The RJW63 Official Jack Grealish Appreciation Thread

[Stevo985]

3 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

Can you expand? Why?

Because Gary Rowett sides sit deep, focus on defence and are very direct. His sides are usually very hard to break down. He plays negative football.

So against a team like that, even with your best attackers, you're unlikely to create a lot of chances against them.

 

Take out your best attacking midfielder and it's obviously going to be even harder to break them down.
So given our first game without Grealish was against Stoke, ,it probably amplified his absence.

I'd wager we'll miss him less against Leeds, even though Leeds are better than Stoke, just because they're not so defensive.

[Cjay]

I do wonder if Grealish isnt available could that be the deciding factor?

Understand that we arent as negative as Stoke but also this season we have been far more stingy when it comes to conceding shooting chances.

We are the only side who concede on average less then 10 shots per game, whereas Stoke on average concede more shots per game (12.4) then they do have shots (11.7 with only 3 of those on target per game average).

Without Grealish they had more shots, conceded less shots.

Maybe without Jack winning free kicks, dragging defenders out of position, finding the Wingers and strikers, you struggle to create as much?

The Stoke game saw you concede quite a few more shots then usual on average and create less.

Perhaps for us that could be the key.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

44 minutes ago, Cjay said:

I do wonder if Grealish isnt available could that be the deciding factor?

Understand that we arent as negative as Stoke but also this season we have been far more stingy when it comes to conceding shooting chances.

We are the only side who concede on average less then 10 shots per game, whereas Stoke on average concede more shots per game (12.4) then they do have shots (11.7 with only 3 of those on target per game average).

Without Grealish they had more shots, conceded less shots.

Maybe without Jack winning free kicks, dragging defenders out of position, finding the Wingers and strikers, you struggle to create as much?

The Stoke game saw you concede quite a few more shots then usual on average and create less.

Perhaps for us that could be the key.

Good spot.

We can only hope we have someone ready to come in, OR a tweak in system.

I don't think we can be judged off of last performance though as conditions were horrendous and everyone seemed a bit off.

We are not a one man team anymore but Jack is certainly a vital cog.

We need someone who can replicate his play.

 

[Vive_La_Villa]

I don’t care who we play Jack is way to good for this league so we need him in the team ASAP.  He is the equivalent of Leeds losing Hernandez. In that time they managed something like 2 wins in 10.

He is crucial for us. 

[Cjay]

44 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Good spot.

We can only hope we have someone ready to come in, OR a tweak in system.

I don't think we can be judged off of last performance though as conditions were horrendous and everyone seemed a bit off.

We are not a one man team anymore but Jack is certainly a vital cog.

We need someone who can replicate his play.

 

Maybe Lansbury? 

Conditions were horrible tbf but they arent going to be unique this time of year, i doubt they'll be much better on Sunday. 

Was quite a big dip for you, didnt see the game but Stoke seemed the more threatening if stats are believed. 

You still have a very good front line, but without the main link man gives us hope, plus he seems your best player for retaining possession, could be vital in transition.

I'm hopeful.

[Cjay]

26 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I don’t care who we play Jack is way to good for this league so we need him in the team ASAP.  He is the equivalent of Leeds losing Hernandez. In that time they managed something like 2 wins in 10.

He is crucial for us. 

Something like that yeah.

But it wasnt so much not creating, which is what Hernandez does better then anyone in the league since he arrived. 

It was not scoring, just couldn't finish chances. 

We averaged 15 shots per game without him, but without Bamford and Roofe we just couldn't finish.

Cost us many points those games.

[Wainy316]

51 minutes ago, Cjay said:

Maybe Lansbury? 

Conditions were horrible tbf but they arent going to be unique this time of year, i doubt they'll be much better on Sunday. 

Was quite a big dip for you, didnt see the game but Stoke seemed the more threatening if stats are believed. 

You still have a very good front line, but without the main link man gives us hope, plus he seems your best player for retaining possession, could be vital in transition.

I'm hopeful.

Hoping it will be Lansbury yeah, rather than having Whelan dithering about with the ball in our own half.  That will allow Hourihane to revert to the deeper role.

[Dave-R]

2 hours ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Good spot.

We can only hope we have someone ready to come in, OR a tweak in system.

I don't think we can be judged off of last performance though as conditions were horrendous and everyone seemed a bit off.

We are not a one man team anymore but Jack is certainly a vital cog.

We need someone who can replicate his play.

 

Well we've got a Grealish, we've got a Mcginn, so how about we go for a Grealish/Mcginn combo, surely there's a player out there that can pull it off..

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

4 hours ago, Dave-R said:

Well we've got a Grealish, we've got a Mcginn, so how about we go for a Grealish/Mcginn combo, surely there's a player out there that can pull it off..

Who does Superman play for?

[Dave-R]

4 hours ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Who does Superman play for?

Smallville?? but they call it a game of football where for most of the game there ball is actually in there hands for 90% of the match, doesn't make sense does it??

[Tomaszk]

In the gym today at the training ground.

Think he'll miss Sunday which would be the right move if he isn't fit.

[Vive_La_Villa]

So I hear he has a shin injury. Anything to do with wearing kids size shin pads!!

[Nigel]

7 hours ago, Tomaszk said:

In the gym today at the training ground.

Think he'll miss Sunday which would be the right move if he isn't fit.

As long as it's not a long term (or worse unknown) injury im fine with that!

The fear was missing the Christmas onslaught.

Edited December 20, 2018 by Nigel

[privateer]

On 14/12/2018 at 02:09, Dave-R said:

Wont wear proper ones will he though, says it restricts his movements so much. Refs keep warning him.

Whats this Jack's first injury for him this season, not doing to bad for a player fouled nearly 100 times..

