Ratings & Reactions: Villa v Wolves

[Vive_La_Villa]

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

Fwiw in my opinion it’s not acceptable to lose 3-2 to Watford.   It’s acceptable to draw 1-1 to Brentford when you have half a team missing. It’s not acceptable to concede 3 to Chelsea but it highlighted that we needed a new second goalie.
 

The wolves defeat was not acceptable. Nobody will say it was. Smith has a very tough job on his hands. If recent form continues and we get dragged in to a relegation battle by end of year many Villa fans will probably get what they want and he’ll be replaced.  But at the moment that hasn’t happened so let’s see where we go from here.   

[foreveryoung]

1 hour 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.

Sounds like your talking about Southgate and England. 

[nick76]

1 hour 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.

What subs would you have made and change in formation considering Luiz and Buendia had to come off on the 67th and 74th minute?  I’m struggling to think of bringing on players replacing them to change formation at that stage.  As both are midfielders taking one of them off for AEG or Bidace would severely impact our central midfield.  So the choices were always really Nakamba, Ramsey and Sanson weren’t they?

When Cashy went off on the 79th minute, maybe then instead of bringing Young on then bring on an attacker and revert to 433 with Konsa moving to RB.

In hindsight it seems if we had made an attacking change on top of Ramsey and Nakamba coming on then we could’ve been in a bad place and down to 10 men if a few minutes later Cashy had to go off and we had no more replacements because we’d used three subs already.

So the only part I can see go more attacking is the 79th minute in replacing Cash and instead of Young then an attacker.  

Given we were fairly comfortable at 2-0 with 10 minutes of normal time left it’s fairly reasonable not to go on the attack by most managers and open the game up.  

Those substitutions shouldn’t have lost the game for us even though the players weren’t as good at Luiz and Buendia, they are still first team players.

Edited October 19, 2021 by nick76

[villalad21]

18 minutes ago, nick76 said:

What subs would you have made and change in formation considering Luiz and Buendia had to come off on the 67th and 74th minute?  I’m struggling to think of bringing on players replacing them to change formation at that stage.  As both are midfielders taking one of them off for AEG or Bidace would severely impact our central midfield.  So the choices were always really Nakamba, Ramsey and Sanson weren’t they?

When Cashy went off on the 79th minute, maybe then instead of bringing Young on then bring on an attacker and revert to 433 with Konsa moving to RB.

In hindsight it seems if we had made an attacking change on top of Ramsey and Nakamba coming on then we could’ve been in a bad place and down to 10 men if a few minutes later Cashy had to go off and we had no more replacements because we’d used three subs already.

So the only part I can see go more attacking is the 79th minute in replacing Cash and instead of Young then an attacker.  

Given we were fairly comfortable at 2-0 with 10 minutes of normal time left it’s fairly reasonable not to go on the attack by most managers and open the game up.  

Those substitutions shouldn’t have lost the game for us even though the players weren’t as good at Luiz and Buendia, they are still first team players.

I disagree with us being comfortable.

I never during any point felt comfortable during that game.

The amount of sloppy passing and lack of concentration I've seen the last 2 games has been alarming. If that keeps happening we will keep conceding preventable goals.

[nick76]

54 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

I disagree with us being comfortable.

I never during any point felt comfortable during that game.

The amount of sloppy passing and lack of concentration I've seen the last 2 games has been alarming. If that keeps happening we will keep conceding preventable goals.

Ok no problem we differ on that but I am genuinely interested on the substitution question we were discussing and in the above quote please? With Luiz and Buendia having to come off, with those coming off what would you have done re subs to be more attacking and maybe change the formation?  I’m just worried anything else would’ve left a big hole in central midfield if not for the subs that were actually done but I may have missed something.

At half time, me and the people around me where I sit in the Holte wanted Axel replaced by maybe somebody like Traore…an attacking player and move to 433 but once Luiz and Buendia needed to go off I think Deans hands were tied in who he could bring on without leaving a hole in central midfield.

Edited October 19, 2021 by nick76

[nick76]

1 minute ago, foreveryoung said:

If we get out played most can handle it. If we F**** up or play poorly which is probably 75% of our losses, it's a little bit harder to take, as you can be kinda frustrated we could have won the game and it's points thrown away, i.e Wolves. 

I’m the opposite, I’d be more concerned if we weren’t in the game and completely outplayed.  Being in the game means we are closer to where we need to be than being completely outplayed, we just need tweaks here and there and we won’t be losing as many.

[foreveryoung]

2 minutes ago, nick76 said:

I’m the opposite, I’d be more concerned if we weren’t in the game and completely outplayed.  Being in the game means we are closer to where we need to be than being completely outplayed, we just need tweaks here and there and we won’t be losing as many.

By being out played I mean, Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool will probably outplay us. Then we have to admit defeat that our team is just not good enough. 

[villalad21]

47 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Ok no problem we differ on that but I am genuinely interested on the substitution question we were discussing and in the above quote please? With Luiz and Buendia having to come off, with those coming off what would you have done re subs to be more attacking and maybe change the formation?  I’m just worried anything else would’ve left a big hole in central midfield if not for the subs that were actually done but I may have missed something.

At half time, me and the people around me where I sit in the Holte wanted Axel replaced by maybe somebody like Traore…an attacking player and move to 433 but once Luiz and Buendia needed to go off I think Deans hands were tied in who he could bring on without leaving a hole in central midfield.

You're putting me on the spot here. I'm not the manager. It's not my job to figure out the right changes. 

But fine you could move Tuanzebe to DM a position he has played in before. 

Ramsey on for Luiz to play as an 8 with Mcginn. 

Bidace and El Ghazi for Buendia and one of the strikers to fill in as wingers. 

Edited October 19, 2021 by villalad21

[nick76]

31 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

You're putting me on the spot here. I'm not the manager. It's not my job to figure out the right changes. 

But fine you could move Tuanzebe to DM a position he has played in before. 

Ramsey on for Luiz to play as an 8 with Mcginn. 

Bidace and El Ghazi for Buendia and one of the strikers to fill in as wingers. 

Thanks interesting to read.

Same as what we were saying at halftime in the ground but taking Axel off for Traore (happy with AEG or Bidace as well).  

I think the slight difference I wouldn’t have moved Axel in midfield.  I didn’t think he’s being playing well and when I’ve seen in DM I haven’t liked it so I was struggling and thought Deans actual subs were reasonable given Luiz and Buendia had to come off.  If one of them hadn’t have to come off I would’ve left them on and instead swapped Axel for Traore and gone 433.

I think we agree we should be playing 433 now.

[TRO]

4 hours 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.

but how many times do you see, other managers bring on defensive minded players in such circumstances.....I think he was right to do that, you just expect them to do their job, that is the issue for me.....no system to blame or personnel types, just players not doing their duty.

They let Dean down, from a group point of view.....I am sure he will remember this, well, in his future decisions.

Edited October 19, 2021 by TRO

[TRO]

2 hours ago, villalad21 said:

I disagree with us being comfortable.

I never during any point felt comfortable during that game.

The amount of sloppy passing and lack of concentration I've seen the last 2 games has been alarming. If that keeps happening we will keep conceding preventable goals.

I agree, I wasn't comfortable either, not based on being 2 goals up, where we should be comfortable, but the quality of our play, was iffy and lacked conviction...too much of our work was tentative, particularly after we scored the second.

[villalad21]

5 minutes ago, TRO said:

but how many times do you see, other managers bring on defensive minded players in such circumstances.....I think he was right to do that, you just expect them to do their job, that is the issue for me.....no system to blame or personnel, just players not doing their duty.

They let Dean down, from a group point of view.....I am sure he will remember this, well, in his future decisions.

The manager sets the mentality. You can't get around it. 

Chelsea had a similar issue under Lampard. They looked frail. 

Don't see that under Tuchel now. Do you? 

