ozvillafan Posted November 28, 2004 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2004 Angel is pure class - just out of sorts at the moment. He remains the best striker we have and, IMO, better than Yakubu and Beattie, the latter of which I don't rate at all. Angel is not helped by the fact that Cole is not a suitable partner (for anybody, really) and is heavily marked. Yes, the penalty miss was bad. But then, it can't get much worse so here's to an improvement next game! As for the first goal - unlucky. It was raining in spades (though that always happens in England, apparently) and the deflection wrong footed both Delaney and Sorenson. Macken couldn't have hoped for better service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted November 28, 2004 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2004 And then the wonderful statement that he is trying to stay injury free so that he can move! LL - sarcasm doesn't always come across in print. And, judging by the poster of that comment, its almost certainly sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
largelugs Posted November 28, 2004 Author Share Posted November 28, 2004 Angel 4 If he doesn't go in January I'll be amazed. I'd just love to know where because he's no longer playing for Villa. hope he gets enough for Angel to finance his purchases and they are better quality than those he bought in the summer. Doesn't sound like sarcasam to me, could think of a few other words for it though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pimpernel Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 No one was at fault for the goal. [...] Once that happened, Delaney hadn't enough time to regain control of the situation and a good strike from Macken sent the ball into the net. I disagree. Delaney did not react as quickly to the loose ball as Macken (mistake number one, ball watching), and then allowed himself to be turned far, far too easily (mistake number two, lack of anticipation plus failure to get himself fully between the striker and the goal). A centrehalf worth his salt would have been down Macken's shorts from the word go. But let's not go overboard - Delaney's doing well, broadly speaking, playing out of position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted November 28, 2004 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2004 Doesn't sound like sarcasam to me, could think of a few other words for it though! On second thought - it wasn't sarcasm. Sorry LL. :oops: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddy Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 it was a bit of a fluke really but still the mistakes were there, it was just 3 mistakes leading to a goal, first one being mellberg sticking his leg out, if he'd got the ball though then there'd have been no problem, this through mark off, but he wasn't watching the ball, as someone else said... school boy error, thirdly sorenson, why dive so early, yes i thought he'd have put it there as well but it's not a penalty, you don't just guess (oh and his crap kick indirectly lead to it) it's easier to blame someone for the 2nd goal i reckon (as you seem to want to blame someone, i'm quite happy saying it was a crap first half but we weren't really out played just gave away 2 silly goals...), what was barry doing? if you're on the edge of the box to pick a man up wouldn't it be wise to pick them up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
largelugs Posted November 28, 2004 Author Share Posted November 28, 2004 Agree about Barry, was a case of i#ve just chased back and now i'll just stand here like a prat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddy Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 was a case of i#ve just chased back and now i'll just stand here like a prat. wasn't it from a poorly cleared corner? (i might be wrong) in which case he hadn't even had to chase back, he could just jog back, even less of an excuse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
largelugs Posted November 28, 2004 Author Share Posted November 28, 2004 No, wasn't just after James had punched out Barry's cross and they broke and scored, commentators went on about the way the game changed so quickly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddy Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 good point, i just remember it being blocked out of the crowded box from a cross, but the cross wasn't from a corner like i thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LancsVillan Posted November 29, 2004 Moderator Share Posted November 29, 2004 no it was from the deadball line and SWP stood where he did all game 30 yards out to pick up any scraps so as GB was on the deadball line I cannot blame him for not getting back on that one then again SWP does that all the time, every game so we should have known about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 29, 2004 Moderator Share Posted November 29, 2004 It was a team defensive "mistake" - Mellberg got caught wrong side, then diverted the ball to Macken. Delaney got turned, Tommy was rooted to the spot. Goals happen, learn a lesson, move along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
largelugs Posted November 29, 2004 Author Share Posted November 29, 2004 Barry was stood no more than 5 yards from SWP when he scored, but had only just turned his head as the goal went in. They both were stood on the edge of the area, Barry didnt react at all and was stood in a totally effective place. If you chase back you eithr pick someone up or cover a dangerous area, he did neither Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts