Ignoring the Other Team

[elltrev]

Anyone else find it annoying when people virutally completely ignore the opposition when analysing a team's performance? Like everyone today bitching about our first-half performance being due to our slow build-up play as opposed to Villa being fantastic in giving anyone but our deepest 3 players absolutely no time or space on the ball.

I'm glad that we were patient and just took what they gave us, rather than trying to force things. The game was bound to change as it went on (and especially after we took the lead), with them becoming more stretched and tired, and when it did we took advantage and played well.

So let's give Villa some credit for a very good defensive performance first half, and let's give AVB and the lads some credit for being patient and ending up comfortable winners.

 

[braineclipse]

Villa clearly deserve some credit. I saw a stat at half time showing that we had 69% possession or something like that. Illustrates their game plan and it's a game plan they're quite good at executing.

Obviously it's rarely going to be easy to create chances against a team that is defensive, hard working and well organized like that. It's probably one of the hardest things to do consistently in football. Still, it's one of our weaknesses I think, and it's a game situation that we will continue to face a lot so I can understand the frustration.

You say we were patient, but was there any difference to our approach today and our approach against West Ham? We looked thoroughly comfortable in the last 15 minutes, but up until the goal the game was balanced on the proverbial knife edge. I think long term we need to improve in these situations and that it's a valid concern to have.

 

[elltrev]

Villa clearly deserve some credit. I saw a stat at half time showing that we had 69% possession or something like that. Illustrates their game plan and it's a game plan they're quite good at executing.

Obviously it's rarely going to be easy to create chances against a team that is defensive, hard working and well organized like that. It's probably one of the hardest things to do consistently in football. Still, it's one of our weaknesses I think, and it's a game situation that we will continue to face a lot so I can understand the frustration.

You say we were patient, but was there any difference to our approach today and our approach against West Ham? We looked thoroughly comfortable in the last 15 minutes, but up until the goal the game was balanced on the proverbial knife edge. I think long term we need to improve in these situations and that it's a valid concern to have.

Two points:

1) I thought Villa's defensive setup and execution today was particularly outstanding. I agree that we can get better at breaking teams down who park the bus, but I didn't think Villa did that today - or if they did, they parked it close to the half-way line rather than their own goal and tried to run over anyone who came near them.

2) I wasn't really clear in my OP that actually my main point isn't about us or today's game specifically, but about the fact that people always seem to analyse a team's performance without much focus on what the opposition's tactics forced or allowed them to do. E.g. the commentator on my stream today saying that the game changed when Paulinho was (allegedly) instructed to get further forward after 30 minutes, as opposed to the fact that Villa changed the way they played and left us with more space going forward.

 

[Jordinho]

It's a common theme across all team's forums. By dismissing the other team as **** you back up your own arguments on how ****e your own team is. We're seeing fewer open and entertaining games in all leagues as everyone are getting better organised and better at pressing, forcing errors.

Being patient and looking a bit slow is more common in leagues like Serie A and La Liga and, yes, it's not always very entertaining, but it's sometimes a necessary evil. You rarely win games in the first half, but you can lose them if you're not careful. We're learning to play for the whole 90 minutes. It's good to see that attitude being ingrained into our team. That's something you need if you want to challenge at the very top.

 

[braineclipse]

Two points:

1) I thought Villa's defensive setup and execution today was particularly outstanding. I agree that we can get better at breaking teams down who park the bus, but I didn't think Villa did that today - or if they did, they parked it close to the half-way line rather than their own goal and tried to run over anyone who came near them.

2) I wasn't really clear in my OP that actually my main point isn't about us or today's game specifically, but about the fact that people always seem to analyse a team's performance without much focus on what the opposition's tactics forced or allowed them to do. E.g. the commentator on my stream today saying that the game changed when Paulinho was (allegedly) instructed to get further forward after 30 minutes, as opposed to the fact that Villa changed the way they played and left us with more space going forward.

1. They were good, but no better than West Ham were two weeks ago and no better than a lot of PL teams are and will be imo.

2. I agree in general, there is a lack of balance in this regard.

 

[elltrev]

It's a common theme across all team's forums. By dismissing the other team as **** you back up your own arguments on how ****e your own team is. We're seeing fewer open and entertaining games in all leagues as everyone are getting better organised and better at pressing, forcing errors.

Being patient and looking a bit slow is more common in leagues like Serie A and La Liga and, yes, it's not always very entertaining, but it's sometimes a necessary evil. You rarely win games in the first half, but you can lose them if you're not careful. We're learning to play for the whole 90 minutes. It's good to see that attitude being ingrained into our team. That's something you need if you want to challenge at the very top.

I think this is an important point. If we had tried to be more ambitious in the first half - if Paulinho or Vertonghen (for example) had regularly tried to turn or lay the ball off under intense pressure in a constricted area instead of taking the easier option of passing back to Daws or Vlad - then we most probably would have given the ball away in a dangerous area on a regular basis. And if we had gone a goal down then it would have continued to be very difficult to break them down.

In general I'm a fan of 'fortune favours the brave' in football, but today I think virtually everyone on here was unduly harsh on our first half performance.

 

[elltrev]

1. They were good, but no better than West Ham were two weeks ago and no better than a lot of PL teams are and will be imo.

2. I agree in general, there is a lack of balance in this regard.

We'll have to disagree on point 1. Don't think West Ham, or indeed any other team, has been as agrressive with their high line and pressing (whilst simultaneously getting so many men behind the ball) as Villa today. Our more attacking players were both outnumbered and harassed to massive degrees.

 

[braineclipse]

We'll have to disagree on point 1. Don't think West Ham, or indeed any other team, has been as agrressive with their high line and pressing (whilst simultaneously getting so many men behind the ball) as Villa today. Our more attacking players were both outnumbered and harassed to massive degrees.

Whilst I suppose I can agree that they didn't "park the bus" as you rightly pointed out they parked their team at around the halfway line I cannot agree that the way they were set up until the goal was a high line. Our defenders were allowed to roll the ball around 10-15 yards from the halfway line quite a lot without any pressure. They were good and aggressive in their defensive setup, but I didn't think they were that special.

For me the lack of chances up until the goal was a result of a combination of their solid defensive setup and work rate combined with our lack of tempo, movement and options.

 

[braineclipse]

I think this is an important point. If we had tried to be more ambitious in the first half - if Paulinho or Vertonghen (for example) had regularly tried to turn or lay the ball off under intense pressure in a constricted area instead of taking the easier option of passing back to Daws or Vlad - then we most probably would have given the ball away in a dangerous area on a regular basis. And if we had gone a goal down then it would have continued to be very difficult to break them down.

In general I'm a fan of 'fortune favours the brave' in football, but today I think virtually everyone on here was unduly harsh on our first half performance.

I thought we did that on a semi-regular basis at least. It's just that our players did really well to win the ball back again in some of those key situations.

What you call patient buildup I see more as passing without purpose. I'm not saying we have to be gung ho, but when slowing the game down like that and just rolling it around and you end up trying to pick out midfielders that are under a lot of pressure there will be quite a few turnovers.

I really feel that Adebayor or a player like him could make a big difference though.

As I haven't read most of the omt I'm not disagreeing with your observations about people being too harsh though, that seems quite likely based on some previous match threads. And I'm not saying we were terrible, just that I think we have significant room for improvement in this area and that it's a very important area for us to improve in.

 

[thfcsteff]

Brilliant thread, excellent point. Villa did nothing positive in their approach to the game.

I was personally appalled to see a home side play with such devastating negativity. Pathetic IMO.
Their tactics were spot-on in so far as they made sure Soldado was isolated from supporting midfielders, but it was only a matter of time right? As for the continual comment that our first goal was 'lucky' I think that's a bit unfair. It didn't take a horrific deflection, it came from open play and it came from a shot. Which went in and eluded everyone. Yes, fortunate in a sense but not as much as is being said.

