Dean Smith

[danceoftheshamen]

The conundrum between Bruce's OTT defensive style which we endured previously and Dean Smiths high pressing attacking style was summed up really well by a guy on a radio interview i heard a while ago... It's like having a blanket that's a foot too short to cover you properly, If you pull it up your feet are exposed but then if you cover your feet your chest is exposed. As some have said Guardiola is possibly the closest to finding a solution to it but then he has a squad of World Class players!

[chrisvilla4]

Surely Terry was brought in to help with the defensive side of things? Hopefully when we get reinforcements/a settled backline this area of the team will improve. 

[Digavilla]

1 hour ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

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. 

Yes , and please buy players with technical skill / composure / calmness / close ball control . So many times our midfielder just  panicked and make stray pass when opponents comes near.  No more of those old unskilled work horse the Whelans/ BB please etc

[DakotaVilla]

You can’t coach Hutton to be a left back because he’s not a left back.

so basically you’re saying he should play anti Football ala Bruce until he has the players to play his preferred style?

Google Gary Neville’s comments about Arsenal’s new manager after they lost at Chelsea earlier this season. Basically, he said that the minute a manager starts adapting his philosophy to the players he is finished.

Going to take a while to fix the significant short term focussed damage that Bruce and Xia did to the club. It’s as simple as that.

[hippo]

20 minutes ago, chrisvilla4 said:

Surely Terry was brought in to help with the defensive side of things? Hopefully when we get reinforcements/a settled backline this area of the team will improve. 

From what I hear that doesn't happen to any great extent. Nor should it - Smith is the head coach I would doubt he would delegate the defensive element of that to Terry - or any coach for that matter. Pretty sure DS knows the defence is the weak point and would be working on that during training. 

[hippo]

3 minutes ago, DakotaVilla said:

You can’t coach Hutton to be a left back because he’s not a left back.

so basically you’re saying he should play anti Football ala Bruce until he has the players to play his preferred style?

Google Gary Neville’s comments about Arsenal’s new manager after they lost at Chelsea earlier this season. Basically, he said that the minute a manager starts adapting his philosophy to the players he is finished.

Going to take a while to fix the significant short term focussed damage that Bruce and Xia did to the club. It’s as simple as that.

Kenny Swain was winger - Ron Saunders converted him to full back.  

I can't see the relevance of your other points - All I am saying is DS has to get the best out of what he has - I am sure he knows that.  By the law of averages DS will sign some players that don't turn out as he expects (as would any manager) - there comes a point where you just have to get on with it.

 

[praisedmambo]

20 minutes ago, hippo said:

Kenny Swain was winger - Ron Saunders converted him to full back.  

I can't see the relevance of your other points - All I am saying is DS has to get the best out of what he has - I am sure he knows that.  By the law of averages DS will sign some players that don't turn out as he expects (as would any manager) - there comes a point where you just have to get on with it.

 

Maybe he is. You want to ignore everything and it's mind-numbing. The 'best of what he has' includes the players available—we were doing excellently with Grealish and Tuanzebe in the team, so how does that fit into your logic? For a while Bruce and Smith had the same players available, no injuries to significant players and we looked so much stronger for Smith's influence—night and day.

Even back then you were just waiting for this moment. It's so simple to create these 'but what about this...' arguments. 'Yeah there are injuries, but what about just making a magic system that covers losing your best players and also all the deputies behind them in the squad'. The way you talk it's as if we've never won a game under Smith. You were prejudiced from the start and there's no helping that.

Now where is that block function... [EDIT: genuine question as I can't find it]

Edited January 2, 2019 by praisedmambo

[praisedmambo]

33 minutes ago, hippo said:

Kenny Swain was winger - Ron Saunders converted him to full back.  

I can't see the relevance of your other points - All I am saying is DS has to get the best out of what he has - I am sure he knows that.  By the law of averages DS will sign some players that don't turn out as he expects (as would any manager) - there comes a point where you just have to get on with it.

 

Day 2 of the January transfer window.

In addition, the logic on display here is the same as suggesting no decent team is ever affected by injuries. It's as if all great teams perform at 100% regardless of losing players and any other context. That's not the way it happens anywhere. Take the best players out of Barcelona/Man City and they suffer for form too. 'But sometimes you have to get on with it'—sure, you do your best, but look at City—form will suffer. Guardiola is a shit manager obviously.

