HanoiVillan Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 His distribution has gone to pot but I don't think its sensible to blame him for the goals yesterday. I do think Sherwood is telling him to play it short, in the old days he'd have just banged it up to Benteke/Gestede. He also made a couple of excellent stops yesterday. No issue with the big guy at all, just needs to stay calm when he's in control of the football. So why does Sherwood tell him not to do that any more? Probably because he's always closer to finding the assistant referee's head than our striker's when he kicks the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAMARV Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 What has changed from the end of last season? Guzan has not improved yet now he is first choice again and we've reduced the quality of the GK's in the squad by replacing Given, Sherwood's first choice, with Bunn. The goalkeepers in the squad probably cost the club about £50k a week less than last season. Its a change, not necessarily the one we want but its a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 People do accept that. I don't know anybody who doesn't. But there's a difference between accepting he isn't great at distribution, and blaming him for a goal that wasn't his fault. Witch hunt might not be the correct term. But like I said, if he did that 2 seasons ago nobody would bat an eyelid. It's only because people have suddenly decided they're going to be overly harsh on him that they've decided it was his fault. VillaTalk has turned. He's going to make a "mistake" every game now, you watch. Your post is spot on except for one thing: 'witch hunt is the correct term to use. when people are looking to blame where none can be apportioned, that's a witch hunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted August 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted August 23, 2015 I still just find it so baffling that the reason for those who don't think guzan is good enough seems to be his distribution. I acknowledge that it isn't great (although not as bad as some people are making out, not by a long shot). But there are so many things I'd value higher in a goalkeeper than distribution. And Guzan is good at all those things. Distribution just seems to be the stick to beat him with at the moment. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAMARV Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 I still just find it so baffling that the reason for those who don't think guzan is good enough seems to be his distribution. I acknowledge that it isn't great (although not as bad as some people are making out, not by a long shot). But there are so many things I'd value higher in a goalkeeper than distribution. And Guzan is good at all those things. Distribution just seems to be the stick to beat him with at the moment. Agree to some degree but we're not talking about not seeing the right time to throw the ball or occasionally miscuing a clearance or two. Its 3/4/5 times a game straight out into touch. And under no pressure from goal kicks or from his hands some of the time. Bosnich couldn't kick very far or very cleanly but his penalty heroics and amazing agility more than made up for it. Like I said earlier, I think he's lost a shed load of confidence. I hate that he didnt play the cup final, but more on a personal level for him after he was dropped for the League Cup final against Man Utd even though he'd got us there. That was really harsh on the lad, but if Sherwood doesn't really fancy him its going to affect his confidence. He wasnt kicking like this after Lambert re-signed him and made him No.1. No witch hunt. just fair observation from my point of view. I dont want rid of him. but I dont want to see any more kicks into touch either. It aint Rugby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted August 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted August 23, 2015 Has he lost confidence? Based on what? He looks as confident as ever to me. He had a great game yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted August 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted August 23, 2015 I just don't see rolling the ball to your fullback when he has enough time to take a touch AND wanted the ball in the first place as a risk. This whole 'Amavi wanted it' bit is also irrelevant to the question of whether it was the right or wrong option. Not it isn't. At all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 (edited) I just dont think he is as commanding as 2012/13 and his shot-stopping has become very average, even yesterday the Sako shot he fumbled when it went straight at him. I expect Bunn to play next 2 games unless he makes a balls of it vs NOtts COunty Edited August 23, 2015 by Zatman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Sako hit that at about 60mph, how he's supposed to hold onto that. It went over the bar anyway unless you're on about another shot which I can't remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAMARV Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Has he lost confidence? Based on what? He looks as confident as ever to me. He had a great game yesterday. That's what I think yes. Based on watching the last 3 games. The frustration with himself when he miscues a clearance would suggest to me that he's putting, or feels, a lot of pressure on himself. He looks nervous to me when the ball is played back to him at the moment. Like I said this seems to be a new phenomenon and as I've said he commands a lot of respect from me. That doesn't mean he's above criticism if it's deserved. Guzan did well yesterday with his hands. Brain and feet could have done a bit better. Butland's performance for Stoke is more my idea of a great game from a goalie. But then that's just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAMARV Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 phenomena? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czechlad Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 At least there are some people of VT who didn't just let their emotions from the match run into these forums. I don't understand how Guzan is getting more blame for the goal than Amavi. I've watched the replay of the goal a number of times. Guzan threw the ball to Amavi who was wide open. Dann was not even looking at Amavi when Guzan threw it. Amavi received it and decided to dribble forward. Dann then decided to try to stop Amavi. Amavi stupidly decided to try to dribble around Dann despite being only a few yards out of the box. If you want to say Guzan could have done more on the shot, I'd agree with you. I thought the shot was savable to be honest, but blaming Guzan for playing a perfectly fine pass to a player who was wide open is silly. Nobody is absolving Amavi from blame or blaming Guzan more they were both culpable the difference is that Amavi's was his first error, it isn't Guzan's first error of this nature so is more of a talking point. Guzan dropped Amavi right in it with the throw and then Amavi made the situation worse. It really isn't anything to do with an emotional reaction to the result the growing criticism of Guzan is a result of his performances. Sorry trent, usually I agree with you, but this is just nonsense. If Amavi does what a competent footballer should do and get rid of the ball or use it then nobody for one second would be saying that was a bad decision by Guzan. If this was 2013 then nobody would be blaming Guzan. Hell, if he'd rolled that ball to Alan Hutton instead of our new signing then nobody would be blaming Guzan. The witch hunt needs to stop. When he received that ball the only correct option would have been burying it in Row Z. If that's what you need to do when the keeper gives you the ball, then the keeper shouldn't have given it you in the first place. This isn't a 'witch hunt', it's a growing realisation that our goalkeeper makes too many avoidable mistakes and is generally hopeless at distributing the ball. It's nothing personal, he seems like a very nice guy as footballers go. He didn't have to bury it into row z at all. Amavi had multiple passing options around him which he failed to use. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dn1982 Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 His overall game is getting worse. Even though Amavi made the mistake he shouldn't have had the ball. Guzan gave it to him when he was under pressure. He could've thrown it out to Adama but decided to let Palace get men back then throw it out. You either go long early or take the sting completely out of the game and protect the point he did neither! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Czechlad Posted August 23, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted August 23, 2015 (edited) Here's the moment Amavi received the ball. This is on his right foot, had he waited until it was on his left, Dann would have been half a yard closer. I was wrong on the previous page. At this exact moment, he has four options as I see it. There are passes into danger available to Clark, who has a man near him, and (poss Westwood?) who also has a man near him but could receive the ball on his blind side. There's knocking it out of play for a throw in. There's turning around and passing it back to Guzan. Or there's trying to beat his man. None of these are great options. The way I see it, Dann reacted quickly, but there's a reason he's running towards our defender, totally out of his own position, at the same time his whole team is jogging back to their half, and that is that he sensed danger. Guzan's distribution here gave Amavi a poor range of options, of which he took the wrong one. The goal is primarily Amavi's fault, for sure. But if Guzan could be trusted to distribute the ball well upfield, he wouldn't be rolling the ball out to a fullback who has no good options on the edge of his own penalty area. No it's not. You are posting a bad angled photo that shows less room than there really is. It also fails to show how wide open the 3 Villa players are in the middle. Here is an actual photo of when Amavi received the ball. Notice the 3 wide open players to his right that he could have easily passed to, but decided to dribble. How in the world this is Guzan's fault with evidence like this is beyond me. Edited August 23, 2015 by Czechlad 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villaphan04 Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 (edited) Don't understand why people are giving Amavi 100% of the blame. Guzan should be gathering some of the blame as he put Amavi under pressure with his errant distribution. Edited August 23, 2015 by Villaphan04 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted August 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted August 23, 2015 Because it wasn't errant distribution. Players get passes like that dozens of times a game. But because this has come from Guzan it's suddenly a dangerous pass. It's not. If Clark had given Amavi that ball from a normal pass nobody would say a thing. Amavi wants the ball, is aware he's getting it, has numerous options inside, has time to take a touch or to clear it or give it back to guzan first time if he's not sure. Instead he lets the ball go across his body and tries to take on an on rushing player in a vulnerable area of the pitch. It IS Amavi's fault. Completely and totally. Guzan has done absolutely nothing wrong. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Well done Czechlad. Case closed as far as I'm concerned. Everyone can concentrate on the next game when Brad gets the blame for Gabby tripping up over his own tongue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macandally Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Common sense and good game management begs the question why Guzan would pass the ball to his full back with three minutes left of an away fixture? Bonkers! I didn't see first half, but second half had me worried based on how poorly we responded to Palaces width and pace. Why was Bacuna left on? Sakho tour him a new one, especially when Traore came on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Common sense would dictate that playing the ball out/around from the back is a better bet than punting the ball upfield when it's likely to come straight back. These are professional footballers - a fifteen yard pass to a team mate is a basic requirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 If Clark had given Amavi that ball from a normal pass nobody would say a thing. It's slightly different though, in open play you haven't always got the same options as a keeper with the ball in his hand. Guzan had the choice to stand still and wait, without the worry of being tackled. An outfield player does not have that choice. Don't get me wrong, amavi is 100% to blame but its still a poor decision from Guzan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts