Now come on, try to articulate your argument. If you don't, and only speak in grunts, everybody is going to think you are stupid. Is it the result? Is it how much they run around? Is it how tactically good they are? What if we have 70% possession, 15 shots on goal, they run their asses off but lose 1-0. Do you boo them then? Or do you boo them just because everybody else is booing them?
By deciding if they could do better (which you find out by comparing your players performances to how they have performed in the past) and whether they have a good enough reason to be performing in this way (good reasons would be that the players are too tired or the other team are far better for example).
I don't agree that we didn't play well in the first half. We pressed them really well and we created some good chances, we had 67% of possession and six shots on goal. True we should have defended the first goal better, but I thought we were unlucky to be two down at Half time. I think it's credit to Wenger and the team, facing a fourth straight defeat that they played the same game in the 2nd half and continued to press and create chances which led to all three goals.
That's not accurate, The BBC match report pointed out that our early play was good. We had six shots on goal in the first half and 67% of possession. We pressed the defence from the front and both Song and Ramsey won back possession by pressing the villa midfield, a couple of them led to direct chances, albeit fruitless in the first half. We were certainly more effective in the second half. We kept up the pressure, created more and were rewarded for the chances we made.
I agree with this. I think Villa worked very hard for their two goal lead and when they sat down for 15 minues at halftime they seized up. They had nothing left in the tank at all. We came out with a bit of extra vim and vigour, raised the tempo a bit, but the tactics and line remained much the same.
Extended highlights of the game here. http://www.101greatgoals.com/gvideos/arsenal-3-aston-villa-2-longer-highlights/ If you don't think we pressed or created chances in the first half, I'd suggest you watch it again. You'll notice that both Song and Ramsey created chances from winning the ball back by pressing and tackling the Villa midfield. Even our fullbacks were pressing the flanks, Coquelin's headed challenge setting up Walcott for a chance. Our were more effective in the second half, but our game ostensibly remained the same as our approach in the first.
I'll agree to disagree, it must also be BBC who reported how well we played in the first half who are in the minority with me then .....
I'd say we pressed the villa midfield and forced them into mistakes that led to chances for us. For the 3 second half goals and 3 gilt edged chances, we had 6 shots on goal in the first half, so it's inaccurate to say that we didn't create. We were more direct and efficient in the 2nd half and we were rewarded for keeping up the pressure and intent of the first. Kos was great in the 2nd half, he made some fantastic runs which really opened up the Villa defence. His burst through for the 2nd pen was a Herculean effort.