Edited January 2, 2019 by praisedmambo

[DaveAV1]

27 minutes ago, hippo said:

Kenny Swain was winger - Ron Saunders converted him to full back.  

I can't see the relevance of your other points - All I am saying is DS has to get the best out of what he has - I am sure he knows that.  By the law of averages DS will sign some players that don't turn out as he expects (as would any manager) - there comes a point where you just have to get on with it.

 

Kenny Swain wasn’t a 34 year old right back with the positional sense of a rabbit on a country lane at 2 o’clock in the morning. Dean Smith is a coach with a training bib, not Merlin  with a wand!

[hippo]

17 minutes ago, praisedmambo said:

Maybe he is. You want to ignore everything and it's mind-numbing. The 'best of what he has' includes the players available—we were doing excellently with Grealish and Tuanzebe in the team, so how does that fit into your logic? For a while Bruce and Smith had the same players available, no injuries to significant players and we looked so much stronger for Smith's influence—night and day.

Even back then you were just waiting for this moment. It's so simple to create these 'but what about this...' arguments. 'Yeah there are injuries, but what about just making a magic system that covers losing your best players and also all the deputies behind them in the squad'. The way you talk it's as if we've never won a game under Smith. You were prejudiced from the start and there's no helping that.

Now where is that block function... [EDIT: genuine question as I can't find it]

Haven't I said a few posts back he needs time to put a system and players in place ?

My point was even the players he signs will at some point get injured or not turn out as good as he\we hoped (Not Just DS any manager).  We have to win on non perfect days - Sure DS is fully aware of that.  

[Stratvillan]

27 minutes ago, DaveAV1 said:

Dean Smith is a coach with a training bib, not Merlin  with a wand!

Favourite quote of the year. End of discussion. 

[Pimlico_Villa]

As refreshing as it is after Bruce to have a Manager clearly recognise and acknowledge mistakes being made in his post-match, we are seeing Smith talk a good game but not generate the results. 

If Bruce had played the same style and approach that Smith elected to play yesterday then we would have been bemoaning him relentlessly. 

On the point about him possibly adjusting the system to suit the players, I think that is a fair criticism. I really didn't like his rationale for playing Whelan. He said he'd been working hard in training - whilst that is nice to hear, and I suppose all the player can do, it shows that tactics come second, which I thought Smith was above. 

The next 3 League games are entirely winnable and a chance to make up ground on the pack above us. Anything less than 9 points and I'd be questioning Smith. He needs to show more that he can do his homework on the opposition and devise a game plan to beat them. 

We also need more variety in attack. Yesterday's opposition were doubling and even trebling up on our wingers and Smith should have reacted to that and played down the middle more. Its this sort of shortsightedness, coupled with consistently conceding pathetic goals, that worries me with Smith. 

[TRO]

10 hours 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.

Having watched the game, i didn't see the pressing you mention on the contrary, i thought we stood off and allowed them too much space....they were quicker to the ball quite often and left us floundering.....its been the same in many games since Albion.

I am not going to go down the analytical route because it sounds contradictory at times, but feel fairly confident in my view, for what ever reason, we concede too easily in a game to have any ambition.

We need to fix it or fanny around from game to game promising ourselves better times that won't be coming.

There were times in that game, particularly without the ball, we was awful.

Edited January 2, 2019 by TRO

[TRO]

1 hour ago, praisedmambo said:

Day 2 of the January transfer window.

In addition, the logic on display here is the same as suggesting no decent team is ever affected by injuries. It's as if all great teams perform at 100% regardless of losing players and any other context. That's not the way it happens anywhere. Take the best players out of Barcelona/Man City and they suffer for form too. 'But sometimes you have to get on with it'—sure, you do your best, but look at City—form will suffer. Guardiola is a shit manager obviously.

You are right what you say, but we rely on individuals to deliver magic moments that deliver our goals.....some of our opponents do not, because they just have average players all over the team, so just work and grind out their results......as a consequence, they don't miss injured players quite so much.

We have some very fine players and we have dross, when the fine players are missing we are left with......yes you've guessed it.

Having said all of that players also have form fluctuations and that too, can play with your head in terms of appraising them in general.

We are not very good at the minute.

ps we know Jack is a big miss.....but Axel is too.

