Ratings & Reactions: Villa v Leeds

[romavillan]

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

I guess what those figures don't show us is how those running numbers relate to our regular stats - are those numbers lower for example than the numbers we put in against Liverpool or are they very good numbers up against something extraordinary; are our numbers our worst of the season, are those Leed's best - the figures tell us that Leeds did more in the game, but it doesn't necessarily say we didn't put in an effort.

 

I'd bet they aren't low for us, Leeds regularly put in extraordinary km run and sprints figures. I don't think it was a lack of effort on our part we principally failed the most with the ball last night. We either went too fast back to front with a long ball, or tried to find a killer pass that was a bit too hollywood and just gave it them back. They were exceptional playing first touch stuff that just looked automatic, we needed to play first touch or at least move it quickly and not be afraid to go backwards and be patient for the right opening to play it forward and keep the ball better. 

[OutByEaster?]

I think our strengths are in players that can carry the ball - rather than our ability to move it around quickly - Leeds challenge you to do the second bit rather than the first. The strength of their system is that they force you to play their game - we weren't quite able to get our own game working properly.

 

[romavillan]

Even if we dribbled it successfully and then saw nothing on and dribbled it back and then passed it I don't mind, just giving it back to them was what hurt us

[Philosopher]

4 hours ago, TRO said:

I purposely included Leicester to show we did it....last night we didn't.....I agree, had we played like we did at Leicester, we might have got a result.

I understand your reasoning in your observation of Jacks defending .....I am reluctant to agree, let me explain my thoughts.....what you say, is not wrong in isolation by the way.

Players of Jacks calibre are exceptional talents and I am not going to compare names, but there have been many players over the years, who comparisons can be made, who equally were not renowned for their defensive qualities.....its a trade off, I guess.

Players are about a team and when there is one weakness you create a strength.....its Deans job as a coach to get sufficent compensating qualities in our team to allow Jack to flourish....Biesla stopped that last night by negating what players we had to do it.

Jack is not beyond criticism and in terms of decision making, he can do better and releasing the ball better at times,too.... but if we are expecting some of our defensive frailties to land at Jacks door, I think we are barking up the wrong tree.

IMO Jack is more valuable than Mount, that is my opinion.....Despite the huge disappointment from Last Night, there are intriguing solutions to be found.....but looking at Jack as a feature of last nights demise, is slightly misguided.

If I had the job of correcting what went wrong last night, Jack would not be prime in my thoughts.......getting others to get him in the game might have been.

 

I don't mind the tracking back issue so much if he is pressing well. Or tracking back and protecting his fullback if he isn't pressing, but to do neither seems lazy to me. Also when Jack plays centrally he does that work. Last season he was doing more defensive work too. I'm not sure if it's tactical, feeling like he doesn't need to put that work in anymore, or if he is carrying an injury, but for his defensive effort wasn't good enough yesterday. These days the best players contribute both with and without the ball. 

How I would use him out of possession is to press high, but tell him to stay quite high and not track back too deep.

[ROTTERDAM1982]

3 hours ago, Rino8 said:

Failing to match us for fitness is really poor.

Well Rino, Barkley has hardly played, and McGinn has been Internationals. You might be right, it is a poor excuse, but i don't think there are many teams who play with as much energy and pace as Bielsas teams, its whether they can maintain it over a whole season 

[TRO]

2 hours ago, romavillan said:

Even if we dribbled it successfully and then saw nothing on and dribbled it back and then passed it I don't mind, just giving it back to them was what hurt us

and we did that at an alarming rate

[TRO]

2 hours ago, romavillan said:

I'd bet they aren't low for us, Leeds regularly put in extraordinary km run and sprints figures. I don't think it was a lack of effort on our part we principally failed the most with the ball last night. We either went too fast back to front with a long ball, or tried to find a killer pass that was a bit too hollywood and just gave it them back. They were exceptional playing first touch stuff that just looked automatic, we needed to play first touch or at least move it quickly and not be afraid to go backwards and be patient for the right opening to play it forward and keep the ball better. 

but we couldn't keep the ball for various reasons, one was, they took it off us, another was when we passed it, it was under duress from a challenge and we subsequently misplaced passes....it was central to our problems of not being able to get free of them, and many issues emerged from that.

