Unai Emery

[thejoker]

We need some Unai content! No sit down interview when the team were away training. Seems like we haven’t heard from him in ages. I guess it’ll be the Liverpool press conference tomorrow? 

[ozvillafan]

11 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I had a dream that we lost 4 in a row including a defeat to the worst team in the league at home 2-0. We had 3 goals disallowed by VAR. Nobody had turned on Emery yet but everyone was turning on the players. 

It's clear, then, what needs to happen....

... you are no longer allowed to sleep.

[IrishVilla10]

Really wish he went full strength in the EFl cup, if we had of beat United the teams left in the quarters bar city could have been an easy route to the final 

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, IrishVilla10 said:

Really wish he went full strength in the EFl cup, if we had of beat United the teams left in the quarters bar city could have been an easy route to the final 

You cant be anymore wrong. newcastle city utd leicester some really good sides left

Hopefully i good fa cup run

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

Should get his first Pre match press conference today surely?

[IrishVilla10]

2 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

You cant be anymore wrong. newcastle city utd leicester some really good sides left

Hopefully i good fa cup run

If we’d have beaten United it would have left City, Newcastle, Carlton, Southampton, Forrest, wolves and Leicester. So the point still stands, it could have been an easy draw to the final 

[Vive_La_Villa]

4 hours ago, IrishVilla10 said:

Really wish he went full strength in the EFl cup, if we had of beat United the teams left in the quarters bar city could have been an easy route to the final 

You mean you wish Emi played ?

[Nigel]

10 hours ago, Tomaszk said:

Rattled me a bit we lost to Everton. They're going down.

Being behind closed doors means the score is not important, we could have been asking our players to hop on one leg all game for all we know.

[DaveAV1]

30 minutes ago, Nigel said:

Being behind closed doors means the score is not important, we could have been asking our players to hop on one leg all game for all we know.

Ah the old 4 4  1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 set up. 

[mjmooney]

On 14/12/2022 at 17:11, MWARLEY2 said:

2-3-5 defo died !!!

2-3-5 never really existed. I started watching football in the early 1960s, and, sure, team diagrams would often show the formation as that 'W' pattern. But in practice, the so-called 'centre half' was always a central defender, rather than a midfielder (much more of a '5' than a '6'). The 'inside forwards' were really midfielders, rather than being up level with the centre forward and wingers, as the diagrams would suggest. The nominal 2-3-5 was almost always a 3-4-3 in reality. No team was ever going to try to defend against five forwards with only two defenders. 

If you haven't read it, this is highly recommended: 

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, IrishVilla10 said:

If we’d have beaten United it would have left City, Newcastle, Carlton, Southampton, Forrest, wolves and Leicester. So the point still stands, it could have been an easy draw to the final 

I still maintain even if we beat utd the teams in it still make it difficult to win it.

Not many easy teams in there.

[IrishVilla10]

39 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I still maintain even if we beat utd the teams in it still make it difficult to win it.

Not many easy teams in there.

United have drawn charlton, and could possibly face either wolves, Forrest, Leicester or Southampton to get to the final. You’re rarely going to get an easier draw

[Demitri_C]

24 minutes ago, IrishVilla10 said:

United have drawn charlton, and could possibly face either wolves, Forrest, Leicester or Southampton to get to the final. You’re rarely going to get an easier draw

Yeah but your making out as if we get kind drews i bet we would have got newcastle  or city away had we beaten utd! 

Hopefully we have a good fa cup run this year

[AntrimBlack]

1 hour ago, mjmooney said:

2-3-5 never really existed. I started watching football in the early 1960s, and, sure, team diagrams would often show the formation as that 'W' pattern. But in practice, the so-called 'centre half' was always a central defender, rather than a midfielder (much more of a '5' than a '6'). The 'inside forwards' were really midfielders, rather than being up level with the centre forward and wingers, as the diagrams would suggest. The nominal 2-3-5 was almost always a 3-4-3 in reality. No team was ever going to try to defend against five forwards with only two defenders. 

If you haven't read it, this is highly recommended: 

Well, I played Left Half (left midfield) in the fifties, in a definite 1-2-3-5. Amateur of course. I also played the same position and same configuration in hockey. In my experience it was prevalent at that time.

But I am probably a lot older than you and played at a lower standard. And I realise you are referencing the sixties.

[mjmooney]

1 hour ago, AntrimBlack said:

Well, I played Left Half (left midfield) in the fifties, in a definite 1-2-3-5. Amateur of course. I also played the same position and same configuration in hockey. In my experience it was prevalent at that time.

But I am probably a lot older than you and played at a lower standard. And I realise you are referencing the sixties.

Thanks, interesting. But didn't you find that, in practice, the centre half played deeper than the two half backs, and the inside forwards deeper than the wingers? 

Edited December 23, 2022 by mjmooney

[TRO]

2 hours ago, mjmooney said:

2-3-5 never really existed. I started watching football in the early 1960s, and, sure, team diagrams would often show the formation as that 'W' pattern. But in practice, the so-called 'centre half' was always a central defender, rather than a midfielder (much more of a '5' than a '6'). The 'inside forwards' were really midfielders, rather than being up level with the centre forward and wingers, as the diagrams would suggest. The nominal 2-3-5 was almost always a 3-4-3 in reality. No team was ever going to try to defend against five forwards with only two defenders. 

If you haven't read it, this is highly recommended: 

I have never ignored tactics, but I am more interested in players having a good game individually and contributing to the team performance.

The Intensity, Workrate, and desire allied to the inherent talent, is what, I look for.

I don't know what UE's time with us will produce, but I suspect, he is well aware of what is expected from each position.....and then collectively.

That is another thing.....I think we should look at a position in the team to strengthen, and find a player to fit it..........not the other way around.

I think UE will do all of that, but I am not sure, it was done in the past.

It was clear to me in the late 70's early 80's thats what we did.

[mjmooney]

2 minutes ago, TRO said:

That is another thing.....I think we should look at a position in the team to strengthen, and find a player to fit it..........not the other way around.

I agree with that... to an extent. There's no point in signing - say - the four greatest left backs in the world, at the expense of other positions. But we also do need to take tactics and formations into account, and that's why I'd be looking at players with the intelligence to respond to changing circumstances within a game. Ashley Young is a shining example of combining experience with versatility - he can do different jobs when it's required (albeit he's near the end of his career). 

[TRO]

1 hour ago, mjmooney said:

I agree with that... to an extent. There's no point in signing - say - the four greatest left backs in the world, at the expense of other positions. But we also do need to take tactics and formations into account, and that's why I'd be looking at players with the intelligence to respond to changing circumstances within a game. Ashley Young is a shining example of combining experience with versatility - he can do different jobs when it's required (albeit he's near the end of his career). 

I agree with you, too.

Players with the amount of attributes closest to being the complete player in that position, is what I meant.....players with limited attributes, need to be replaced with players who have more.

As a team, we have too many gaps in our abilities.....as an example...in the 2019/2020 season we had one of the worst records for scoring headed goals, most of the top teams had the best...These are facts we can do without.

Now I am not saying, we have to go over board, but we do need to sign players, who can give us something in the area's, we are weak, is my point....to make us more complete as a side.

I believe Unai Emery will be well aware of that.

I felt, for sometime, that whilst our players are good....in terms of attributes, too samey, not enough contrast to fulfil the teams needs.

 

 

Edited December 23, 2022 by TRO

[AntrimBlack]

4 hours ago, mjmooney said:

Thanks, interesting. But didn't you find that, in practice, the centre half played deeper than the two half backs, and the inside forwards deeper than the wingers? 

No, not that I remember. It was completely rigid. And my recollection, could easily be wrong though, was that in the Fifties the professional teams were playing a rigid 1-2-3-5. 

 

[Villan_of_oz]

Good press conference, he's articulate yet he says what he thinks. He answered questions regarding Emi's celebration antics and Xmas day training carefully but with a straight bat.

What ever becomes of his tenure, I find it hard to comprehend how I could ever feel about Unai, the way I felt about the previous regime and it's end.