[Troglodyte]

1 hour ago, DakotaVilla said:

Google Gary Neville’s comments about Arsenal’s new manager after they lost at Chelsea earlier this season. Basically, he said that the minute a manager starts adapting his philosophy to the players he is finished.

That all depends on context. You can't just come into a club with players who don't suit your style of play and fully implement it with success, especially if there are immediate expectations about results.

Also someone like Gareth Southgate has had to tailor a system to get the most out of his players, and he's done really well. If he'd have gone in insisting on implementing an entire 'philosophy' then I doubt this summer would have been quite as enjoyable!

[A'Villan]

15 minutes ago, TRO said:

Having watched the game, i didn't see the pressing you mention on the contrary, i thought we stood off and allowed them too much space....they were quicker to the ball quite often and left us floundering.....its been the same in many games since Albion.

I am not going to go down the analytical route because it sounds contradictory at times, but feel fairly confident in my view, for what ever reason, we concede too easily in a game to have any ambition.

We need to fix it or fanny around from game to game promising ourselves better times that won't be coming.

There were times in that game, particularly without the ball, we was awful.

I watched the game too. Had a great stream which was a pleasant surprise.

I would be interested in you elaborating on how analysis conveys a contradictory message. I like to take in the game first hand most of all, analysing statistics is no where near as much fun.

However they serve a purpose, being a semi professional athlete myself I can tell you from experience that if you are not keeping checks on your development in a way that is quantifiable you are not going to improve anywhere near as much as you would by analysing your approach and technique and making adjustments accordingly. The simple task of recording how many you make against how many you take gives an indication of success rate.

I'm surprised if you didn't see our players closing down the opposition, or at least attempting to. The stats are in line with my observations from watching the game. We won 55% of duels on the floor, so I don't know how they can be 'quicker to the ball quite often'. It was us who won the contest, more often than not.

The only reason I can currently think of which would have you believe QPR 'had us floundering' is that they went 2-1 up in a game where we lacked the quality on the ball to create the goals required to overcome the two we conceded.

It's a funny old things, points of view, I agree we were awful at times, but it was on the ball that we were awful and clumsy I thought.

 

[TRO]

1 hour ago, DakotaVilla said:

You can’t coach Hutton to be a left back because he’s not a left back.

so basically you’re saying he should play anti Football ala Bruce until he has the players to play his preferred style?

Google Gary Neville’s comments about Arsenal’s new manager after they lost at Chelsea earlier this season. Basically, he said that the minute a manager starts adapting his philosophy to the players he is finished.

Going to take a while to fix the significant short term focussed damage that Bruce and Xia did to the club. It’s as simple as that.

Gary Neville is hardly an authority on good management.....however playing football that defends what you have got i.e 2 goals up, is not anti- football, i think there could be a confusion there....and if its dismissed as such, we will have long miserable wait for success......Gary might want to glance at what George Graham left Wenger at the back, when he left to realise Arsenals problems

Liverpool have gone up a dimension by improving their defensive qualities in the goalkeeper and Centre Back......the trick is they HAVE to be better than what you have.

Despite all Man city,s plaudits for attacking football.....Kompany and Fernandinho are central to that success.....and all these teams are competent without the ball.

over the years, we have brought in no better or maybe actually worse than what we had, hence one of the reasons why we are, where we are.

[TRO]

2 hours ago, A'Villan said:

I watched the game too. Had a great stream which was a pleasant surprise.

I would be interested in you elaborating on how analysis conveys a contradictory message. I like to take in the game first hand most of all, analysing statistics is no where near as much fun.

However they serve a purpose, being a semi professional athlete myself I can tell you from experience that if you are not keeping checks on your development in a way that is quantifiable you are not going to improve anywhere near as much as you would by analysing your approach and technique and making adjustments accordingly. The simple task of recording how many you make against how many you take gives an indication of success rate.

I'm surprised if you didn't see our players closing down the opposition, or at least attempting to. The stats are in line with my observations from watching the game. We won 55% of duels on the floor, so I don't know how they can be 'quicker to the ball quite often'. It was us who won the contest, more often than not.

The only reason I can currently think of which would have you believe QPR 'had us floundering' is that they went 2-1 up in a game where we lacked the quality on the ball to create the goals required to overcome the two we conceded.