Edited October 24, 2020 by TRO

[TRO]

We are a team who need space like a fire needs oxygen.....take it away and we flounder.

[Brumstopdogs]

4 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I guess what those figures don't show us is how those running numbers relate to our regular stats - are those numbers lower for example than the numbers we put in against Liverpool or are they very good numbers up against something extraordinary; are our numbers our worst of the season, are those Leed's best - the figures tell us that Leeds did more in the game, but it doesn't necessarily say we didn't put in an effort.

 

As a guide pre lockdown the most distance we covered was 114.2km vs Watford (less than Leeds covered last night).

Saying that pre lockdown 3 of the top 6 teams for covering the most distance eventually got relegated! The impressive thing with Leeds was not only covering the distance but everything was done with a purpose and was frustratingly effective.

[villalad21]

56 minutes ago, TRO said:

We are a team who need space like a fire needs oxygen.....take it away and we flounder.

Southampton plays in a similar sort of way.

Although they don't press anywhere near as intense at Leeds. Will be an interesting game.

[Kiwivillan]

7 hours ago, TRO said:

I would like to know what the defintion of this thing they call "Murderball" is.....it sounds novel.

My Leeds mate mentioned it pre season. I asked what that was and he said they play 60 min games as training non stop. If ball goes out one is thrown in and play continues

[Rino8]

1 hour ago, Kiwivillan said:

My Leeds mate mentioned it pre season. I asked what that was and he said they play 60 min games as training non stop. If ball goes out one is thrown in and play continues

Its 5 minute games with no offsides and no fouls. Minute rest and they go again. Bet its pretty fun for the first 20 minutes or so until you're nackered.

[PaulC]

2 hours ago, villalad21 said:

Southampton plays in a similar sort of way.

Although they don't press anywhere near as intense at Leeds. Will be an interesting game.

Yes going to be a tough game that, would settle for a point. 

[Radness]

For all the talk about Leeds impressive tempo i think it was the decisive passing n excellent first touch that undid us. We need a player like Harrison on the right to stretch the play n get us our space, he was brilliant.

Edited October 24, 2020 by Radness

[chrisvilla4]

Watched the game with my daughter who is a Leeds fan.

Quite simply once they scored they were the better team and very impressive to watch. 

 

Hate Bamford even more though. Making him look world class is not acceptable 

[gwi1890]

Watching motd highlights now (watched the full game to)  we were very unlucky not to be 2-0 up from the Grealish and Konsa chance 

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

2nd and particularly the 3rd goal was very poor defending. Standing off and allowing that gimp Bamford to get the shot away instead of engaging was criminal. Mings on the third not aggressive enough.

[Kiwivillan]

2 hours ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

2nd and particularly the 3rd goal was very poor defending. Standing off and allowing that gimp Bamford to get the shot away instead of engaging was criminal. Mings on the third not aggressive enough.

2nd was Barkley ridiculously giving the ball away. Other than that I've calmed down. Unlucky not to score first and won't play many teams with intensity of Leeds and hopefully we've learnt many lessons and can reset 

[TRO]

18 hours ago, Kiwivillan said:

My Leeds mate mentioned it pre season. I asked what that was and he said they play 60 min games as training non stop. If ball goes out one is thrown in and play continues

Sounds like a method of working on energy levels and intensity......I think we need to work on that too.

[gwi1890]

On 24/10/2020 at 14:27, Rino8 said:

I don't know how you could use tired or playing too many games as an excuse tbh. You had a few more days rest than us and we're only 6 games into the season.

Failing to match us for fitness is really poor.

Yes you beat us and congratulations either way we still have 12 points 4 wins and a loss, can’t win them all as you would obviously know