The difference last night...

[H4H 0]

• Villa Players wanted it more

• Villa fans wanted it more

• Lambert wanted it more

We didn’t show up in any capacity, It had a horrible stink to last season’s FA cup game against Leicester.

 

Classic Lambert tho, completely tactically outclassed CH, who really lacks any plan B.

 

One of the more disappointing nights at Carrow Rd for a while... Watching Lambert celebrating Villa goals, was like watching your ex girlfriend running off with your best mate.

 

Anyway lets pick ourselves up for Saturday and get 3 points against a very beatable Wigan...

 

OTBC

 

(one final thought – Lambert must have pissed himself when he saw Barnett on the team sheet)

 

 

[pete 318]

Really should have stuck to 4231 with Snoddy in Hoolahan position.

[lake district canary 0]

[quote user="pete"]Really should have stuck to 4231 with Snoddy in Hoolahan position.[/quote]

It would have been interesting to see that formation.   Keep the same formation as for league games.  But I wonder if there''s a bigger game going on here.   We have to play Villa in the league at CR later in the season.    Play a similar formation to the league and give your opponents practice for when they come here later in the season may not be a good strategy.     As it is, we know that when Villa come calling again we will  be a different proposition.   These cup games are a lottery - by all accounts we could have won if we had taken our chances - that we didn''t is a shame, but there is more than half a season to go and the disappointment will soon go - especially if we win on Saturday.

[CJ 0]

Well it looks like Lambert has learned from last seasons disasterous result against Leicester in the FA Cup which started a very poor run in the league for us and Chris H has not. Clearly we are resting key players as Lambert did a season ago and unlike Man City Utd etc we do not have enough quality players to do that and win against Premier teams. Our back four is changing by the game and we have now shipped seven goals in the last two matches. I feel sorry for all those fans who came a long way to see Chris H latest experiment in the defence, no doubt poor old Bunn will see a different four again on Saturday. And I really can not believe we have all those absent players injured if so we need emergency loans in nowMorrison should have gone out on loan he just lacks that killer instinct in front of goal which he could have gained like Vaughan in a Champs side. A decent striker alongside Holt and that game would have been dead long before last ten mins.

[hootenanny 0]

I don''t think playing Villa later in the season had anything to do with the 442 being used.

At Birmingham that was the formation Hughton mainly used and I think he wanted to try it again last night.

For me the 442 doesn''t work for our squad, we need Hoolahan to keep possession higher up the pitch and dictate our play in the final third. This allows the team to move higher up the pitch.

Since our wingers lack the raw pace to beat a player and commit fullbacks. Hoolahan allows the full backs to get higher up the pitch to support play.

The Holt/Morison partnership doesn''t work from the start of matches. It just results in the midfield being bypassed. It could be useful in the last 20 minutes if we need a goal.

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

It was an end to end game and we had more than enough chances in the second half to have won it. when their 2nd went init was late on and we had to chace a game which resulted in us being hammered on paper when the game was never like that

[Howson is now! 0]

Our midfield wasn''t bypassed last night, it gave the ball away nearly every single time they tried to pass it.

[Beefy is a legend 224]

I disagree with most of what has been posted.

The game was very tight for 75 minutes last night. My friends and I were saying at half-time that the game was on a knife-edge and could go either way. We had plenty of chances and I thought Morison had a good game and could have had a hat-trick - he certainly looked more dangerous than Holt for most of the game.

The fact is that Villa got the crucial third goal in the game and that is why they won, but to say that we didn''t want it etc is in my view short-sighted. We also played a pretty strong side. As far as I could see Garrido was the only glaring omission, the other players such as Wes, Tettey and Whittaker had knocks and Turner has hardly trained so I don''t see how you can criticise changes to the back four - you have to change it when you have knocks and injuries!

When Holt went over on his knee in the first half I really thought he''d done something bad. If he had then no doubt a load of posters on here would have been saying that we shouldn''t have risked him. It''s very easy to be wise in hindsight...

[ZLF 271]

Passing quality remains an issue but not just in midfield - leading again to us only around 45% of possession yest according to BBC - at home in a cup game that does not feel good

[RvWs 4 year contract 0]

[quote user="H4H"]

• Villa Players wanted it more

• Villa fans wanted it more

• Lambert wanted it more

We didn’t show up in any capacity, It had a horrible stink to last season’s FA cup game against Leicester.

 

Classic Lambert tho, completely tactically outclassed CH, who really lacks any plan B.

 

One of the more disappointing nights at Carrow Rd for a while... Watching Lambert celebrating Villa goals, was like watching your ex girlfriend running off with your best mate.

 

Anyway lets pick ourselves up for Saturday and get 3 points against a very beatable Wigan...

 

OTBC

 

(one final thought – Lambert must have pissed himself when he saw Barnett on the team sheet)

 

 

[/quote]Well Hughton has tactically outclassed the likes of Arsene Wenger, Sir Alex Ferguson this year so I think I''ll live!

[Two penneth 0]

My thoughts exactly Beefy.

[havemyhowsonit 0]

Worst thing was bent getting injured bringing on wiemann. They looked a different team with him. Morrison should take a leaf out of his book.

[Salopian 1]

There was also the matter of the loss of most of the defensive core, and a switch in three of the back four.

 

Another important reason was our failure to convert some good chances early in the second half, which probably discouraged us as much as it encouraged the young players of Villa. That was surely the difference between almost going four-up at Swansea, and last night - the failue to convert chances. That, in CH''s opinion was an important reason - he mentioned two or three times in his post-match interview that we had not been clinical enough!

 

One or two players have played better, bu the main two factors are those above, I believe.

 

If either of these had been different - perhaps Benno at RB, martin in the Centre and Garrido, who knows how different it might have been.

[Yellowfuture 71]

There is a spine to our success which for me is Ruddy, Tettey and Wes, all three have a huge influence on the players around them, Bunn is a good keeper but does lack the command of Ruddy and the confidence that brigs to the back four, Tetty`s ability speaks for itself, he also brings a threat when he carries through mid field to the edge of the box, nobody was doing that last night, then of course Wes is the creator of so much that we do well in the final third. Three key players, we can cope with maybe one of them being absent but when all three are missing there is a huge hole in the team.

[Beefy is a legend 224]

I agree Yellow.

My point is that it''s a bit silly, considering the players unavailable and the fact that the game was so tight for so long, to simply say ''Villa wanted it more''. Had we converted one of several chances throughout and got back in front it may well have been us to go through. Football matches turn on fine margins, as most managers often point out, and the reason of course why they point it out is because to some supporters losing = ''didn''t want it'' and winning = ''wanted it more''.

Sometimes you have to remember that old addage of treating those two imposters, success and failure, in the same manner because there is often very little between professional teams. Winning or losing can be decided by the width of a goalpost and that is why we shouldn''t be too quick to slag off the players just because we''ve lost a game.

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="Beefy is a legend"]

I disagree with most of what has been posted.

The game was very tight for 75 minutes last night. My friends and I were saying at half-time that the game was on a knife-edge and could go either way. We had plenty of chances and I thought Morison had a good game and could have had a hat-trick - he certainly looked more dangerous than Holt for most of the game.

The fact is that Villa got the crucial third goal in the game and that is why they won, but to say that we didn''t want it etc is in my view short-sighted. We also played a pretty strong side. As far as I could see Garrido was the only glaring omission, the other players such as Wes, Tettey and Whittaker had knocks and Turner has hardly trained so I don''t see how you can criticise changes to the back four - you have to change it when you have knocks and injuries!

When Holt went over on his knee in the first half I really thought he''d done something bad. If he had then no doubt a load of posters on here would have been saying that we shouldn''t have risked him. It''s very easy to be wise in hindsight...

[/quote]I totally agree with your posts, these were exactly my thoughts on leaving the ground last night.  I cannot believe some of the rubbish being written on here.  It really is just as simple as you are describing it I think but for some people somebody has to be blamed and apparently even going over two months without losing a game just isn''t good enough.

[kingsway 94]

Villa took their chances while when 1-1 we didn''t!

 

No Tetty to shield the defence!

 

These were the differences in my opinion!

[Theres only one Martin Peters! 0]

Last night we saw what a good player Tettey is. He would have snuffed out any threat from Holman who caused us problems all night long playing in the hole behind Villa''s front 2. He would also have led the counter attacking charges. Wes was another huge miss, we really needed him linking up midfield and attack.I still think we''ll finish above Villa, although they look a better team than the one we played at VP.

[Cambridgeyellow 0]

The difference last night was we did not play - Ruddy, Garrido, Turner / Bennett, Whittaker, Tettey, Hoolahan. I suspect if these players are available when we play them at the end of the season there will be a different outcome.

To throw in a conspiracy theory as well, Lambert told us he does not really risk players in cups ala Leicester last year. Now Villa are in a far worst position than we were so why did the majority of Villa''s 1st team play last night. It would not be because ( as some rumours suggest ) he had already decided to leave and was quite happy for us to be knocked out ? 

[drurys testamonials V 15 0]

[quote user="CJ"]Morrison should have gone out on loan he just lacks that killer instinct in front of goal which he could have gained like Vaughan in a Champs side. A decent striker alongside Holt and that game would have been dead long before last ten mins.
[/quote]

 

Would that be because he''s not playing regularly? Morison I mean. How many goals did Holt score last night? He should''ve been subbed after he pulled that muscle or whatever it was that Reynolds treated him for as he wasn''t as sharp as he could have been after.