Jump to content

Ron Vlaar


irreverentad

Recommended Posts

Thought once we were two down he grew into the game and made some vital tackles on long. Only criticism is maybe he should have taken responsibility for long straight away. As Albion were playing one striker and him being the senior defender he maybe could've marked long which ever side he went, which probably would've stopped the first goal (which whilst been an excellent goal baker should've been tighter)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

He was great in defense but also started a number of attacks in the second half, with runs forward creating an extra man in midfield for us. 

 

Long started marking him in that second half when we were in possession leaving Baker to make the passes up field (which were much less effective). 

I still think he'd make a good DM - only problem would be we have no one nearly as good to replace him at CB. Been really impressed with Ron.

 

I said this in a different thread.

 

But why do we on VillaTalk have a small obsession with moving players as soon as they start playing well?

 

He's playing well at CB because that's his position. And in other threads there's talk of moving Bacuna upfield, Delph into a number 10 etc

 

Surely it should be the other way round? If a player's playing well, keep him playing that position. He's obviously good at it!

It's when a player is underperforming that we should perhaps be looking to move him somewhere more suitable

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think what impressed me last night was he was pushing us forward when we were behind and even took responsibility with the ball. Except 1st 10 minutes he has solidified our defence this season with his return to fitness

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And is much, much, better on crosses this season helping us to concede less from set plays.

 

I found myself agreeing with you, then checked the stats for aerial duels

 

This season: 55% successful

Last season: 63% successful

 

Why are we better at set pieces?

 

Partial explanation may be Clark has improved +2% from 61%-63%.

 

However, like Vlaar, Baker has dropped: from 63%-56%.

 

Maybe we have just been lucky, or have a more effective system? Do we defend zonal or man-mark at corners?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And is much, much, better on crosses this season helping us to concede less from set plays.

I found myself agreeing with you, then checked the stats for aerial duels

This season: 55% successful

Last season: 63% successful

Why are we better at set pieces?

Partial explanation may be Clark has improved +2% from 61%-63%.

However, like Vlaar, Baker has dropped: from 63%-56%.

Maybe we have just been lucky, or have a more effective system? Do we defend zonal or man-mark at corners?

How is that stat calculated?

It may offer the explanation.

Edit: nevermind, misunderstanding by me.

Edited by AVTuco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're better despite those numbers because football isn't baseball and isn't decided by stats.

This

 

But like we've said before, I'm not convinced Con watches games. He just watches dozens of screens covered with live stats. it's like the matrix

 

I don't even see the code

 

matrix-300x227.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And is much, much, better on crosses this season helping us to concede less from set plays.

 

I found myself agreeing with you, then checked the stats for aerial duels

 

This season: 55% successful

Last season: 63% successful

 

Why are we better at set pieces?

 

Partial explanation may be Clark has improved +2% from 61%-63%.

 

However, like Vlaar, Baker has dropped: from 63%-56%.

 

Maybe we have just been lucky, or have a more effective system? Do we defend zonal or man-mark at corners?

 

 

 

Like Lambert and Gary Neville say, stats are for supporters and the media, they actually mean naff all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â