Ratings & Reactions: Villa v Chelsea

[nick76]

5 minutes ago, WallisFrizz said:

He clearly misses a certain £100 mil player who would get the ball into the box and create an absolute ton of chances for him. JG and Ollie were great together a lot of the time. I’m not sure we’d have taken to Ollie as much without Jack to create for him.

A very good point!  Maybe Jack made Ollie look better than he actually is.  Something I will ponder further as Yoda would say!

 

Edited December 26, 2021 by nick76

[pichichi]

Issue with Watkins is his lack of vision in final 3rd. Got into some really good positions tonight where he could’ve laid off a pass to Ings (2 occasions i can think of) that probably would’ve created a scoring opportunity but he just doesn’t have the awareness of what’s around him. Hopefully this is something the coaching team can work on as at the moment it’s blunting the attack. 

[OutByEaster?]

Not having this one as a plucky performance against a big side, not having that we put in a performance, or gave a good account of ourselves, or any of those nice things - we deserved more out of this game and I'm gutted.

First half we were the better side; they struggled to deal with our shape and running, we had time at the back and played the ball around confidently and we got it out wide well and through the middle well, if Ings had shot first time, or Buendia had taken his chance, we'd have deservedly gone in ahead at the interval. 

Tuchel then won the game at half time, changing the shape and bringing on a forward for a centre half - it meant with four in the middle they were much tighter on our full backs and had another body in and amongst our defenders, it tightened the space for Mings and Luiz and lead to a second goal that they'd deserved through their start to the half.

But that period of twenty-five minutes after half time was the only time they were really on top in the game and it had late equaliser written all over it for the last ten minutes, we were all over them in that period, albeit without creating a really clear chance on goal. I couldn't see any other result coming except 2-2 and we'd have thoroughly deserved it.

I guess that's the advantage that having a £98m substitute gives you.

I thought Luiz was superb, especially in the first half when he recycled the ball better than Kante and passed it better than Jorginho, the sixty yard ball he played on the volley to Watkins on 19 minutes was worth the ticket price on its own. This formation really suits him, we've gone from having one full time holding midfielder to having three midfielders who all play slightly deeper - three half-holders* - they share the defensive stuff but can push forward a bit - he's blossoming in this shape.

Mings was Jekyll and Hyde, he was imperious in the first half, calm, confident and composed, then rattled in the second half by someone who could match him physically. Jittery, in two minds and hasty in possession. He's never at his best when he's against someone that's bigger and stronger than he is - thankfully there aren't many of those about.

I thought Martinez made a couple of really good saves in the second half and that Cash was excellent throughout, Konsa looked composed and Targett battled well with Reece James, Sanson looked decent enough and there's plenty of promise there while Jacob Ramsey continues to impress, Buendia worked his socks off and Watkins did okay, but Id sooner see him chasing through balls than trying to play them, Ings grafted a bit, but didn't look like doing more than that. Traore brought something to the game, Chukwuemeka got in good positions and did things that didn't come off and El Ghazi gives you a gamblers chance at the end of games like this with his keenness to shoot.

Overall, I thought we played really well, more than matched one of the three quality teams in this league and came out unlucky - we deserved more and we looked like a team that know we can play at this level.

We're not far off it and we might have been a bit closer today.

*I didn't say triple pivot.

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, Tommo_b said:

Lukaku changed the game. 

I'd say Tuchel changed the game - he saw a tactical battle he was losing, took off a centre half and brought on a striker and changed the pattern of the game. Of course it helps when that striker is one of the best in the business.

[USA_Villa]

The second half was as bad a performance that I have seen for a while. Mings was shocking for the goal. Did he really expect to lever Lukaku out of the way for the goal? That's either a bad decision, lazy or being unwilling to put yourself where it might hurt. I expect better from our captain.

Edited December 26, 2021 by USA_Villa
Missed a word

[icouldtelltheworld]

1 hour ago, pacbuddies said:

Gerrard has his work cut out sorting out the mess Smith left him. Looks like DS is now working his special magic on Norwich!

Stay classy mate

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, tonyh29 said:

thought Doug was the best midfielder on the pitch today , was also impressed by JJ and Sanson … McGinn doesn’t get straight back in the team based on today , he has to earn it .

