KHV Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Tactically it was a shambles. Nobody seemed to know what to do and as for this tippy tappy style well thats a complete suicide mission. We have about 3 players in the squad capable of playing that brand of football. Lambert has always played quick direct football that involves getting the ball out wide and getting it in the box. All this **** about with little passing triangles between given and the centre halves is a complete waste of time. If he thinks this is going to get villa anywhere by doing this he is deluded. We simply dont have the players and darren bent is about 30 yards away from any support again. Even when we were losing there was nothing at all almost as if 1-0 wasnt to bad. I bet you're one of those touching Dads who shout "**** hoof it you little word removed at any kid who takes more than 3 touches. its all very well taking touches but if it goes nowhere its pointless. It didnt help that there was no width as an outlet. if you have a centre half at lb then thats what you get Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Tactically it was a shambles. Nobody seemed to know what to do and as for this tippy tappy style well thats a complete suicide mission. We have about 3 players in the squad capable of playing that brand of football. Lambert has always played quick direct football that involves getting the ball out wide and getting it in the box. All this **** about with little passing triangles between given and the centre halves is a complete waste of time. If he thinks this is going to get villa anywhere by doing this he is deluded. We simply dont have the players and darren bent is about 30 yards away from any support again. Even when we were losing there was nothing at all almost as if 1-0 wasnt to bad. I bet you're one of those touching Dads who shout "**** hoof it you little word removed at any kid who takes more than 3 touches. its all very well taking touches but if it goes nowhere its pointless. It didnt help that there was no width as an outlet. if you have a centre half at lb then thats what you get At least we kept the ball better than we did for the whole of last season. Agree we need width and better support for a striker, but I'm not sure Bent is the answer to our problems. He does absolutely no work for the rest of the team - he can't just stand there and expect the ball to come to him. SOME work for it would help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanisgod Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 It's hard to know what's best, that's why we pay a manager a lot of money, but I would say we don't have the wingers or strikers available to play a direct 4-4-2 at the moment. N'Zog is not an out and out winger and really you'd expect him to thrive in a fluid midfiled that lets him cut inside and swap position at will. What we seem to have suffered from on Sat is a lack of movment in the final 3rd, and that will come if given time. West Ham will always be well organised defensively, so we need players making forward runs in order to draw their defence out of position. Bent will not get the ball in goal scoring positions when he's surrounded by 3 defenders. Whilst I agree keeping the ball with no end product is annoying it's better than backs to wall defending for 85 mins because we cant keep hold of it. We lined up with effectively only 4 regular players on Sat, 5 if you count Delph but he hardly featured last season. It's bound to take a bit of time before the team gels and players can instictively make and pick out the kind of movement we need to play through teams but it will come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Ha ha, good OP but I did ask myself when I started reading it, how many posts before someone mentions Barcelona? I t took about 4. Guys, we are not Barcelona and will never be anything like them - not a remote chance - so I certainly hope we don't have a manager who is trying to emulate that style of football. Lambert came with a reputation as a superb tactician and pragmatist and that's what we need from him at Villa. I'm sure he knows that and there will be no long term problem but let's face it, the tactics and reaction to the way the game was going on Saturday were a bit lacking to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Trying to get us passing the ball and moving better is being pragmatic. It's the way the game is played at the top level nowadays. People need to accept this. Kick and rush is dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Kick and rush is dead. And I say good riddance.. But if we signed players like Kenyne Jones or andy carroll, then the temptation to hoof it up there would be greater.. we need to keep it on the floor, Not in the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Trying to get us passing the ball and moving better is being pragmatic. It's the way the game is played at the top level nowadays. People need to accept this. Kick and rush is dead.Well, if you look at the results on Saturday & Sunday, some of the best results were achieved by superb counterattacking play based on soaking up pressure coupled with pace of attack, so if that's what you mean by "Kick and rush", I think you need to think again. As I keep trying to point out, Wigan, who are crap and fight relegation every season, play a passing game and often dominate the possession so I suggest there is no guaranteed link between this style of football and success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Trying to get us passing the ball and moving better is being pragmatic. It's the way the game is played at the top level nowadays. People need to accept this. Kick and rush is dead.Well, if you look at the results on Saturday & Sunday, some