Jump to content

Team shape, tactics and personnel


MaVilla

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, hippo said:

I clocked it in a pre season game. Ings scored and Watkins could barely look at him in the celebrations. Surprising as he always seems so laid back.

Yeah but they also had a very genuine , happy hug when Watkins scored the other day.

I think we can skew narratives however we want.

Many people were commenting on how good it was to see that they obviously like each other as well. lol

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hippo said:

Well young/ AT/ Ings doesn't smack of coherent thinking to me. Nor does the departure of 2 coaching staff after our best season for 10 years .

I can understand  them

Young: Good for dressing room, experienced, free and could provide backup for both fullbacks and come on as a sub with 25/20 mins to go. Problem is we don't play with fullbacks

Axel, we needed a backup CB in case of injury and Axel could give Hause competition for this place. But we are now playing him as a 1st 11 player due to formation

Ings. We only have Ollie as a striker, we couldn't go into the season without backup but we are trying to play the two of them together

ROK and JT both reported into Dean. It is a shame they have gone. If it was for personal reasons then fine, if they weren't happy that is Dean's responsibility

But the process for recruiting players is the right one imo

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, avfc1982am said:

Speak for yourself, I've never wanted to see 2 up top. It's no good having 2 strikers if what's behind them aren't creating. Everyone wanted CF cover and to replace KD and Wesley but I haven't seen many people say they wanted the 352 as our primary formation.

speaking for myself, and a lot of the fanbase on here. albeit particularly in our first season back in the PL, not so much last season in fairness, but there was definite calls for a partner for ollie when he had a dry patch last season

there are numerous formations that involve 2 up top...i never said anyone was calling for 352

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

speaking for myself, and a lot of the fanbase on here. albeit particularly in our first season back in the PL, not so much last season in fairness, but there was definite calls for a partner for ollie when he had a dry patch last season

there are numerous formations that involve 2 up top...i never said anyone was calling for 352

Agreed. 4-2-2-2, with Dougie and Nakamba in a double pivot with Emi and Bailey out wide, would probably get eaten alive in midfield but is an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I still think we switch back to 4-3-3, Bailey and Traore come back in and we have a strong 2nd half to the season.

I agree.

Under a new manager 😝

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I still think we switch back to 4-3-3, Bailey and Traore come back in and we have a strong 2nd half to the season.

Yes could do. For the moment I would drop one of Ings or Watkins and play a 4-3-3 with Buendia and Bailey out wide. If he keeps persisting with the Ings and Watkins partnership I dont think he will be here for the 2nd half of the season 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This Weekend 12 teams will play with more than 1 player up front.

my question is : is the system the main culprit or is it more latent criteria at play?....is the system, just too easy to blame?

personally, I have flaws in our play, irrespective of the system employed or whether we win or lose.

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, KentVillan said:

I agree the performances aren’t good, not trying to defend them, but I don’t think a lot needs fixing.

If I look through the team, I’m largely happy with Martinez, Cash, Konsa, Mings, Luiz, McGinn and what little we’ve seen of Bailey.

Targett and Buendia have been poor but we know they’re both capable of better.

Ramsey up and down… fine for his age, just a bit too much responsibility.

And then the Ings / Watkins thing seems to be making them both look worse than they are. This is the main problem isn’t it?

So it isn’t a massively complicated thing to fix, but it will mean benching one of our star strikers or playing them out of position.

Both will improve when they are played in the correct position. MT not a wingback and EB not a cam

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TRO said:

This Weekend 12 teams will play with more than 1 player up front.

my question is : is the system the main culprit or is it more latent criteria at play?....is the system, just too easy to blame?

I think when we switched from 352 to 433 we looked much better.  Our confidence was low after the first half and Wolves collapse and some people are well out of form like Ollie and Buendia but we looked better and that’s a guide for future games.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nick76 said:

I think when we switched from 352 to 433 we looked much better.  Our confidence was low after the first half and Wolves collapse and some people are well out of form like Ollie and Buendia but we looked better and that’s a guide for future games.

Nick, I will be quick to tell you.....I don't have the answer, I only have suspicions.

I accept we was better, in the second half, but was the system, just a cop out.....I saw players with a bit more of a spring in their step, was that down to a huge bollocking?.....was it down to players saying they didn't want to play that way and Dean giving in...was it down to Bailey instilling more belief, in to a disbelieving team?

I am just speculating....but there are more questions than answers for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I still think we switch back to 4-3-3, Bailey and Traore come back in and we have a strong 2nd half to the season.

same here...if anything it's a positive that has come out of the last few games that it's inevitable that we'll revert back to that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, PaulC said:

That is exactly what Dean Smith said and whilst i partially agree, Everton have shown today that they not that good and Man U are easy to play against. They give you time and space to play!, So i dont think you can use them results to say the system works. In any case we changed the system when Bailey came on against Everton.  

I don't think you can use the system in isolation to prove or disprove the situation....I just happen to think other criteria is at play too....but not sure what.

I don't favour 3-5-2 because I don't think the full backs are wing backs, or not good enough to play it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Oh I agree, we are completely speculating and it might not just be one thing it could be a mixture of many.  I think Axel isn’t working both as a player and the three were struggling to work together…a three might work but those three are struggling to play together.  Axel came out suddenly they were better.  Yes far from perfect but it felt more comfortable.  It also meant Cash and Targett who aren’t wingbacks at all played more natural positions and looked better.  We then with Bailey had more width upfront which made Arsenal think more defensively.  It also had the benefit that the space down the sides weren’t as free for them to roam forward without pressure.  

Obviously Bailey coming on helps because it adds creativity and speed whereas before we only had Buendia as a creative player and he’s struggling with form.  The 352 we’ve been playing is too defensive and brings teams onto us without us having an outlet, 433 freed us a bit.

The whole players speaking out and/or tantrums I’ll leave for others to speculate because we’ll unlikely never know and people will believe whatever they want anyway.  I can’t only comment on what I see on the pitch re matches.

The other theory is.....when a team is 3-0 up do they inadvertently take their foot off the gas.....and we was able to get more of a footing in game, albeit consolation.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, villa4europe said:

Buendia missed the Chelsea game thanks to international duty which is when we made the change in formation, he's been fit but not in form, you could question form being his fitness based on his pre season injury

Traore and Bailey have been battling injuries all season hence why neither have them have started a game yet, there's a misunderstanding between fit enough for the bench and fit enough to start

El Ghazi is better than 5 at the back but he's good enough, the stubbornness is believing that Watkins and ings is better than el ghazi

Bidace I dunno why he's not had some minutes 

At full stength we won't play 5-3-2

Ings and Watkins have in the past shown they are formidable exponents of forward play.....and if they came up for grabs, we would have many suitors.

Arguably amongst our most marketable players.....do they look a partnership, like many others we could all mention, no......but is that down to the malfunction of other parts of the team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, TRO said:

I don't think you can use the system in isolation to prove or disprove the situation....I just happen to think other criteria is at play too....but not sure what.

I don't favour 3-5-2 because I don't think the full backs are wing backs, or not good enough to play it.

So do I but you have to play to your strengths. Brian Little favoured that formation and it worked for him but we had two strikers that complimented each other  and we were a team. I agree theres so much wrong at the moment and that has to point at the manager and the coching. We're ok when teams give us time on the ball  but if a team plays with any intensity, we cant keep the ball. Teams have us figured out and so we need to change something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â