It's a funny old things, points of view, I agree we were awful at times, but it was on the ball that we were awful and clumsy I thought.

 

Its interesting how we differ in our views, but i would be happy for anyone to sit next to me in the stadium to point out my observations.

Dean Smith himself was disappointed in the performance of Hourihane and MCGinn so i would have guessed  had they pressed,( for any meaningful time in the game )he would have been happy.

I have just asked 2 other fans who were at the game like me and they said pressing , did we?.....are you joking they said.

I have to respect everyones views its their interpretation, so they are entitled to it.

I am not trying to be difficult, but Football is a simple game......the teams with the best players usually win....but that interpretation of "best" opens up another far searching debate, because its a team game.

My stance is simply this......2 goals is enough to win a game handsomely and to do so and not concede means you will win the league.....there is plenty of pitch craft both offensively and defensively to entertain the fans....the name of the game is points, thats what the competitions demand.

We concede far,far too easily and too readily......that has to stop.

quite frankly, i don't care that much, what style we play .....i just want winning football. The contest i watched we drew 2-2 and had to come from behind at home with 38,000 fans in attendance.

but when a player like Hourihane shadows the both goal scorers Eze and Freeman without getting ANY physical contact on the player, i despair.....not a nudge, not even leaning in, not a tackle.....no challenge whatsoever. It only takes a few minutes to score a goal, we have to be on our metal for 90....you don't get points for possession or anything other than scoring more than the opposion.....2 is enough to win a game at home.

Ps off the ball we are totally Lightweight.

Edited January 2, 2019 by TRO

[jonjon]

12 hours ago, TimTort said:

I don’t post often but my sister is married to a Brentford supporter and when Dean Smith was appointed, he said exactly that to me - almost word for word. Although he was not happy when Smith left them he also made a few comments that I thought maybe were just an indication of his disappointment and they may well prove to be, but he said that whilst the open attacking style of Brentford was the best he had ever seen in his time supporting them, the defensive frailties of the team as a whole were never really solved. The defensive players who were signed kept getting better in terms of their footballing qualities but the defensive organisational side of their game never improved. I found this a really odd thing to say about a man who had been a central defender himself but my brother-in-law’s response was that when Smith joined Brentford, a Walsall fan came onto their forum and said they would see some fantastic attacking football because Dean Smith’s teams loved having the ball up top because they didn’t know how to defend.

I'm not decrying Smith at all and I think he’s a fantastic appointment in comparison to recent managers, but it does worry me a tad.

That's spot on, I'm a Brentford supporter married to an Aston Villa Supporter living in West London, Everything that has just been said is true, Dean Smith's team was the best I have seen in over 40 years of supporting them, fast, entertaining, fluid attacking with plenty of goals, but deary, deary me his defensive organisation left a lot to be desired, this is now his third club in charge and reading your forum it seem's very little has changed, he left us without a win in 5 games before joining you, that poor run continued for another 10 games and we were tumbling downwards like there was no tomorrow, we have now just gone 4 games over the Christmas without a defeat, and are slowly improving our defensive play with the same players under our new coach who has changed the system round, hopefully for the better, we shall see.

We expect to lose a couple or more players in this window, but they won't be cheap buy's, no longer do we get turned over with derisory offers, we have to sell to survive as the income for our 12,000 capacity ground does not generate much income, unlike you who generate millions, but we made a total of £50 million PROFIT in the last 3-4 years in player sales, we buy cheap using a team of 5 including the owner, coach and DOF's using unique statistics and the like, develop them and sell for vast profit (Hogan comes to mind!!!) we don't always get it right, but nearly, take our leading goalscorer Neil Maupay, purchased for 1.5 million and now worth a fortune, we also turned down 10 million from Bournemouth in the summer for a defender, but it won't be until we are in our new stadium next season that we can start to generate more money so we don't have to sell our crown jewels, best of luck for the rest of the season. 

[MarkLillis]

It isn't the first time its been mentioned as most of you have picked up on it...

Our midfield struggle to track runners.

Sometimes our full backs struggle to track runners also.

Its our biggest problem at the moment in my eyes, (apart from the elephant in the room which is Jacks injury) when we play on the front foot we leave gaps on the pitch. The players have to be able to recover and recover quickly or we are exposed when we turnover possession.

Dean Smith absolutely knows this and I am sure we will be fixing it this January