of the best results were achieved by superb counterattacking play based on soaking up pressure coupled with pace of attack, so if that's what you mean by "Kick and rush", I think you need to think again. As I keep trying to point out, Wigan, who are crap and fight relegation every season, play a passing game and often dominate the possession so I suggest there is no guaranteed link between this style of football and success.That kind of style doesn't get you very far. In fact most of the teams that won at the weekend are very good with the ball, or at least far better than we are. Man City, Swansea, Newcastle, Fulham and Chelsea. You point out Wigan, but how many of the top teams are comfortable on he ball? All of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Trying to get us passing the ball and moving better is being pragmatic. It's the way the game is played at the top level nowadays. People need to accept this. Kick and rush is dead.Well, if you look at the results on Saturday & Sunday, some of the best results were achieved by superb counterattacking play based on soaking up pressure coupled with pace of attack, so if that's what you mean by "Kick and rush", I think you need to think again. As I keep trying to point out, Wigan, who are crap and fight relegation every season, play a passing game and often dominate the possession so I suggest there is no guaranteed link between this style of football and success.That kind of style doesn't get you very far. In fact most of the teams that won at the weekend are very good with the ball, or at least far better than we are. Man City, Swansea, Newcastle, Fulham and Chelsea. You point out Wigan, but how many of the top teams are comfortable on he ball? All of them.Umm, we weren't actually discussing "being comfortable with the ball". Counterattacking football requires players to be exceptionally good on the ball, maybe more so than teams who retreat into a short passing game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Trying to get us passing the ball and moving better is being pragmatic. It's the way the game is played at the top level nowadays. People need to accept this. Kick and rush is dead.Well, if you look at the results on Saturday & Sunday, some of the best results were achieved by superb counterattacking play based on soaking up pressure coupled with pace of attack, so if that's what you mean by "Kick and rush", I think you need to think again. As I keep trying to point out, Wigan, who are crap and fight relegation every season, play a passing game and often dominate the possession so I suggest there is no guaranteed link between this style of football and success.That kind of style doesn't get you very far. In fact most of the teams that won at the weekend are very good with the ball, or at least far better than we are. Man City, Swansea, Newcastle, Fulham and Chelsea. You point out Wigan, but how many of the top teams are comfortable on he ball? All of them.Umm, we weren't actually discussing "being comfortable with the ball". Counterattacking football requires players to be exceptionally good on the ball, maybe more so than teams who retreat into a short passing game.No it doesn't. Where did you get that idea from? To be a good counter-attacking side all you need is pace, which is why we used to be so good at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Dortmund managed to win the Bundesliga by counter-attacking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanisgod Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Trying to get us passing the ball and moving better is being pragmatic. It's the way the game is played at the top level nowadays. People need to accept this. Kick and rush is dead. Well, if you look at the results on Saturday & Sunday, some of the best results were achieved by superb counterattacking play based on soaking up pressure coupled with pace of attack, so if that's what you mean by "Kick and rush", I think you need to think again. As I keep trying to point out, Wigan, who are crap and fight relegation every season, play a passing game and often dominate the possession so I suggest there is no guaranteed link between this style of football and success. That kind of style doesn't get you very far. In fact most of the teams that won at the weekend are very good with the ball, or at least far better than we are. Man City, Swansea, Newcastle, Fulham and Chelsea. You point out Wigan, but how many of the top teams are comfortable on he ball? All of them. Umm, we weren't actually discussing "being comfortable with the ball". Counterattacking football requires players to be exceptionally good on the ball, maybe more so than teams who retreat into a short passing game. No it doesn't. Where did you get that idea from? To be a good counter-attacking side all you need is pace, which is why we used to be so good at it. Not neccesarily. It's no good having the fastes players in the league if you cant get the ball into the opposition box, unless you're suggesting you have them queued up on the half way line and literally thump the ball over everybodies head for them to run onto? If you look at teams like Man Utd they counter attack very well, through a combination of pace and skill on the ball, whether it's the ability to beat a man and deliver a quality ball into the box, or the ability to play the ball from defence through midfield with incisive, quick passing. there is more o football than the 2 extremes of punt and run or tippy tappy 50 passes along the back line. The succesful teams will hold onto possesion when they need to but equally play direct, INCISIVE, football when the opportunity to break is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Trying to get us passing the ball and moving better is being