Whilst I agree with many of the views given on this board I think some people need to grasp an understanding between a "lack of intelligence" and a "difference of opinion". It does not signify a lack of intelligence just because someones view is a minority one. It simply means they see things differently. I for one was one of those who thought that whilst the QPR result was good but that the performance was near unbearable. I also questioned Hughton's lack of substitutions. Unlike the article, I didn't think it should be a wide man or Wes, but Tettey who should have made way. I understand that this would have shortened us at the back but at the same time, we would have been able to hold the ball up front a bit better (Tettey was giving the ball away left, right and center) which would have relieved the pressure on the defence. That's all. I wasn't calling for Hughton's head or anything. Just giving my opinion.
For me, at the moment for the Fulham game only and because of injuries: Bunn Whittaker Turner Bassong E Bennet Johnson Snodgrass Surman Hoolahan Holt Becchio My only instruction would be to defend nearer the half way line and if you can't pass it to a team mate in a better position then keep it but don't waste it.
Pretty sound reasoning there and I totally agree re getting the full backs to get forward more whilst not sacrificing their defensive roles. I'd be inclined to have Garrido at LB and use E Bennett to replace Surman, but then I'm not the manager!!!
But it appears unlikely that Pilkington will be fit to play. From what you have said previously about Elliott Bennett, added to what you say here about having the "wingers" play more narrowly and work the ball into the box rather than throw in crosses, I would guess you might prefer to see Surman in; an alternative might be to put Howson centrally behind Holt and play Hoolahan on the left. That apart, the single change you would make to CH's first choice line up is Fox for Johnson. You don't want to see a reversion to 4:4:2, whether orthodox midfield or diamond. So I infer you think Fox is more adept at midfield linkup play than Johnson i.e. you don't want him playing because of his ability to fire accurate long passes from midfield to advanced wingers who then deliver crosses into the box. I have no particular quarrel with this. It is intended to trade Johnson's energy and physicality in the tackle for Fox's more accurate passing. However, you yourself say that, against Spurs, at least in the first half, we did what you want us to do quite effectively with Johnson in the team. Do you think the ball is more likely to be played out from the back with Fox in the team than with Johnson in the team? If so, why do you think that? My main question though is this: What makes you think CH is not giving very much these same instructions to the team? There seems to me to be a myth growing up that Hughton is telling his players to sit back, defend deep in two rigid lines of four, and just pump the ball long as far as they can (if possible towards the completely isolated Holt). I do not believe for a moment that those are his standard instructions. Pretty much everything the team were doing during the long unbeaten run, and against Spurs, suggests to me that Hughton too wants the ball played from the back through midfield to forward players prepared to attack the box rather than throw in crosses from wide (of course varying it with crosses from wide from time to time). If people will just think back to pre-season, the same complaints against "Hughton's style" were being aired. What was happening was that he was imposing better defensive discipline on the side and, to begin with, the attacking play suffered badly, so badly as to be almost completely absent in some games. The players (not Hughton) were simply taking time to adjust to being defensively more solid, and couldn't get the balance right. That problem was addressed, the balance improved, we got our first win, and never looked back -- until Christmas. Our sequence of games without a win since Christmas (despite some good play against both Chelsea and Man City) knocked confidence. Throw in an injury or two (e.g. Bassong, Whittaker), and drop in form (Tettey, Garrido) and you have the real explanation of why the team have regressed, culminating in the debacle at Liverpool. Nothing to do with Hughton being negative or having a penchant for Allardyce-style hoofball. He has now done what he needed to do, worked with the team to arrest the pointless run and start getting back on track. It sometimes appears to me that people think that players are programmable like a computer. The manager decides how he wants them to play, then he clicks on "Settings" and ticks a few boxes labelled "Keep possession", "Stay wide", "Defend high up the pitch", "Press the opposition in their defensive third" etc. etc. and presses "Save these Settings". Then he sends the team out and they do exactly that. We all know that it isn't like that, but we are still inclined to attribute to the manager more control over what happens on the pitch than he can ever possibly have.
But if the players aren't doing what the manager has instructed them to do why does he leave it until the 87th minute before making a substitution and give someone else a chance to do as he wants them to?
Really enjoying this thread, to add my $0.02: Against Fulham: -------------Bunn---------------------- Martin-Bassong-Turner-Garrido/Whittaker ----------Fox------Johnson------------ Snodrass----Hoolahan--------E Bennett --------------Holt--------------------- If Whittaker is fit (and I think he can cover LB) I'd prefer him to Garrido based on recent form, Martin has played well recently. Tettey has been sub-par, and if Johnson is really disciplined at sitting in midfield, him and Fox might work.
I got berated for saying Fox should be given a go the other day but on this thread iv seen loads of people calling for him instead of Tettey. I like Tettey because he can tackle and has a bundle of energy, but he cannot pass to save his life and that is what we have been missing so far. Dont forget either that Fox was 3rd (or 4th) in our player of the season last season so he is obviously capable. Im with DH re he team selection. Id maybe even throw Kamara in on the left as a bit of a curve ball that Fulham wouldn't know anything about?
I toyed with Kamara over E Bennett, but I don't think he's match fit as the MLS is finished, he's effectively only in pre-season. From the interview posted on another thread, he seems to be a very energetic, dynamic player (by MLS standards), so hopefully it won't take him long to reach full fitness. Fulham is probably too soon for a start, but perhaps a sub appearance isn't impossible.
Are you talking about last Saturday Tony? Short answer is that, if the problem is general, making like for like substitutions of two players (Elliott Bennett was already on for Pilkington) is unlikely to significantly change things. The outfield subs remaining were Whittaker, R Bennett, Howson, Jackson, Becchio. So Whittaker might have replaced Martin or Garrido, and Howson might have replaced one or other of Hoolahan, Johnson or Tettey. Can anyone say hand on heart that they think that would have made much difference? What might have made a difference would be going 4:4:2, but it might also have cost us our hard-earned point. I didn't hear the post-match interviews, but CH usually explains his thinking on substitutions in the game (or at least he does if asked). Whether he did this time I don't know.
I do like Surman and I did toy with putting him in anyway. I disagree with Munky about Martin though, he's scored 3 goals and has been involved in alot of our chances since he's been back. I really disagree about the fact we were really playing differently when we were picking up points, I think those results are what caused the damage now. I don't think the intention was any different to now, we just had more success with it so nobody really minded. Does no one find it strange that despite Hughtons intention to make us better defensively, it all seems to fall apart if one player (Bassong) is missing. That doesn't tell me he's got it working tactically, if you are set up to defend, you shouldn't of had the frequent hammerings we have had this season. Lambert could of said "we need to stop conceding" and done exactly the same. Hughtons not doing anything to deserve the tactical accolades that he's sorted the defence out, HE HASN'T we have conceded one less goal compared to last season at this stage whilst scoring 12 less goals and we have 7 less points. This is despite having a much better squad of players to pick from. So we have a frequently poor level of football, frequently poor results all in an attempt to make the defence better which it really isn't.
Just picked up on this critique of some comments I made a couple of days ago about koo pee arr being the worst side in the Premiership, and have to say I entirely disagree with your retort and I can't see how on earth you can call it a "very bad example" . You say that "we all know that form is the most important thing in football" - do we?? Don't speak for me my friend because I don't know that at all, for me the most important thing is how many points you have on the board and where you are in the league, and after 25 games koo pee arr are firmly rooted to the bottom having won just two games and having scored just 18 goals - comfortably the worst record out of all teams this year. They have scored just eight goals at home from 13 games, and both times I have watched them play us this season they have been absolute dogshit of the highest order. Yes they've been tough to score against lately, but this is purely down to the form of their keeper Cesar who is the best in the division this year, hands down. Take him out of the side - like at home to MK Dons for example where they conceded four goals against a division 3 side - and they would be completely ****ed. Quite obvious to me. And what exactly do you mean about Redknapp's "honeymoon period"? Does that really mean anything or is it just something that came into your head? I take your point that we shouldn't look at it as an easy three points as I concur that there is no such thing in this division, but I'm afraid for you to say that me suggesting the team at the bottom of the league having scored the fewest goals and won the fewest games are the worst team in the league is a "very bad example" is quite frankly bollocks
Well we simply disagree about that. I stick by what I said: I think Hughton intends us to play very much as you say you'd like to see us play on Saturday and saw us play to good effect in the first half against Spurs. I think the fact that he wanted Snodgrass, that earlier on he played Surman in preference to Pilkington and has since gone on record saying he has been encouraging Pilkington to leave his wing and come inside, not to mention his preference for one up front, speaks volumes about his antipathy to orthodox wing play and percentage area crossing. Many people will argue that, since we are still having to rely heavily on set piece goals, we would actually do better to revert to 4:4:2 and put balls in to Holt and Becchio from wide. That's as may be, but IMO it certainly isn't Hughton's way. Well, Lambert HAS said that this season about his Villa team, since when they have got worse. Despite a pretty potent attacking force at his disposal in Benteke, Weimann, Agbonlahor, N'Zogbia and Bent, far more potent than ours last season, they are 7 points behind us with a shatteringly awful defensive record. Getting Dunne back may save them, or not.
This debate has gone on and on and will continue to do so. I don't buy the 'same number of goals as last year argument as many of those came when a new manager and 9 new players were establishing themselves. Although Tettey had a bad game against Liverpool, I thought he played well against Spurs and QPR and I especially like the way he is being encouraged to get forward more. I'm much more confident since the addition of Becchio and Kamara but this is not the time for 'devil may care' football. I would like to see Bennett and Kamara running at tired defences late in games and/or Becchio and Holt playing up front together when City are chasing games, but I think that those still longing for PL might like to read this: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ale...-city-plan-failed-aston-villa_b_2626013.html?
Some excellent points adding to the debate, which I think will run for a while yet. we may see some SUBTLE changes to the line up on Sat, but I'm pretty sure it won't be too drastic. Pretty accurate article re Villa and PL!!!
Thanks for the link to the article, Rick What a well written piece it is too - I almost found myself feeling sorry for PL and Villa by the end of that!
I doubt anyone would want Paul Lambert back. We will always remember what he did and that is it. Even those among us who aren't enjoying our style as well as performances at the moment want CH to succeed with this club and be our manager for the length of time as the Fergusons and Wengers. And I don't think anybody has advocated "devil may care" football. What is being pointed out is that this new style might well work this season and help us retain Prem status but is not what we want to see season after season just to retain that status. If you, CH and the board do, then we will have to put up with it as none of us are walking away from our club. Many posters on here have said that they think we will change next season. Let's hope they are right.
I think the word "evolve" may be more apt than "change". There will certainly be changes in personnel; the style will evolve. One thing I'm pretty sure about is that CH feels his options are too limited at the moment. Saturday is going to be interesting, seeing the starting eleven I mean.
Rusty isn't there to score goals, when he does it's a bonus but fundamentally he's in there as a defender and I personally think Whittaker is a far better option when fit. If you must look at his goals then the three he did score were all in vain in losing games, compared to the one Whittaker scored in a win against Swansea. I'd rather look at at the goals we've conceded in games he's played, every time we've conceded four or more (Fulham, Chelsea, both Liverpool games, Villa, Man City) it's been Rusty at RB, it's surely not a co-oincidence. As much as I love the guy, I'm afraid I don't think he's quite good enough to hold down a regular starting place at this level. He's Mr.100% and would throw his life on the line for the cause but he's not technically good enough for me, I'm surprised you're such a fan Carrabuh. I wasn't overly excited by the signing of Whittaker in the summer but he's proved to be a great signing, he's far better than Rusty in my opinion, as much as it pains me to say that. And regarding the goals conceded this year compared to last, you fail to mention the seven clean sheets we've kept this season in the first 25 games (28% of matches) against just three all of last season (less than 8% of matches). Yes we've had some batterings (usually when Bassong is out like you say, and also when Whittaker is also not playing) but you also forget to mention that our first choice keeper has been out for much of this year as well. It is clear to me that we are a better defensive unit this season, probably due to the extra protection our two DMCs give our defense, and definitely because we now have Bassong in the ranks but whatever the reason is you are wrong to say that we are not.
I think we are closer in thinking than it may seem, Redruth. I like Robbie's use of the word 'evolve' to describe this season. PL teams don't just happen, they have to be built over time and I think that is what CH is thinking. My use of 'devil may care' football wasn't directed at the thoughtful cases Redruth and Carrabuh have been making, but more to those who advocate the 'diamond' as an attacking formation and PL's attacking substitutions regardless of the situation. Tony is right about the clean sheets as well. 4-2-3-1 suits City at the moment, because it helps to nullify the quality of the technically gifted midfielders in many of the teams at this level. I don't think CH would have gone for Kamara, Wolfwinkel, and/or Hooper if he wanted to keep it conservative in midfield and up front. Becchio and Kamara bring new options and I think we'll see further evolution before the season is out.