They should make him wear wicket keeper's pads 24x7 for the time he's out of training. When he comes back, regular shin pads will feel like woven dragonfly wings.

[A'Villan]

On 20/12/2018 at 01:15, Cjay said:

Maybe Lansbury? 

Conditions were horrible tbf but they arent going to be unique this time of year, i doubt they'll be much better on Sunday. 

Was quite a big dip for you, didnt see the game but Stoke seemed the more threatening if stats are believed. 

You still have a very good front line, but without the main link man gives us hope, plus he seems your best player for retaining possession, could be vital in transition.

I'm hopeful.

I'm not trying to take a shot at your optimism for the sake of it when I say that we dominated Stoke in the 2nd half and that I think 2 very poor efforts from our full backs has seen us concede two goals that otherwise wouldn't have been. Yes Stoke were very much on top of us early in the first half, so there was some balance in who had control of the game.

Our build up play was actually quite impressive considering there was no Grealish. If you like your stats then we had 57% possession, 500 odd passes and a pass completion rate of 80%.

Stoke are no mugs. They have Ince, Berahino, Williams, Shawcross, Butland, McClean and Allen all who can be very impressive on their day.

I imagine Bielsa will have taken some notes about how we played against Stoke without Grealish but I still think we're in for a heavily contested game.

[Cjay]

38 minutes ago, A'Villan said:

I'm not trying to take a shot at your optimism for the sake of it when I say that we dominated Stoke in the 2nd half and that I think 2 very poor efforts from our full backs has seen us concede two goals that otherwise wouldn't have been. Yes Stoke were very much on top of us early in the first half, so there was some balance in who had control of the game.

Our build up play was actually quite impressive considering there was no Grealish. If you like your stats then we had 57% possession, 500 odd passes and a pass completion rate of 80%.

Stoke are no mugs. They have Ince, Berahino, Williams, Shawcross, Butland, McClean and Allen all who can be very impressive on their day.

I imagine Bielsa will have taken some notes about how we played against Stoke without Grealish but I still think we're in for a heavily contested game.

Fair enough mate you can give a balanced view of the game (from a Villa perspective) i can only look at stats.

I do like my stats 

Thats true, but for example 300 of those passes (roughly) were Elmo, Tuenzebe, Chester, Hourihane and Whelan, yet only 4 of those, 1 from Whelan and 3 from Hourihane ended in a shot. From looking at the stats you put in 34 crosses, only 5 were accurate.

Just my reading of it but it would seem to me you were lacking ideas, lots of passing for passings sake, then getting frustrated and crossing the ball? Maybe im wrong. 

Stoke are no mugs as you say, there squad is probably the best in the league, but there mid table for a reason, there own stats reflect that, not just positions and points. They were able to have more shots against you then they have had since Birmingham beat them back in October, and your shots against them was the same as Ipswich managed at Stoke. 

Imo there is a clear evidence of a lack of ideas especially through the middle without Grealish, think thats reflected in the stats, the amount of crosses and the lack of shots despite as you say the passing numbers. 

That being said you have a tall forward line, so the crossing is less then ideal, but a cross is a good opportunity to regain possession and counter, so every cloud. 

[A'Villan]

6 minutes ago, Cjay said:

Fair enough mate you can give a balanced view of the game (from a Villa perspective) i can only look at stats.

I do like my stats 

Thats true, but for example 300 of those passes (roughly) were Elmo, Tuenzebe, Chester, Hourihane and Whelan, yet only 4 of those, 1 from Whelan and 3 from Hourihane ended in a shot. From looking at the stats you put in 34 crosses, only 5 were accurate.

Just my reading of it but it would seem to me you were lacking ideas, lots of passing for passings sake, then getting frustrated and crossing the ball? Maybe im wrong. 

Stoke are no mugs as you say, there squad is probably the best in the league, but there mid table for a reason, there own stats reflect that, not just positions and points. They were able to have more shots against you then they have had since Birmingham beat them back in October, and your shots against them was the same as Ipswich managed at Stoke. 

Imo there is a clear evidence of a lack of ideas especially through the middle without Grealish, think thats reflected in the stats, the amount of crosses and the lack of shots despite as you say the passing numbers. 

That being said you have a tall forward line, so the crossing is less then ideal, but a cross is a good opportunity to regain possession and counter, so every cloud. 

I have to say, that's an impressive analysis for someone who didn't watch the game and is relying on statistics to paint a picture of the game.

It wasn't our best outing. Stoke had all the play in the first half and once they went up sat back for a solid 30 minutes until we equalised, only pressing our player on the ball when they reached the final third. So you can imagine that it is pretty difficult to break down a team of Stoke's quality when they are sitting so deep. It meant that space was harder to find, but we managed some okay chances.

Here is 10 minutes of highlights if you are further interested in what transpired:

 

[bobzy]

I don’t think we dominated Stoke at any point at all. They looked dangerous most times they broke. We were ponderous and very evidently missed Grealish in the middle of the park. 

Hourihane will be utterly destroyed by Leeds midfield, IMO. 

[A'Villan]

4 minutes ago, bobzy said:

I don’t think we dominated Stoke at any point at all. They looked dangerous most times they broke. We were ponderous and very evidently missed Grealish in the middle of the park. 

Hourihane will be utterly destroyed by Leeds midfield, IMO. 

This is probably fair to say. Dominating is a bit extreme, but we certainly had the upper hand and lion-share of the ball in the 30 minutes between them scoring and sitting back and when Kodjija was awarded the penalty.

[Dave-R]

4 hours ago, privateer said:

They should make him wear wicket keeper's pads 24x7 for the time he's out of training. When he comes back, regular shin pads will feel like woven dragonfly wings.

It sounds as though your trying to create RPG gear for Jack, that being said I think Jack needs to go for a Tank build. He certainly is a damage sponge.