Vojskovoda Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 I'd say our defence in general and as a unit is much better than Spurs' defence. King and Woodgate both are vastly overrated, Laursen shitted all over both of them. Even when you spent the majority of time in our half in the second-half you still couldn't break us down and you only managed one goal from a possibility of quite a lot. If we didn't have 'anything special' we wouldn't have the second best defence in the league. Spurs' defence has always had a weak mentality, it doesn't matter if you have King or Woodgate playing or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colleh Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Friedel has had to make more saves than any other GK in the Prem and by quite a distance. What the? Joey, how do you like these apples? Goalkeepers Team Saves Saves/shots Green West Ham 53 70% Jaaskelainen Bolton 53 67% Jensen Burnley 51 68% Friedel Aston Villa 47 78% Sorensen Stoke 47 78% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vojskovoda Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 joey55: I just hope Dawson plays, I really do! You must be chuffed. He still looked average defensively. Cuellar > Dawson (and every Spurs central-defender for that matter lol). When fit they are in a different league to anything you have. Typical Spurs fan Can talk the talk but his team can't walk the walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daft Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 True, Spurs certainly pushed us back in the second half, but how many clear cut chances did they have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 29, 2009 Moderator Share Posted November 29, 2009 When fit they are in a different league to anything you have. Trouble is for you that neither of them are ever actually fit are they so talking about them being better than our players when fit is a little pointless. Woodgate and King get patched up now and again and manage a few games then break down or get a fresh injury, neither can play every game, neither can perform consistently and neither can even train on a regular basis. The pair of them are on borrowed time in their careers and as such I wouldn't swap any of our 4 CB's for either of those two. In fact I wouldn't swap your full backs or keepers for ours either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey55 Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Friedel has had to make more saves than any other GK in the Prem and by quite a distance. What the? Joey, how do you like these apples? Goalkeepers Team Saves Saves/shots Green West Ham 53 70% Jaaskelainen Bolton 53 67% Jensen Burnley 51 68% Friedel Aston Villa 47 78% Sorensen Stoke 47 78% Well i got the stats from here: http://football.stats.com/Premier League/player_leaders.asp?category=105 Says Friedel has made 67 saves, which is 9 more than the next GK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMFy Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 I have noticed that recently Villa fans have started talking about their great defence. I think you have decent defenders, but nothing special. Come the end of the season i doubt you'll have conceded significantly less than us, or maybe even more. Villa's defence are currently the third best in the league, conceding 27% less goals than Spuds. I think because you've had quite a few clean sheets, it's brought attention to the defence and given them more credit than they deserve. It's not the clean sheets we rave about, it's the fact that the opposition rarely score more than once past us. See Chelsea, Liverpool, Yourself, Citeh. Besides, we haven't had a clean sheet in the league since 19th September against Portsmouth. In our games since, we have conceded 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1. Please do not speculate and present myths as facts, it's embarrassing. Friedel has had to make more saves than any other GK in the Prem and by quite a distance. No he hasn't. It doesn't make much sense that your defenders are that good, if you keeper is having to save you so often. Richard Dunne and Collins can't suddenly have turned into top class defenders because they are now wearing Villa shirts. Watch them, they are better statistically and skilfully than your Spuds back line. I've always thought they are pretty good, but I've read about you having better defenders than us a few times on this board and I'm not convinced. I think Friedel is a great GK. We almost always have a better defensive record than Spuds come the end of the season. But I think the main difference is that Leds and Woody have injury problems. When fit they are in a different league to anything you have. My balls, your chin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 But I think the main difference is that Leds and Woody have injury problems. When fit they are in a different league to anything you have. The reason they are at Spurs is probably because they have injury problems. Woodgate would still be at Real Madrid or Newcastle if he hadn’t injuries or refuelling problems. Maybe King would have moved to Arsenal if he had stayed fit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabby15 Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 joey55: I just hope Dawson plays, I really do! You must be chuffed. He still looked average defensively. Cuellar > Dawson (and every Spurs central-defender for that matter lol). When fit they are in a different league to anything you have. Typical Spurs fan Can talk the talk but his team can't walk the walk. I really do think all of their fans are retarded. Not one of them seems capable of having a reasoned, balanced discussion without constantly claiming everything about Spurs is superior Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey55 Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 I have noticed that recently Villa fans have started talking about their great defence. I think you have decent defenders, but nothing special. Come the end of the season i doubt you'll have conceded significantly less than us, or maybe even more. Villa's defence are currently the third best in the league, conceding 27% less goals than Spuds. I think because you've had quite a few clean sheets, it's brought attention to the defence and given them more credit than they deserve. It's not the clean sheets we rave about, it's the fact that the opposition rarely score more than once past us. See Chelsea, Liverpool, Yourself, Citeh. Besides, we haven't had a clean sheet in the league since 19th September against Portsmouth. In our games since, we have conceded 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1. Please do not speculate and present myths as facts, it's embarrassing. Friedel has had to make more saves than any other GK in the Prem and by quite a distance. No he hasn't. It doesn't make much sense that your defenders are that good, if you keeper is having to save you so often. Richard Dunne and Collins can't suddenly have turned into top class defenders because they are now wearing Villa shirts. Watch them, they are better statistically and skilfully than your Spuds back line. I've always thought they are pretty good, but I've read about you having better defenders than us a few times on this board and I'm not convinced. I think Friedel is a great GK. We almost always have a better defensive record than Spuds come the end of the season. But I think the main difference is that Leds and Woody have injury problems. When fit they are in a different league to anything you have. My balls, your chin. I'm aware you've had a lot of clean sheets and have a better defensive record than us, but the point I'm making is that it isn't simply down to you having better defenders. Which ever stats you look at, Friedel has ahd to make more saves than a majority of Prem GK. There has to be a reason for that and it does show your good defensive record has a lot to do with the quality of Friedel. Also you seem to keep alot of men behind the ball. Thats makes it harder for you to score and harder for teams to score against you. But it also means your defenders have more protection. A quality GK and deep midfield is going to really help a team concede less goals and so it really isn't as simple as saying you have good defenders. If your midfield pressed higher up the pitch and the defence was more exposed, i'm not so sure you'd think they were so good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey55 Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 joey55: I just hope Dawson plays, I really do! You must be chuffed. He still looked average defensively. Cuellar > Dawson (and every Spurs central-defender for that matter lol). When fit they are in a different league to anything you have. Typical Spurs fan Can talk the talk but his team can't walk the walk. I really do think all of their fans are retarded. Not one of them seems capable of having a reasoned, balanced discussion without constantly claiming everything about Spurs is superior Come of it. I haven't said Spurs are superior. I've always been polite and respectful about Villa on this forum. I've raised a fair issue about the suppossed quality of you defenders. Because i support another team it seems you've all taken it as an attack on Villa rather than actually acknowledge the points I've made. You don't have to agree with them, but at least provide reasons, such as explaining why Friedel has had to make so many saves. Do the midfield sit deeper than most teams or not and does this make you harder to break down, thus meaning you defensive record has as much to do with that as the quality of your defenders? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Do the midfield sit deeper than most teams or not and does this make you harder to break down, thus meaning you defensive record has as much to do with that as the quality of your defenders? This doesn't make sense really. Sitting deeper would help defensively, yes. But surely the reason you don't sit as deep is because, as you put it, your defenders being "in another league" to ours means that they should be able to keep out the goals without the midfield help. Laughable really, King and Woodgate are crocks, the 'when fit' arguement is balls because they hardly ever are. It's not like they have great performances when they do play either. Bassong is the only CB I'd even really consider of yours. Dunne would walk into your side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMFy Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Joey55: Don't get me wrong mate, if Spuds had a great defence they would be a great team. They can produce the goods higher up the field, which is usually enough to see off the lower teams and should secure you European football. However, the defensive unit must play together, and that means the goalkeeper and the back line. For whatever reason, be it injuries or otherwise, they do not seem to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Im starting to feel Redknob has MON's number on a 1 to 1 basis. He always seems to do well against us weather it be for Spurs or Pompey. I haven't see a team dominate us like that for a half for ages, even when we were shit against Utd and Arse when they were at there peek, i dont remember getting out played like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Im starting to feel Redknob has MON's number on a 1 to 1 basis. He always seems to do well against us weather it be for Spurs or Pompey. I haven't see a team dominate us like that for a half for ages, even when we were shit against Utd and Arse when they were at there peek, i dont remember getting out played like that. I think they said MON has only beaten Redknapp once in 15 games or something. Though Redknapps record at VP is quite poor, oddly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Im starting to feel Redknob has MON's number on a 1 to 1 basis. He always seems to do well against us weather it be for Spurs or Pompey. I haven't see a team dominate us like that for a half for ages, even when we were shit against Utd and Arse when they were at there peek, i dont remember getting out played like that. I think they said MON has only beaten Redknapp once in 15 games or something. Though Redknapps record at VP is quite poor, oddly. Who said that? Sounds about right though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey55 Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Do the midfield sit deeper than most teams or not and does this make you harder to break down, thus meaning you defensive record has as much to do with that as the quality of your defenders? This doesn't make sense really. Sitting deeper would help defensively, yes. But surely the reason you don't sit as deep is because, as you put it, your defenders being "in another league" to ours means that they should be able to keep out the goals without the midfield help. Laughable really, King and Woodgate are crocks, the 'when fit' arguement is balls because they hardly ever are. It's not like they have great performances when they do play either. Bassong is the only CB I'd even really consider of yours. Dunne would walk into your side. I didn't say our defenders are in another league. I said Woody and Leds are. I'm aware they are hardly ever fit, but i can hardly comment on their performances when they aren't. This season and last, they've only played 20 times together, but in those games we've only condeded 17 goals, which is better than your current record, even though we play a much higher line. So they can keep out goals without the same level of help from midfield. But either way, there is little point discussing it further, as it seems most have taken my comments it as an attack on Villa. I haven't said you have bad defenders, but simply that maybe they aren't as good as you think or your defensive record suggests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAZZAM Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Woodgate and King are shit lol. does make me laugh the whole 'if' they were fit,look their **** renowned crocks pull the other one. ps. 'if' Laurson didnt retire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 ps. 'if' Laurson didnt retire. BAM there you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Showed yesterday they deserve to be up there, especially coming from a goal down as they certainly have'nt had that sort of resolve away from home in recent seasons. Can see them being like us last season, will be in contention to March/April and then I think they'll fall away as they have a hard run in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts