Jump to content

Dean Smith


Demitri_C

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

I think it had less to do with the formation and more to do with the application and desire.

I agree, Brentford did the same thing with Smith, he wasn't really managing them, just putting out the cones and keeping the players chipper. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, romavillan said:

Some people have a real problem with 3 at the back, don't know why. In my lifetime I've seen us use it to very good effect, playing good football too. Apart from Villa though sooooo many sides have won stuff with it, seems daft to think it's a no go as a formation. We've got centre backs who are comfortable on the ball, that's half the battle. I think it really suits us, I'd like to see us play it with Jack in the middle, as part of the 2 in a 3-4-2-1 I think he'd run things.

Hand up that was me. For the most part I have always seen 3 in the back as a negative formation. This is what changed it for me. Mings and Konsa are so comfortable on the ball. They easily make up for a lack of that 3rd midfielder. Especially if that 3rd midfielder is going to be Lansbury or Hourihane. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, romavillan said:

Some people have a real problem with 3 at the back, don't know why. In my lifetime I've seen us use it to very good effect, playing good football too. Apart from Villa though sooooo many sides have won stuff with it, seems daft to think it's a no go as a formation. We've got centre backs who are comfortable on the ball, that's half the battle. I think it really suits us, I'd like to see us play it with Jack in the middle, as part of the 2 in a 3-4-2-1 I think he'd run things.

And some people continue to reply to trolls which means people that have blocked said trolls end up seeing their posts.  Our new system is working better than 4-3-3 and anyone that is not on the wind up can see that. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smith: “The team have worked hard without a striker. I've got to work out whether it's best to start Ally or Keinan or keep with the players that have been getting the results and the performances.”

 

Oh boy, I hope he doesn't choose to start without a recognised striker just because "they did well without one".

 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, villalad21 said:

I really hope this 5 at the back thing is only temporary. 

What 3 centre backs is it takes away one of the forward players, whether it's a midfielder or attacker. And basically what this is is damage limitation tactics with 3 at the back.

Let's call a spade a spade here. We're going 5 at the back because we don't wanna get embarrassed.

 

50 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

I think it had less to do with the formation and more to do with the application and desire.

If it has less to do with formation, then why do you moan about the formation not an hour earlier? 

As has been said by others, this formation isn’t doing too bad for us at the moment. Conte has also won the league and wolves play this system to great effect. It’s working without a damn striker and now we have 1, we might do even better. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Rightdm00 said:

Hand up that was me. For the most part I have always seen 3 in the back as a negative formation. This is what changed it for me. Mings and Konsa are so comfortable on the ball. They easily make up for a lack of that 3rd midfielder. Especially if that 3rd midfielder is going to be Lansbury or Hourihane. 

And especially from an attacking perspective as well, because if a team is pressing and one of them suddenly steps into midfield then we have men over and can start to build a nice attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, cyrusr said:

 

If it has less to do with formation, then why do you moan about the formation not an hour earlier? 

As has been said by others, this formation isn’t doing too bad for us at the moment. Conte has also won the league and wolves play this system to great effect. It’s working without a damn striker and now we have 1, we might do even better. 

Because 4-3-3 is more attacking.

When you play a defender at the cost of a midfielder it means you will often times lose the initiative to control a football game. Games generally are won in the midfield.

I hope we one day can get a strong enough midfield to return to 4-3-3

The best teams in the world play 4-3-3 with inside forwards and we should aspire to that.

Edited by villalad21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Smith: “The team have worked hard without a striker. I've got to work out whether it's best to start Ally or Keinan or keep with the players that have been getting the results and the performances.”

 

Oh boy, I hope he doesn't choose to start without a recognised striker just because "they did well without one".

 

I would genuinely not know how to react if he does that. Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Smith: “The team have worked hard without a striker. I've got to work out whether it's best to start Ally or Keinan or keep with the players that have been getting the results and the performances.”

 

Oh boy, I hope he doesn't choose to start without a recognised striker just because "they did well without one".

 

Hmm. Since we last played with a recognised striker we have won one, drawn two and lost two. We have scored 5 and conceded 11.

I don’t disagree with Smith’s judgement about the hard work but I may be on a slightly different page about “getting the results”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Smith: “The team have worked hard without a striker. I've got to work out whether it's best to start Ally or Keinan or keep with the players that have been getting the results and the performances.”

 

Oh boy, I hope he doesn't choose to start without a recognised striker just because "they did well without one".

 

I can’t see that, it’s just good management giving credit publicly to the players that have filled in well in the circumstances. I’m 100% sure our 2 forwards will both play a part (assuming they are fit).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

Hmm. Since we last played with a recognised striker we have won one, drawn two and lost two. We have scored 5 and conceded 11.

I don’t disagree with Smith’s judgement about the hard work but I may be on a slightly different page about “getting the results”.

I thought we had lost one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Delphinho123 said:

I wouldn’t mind seeing Keinan start with Samatta coming on early in the second half. 

I’m a big fan of Davis and think he’d lead the line better than Wesley did for however many games. 

Has he played any football since the injury, even u23's or friendlies?

Would be a bit rough to throw him in at the deep end without any game since October, poor guy would be dead after 15 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, sne said:

Has he played any football since the injury, even u23's or friendlies?

Would be a bit rough to throw him in at the deep end without any game since October, poor guy would be dead after 15 minutes.

Keinan is just window dressing in another Wesley rant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I thought we had lost one?

Oh, I was counting Fulham 1-2 as well as Man C. But of course we played Kodjia against Fulham so strictly speaking we had a “recognised” striker playing in that one. He had so little impact I had forgotten.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â