over 40 appearances as an international.

[DakotaVilla]

8 hours ago, A'Villan said:

Fair enough. I disagree, in part. I see us as stronger this season than last. So if we nearly went up last season, why not this one?

• Terry was absent for a third of the season in 17/18. We had defenders like Samba, Elphick and Baker in the team.
• Grealish was absent even longer than Terry was, Josh Onomah played in his place, playing over two thirds of the season.
• Davis played over half the season for us. Now we Abraham, Kodjia and Hogan all ahead of him.
• Yes Snodgrass was great and Adomah scored 14, though Green was the backup. Now we have Bolasie, El Ghazi and Adomah. Improved. At least it should be.
• We now have McGinn who adds impetus and dynamic that previously wasn't there.

I agree the keeper situation is less than desirable and god knows why we opted to take that route. Apart from that though I see no reason why promotion was possible last season but unobtainable this season.

Defenders - at least we had covering defenders last year. A blind person could see that we have had a serious downgrade in this department so far.

midfielder - at least we had some cover for Jack last season. 

Bolaise and El Ghazi - were totally unfit/unproven before they started hence the inconsistency. 

The rest of the midfield - Bruce essentially used them as a second line of defence hoping for some miraculous attacking play from Jack or Snodgrass. The fact that none of them (Jedinak, Whelan, Hourihane, Bjarneson)  can pass a ball and don’t have the athleticism to get past a man or move into space is hardly smiths fault. At best the only one that will still be here in 12 months is Hourihane.

Attack - agreed, that this is a serious upgrade on last year. 

 

[hippo]

1 minute ago, DakotaVilla said:

So, with the players available, who else should he have played in those positions? 

The dinner lady?

?????

Not really sure of you're point - He has to in time put players and systems in place to minimise individual errors what what I said.  Hutton had a poor game V QPR  - granted. The options for a manager are:-

1.Replace him

2.. Coach him to be better

3.Tweak the system 

I am sure everyone will be screaming option 1 - and I wouldn't entirely disagree - but options 2 & 3 are still in the managers remit - and he will need to call on these even when he gets his own players.  Personally with decent wingers I don't see the need for Hutton to play so high up the pitch.