Ratings & Reactions: Villa v QPR

[VillaChris]

Have to say btw if the other 10 players had McGinn's attitude and skill promotion would be a doodle.

 

97th minute and he must've been out on his feet. Still had the energy to track Eze and snuff out a very dangerous counter attack.

[punkiller1981]

I might well be wrong and I probably am but almost every team I watch us play against In the top half seem to have hungry quick midfielders who when they nick the ball of us break forward with pace and numbers. We don’t seem to have that and that’s how there 2nd goal came from

[TRO]

2 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

I don't think we have a very good squad at all. I haven't for quite some time. Most Villa fans overrate their own players and undervalue players they don't know that well. 

It's not on Smith though. He has had us playing some really nice football compared to the dross Bruce served up. Lets let Smith work a couple of windows before we get worried about this and that. 

too samey....not enough diversity of individual.

Edited January 1, 2019 by TRO

[TRO]

50 minutes ago, punkiller1981 said:

I might well be wrong and I probably am but almost every team I watch us play against In the top half seem to have hungry quick midfielders who when they nick the ball of us break forward with pace and numbers. We don’t seem to have that and that’s how there 2nd goal came from

No, You're not wrong.

[TRO]

2 hours ago, pacbuddies said:

Sorry, I must have misunderstood your 'We're 10th' comment in response to my request to name one better squad and I therefore concluded that you thought there were nine better squads than ours.

8

[OutByEaster?]

I think we've got the best team on paper in the league - maybe the best match day eighteen on paper, with everyone fit - but once you extend it to the twenty five to thirty you need to win this thing, we fall off the edge of a cliff - we lack depth across the whole squad and in some areas we're comically thin. I don't think you could take a squad with an allocation of defenders like ours and say it's the best in the league - we're incredibly strong in parts, but so weak in others it completely undermines us. 

 

[TRO]

2 hours ago, Delphinho123 said:

The point I was making is that we’re 10th because we don’t have the best squad in the league. I think with Grealish fit we could push for 5th/6th but currently, with our defense, I don’t think we’re anywhere near having the best squad in the league.

Hopefully a few new defensive additions in January will see us make a late push for the Playoffs.

I just can’t agree with the opinion that we have the best squad in the league when we are so so poor defensively. I don’t think any of the teams above us would choose any of our defenders over what they currently have.

Maybe I’m wrong. Anyway, UTV.

the defensive problem is in midfield too...teams run right through the middle of us.

We MAKE it so desperately easy for teams to score against us.

Edited January 1, 2019 by TRO

[KenjiOgiwara]

13 minutes ago, TRO said:

too samey....not enough diversity of individual.

Just too much shit IMO. We have some very inconsistant wingers. Not enough graft for ny liking.  

Abraham, McGinn and Grealish are good. Hopefully the new keeper as well. 

Rest of the central midfielders are beyond average. The defence is straight up shite. Depth behind Abraham is ok I guess. 

[TRO]

3 hours ago, Davkaus said:

Shocked to read this, I thought I was going to drift off in the second half. I think that was as poor a game as we've played all season. Certainly the worst under Smith, by far. 

I was just idly gazing up in to the Holte end at one stage( and shaking).....such was my disgust at what I was watching....just after their second

The space we allow teams to play in is bordering on criminal....The whole team has a defensive issue....Off the ball we are shocking. This team are lightweight and stand off far too often.

We are beaten to headers at an alarming rate....which lead to one of their goals....It needs a hell of a lot of work.

Since the Albion game we have gone down a dimension.

Edited January 1, 2019 by TRO

[srsmithusa]

The amount of time wasting our opponents commit is shocking.  QPR were just more brazen than the previous three.  

Adding time at the end is not sufficient because it doesn’t nullify the tactical advantage of taking the air out of the match.

Two points.  First, it’s sort of a complement.  The fact they are doing it means they are aware that we can move the ball well and can create chances out of our movement and possession.  Delaying all dead balls is a tactic to make sure we can’t get the bell moving until they have time to rest and set up is tactical to prevent us from doing the lovely attacking, passing game we can play.  They fear our attack.  It’s why they start time wasting from the first minute, and when tied, and even when they are behind.   

Secondly, it’s still cheating and the ref should be aware and strong to put a stop to it.  So far they haven’t, so the team needs to force the ref’s feeble hand. When an opponent walks away holding a ball you have to go take it from him. It will create a scuffle and force the referee to act in order to prevent another scuffle.  When they are standing a few feet in front of a restart pick up the ball, set it 2 yards away and play quickly. You either bypass the cheater who has to scramble so he isn’t bypassed by the play or you force him to cheat more obviously and deliberately by moving in front of you again,  if he does, move the ball again,  If he moves in front of you 2-3 times, you essentially force the referee to make a decision he clearly didn’t want to make.  When they are delaying their own restarts there’s less you can do.  Run get the ball they are ambling toward and hand it to them.  But other than that, when they are delaying their own restarts, complaining  to the ref is about your only option.  

[onmeedson]

When you worry about timewasting your team has  failed

[imavillan]

I said it in the match thread, the midfield are simply not good enough.

Most people think the defence is not good enough, but it gets absolutely no protection from the midfield, none whatsoever. It gives the ball away too easy and is not mobile enough.

Hourihane and Bjarnason were woeful today, woeful. For all is effort McGinn looked leggy. Kodjia is not a team player. 

Bolasie, cuts inside and blasts a great chance out well wide....

Smith has come in and made a difference to us but ultimately it will take him a while to turn round the the crock of shite that Bruce left behind.  

[The Fun Factory]

2 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think we've got the best team on paper in the league - maybe the best match day eighteen on paper, with everyone fit - but once you extend it to the twenty five to thirty you need to win this thing, we fall off the edge of a cliff - we lack depth across the whole squad and in some areas we're comically thin. I don't think you could take a squad with an allocation of defenders like ours and say it's the best in the league - we're incredibly strong in parts, but so weak in others it completely undermines us. 

 

I am sorry but that does start to sound somewhat deluded with over half the season gone and we are trending water in 10th position. Its a mediocre, unbalanced side with too many loans signings with no clear signing strategy ever since the day we have started down in the Championship. 3 managers later and 2 ownership changes we are going nowhere fast. 

[Hanky]

1 hour ago, onmeedson said:

When you worry about timewasting your team has  failed

It was pretty poor from them. If they’d have bothered to attempt to attack they could well have won. 

[srsmithusa]

1 hour ago, onmeedson said:

When you worry about timewasting your team has  failed

So what other tactical advantages an opponent gains should we ignore?

I don’t remember saying it was the most important factor in the match, but it was clearly a factor!   I just thought I would discuss something that impacted today’s match (and several others recently).  I thought was the purpose of this thread?  

Something BTW, that the ref’s nor our players have managed well.  

Sorry to discuss a point that doesn’t interest you or seem important enough for your attention.

Gimme a break.  

[A'Villan]

13 hours ago, TRO said:

I was just idly gazing up in to the Holte end at one stage( and shaking).....such was my disgust at what I was watching....just after their second

The space we allow teams to play in is bordering on criminal....The whole team has a defensive issue....Off the ball we are shocking. This team are lightweight and stand off far too often.

We are beaten to headers at an alarming rate....which lead to one of their goals....It needs a hell of a lot of work.

Since the Albion game we have gone down a dimension.

I'm sorry TRO but if losing the aerial duels 29-33 is being beaten to headers at an alarming rate, I'd like to read the superlatives you'd use to describe the things we do well.

We won duels on the floor 75-60, We had the same number of tackles as QPR and yet we had half the fouls. The ball was ours 60% of the time and played over 150 more passes than them.

We had half their interceptions and a third of their total clearances because it was us occupying the territory and the onus on them to defend. Nearly a third of their passes were longs balls.

That's one in every three. Doesn't allow for much build up play, does it? We kept them to under 70% pass completion rate. How? By pressing the ball and forcing errors and turnovers in positions where we can start attacks closer to the goal we're attacking.

When defending a one-on-one it's better to stand off the ball as long as you remain between the opponent and his intended target than it is to over commit and get beaten giving up a easier opportunity. There's a saying in basketball 'don't reach because I'll teach' which means don't reach in for the steal because a worthy ball handler will leave you behind en route to scoring an open goal. It's true for football too. I play Division One futsal and if you are too eager to dispossess someone then you get left for dead.

Because we chase down the ball high up the pitch one of the inherent flaws of this system is that there is no space occupied by a steady line or two of players sitting deep ready to stifle the opposition attack once it reaches our defensive third. We don't get that luxury. We rely on offense being the best form of defense by controlling the game as best we can by being on the ball as much as we can, and when that fails, we do our best to chase down the angles of our opponents intended target as soon as they take possession.

So maybe what you are seeing is defenders standing off the ball because they are on the back foot and run the risk of allowing the opponent to penetrate  and go 1 vs 1 with the keeper.  There's a lot more freedom to make a tackle when you are immediately surrounded by teammates deliberately positioned to have your back if you get beat by the man on the ball. It's a different proposition when you're the last man between a whole lot of space and your goalkeeper.

That's one of the aspects of our game that can be exploited. If we turn it over playing it out from the back or have the opponents play through our press successfully then there's a canvas of space to be pained by opposition forwards and our defenders are forced to scramble back on the back foot.

Yes it needs work but I think 6 wins, 5 draws, 3 losses considering our opposition it's a good sign that with a bit of improvement it will be adequate and effective strategy for us to adopt.

[A'Villan]

14 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think we've got the best team on paper in the league - maybe the best match day eighteen on paper, with everyone fit - but once you extend it to the twenty five to thirty you need to win this thing, we fall off the edge of a cliff - we lack depth across the whole squad and in some areas we're comically thin. I don't think you could take a squad with an allocation of defenders like ours and say it's the best in the league - we're incredibly strong in parts, but so weak in others it completely undermines us. 

 

Stoke do. Easily. And they are 14th for it.

Edited January 2, 2019 by A'Villan

[A'Villan]

15 hours ago, punkiller1981 said:

I might well be wrong and I probably am but almost every team I watch us play against In the top half seem to have hungry quick midfielders who when they nick the ball of us break forward with pace and numbers. We don’t seem to have that and that’s how there 2nd goal came from

The role of the midfield three was different without Jack in the side.

Because Grealish wasn't around to penetrate centrally, build up play was more reliant on creativity from the wide areas and therefore we utilised wall passes and overlaps from the full-backs to get forward where Grealish would normally play maestro. We played more long balls than we usually would too, 1 in 6 passes were long balls vs QPR where we would usually play less than 1 in 10.

The way I saw it was they were responsible for winning the ball back and being a safe passing outlet when we were on the ball in order to retain possession more than they were for getting on the front foot and getting involved in attacks with the front three. If an attack broke down on the wing a midfielder could support the players on that wing in switching the play or playing it back to defense to start a fresh attack, as I said, not overly concerned with joining attacks.

[OutByEaster?]

Steve McClaren described this game as  “A great game of football and a great advert for the Championship".

Despite your best efforts eh Shteve? 

 

[bannedfromHandV]

They did a number on us, slowed the game down at every given opportunity, something as per usual the referee seemed to cotton on to too late.

Undone by a wonder strike and a counter attack, both out of nothing.

That said, we didn't do enough again.

Massive opportunity missed.