Ratings & Reactions: Villa v Wolves

[villalad21]

2 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I kind of agree with you on the principle, but oddly, we're the opposite - our character when we're up against it and in a fight is fantastic, we'll battle anyone, we're a terrier. Our problem is that we can't do it when everything is rosy.

We're a brilliant underdog with no idea how to relax, dominate and control games - the character I think is there - it's the movement, the bravery, confidence and ability on the ball that's missing.

 

Against the big teams there is no pressure though.

We are not expected to get anything in the first place. Players wouldn't feel the same pressure as home against Wolves.

[Peter Griffin]

2 hours ago, The Fun Factory said:

I just think it was a collective brain fart by the team.

I am not trying to be harsh on Ds or the team, but collective brain farts are not acceptable. The staff are all paid a ridiculous premium as they are the elite. At a certain level brain farts are just not allowed. They need to perform consistently at 100% for a full 90 minutes once or maybe twice a week. Less than that is not good enough

[Peter Griffin]

1 hour ago, villalad21 said:

Also we are not good to come back from losing positions.

 

That's an understatement 

[Peter Griffin]

1 hour ago, onmeedson said:

the total lack of leadership on the park

this

[TRO]

50 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I'm still baffled by it - sometimes when there's a comeback, you can see it coming - this wasn't coming - it just wasn't happening, there was no hint of it, no chance of it occurring.
Until it did.

I thought we edged the first half but it was pretty even, then McGinn grabbed the game by the scruff of the neck and we dominated from 45-80. 

I don't think the substitutes were the difference, I think it's a daft challenge by Ramsey at the end, but he initially brought us some energy through the middle and I thought showed signs that he'd be instrumental in a third for us - Nakamba gave us a bit of energy, but I don't think changed the game substantially. Luiz was tiring, but I think his good decision making and calmness on the ball could have been helpful if we'd gone with taking off one of the first two instead - Buendia had become less effective as the second half wore on and was struggling to get into the game. There's a case for Cash having to go off weakening us for the last ten - hopefully he's back for Arsenal.

I think the two keys for me are two things we did and one thing we didn't do - both of them come down to mentality.

My timing might be out on this, but there were two scuffed clearances from Mings, one after our second goal and one after their first, both of which were sliced into the air - they looked anxious and nervy and it seemed like the rest of the side took their keys from that and followed from the skipper - a sort of collective decision that if Tyrone was nervous we should be nervous too. Little things, but they affected the mood I thought. It's important we have people on the pitch and on the sideline that can change that.

The other one was our inability to keep the ball, we'd not been great at it during the game with our success largely coming from McGinn running it out from the back and longer balls down the channels for the forwards or McGinn to chase - at the end what we really needed was to get into positions where we were passing the ball around at the back and in midfield and just taking the sting out of things - we're absolutely awful at that and it's something we really need to work at - instead the balls into the channels were a bit scrappy and we'd just be giving the ball back. When McGinn and co tried to run it out they'd get caught. I'd love to see the possession numbers for that last ten minutes, I'm sure it'd be awful. Confident, calm possession without an immediate aim might not be our plan A, but as a plan B we really need to work at it - I watched Spurs do it yesterday and Newcastle didn't get near them, let alone threaten them in the last seven minutes of their game.

In the end, the goals we conceded were scrappy, but we'd invited the ball into our box and then looked nervous - it's still almost freakishly unlucky that there'd be three goals out of them, but y'know, that's football for you - and we've ended up making a great day out for the Wolves fans who certainly looked like they enjoyed it.

Even after the first goal I thought there was still no chance of it happening, I never really thought "here we go", at least not until the free kick at the end - at 2-2, I actually thought we were still the more likely winners - sadly, that's not something I think our players felt.

If we had that plan in place to control the ball, it brings some composure with it and that brings the confidence that would have stopped those goals happening - as it was, we hoofed and sliced and scampered up blind alleys and allowed our defence to become a little frantic. All we need is calm heads and a plan to keep the ball - it's not a massive change - I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel, just make sure it doesn't fall off when we need to control things. 

 

So much of that I agree with, but this bit ,I don't:.....something was coming, well I could see it anyway..

I didn't see the scoreline coming, but I saw trouble coming and you described it well in the second highlighted paragraph.....sloppy play invited them back in.....we surrendered the initiative, once again.....I turned to the guy sitting next to me on c75 minutes and said I think we are in trouble, if we don't get a grip of the ball....

They sniffed blood from the shabby play you eloquently mentioned and then they steamrollered us.....I've seen Burnley do it and when it happens, we seem like conceding with every raid, they simply bully us in to floundering with the ball and then the slightest touch is all it needs.....its quite Damning really for a team in our position......If I was one of our players, I would be red faced, walking in this Morning to BMH.