Glad to see people ready to take Ade back...I've long felt he could be vital to this season and still believe he has a massive role to play...

 

[braineclipse]

Brilliant thread, excellent point. Villa did nothing positive in their approach to the game.

I was personally appalled to see a home side play with such devastating negativity. Pathetic IMO.
Their tactics were spot-on in so far as they made sure Soldado was isolated from supporting midfielders, but it was only a matter of time right? As for the continual comment that our first goal was 'lucky' I think that's a bit unfair. It didn't take a horrific deflection, it came from open play and it came from a shot. Which went in and eluded everyone. Yes, fortunate in a sense but not as much as is being said.

Glad to see people ready to take Ade back...I've long felt he could be vital to this season and still believe he has a massive role to play...

A lot of people seem to have a lot of time for Lambert. Not bashing him for a lack of results of course, but when it comes to playing style he's not much better than Allardyce (and to some extent Pulis) for me.

I would much rather see teams like Swansea and Southampton do well with their managers than Villa under Lambert.

The goal came from a cross, not from a shot There was clearly an element of luck involved even though it was an excellent cross. If we had been delivering a lot of those into the box then I think the lucky tag would have been harsh, but Villa were looking about as threatening as us up until that point.

Edit: That might be a bit harsh on Lambert. It could be that he's planning to evolve this Villa team in time, he's had a lot of work to do so far to get them back on track and a basics first approach is obviously fine. His Norwich side wasn't that much different though from what I remember at least. For me at least the jury is very much out on Lambert, particularly with regards to playing style.

 

[thfcsteff]

A lot of people seem to have a lot of time for Lambert. Not bashing him for a lack of results of course, but when it comes to playing style he's not much better than Allardyce (and to some extent Pulis) for me.

I would much rather see teams like Swansea and Southampton do well with their managers than Villa under Lambert.

The goal came from a cross, not from a shot There was clearly an element of luck involved even though it was an excellent cross. If we had been delivering a lot of those into the box then I think the lucky tag would have been harsh, but Villa were looking about as threatening as us up until that point.

So funny you say that, I said exactly the same to my mate afterwards re Fat Sam comparison and further stated that his continual whinging and moaning has me really finding him an increasingly huge dingdonghead.

 

[braineclipse]

So funny you say that, I said exactly the same to my mate afterwards re Fat Sam comparison and further stated that his continual whinging and moaning has me really finding him an increasingly huge dingdonghead.

His whinging about the yellow card after the assault like challenge on Holtby in the first half certainly had me convinced about his dingdongheadedness.

 

[elltrev]

Whilst I suppose I can agree that they didn't "park the bus" as you rightly pointed out they parked their team at around the halfway line I cannot agree that the way they were set up until the goal was a high line. Our defenders were allowed to roll the ball around 10-15 yards from the halfway line quite a lot without any pressure. They were good and aggressive in their defensive setup, but I didn't think they were that special.

For me the lack of chances up until the goal was a result of a combination of their solid defensive setup and work rate combined with our lack of tempo, movement and options.

Agreed - this is why I think their setup was interesting - letting our centre-backs and even deepest CM have the ball but also playing their defensive line quite high - really squeezing their team into our midfield area and massively restricting space there through their superior numbers and aggressive pressing.

But maybe I'm imagining / overemphasising their setup, and without watching the game again we're probably not going to agree anytime soon!

P.S. I don't think we had patient buildup play as such - more that we were patient in not even trying to build up play!

And yes I think an in-form Adebayor would have been useful in that first half-hour.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

I agree with the OP in principal. But Villa are a very poor team. 6 years ago they would have been relegation certainties, they are THAT bad. But this season there are at least six teams even worse than them, so I think they'll stay up. But they are a very poor side and Lambert has his work cut out. They lose Benteke for a period of time this season they are down.

 

[monkeybarry]

Most fans are insular idiots when it comes their own club and play too much FM to be rational

 

[Bullet]

OP Trevor: Sigg and Holtby do not have pace, they do not have power, they are not explosive... so they should be adept at interlinking, short pass and move, keeping possession, knitting the midfield and attack, probing through balls, exchanging positions, dropping deep or pulling wide or doing SOMETHING to get on the ball.

I appreciate that Villa were pressing hard, compressing midfield and there wasn't much room, but those guys had to do something about it.

I feel confident that the Goons midfielders (Ozil Cazorla Ramsey Wheelchair Arteta Podolski types) would have found a way to get the ball, turn and attack Villa. They would play a 1-2, create a chink in the armour and push forwards.

All we did for ages was probe a little, panic, pass back to the centre backs and then knock it long. It was not good football, one of Sigg and Holtby should have been able to turn and face the right way, but every time they just smuggled it backwards to recycle the same pattern of play.

 

[DHSF]

As far as im concerned, whilst there is a degree to which the opposing team has an effect on how we play, it is not the fact that this happens but the ease by which it happens.

People need to get their head out of the ground and stop trying to find 'excuses'. Have you not considered WHY this seems to happen? WHY is it simple to nullify us? and yes yes it is. Its predictability. Ghod said it himself and so have members on here. AVB needs to sort that out. Whats ironic is that its actually unpredictable which spurs turn up - the one that battered the likes of Norwich or Inter or the one that struggled to create anything against Villa in the first half or West Spam in the last game.

It is an issue, a recurring one at that, and its not one that required heads in grounds, its one that requires attention rather than 'excuses'.

 

[braineclipse]

OP Trevor: Sigg and Holtby do not have pace, they do not have power, they are not explosive... so they should be adept at interlinking, short pass and move, keeping possession, knitting the midfield and attack, probing through balls, exchanging positions, dropping deep or pulling wide or doing SOMETHING to get on the ball.

I appreciate that Villa were pressing hard, compressing midfield and there wasn't much room, but those guys had to do something about it.

I feel confident that the Goons midfielders (Ozil Cazorla Ramsey Wheelchair Arteta Podolski types) would have found a way to get the ball, turn and attack Villa. They would play a 1-2, create a chink in the armour and push forwards.

All we did for ages was probe a little, panic, pass back to the centre backs and then knock it long. It was not good football, one of Sigg and Holtby should have been able to turn and face the right way, but every time they just smuggled it backwards to recycle the same pattern of play.

Sig feeds on good balls into the final third. He's not a "make it happen out of nowhere" player. I think something similar is true about Holtby. In general players like that need the ball in at least a little bit of space in the final third to make stuff happen. Very few players drop deep, participate in buildup play then push on to be instrumental in the final third. Expecting that seems like expecting something that we're not going to get from those players.

It's up to the players participating in our buildup play, our back 4 and deep central 2 to move the ball around quickly enough, in combination with the movement ahead of them, to create that space and find that right pass into the final third.

We've seen us struggle similarly in similar situations with Eriksen in the team, last season with Bale and Lennon in the team and before that with VdV and others around.

 

[onlyme]

As far as im concerned, whilst there is a degree to which the opposing team has an effect on how we play, it is not the fact that this happens but the ease by which it happens.

People need to get their head out of the ground and stop trying to find 'excuses'. Have you not considered WHY this seems to happen? WHY is it simple to nullify us? and yes yes it is. Its predictability. Ghod said it himself and so have members on here. AVB needs to sort that out. Whats ironic is that its actually unpredictable which spurs turn up - the one that battered the likes of Norwich or Inter or the one that struggled to create anything against Villa in the first half or West Spam in the last game.

It is an issue, a recurring one at that, and its not one that required heads in grounds, its one that requires attention rather than 'excuses'.

I agree with a lot of that.