Edited October 19, 2021 by villalad21

[TRO]

10 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

The manager sets the mentality. You can't get around it. 

Chelsea had a similar issue under Lampard. They looked frail. 

Don't see that under Tuchel now. Do you? 

I am not arguing that point...He is responsible for that and maybe, just maybe, he has been a bit too respectful to them, in general....Dean is a very amiable guy ( to a fault maybe)

He may think different after that let down....we will see.

I can't ignore or dismiss that point you are making, but it can't be confirmed or denied, we can both only assume, what we want.

Dean has to get his team to bounce back, he does that and we can perhaps say, it was a figment of our imagination.

Look, He could be screaming blue murder at them behind the scenes, we simply don't know.

I think his team selection at Arsenal, could reflect just how he truly feels...it would not surprise me at all.

Edited October 19, 2021 by TRO

[villalad21]

5 minutes ago, TRO said:

I am not arguing that point...He is responsible for that and maybe, just maybe, he has been a bit too respectful to them, in general....Dean is a very amiable guy ( to a fault maybe)

He may think different after that let down....we will see.

I can't ignore or dismiss that point you are making, but it can't be confirmed or denied, we can both only assume, what we want.

Dean has to get his team to bounce back, he does that and we can perhaps say, it was a figment of our imagination.

Look, He could be screaming blue murder at them behind the scenes, we simply don't know.

I think his team selection at Arsenal, could reflect just how he truly feels...it would not surprise me at all.

Of course it's fixable but I'm sure some Chelsea fans said the same thing under Lampard too.

My fear is this soft underbelly will always be there in the mist, lurking.

Reason being this is not a new thing. It's been there since the day he took charge.

It always seem to creep back. I hope you are right and he is able to fix it, nothing would be better but I've seen the same issues since the day he took charge and it makes it very hard for me to have complete faith in him.

I know it sounds negative but it's just how I feel.

Edited October 19, 2021 by villalad21

[nick76]

9 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

The manager sets the mentality. You can't get around it. 

Chelsea had a similar issue under Lampard. They looked frail. 

Don't see that under Tuchel now. Do you? 

(This isn’t me comparing to Smith at all)

I’m not 100% in agreement re Tuchel yet.  I’m not ready to put him in the Klopp/Guardiola category.  Yes he won the Champions League with Chelsea but so did Di Matteo.  I think Tuchel is a fantastic manager but….

I would just like to see a full season or more with Chelsea before I can put him on the Klopp/Guardiola level and to your point, recent games I’m seeing bit unsureness in games.  In the last four games for example, Man City and Juventus loses and how Brentford didn’t get a draw last game I don’t know.  Brentford at the end were all over Chelsea and deserved a draw and Chelsea were only saved by Mendy and pure luck.  Chelsea’s outfield players at the end were poor and mentally not elite in able to see out the game.  They did see out the game though but as I said that was Mendy and luck, their defence and midfield almost imploded as we did against Wolves.  So three of the last four games I’ve seen cracks.  Let’s see how they get on over a longer period.

[villalad21]

1 minute ago, nick76 said:

(This isn’t me comparing to Smith at all)

I’m not 100% in agreement re Tuchel yet.  I’m not ready to put him in the Klopp/Guardiola category.  Yes he won the Champions League with Chelsea but so did Di Matteo.  I think Tuchel is a fantastic manager but….

I would just like to see a full season or more with Chelsea before I can put him on the Klopp/Guardiola level and to your point, recent games I’m seeing bit unsureness in games.  In the last four games for example, Man City and Juventus loses and how Brentford didn’t get a draw last game I don’t know.  Brentford at the end were all over Chelsea and deserved a draw and Chelsea were only saved by Mendy and pure luck.  Chelsea’s outfield players at the end were poor and mentally not elite in able to see out the game.  They did see out the game though but as I said that was Mendy and luck, their defence and midfield almost imploded as we did against Wolves.  So three of the last four games I’ve seen cracks.  Let’s see how they get on over a longer period.

It's just night and day when I watch them.

Under Lampard they looked like conceding every time the opposition team entered their half.

Now it's like. I don't know how to explain it. They just don't concede goals.

[nick76]

10 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Of course it's fixable but I'm sure some Chelsea fans said the same thing under Lampard too.

My fear is this soft underbelly will always be there in the mist, lurking.

Reason being this is not a new thing. It's been there since the day he took charge.

It always seem to creep back. I hope you are right and he is able to fix it, nothing would be better but I've seen the same issues since the day he took charge and it makes it very hard for me to have complete faith in him.

I know it sounds negative but it's just how I feel.

I don’t quite agree but let’s take it your right, despite that issue the team keeps progressing even going from 35 points to 55 points last season.  In anybody’s book that is impressive.  Our clean sheet record was really impressive last season so we weren’t as soft and while we’ve started slow this season it’s still early.

Edited October 19, 2021 by nick76

[villalad21]

10 minutes ago, nick76 said:

I don’t quite agree but let’s take it your right, despite that issue the team keeps progressing even going from 35 points to 55 points last season.  In anybody’s book that is impressive.  Our clean sheet record was really impressive last season and while we’ve started slow this season it’s still early.

It indeed is.

But things are a little alarming right now which is why things are being questioned.

What is bugging me the most is our incredibly sloppy passing. I honestly can't believe how cheaply we are losing the ball and our inability to keep hold of it.

Watched Man City today and it's incredible how easy they make the game look.

Edited October 19, 2021 by villalad21

[TRO]

6 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Of course it's fixable but I'm sure some Chelsea fans said the same thing under Lampard too.

My fear is this soft underbelly will always be there in the mist, lurking.

Reason being this is not a new thing. It's been there since the day he took charge.

It always seem to creep back. I hope you are right and he is able to fix it, nothing would be better but I've seen the same issues since the day he took charge and it makes it very hard for me to have complete faith in him.

I know it sounds negative but it's just how I feel.

You are entitled to feel, how you do....and I too can empathise with it.

when I was managing, I know I was perhaps thought by my bosses a bit too easy going at times, because I gave folk a chance, I thought I could get the best out of them and more often than not, I was proved right.

However, lurking in my head in the background, was always Ian Flemings famous quote....first time is happenstance, second time is coincidence, third time is enemy action....It worked for me, it was a good benchmark to work to.

Sometimes you have to show the other side of your good nature......I hope Dean allows himself to do that, if he thinks its necessary.

[TRO]

4 hours ago, nick76 said:

What subs would you have made and change in formation considering Luiz and Buendia had to come off on the 67th and 74th minute?  I’m struggling to think of bringing on players replacing them to change formation at that stage.  As both are midfielders taking one of them off for AEG or Bidace would severely impact our central midfield.  So the choices were always really Nakamba, Ramsey and Sanson weren’t they?

When Cashy went off on the 79th minute, maybe then instead of bringing Young on then bring on an attacker and revert to 433 with Konsa moving to RB.

In hindsight it seems if we had made an attacking change on top of Ramsey and Nakamba coming on then we could’ve been in a bad place and down to 10 men if a few minutes later Cashy had to go off and we had no more replacements because we’d used three subs already.

So the only part I can see go more attacking is the 79th minute in replacing Cash and instead of Young then an attacker.  

Given we were fairly comfortable at 2-0 with 10 minutes of normal time left it’s fairly reasonable not to go on the attack by most managers and open the game up.  

Those substitutions shouldn’t have lost the game for us even though the players weren’t as good at Luiz and Buendia, they are still first team players.

Personally, Nick...I would have played Hause in leiu of Tuanzebe, for 3 reasons.

1. He would have extra motivation against his old club

2. I thought Raul would be playing and he is good in the air

3. I don't think in his last games he has done much wrong, maybe losing Son, but there was still others that could have helped.

I guess hindsight is an exact Science, but Hause would have played, in my eyes...as it turned out Axel was shaky, from the first few minutes.