Our inability to keep the ball is our achilles heel and it has been for too long....it needs to be fixed.

I also think you are spot on, with your comments on mentality.....we need some more players with real Character, Leaders to turn to, in times like that.

 

 

[ferguson1]

I’ve been wound up since Saturday by my father in law, who is a Dog Head.  This is one of his better ones that did make me laugh. 
 

[rjw63]

4 minutes ago, ferguson1 said:

I’ve been wound up since Saturday by my father in law, who is a Dog Head.  This is one of his better ones that did make me laugh. 
 

Got to be honest, I'd have more than likely volleyed him in the jaw.

[ferguson1]

9 minutes ago, rjw63 said:

Got to be honest, I'd have more than likely volleyed him in the jaw.

He can have his moment mate, I still believe we’ll finish the season higher than them. 

[flashingqwerty]

On 16/10/2021 at 17:53, Farlz said:

Well if Buendia is asking to come off then I'm not blaming Smith at all for today

The game called for more than 'like for like' changes.  Manager should know his players well enough to be able to judge that.

[villalad21]

9 hours ago, flashingqwerty said:

The game called for more than 'like for like' changes.  Manager should know his players well enough to be able to judge that.

We all know he is very basic in his in game management. 

It is what it is. 

[TRO]

11 hours ago, flashingqwerty said:

The game called for more than 'like for like' changes.  Manager should know his players well enough to be able to judge that.

but I think thats all we have....like for like , no contrast.

I thought in the summer, we should have gone for Conor Gallagher, more energy than a power station.

[Bizzzle]

I am really the constant meme's I am being shown today at work about the game 

[PussEKatt]

4 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

seen a lot on here last few days, and i've not seen anyone say the wolves game was 'OK'...nor the spurs game frankly

with the others, its not that they were OK, it was that there were mitigating factors such as those you mentioned

Someone on this thread thought that tirdness from playing international football might have led to Martinez not being his usual self and it was DS himself that said that the defence switched off and he has to something about that ( he said the same thing after the Spurs game ) All I am trying to say is that on this thread people are willing to accept losing because of "mitigating circumstances"as you say.I am sure the supporters of the top teams in europe/the world dont say "it does not matter that we lost on saturday because Bill had a headache"

As far as our pre-season goes,the way I see it (and I could be wrong but this is my view ) all our first team players are seasoned proffesionals and none of them are playing their very first game in the PL, so all they need to do for pre-season is run around the paddock so they can last 90 minutes.Match fitness comes from playing competitive games and as far as playing games go,how many games Less than Watford/Brentford did we play ? 

[PussEKatt]

5 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Nobody likes losing, they just trying to look at the reasons why we lost. Doesn’t mean it was acceptable. 

Yes,I have already mentioned the "reasons"we lost.None of the reasons is because DS made the wrong lineup/substitutions.Or that our tacts were wrong or that our subs were wrong.FFS we were 2-0 up then Wolves scored,2-1 no big deal,then they scored again 2-2 thats 2 goals in about 6 minutes,they were on the front foot,they were attacking and most important they were scoring goals,so what was our answer to a team that has JUST scored 2 goals in 6 minutes and are still attacking...we still had 3 at the back and 2 up front.Lets not even consider taking 1 attacker off and putting another player on in defence/midfield.

As you say "Nobody likes losing"but it seems to me that every time we do lose its because of mitigating circumstances,NOT because of tactics/wrong players on the park or that the other team was better ( Chelsea put 3 past us but thats ok cause we played really well ) not one person said,we should not have conceeced 3 goals.No one said there is a problem with our defence or maybe we played the wrong tactics.No we played well,so its ok.

I tell you what.This might be a bit far fetched BUT if we get relegated,Im sure it will be ok because of mitigating circumstances.

[Vive_La_Villa]

4 minutes ago, PussEKatt said:

Yes,I have already mentioned the "reasons"we lost.None of the reasons is because DS made the wrong lineup/substitutions.Or that our tacts were wrong or that our subs were wrong.FFS we were 2-0 up then Wolves scored,2-1 no big deal,then they scored again 2-2 thats 2 goals in about 6 minutes,they were on the front foot,they were attacking and most important they were scoring goals,so what was our answer to a team that has JUST scored 2 goals in 6 minutes and are still attacking...we still had 3 at the back and 2 up front.Lets not even consider taking 1 attacker off and putting another player on in defence/midfield.

