Ratings & Reactions: Villa v Spurs

[TRO]

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

The mixed reaction to the performance reminds me of the Chelsea game at the start of the season, where we missed a bunch of chances, and got thumped 3-0, but some were keen to stress it was a good performance regardless and a sign of promising things to come. We know how that panned out.

I find it hard to say it was a good performance losing 0-4 at home and half the crowd walking out in disgust, so early in the game.

But after the first goal, they showed Character and worked hard to get back in....we talk about the contrast of the second half, but it was really just moments of shocking defending.

The result of this game hinged entirely on a few players, not the whole team.....their execution of fundamental play at both ends of the pitch, undone us.

Spurs just did their job......and we allowed them to do it.

but in terms of looking for positives, there was some good work by some of our players, nevertheless.

[TRO]

17 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Despite Konsa's poor defensive header, it has to be acknowledged that the ricochet was incredibly fortuitous for Tottenham, and have their goalkeeper to thank for staying in the game.

Conte knew that to get back in the game, Villa would need to play a high line, and he changed Tottenham's shape accordingly. 

It was only a matter of time that Spurs would add to their score and by the end I was glad it never got any worse than four.

With such bad luck and Konsa making two fatal errors in two consecutive matches, he might want to consult an exorcist.

Positional play is not always fortuitous, its more Nous of being in the right place at the right time......The like of Son, smell blood, thats football intelligence.

as Gary Player once said about work too.......The harder I work, the luckier, I get.

activity and postional sense.....pays dividends.

[PaulC]

3 hours ago, sheepyvillian said:

What about when the second goal went in ? We totally crumbled. The more players lack confidence and belief in their own ability, the more prone they are to making individual, costly errors.

 

I totally agree 

[PaulC]

3 hours ago, sheepyvillian said:

Let's be honest, the defence as a whole were simply woeful. Not one of them came out of that game with any credit . You can talk about systems till your blue in the face, but, for me, our two central defenders are not good enough to take this club into the top eight of the Premier League 

Yes I am beginning to think that myself. Yes I know we need a good strong CDM but when your two centre backs cant deal with long balls down the centre of the pitch then you know something is seriously wrong. Its good to play well for 30 minutes but when the final result is 0-4 theres isnt too many positives we can take. 

[TRO]

15 hours ago, avfc1982am said:

You don't have to have it, that's just my opinion. You can't say the players don't have the minerals for a battle when we bullied Spurs in the first half. Our problems go deeper than just being up for a battle. 

We didn't bully them....We was just quicker to the ball for a period in the game.

We lack stature/muscle to bully teams.....we showed urgency and intensity, sure and that in itself was a welcome change, but it petered out in the second half.....but their superior defending inc the keepers, and lady luck, negated us.

[avfc1982am]

51 minutes ago, TRO said:

We didn't bully them....We was just quicker to the ball for a period in the game.

We lack stature/muscle to bully teams.....we showed urgency and intensity, sure and that in itself was a welcome change, but it petered out in the second half.....but their superior defending inc the keepers, and lady luck, negated us.

We bullied them first half thats why they were rolling every 5 mins, not because we were just quicker but stronger in the challenge. Also size has nothing to do with being bullish or physical. Many a small man has dominated much larger - especially in football. 

[TRO]

53 minutes ago, avfc1982am said:

We bullied them first half thats why they were rolling every 5 mins, not because we were just quicker but stronger in the challenge. Also size has nothing to do with being bullish or physical. Many a small man has dominated much larger - especially in football. 

That rolling was gamesmanship.

but it does, have a relationship....Its easier to bully with stature than without it, and easier to be seen on the eye by officials, to just being you.....a smaller man has to make a point, of the challenge and Referee's pick up on that.

many a small man can dominate a larger version if the mental strength is there, sure......Vardy does it, Andy gray wasn't that big.....but generally speaking, its harder, for the smaller version, with such huge centre backs....huge for a reason.

Pep himself has commented on the stature of his team on occasion, making reference to stature...saying we need some bigger players.

and its easier to cut out high balls when height is in the team, you just cannot escape that fact.

Edited April 11, 2022 by TRO

[danceoftheshamen]

So having digested the game for a couple of days here's my take...

I thought in general play between the penatly area's in the first half we were actually really good, quite possibly the best I have seen us for many a year. Even the Spurs fans were silent (aside of course from the goal) as they knew they were being schooled for that half. The only song they mustered was "come on you spurs" as they were totally being out played.

I thought the first spurs goal was somewhat fortuitous as on virtually their only attack of the half, the ball rebounded freakishly right into their strikers path (albeit a good strike from Son). Other than that we completely dominated the whole half and should have had at least a goal if not two by half time. That I feel would have changed the game totally and forced them to open up more rather than have the ease of sitting in and countering us... a thing they excel at as we saw.

So the all important 1st goal is what killed us but despite this we should have gone in at least level...then it's a different game second half.

The second half was basically a master class from Spurs in how to counter attack at pace and literally every strike they had seemed to find the net low to Martinez' right (which appears to be his blind spot I have to say and I think Spurs knew it)

Our heads dropped and the scoreline took on an embarrassing look in the end.

It was our play in the penalty area's which disappointed me. Watkins & Ings were as they have been most of the season sadly & that's wasteful & sluggish. Neither look sharp, Ings you can understand to a point due to a lack of game time and Watkins is well, just Watkins.

Coutinho also was wasteful when shooting as were Ramsey & Cash all not capitalising on the chances they had albeit Cash & Ramsey's efforts being well saved though too close to their keeper.

On another day we win that game but Spurs are in irresistable form in front of goal at present & that was the main difference.

As for our defending mind..ahem 

 

 

 

Edited April 11, 2022 by danceoftheshamen

[Zatman]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

That rolling was gamesmanship.

but it does, have a relationship....Its easier to bully with stature than without it, and easier to be seen on the eye by officials, to just being you.....a smaller man has to make a point, of the challenge and Referee's pick up on that.

many a small man can dominate a larger version if the mental strength is there, sure......Vardy does it, Andy gray wasn't that big.....but generally speaking, its harder, for the smaller version, with such huge centre backs....huge for a reason.

Pep himself has commented on the stature of his team on occasion, making reference to stature...saying we need some bigger players.

and its easier to cut out high balls when height is in the team, you just cannot escape that fact.

Tell Matt Doherty it was gamesmanship

[OutByEaster?]

Spurs fan base seem to have decided we're the dirtiest team in the league and set about them like a bunch of rabid thugs from start to finish.

I do wonder about Spurs sometimes.

 

[Zatman]

40 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Spurs fan base seem to have decided we're the dirtiest team in the league and set about them like a bunch of rabid thugs from start to finish.

I do wonder about Spurs sometimes.

 

Arsenal and West Ham fans said similar as well

Interestingly our own fans think we are the weakest  

[TRO]

53 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Spurs fan base seem to have decided we're the dirtiest team in the league and set about them like a bunch of rabid thugs from start to finish.

I do wonder about Spurs sometimes.

 

We are anything, but that.

They need to re run Romero's assault on Digne after the ball had gone, to dislocate his shoulder.....bit rich that comment from them.

[danceoftheshamen]

7 hours ago, TRO said:

We are anything, but that.

They need to re run Romero's assault on Digne after the ball had gone, to dislocate his shoulder.....bit rich that comment from them.

I had a few choice word to Romero after that and he deffo heard me as he looked straight at me in the eyes. 

[VillaParkAvenue]

9 hours ago, Zatman said:

Arsenal and West Ham fans said similar as well

Interestingly our own fans think we are the weakest  

Did West Ham fans say that? I remember them kicking Villa players for 90 minutes, in the face and other places.

I don’t think Villa are weak by the way, fans just assume we’re soft when we give the ball away. More a lack of football skills than softness imo.

[Zatman]

1 hour ago, VillaParkAvenue said:

Did West Ham fans say that? I remember them kicking Villa players for 90 minutes, in the face and other places.

I don’t think Villa are weak by the way, fans just assume we’re soft when we give the ball away. More a lack of football skills than softness imo.

I think they had 2 players come off injured that game