I think McGinn comes straight back in and Ings goes out with Ramsey pushing up into the position Watkins played today. 

[pacbuddies]

46 minutes ago, foreveryoung said:

He's still a bit upset obviously 

He was clearly in bed with Smith

[icouldtelltheworld]

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

Well, yeah. We won't, for reasons of finance and practicality, but who'd be upset if we replaced any of those next season? Martinez is the only player we ought to really be desperate to keep at any cost, IMO

Utterly bizarre comment IMO

[hippo]

8 minutes ago, Condimentalist said:

Truly believe we may have taken something with him on the sidelines. Brings an intensity and game management that I'm not sure is there without him. 

I think it's guidance and a plan we need. We had the intensity for 25 minutes. But you can't keep that up against the better sides.

We seem to have less idea each time we play. A few moments of individual skill bag us the points against the minnows. 

[StefanAVFC]

4 minutes ago, pacbuddies said:

He was clearly in bed with Smith

Class that. Witty as anything!

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, foreveryoung said:

They were missing Kante, one of the best midfielders in world football, Ziyech, Werner, Kavez, Havertz, Chalobah, Chillwell.

Two of those played, one was on the bench and I'm not sure who Kavez is.

[Davkaus]

5 minutes ago, icouldtelltheworld said:

Utterly bizarre comment IMO

What's bizarre about it? I was replying to a post on the topic of any of our players being replaceable. Of course they are. We have a bang average squad, capable of finishing midtable. There is precisely one really, really good player in the team. I'm not saying we need to replace the whole squad, but yes, all of the others are absolutely replacable, have their price, and I wouldn't be upset if we tried to upgrade on them. Pretty much every team south of 4th place is in a similar position, of course, and it's a question of value for money and which positions you can get away with "ok" players with the right quality around them.

[USA_Villa]

I've come to realize that Villa having a lot less possession will be the new norm, whether I like it or not. We are going to be more of a counter attacking, but 31% possession at home is not what I was hoping for, even if it was against Chelsea.

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, Paul33 said:

Just from observation of body language and interaction on the pitch, I would be completely confident in saying that Ollie is not happy sharing attacking duties with Ings. He clearly prefers the freedom to play anywhere across the front and without the need to have to consider where Ings is. 

He's not effective in midfield and you get the feeling he knows it. 

This for me is a Highlander partnership.

 

[VillaChris]

23 minutes ago, Condimentalist said:

Truly believe we may have taken something with him on the sidelines. Brings an intensity and game management that I'm not sure is there without him. 

He'd certainly have clocked how passive we were start of second half. Were just letting Chelsea pass it around for a good five minutes before the second goal. Might've put the double subs on a little earlier aswell.

[icouldtelltheworld]

4 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

What's bizarre about it? I was replying to a post on the topic of any of our players being replaceable. Of course they are. We have a bang average squad, capable of finishing midtable. There is precisely one really, really good player in the team. I'm not saying we need to replace the whole squad, but yes, all of the others are absolutely replacable, have their price, and I wouldn't be upset if we tried to upgrade on them. Pretty much every team south of 4th place is in a similar position, of course, and it's a question of value for money and which positions you can get away with "ok" players with the right quality around them.

Aye right.

In response to your original point, there's several of our first team squad I'd be disappointed to see moved on.

[VillaChris]

2 minutes ago, USA_Villa said:

I've come to realize that Villa having a lot less possession will be the new norm, whether I like it or not. We are going to be more of a counter attacking, but 31% possession at home is not what I was hoping for, even if it was against Chelsea.

Chelsea completely dominated second half, think first half would be a kinder view as we had spells when we knocked it around them nicely and created some good openings.

West Ham only had 36% possession defeating Chelsea 3-2 three weeks ago.

[Davkaus]

Great constructive discussion mate, cheers. 

[foreveryoung]

First half we looked sharp with our passing, quick and precise. Second half we were walking in our own half passing it around with no intensity. I realise we was probably getting tired, but Stevie would have brought the passion to push a bit more. I didn't hear much from the sidelines today at all.