As you say "Nobody likes losing"but it seems to me that every time we do lose its because of mitigating circumstances,NOT because of tactics/wrong players on the park or that the other team was better ( Chelsea put 3 past us but thats ok cause we played really well ) not one person said,we should not have conceeced 3 goals.No one said there is a problem with our defence or maybe we played the wrong tactics.No we played well,so its ok.

I tell you what.This might be a bit far fetched BUT if we get relegated,Im sure it will be ok because of mitigating circumstances.

Yeh Smith has to be held accountable but all 3 substitutions were enforced. Surely you have to mention that if having a balanced discussion. Not a defence of Smith at all. Just a fact. 

[villalad21]

12 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Yeh Smith has to be held accountable but all 3 substitutions were enforced. Surely you have to mention that if having a balanced discussion. Not a defence of Smith at all. Just a fact. 

But he could have changed the shape and perhaps have brought some fresh attackers on instead of making 2 defensive subs which actually forced us further back and lost the initiative of the game.

And I have to say I am disappointed how little faith he's shown in Bidace. A player who has looked unbelievable every time I've watched him. 

Most of the time Smith just seem to make like for like subs. His in game management seem very basic at best.

Making defensive changes and trying to defend out a lead barely ever works. All you are doing is inviting the opposition into your own half. Giving them a chance.

Edited October 19, 2021 by villalad21

[Vive_La_Villa]

2 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

But he could have changed the shape and perhaps have brought some fresh attackers on instead of making 2 defensive subs which actually forced us further back and lost the initiative of the game.

And I have to say I am disappointed how little faith he's shown in Bidace. A player who has looked unbelievable every time I've watched him. 

Most of the time Smith just seem to make like for like subs. His in game management seem very basic at best.

Making defensive changes and trying to defend out a lead barely ever works. All you are doing is inviting the opposition into your own half. Giving them a chance.

See you just said he shouldn’t have made defensive changes and @PussEKatt said why didn’t he make more defensive changes.

Yet your both upset with Smith.  

 

[PussEKatt]

2 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Yeh Smith has to be held accountable but all 3 substitutions were enforced. Surely you have to mention that if having a balanced discussion. Not a defence of Smith at all. Just a fact. 

Taking that into account still doesent explain why when we were 2-2 and Wolves were on the front foot we didnt take 1 attacker off and shore up our midfield/defence.Also If Martinez and Doug were not 100% why did they even start ?We are supposed to play our strongest team.Last I heard that does NOT include players that are suffering from jet lag.especially when we have Doug and Steer.Yes,I know people will say that Steer is rubbish BUT he IS our backup GK and if we are afraid to use him then he should not be on the bench,the same goes for Nakimba.

I am not just holding DS accountable,I am questioning the attatude on this thread.IMHO people should be saying that its not acceptable to lose 0-2 to Watford in our first game,its not acceptable to draw with Brentford and its not acceptable to conceed 3 goals to Chelses.Most of all its not acceptable to be 13th and have 10 points from 8 games.Its not acceptable to have Wolves and Brentford above us on the table......Mind you if all the above IS acceptable then all I can say is that we are doing well and are in our rightful position of 13th

[villalad21]

1 minute ago, PussEKatt said:

Taking that into account still doesent explain why when we were 2-2 and Wolves were on the front foot we didnt take 1 attacker off and shore up our midfield/defence.Also If Martinez and Doug were not 100% why did they even start ?We are supposed to play our strongest team.Last I heard that does NOT include players that are suffering from jet lag.especially when we have Doug and Steer.Yes,I know people will say that Steer is rubbish BUT he IS our backup GK and if we are afraid to use him then he should not be on the bench,the same goes for Nakimba.

I am not just holding DS accountable,I am questioning the attatude on this thread.IMHO people should be saying that its not acceptable to lose 0-2 to Watford in our first game,its not acceptable to draw with Brentford and its not acceptable to conceed 3 goals to Chelses.Most of all its not acceptable to be 13th and have 10 points from 8 games.Its not acceptable to have Wolves and Brentford above us on the table......Mind you if all the above IS acceptable then all I can say is that we are doing well and are in our rightful position of 13th

I agree.

It's not even a Smith out or Smith in thing.

It's about fans lowering the standards. Driving the club forward comes from the top of the hierarchy but it also comes from the fans.

[PussEKatt]

2 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

See you just said he shouldn’t have made defensive changes and @PussEKatt said why didn’t he make more defensive changes.

Yet your both upset with Smith.  

 

We both said something different.Smith had 2 choices,attack and score more goals than the opposition ( seems unlikely as we gave Wolves all the incentive they needed to go on and win the game.Or put more bodies in defence/midfield and go for a draw.What did he actually do ? left everything as it was.