Villa v Leeds

[hogesar 9,618]

I thought Villa looked inferior even in the first half, but they were doing all the right things. When they started doing all the wrong things in the second half it was only going to go one way. 

Villa may well struggle for playoffs this season.

[Van wink 2,994]

Leeds have a number of good young players, just like us.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Rob Whites has a very good point when he says having to score late goals is not the best situation to keep finding yourself in. It's much better to have the game won earlier and the organisation, discipline and concentration to protect the lead to the very end.

That is a fair point but on balance a late goal is harder to equalise. Best way is to score a couple at least.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

The reason why better teams win games late is that the opposition tire. Especially mentally. Our winner yesterday was a great example. We wouldn't have passed through them so easily earlier in the game.

[westcoastcanary 173]

34 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

The secret lemonade drinker is wrong about the late goals Westy. Late goals are the sign of a good team. Most famously called Fergie time for a reason. 

"Fergie time" was defined as follows: "A period of play beyond the official 90mins the length of which is determined by whether or not Man Utd are winning". Thus if Man Utd are winning at the end of 90 mins, the duration of Fergie time should be 0mins; otherwise it should last until Man Utd score.

I don't dispute that the ability to score late goals is an asset, and the mark of a good team. My point is that it is better to have the match already won. Most goals are scored relatively late in games (though not of course in added on time), and even rather poor teams going gung ho in desperation can snatch a goal at the death.

[Bill 1,788]

16 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Rob Whites has a very good point when he says having to score late goals is not the best situation to keep finding yourself in. It's much better to have the game won earlier and the organisation, discipline and concentration to protect the lead to the very end.

That is a fair point but on balance a late goal is harder to equalise. Best way is to score a couple at least.

I doubt it is a matter of choice, more like how the game pans out - as with Swansea. And as NN says we look to be able to keep going longer than the opposition. As shown by the collapse of a few Blacburn players after we scored.

We had that never say die approach in L1 and the Championship under Lambert. Liverpool were reknowned for it in the 1980's,

So it is not a case of 'having' to score late goals, but one of being able to score late goals.

One that has taken us to where we are now.

[Van wink 2,994]

Bill

"So it is not a case of 'having' to score late goals, but one of being able to score late goals."

or is it a case of woffle

[JF 694]

Best let the Manchester teams know that their Champions league and Premier League title wins are questionable due to needing late goals

[Van wink 2,994]

5 minutes ago, JF said:

Best let the Manchester teams know that their Champions league and Premier League title wins are questionable due to needing late goals

We have tremendous self belief and never give up, just like the sides you mention above.

[Bill 1,788]

11 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Bill

"So it is not a case of 'having' to score late goals, but one of being able to score late goals."

or is it a case of woffle

woffle ?

 

 

[Van wink 2,994]

On a train Billy😘

[Essjayess 307]

Leeds have been in top 6 since the season kicked off, whereas we were languishing far in the lower half after 6 games, since when we battled up the division. But i recall as we were nearing the top 6, at some point only 2 points seperated the top 8 teams. But now the healthy weekly battle between us and Leeds has proved a good filip against complacency and has has put daylight between us and the others. If WBA keep chugging along in 3rd also, it will keep our club wide awake and alert  for the need to be sharp week in week out, although dont think theres any chance of complacency anyway, DF sees to that.

[Yellow and Green 334]

It will be interesting to see how the table looks at the end of January. West Brom have a favourable run of fixtures, whilst ours is quite tricky. 

 

[nutty nigel 7,513]

3 hours ago, westcoastcanary said:

"Fergie time" was defined as follows: "A period of play beyond the official 90mins the length of which is determined by whether or not Man Utd are winning". Thus if Man Utd are winning at the end of 90 mins, the duration of Fergie time should be 0mins; otherwise it should last until Man Utd score.

I don't dispute that the ability to score late goals is an asset, and the mark of a good team. My point is that it is better to have the match already won. Most goals are scored relatively late in games (though not of course in added on time), and even rather poor teams going gung ho in desperation can snatch a goal at the death.

Westy, gonna have to break it to you buddy, the ref didn't really play until man u scored. It was just that man u were the best team and the later the game got the more their opponents struggled to keep them out. 🙃

[CirclePoint 200]

5 hours ago, Van wink said:

Bill

"So it is not a case of 'having' to score late goals, but one of being able to score late goals."

or is it a case of woffle

Ah, Van.........that’ll be a straight no.

Using stamina and mental focus while fatigued is a strategy I employ when I coach my youth teams. I run them ragged in the week. I force them to see clearly and maintain their composure when they are exhausted. I put them under more stress and demand that they push through the haze in practice and sure enough, in a close game, more often than not, we come out the winners. Why? Because they can still play sharp football in the final 15 minutes.

And they love it.

So Bill, you are spot-on and I agree completely with your perspective.

Edited December 24, 2018 by CirclePoint

[westcoastcanary 173]

3 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

The reason why better teams win games late is that the opposition tire. Especially mentally. Our winner yesterday was a great example. We wouldn't have passed through them so easily earlier in the game.

So surely a team which doesn't have to wait for the opposition to tire before it has the game won would be an even better team than the better teams who have to wait for the opposition to tire? Such a team would almost certainly score a lot of late goals as well, taking advantage of a tiring opposition to boost their goal difference.  

And incidentally, I don't think Blackburn is that good an example for you, for two reasons. Firstly, because they were down to 10 men in those closing minutes after Harrison Reed had to come off; and secondly because Blackburn have a particularly bad record this season of conceding goals in the last quarter of an hour (76th minute to final whistle), which suggests you don't have to be that good to score late against Blackburn!

[westcoastcanary 173]

4 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

Westy, gonna have to break it to you buddy, the ref didn't really play until man u scored. It was just that man u were the best team and the later the game got the more their opponents struggled to keep them out. 🙃

Nutty, if you would just look at the stats for the timing of Man Utd's goals under Fergie I think you will be surprised. For example, in the 2012-2013 season, they scored as many goals in the first 15 minutes (17 goals), and the second 15 minutes (16 goals) as in the final 15 minutes plus injury time (16 goals). And in SAF's final season, 2013--2014, they scored just as many goals in each of the three 15 minute periods between the 31st and 75th minutes (13, 13 and 12 goals respectively) as they scored in the final 15 plus added on time (12 goals). The best teams have matches won before the closing stages, but in the minority of cases when they haven't, they also have the capability to score late.

[Chelm Canary 404]

18 hours ago, ricardo said:

Why?

 

Leeds comfortably the better side and never looked out of it even at 0-2.

They were far superior to Villa and deserved to win.

I was more alluding to the fact it was pretty much the last kick off the game. 

I thought both teams were going for it at the end. 

I didn't view Leeds as comfortably the better side, but yes, Leeds did keep their composure at 2 down. 

A last gasp winner was required. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

I think it is time we all told DF that he mustn't let the players score late on anymore. The TV pundits, journalists and now some of our supporters would prefer we stopped doing it.

Or bribe that chap with the board to put it up after we have scored.

I jest but it was a trait during the Lambert years and now we are doing it again. Nothing wrong with it at all and I think the debate about it is just that; debate. Aliens from another galaxy, tuned in to our match might believe we keep scoring in the first minutes as they think the North Pole is the South.

I remember playing a singles golf match against a chap and after a few holes he remarked that it wasn't real golf to be using a putter off the fairway. I did however remind him that I was 5 up at the time.

 

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

Middlesbrough and Derby are only one win further back than WBA. With so many games between the top eight coming up, either of them could make a good charge. Boro in particular are very strong at the back, and have two relatively easy home games (Sheff Wed and Scum) before they travel to Derby on New Year's Day.

[JF 694]

Theres a lot of self indulgent clap trap on this. Maybe it’s a west coast thing that the east coast doesn’t get... Bottom line is that a match lasts 90 minutes plus injury time and until that changes a goal in whatever minute is equal to any other

[Surfer 1,547]

Goals count the same whenever scored. Using intelligent movement and passing to wear the other team down is part of our overall game plan and so we will be more likely to score later than earlier. You could argue that teams that score early tend to be the worst teams, i.e. let's grab a goal and defend for the remaining 80 minutes. Of course the very best teams scored often and in all phases of the game, but then not everyone is a Man City or Liverpool. 

[nutty nigel 7,513]

Westy, Leeds best period is after 75 mins where they've scored 10 and conceded 2. Ours is also after the 75th minute where we've scored 15 and conceded 7. The goal difference is the same for both.

Leeds record in the first half is F12 A11 +1. Ours is F9 A11 -2.

So you can clearly see the better teams are stronger towards the end of the game when others tire mentally and physically. In fact Blackburn are a better first half team than either of us with F12 A9. But games aren't won in the first half.

Merry Christmas to you and yours buddy🎄🎅 

[C.I.D 302]

5 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Westy, Leeds best period is after 75 mins where they've scored 10 and conceded 2. Ours is also after the 75th minute where we've scored 15 and conceded 7. The goal difference is the same for both.

Leeds record in the first half is F12 A11 +1. Ours is F9 A11 -2.

So you can clearly see the better teams are stronger towards the end of the game when others tire mentally and physically. In fact Blackburn are a better first half team than either of us with F12 A9. But games aren't won in the first half.

Merry Christmas to you and yours buddy🎄🎅 

Spot on Nutty .......which is why darlings of the media such as Villa are unlikely to threaten the automatic promotion places this season imho.Leeds winner was exemplified by at least 5 or 6 of Villa's players floundering in the opposition half to get back to defend 1 long pass in the final minute.

[Bradwell canary 109]

Like everyone else I was, for a change hoping for Villa to win.

However I have to say Leeds impressed me. Clearly they are very fit, and can run and run until beyond the 90 mins.

I think their manager has a similar outlook as DF, in that they never give up, and play a high tempo game, in an attractive manner.

looking  forward to our game up there in Feb, delighted to note that Sky are showing it. Probably because it’s Leeds, who get more than their share on Sky, and the money that goes with it!

 

[westcoastcanary 173]

5 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

 ............. Nothing wrong with it at all and I think the debate about it is just that; debate. 

No, there's absolutely nothing wrong with scoring late goals. The question is what a heavy reliance on scoring late goals says about the quality of a team (the debate being started by Leeds fan Rob White's comment that it was not a sustainable strategy or a strategy that the best teams rely on). Nutty cited Fergie's Man Utd teams as examples of excellent teams who did rely on scoring late, but the stats simply don't support that view. Fergie's teams relied on it only in the relatively few matches when they had to; in the great majority of cases they had the game won well before second half added time. 

My opinion is that we are currently too reliant on scoring late goals, and I don't believe there are many -- if any -- posters on here who wouldn't rather we more often had games won without the need for those nail biting "can we score another at the death" finishes. 

[JF 694]

Personally speaking I find our inability to score from the spot far more concerning than our ability to score goals late in matches. The idea of our fate coming down to spot kicks in the play off final is not a confident one. Clearly we are at our strongest in the second half of matches and going into the final 15 minutes. As for having games won early that’s nonsense. A game is never won until the final whistle. Did Aston Villa have the game sewn up at half time then?

[westcoastcanary 173]

1 hour ago, JF said:

 Did Aston Villa have the game sewn up at half time then?

No, but not because no team leading 2:0 at half time can ever be said to have the game won, but because anyone conversant with Aston Villa's performances this season would know that they among the worst teams in the league when it comes to conceding goals (their average GA per game being on a par with Ipswich, Millwall, Rotherham and Sheffield W), and their well documented propensity for surrendering leads. In actual fact a number of posters on here watching the game at 2:0 were tipping Leeds to at least haul Villa back in the second half.

Edited December 24, 2018 by westcoastcanary
Added final sentence.

[Surfer 1,547]

In fact you could argue Villa scored too early and gave Leeds the whole 2nd half to get back in it... much better to score later in the game and not allow the other team that time to react. 

A nonsense argument? Probably, but I think there may be something in it regarding normal human response - when even both teams are happy enough, once behind you are motivated to try harder, if ahead you tend to relax etc. 

[westcoastcanary 173]

40 minutes ago, Surfer said:

In fact you could argue Villa scored too early and gave Leeds the whole 2nd half to get back in it... much better to score later in the game and not allow the other team that time to react. 

A nonsense argument? Probably, but I think there may be something in it regarding normal human response - when even both teams are happy enough, once behind you are motivated to try harder, if ahead you tend to relax etc. 

I don't think it's a nonsense argument, but it applies particularly to defensively weaker teams. If you are not confident of holding onto even 2 goal leads it is definitely a good idea to take the lead as late as you can.