pragmatic. It's the way the game is played at the top level nowadays. People need to accept this. Kick and rush is dead. Well, if you look at the results on Saturday & Sunday, some of the best results were achieved by superb counterattacking play based on soaking up pressure coupled with pace of attack, so if that's what you mean by "Kick and rush", I think you need to think again. As I keep trying to point out, Wigan, who are crap and fight relegation every season, play a passing game and often dominate the possession so I suggest there is no guaranteed link between this style of football and success. That kind of style doesn't get you very far. In fact most of the teams that won at the weekend are very good with the ball, or at least far better than we are. Man City, Swansea, Newcastle, Fulham and Chelsea. You point out Wigan, but how many of the top teams are comfortable on he ball? All of them. Umm, we weren't actually discussing "being comfortable with the ball". Counterattacking football requires players to be exceptionally good on the ball, maybe more so than teams who retreat into a short passing game. No it doesn't. Where did you get that idea from? To be a good counter-attacking side all you need is pace, which is why we used to be so good at it. Not neccesarily. It's no good having the fastes players in the league if you cant get the ball into the opposition box, unless you're suggesting you have them queued up on the half way line and literally thump the ball over everybodies head for them to run onto? If you look at teams like Man Utd they counter attack very well, through a combination of pace and skill on the ball, whether it's the ability to beat a man and deliver a quality ball into the box, or the ability to play the ball from defence through midfield with incisive, quick passing. there is more o football than the 2 extremes of punt and run or tippy tappy 50 passes along the back line. The succesful teams will hold onto possesion when they need to but equally play direct, INCISIVE, football when the opportunity to break is there.And Man United are very good on the ball, which is the point I'm getting at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 I've never seen the point of passing the ball around in 5 yard circles if there's nothing to come at the end of it. Well one point of it is that if you have possession of the ball then the opposition can't score. The inherent impatience of the average fan's English Football mentality is part of what holds back good passing football in England. IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanisgod Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Nobody is doubting to be succesful you need to have players that are comfortable on the ball, at least I havn't seen anybody on this thread claiming anything of the sort. The argument was over the pros and cons off possession football against counter-attacking football, or in VT extremes tippy tappy Vs kick and rush. Personally I think the ideal comes somewhere between the 2, if you look at spurs I wouldn't call their style tippy tappy or kick and rush but they use the possesion they have to move the ball quickly. The reason we've been so reliant on counter attacking play is that we've largely had a team of committed but less talented players that aren't as comfortable on the ball and those that were comfortable on the ball have been poached by more successful clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulver Posted August 20, 2012 Author Share Posted August 20, 2012 I've never seen the point of passing the ball around in 5 yard circles if there's nothing to come at the end of it. Well one point of it is that if you have possession of the ball then the opposition can't score. The inherent impatience of the average fan's English Football mentality is part of what holds back good passing football in England. IMO. Except this wasn't the case on Saturday because they did get the ball and score. Whilst we continued to pass it around our defence and midfield and not threaten them at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 It's a bit funny how similar VillaTalk is to Liverpool's RAWK at the moment. Both teams underperforming last season by fans expectations, both teams have a new inexperienced manager who is trying to change the playing style. Both teams lacking the signings required to make the transition. Both teams having a disappointing loss on opening day. Both fan bases starting to panic on their respective message boards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Both sets of Fans, are the most fickle in the PL I'm 100% sure Lambert will succeed here, No worries at all!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanisgod Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 It's all relative,we're never going to have 100% of possession for 90 minutes so there's little point having 80% of possession and doing bugger all with it if the opposition are able to hurt you with the remaining 20%. Equally there's no point in punting the ball forward to nobody and inviting the opposition to have possession. Possession is only valuable if used correctly, I would rather play 5 passes through midfield and lose the ball in the opposition box than play 15 passes across the back 4 and lose the ball near our box. But I think the confidence to use the ball more effectively will come once the players get used to knoacking it about rather than lumping it forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabby Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 The positive for me is when we do score ,now we will be able to hold onto the ball which should eliminate the back to the walls sieges we have endured for years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts