BJ

[pablofarmer 0]

So, when they announced the team on Saturday one of the regulars who had been dropped was Johnson.

Now for most this was met with cheers, but I was worried.

Whilst I will admit to being a big fan of the man I know others who are not, and I fully understand why (his passing can be poor).

However he has been a good regular and against many teams he battles well in midfield.

So anyway a simple question, did we miss him on Saturday?

I have not been able to see anything of the game yet so if the answer is a simple no, then fair do''s!

[nutty nigel 7,506]

Missed him! Doubt Villa would have scored their goal if Johnson had been playing. Howson was probably better going forwards though. Johnson gives us that insurance that Gary Holt used to give when the full backs get caught forward.

 

 

[pablofarmer 0]

In that case Nigel, when the reason for his exclusion was ''tactical'' what tactics was. CH hoping would work?

[Mr Brownstone 0]

Villa like to play on the counter away from home and are happy to concede possession. CH would have realised that it would no doubt be down to us to make the running and would have hoped Howson''s better quality on the ball would have helped to unlock their defence.

[nutty nigel 7,506]

I can''t answer that Pablo. It was the change a lot wanted and we were probably better going forward. If we''d have won 2-1 the Villa goal wouldn''t have been such an issue. However it stuck out like a sore thumb for me because BJ saved us in a similar situation against Southampton.

 

Maybe Fer/Tettey will work best? I''m not sure. But I think the central midfield pairing is crucial. Fer/Howson and Fer/Johnson both worked to a degree. What do you think buddy?

 

 

[ricardo 7,336]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I can''t answer that Pablo. It was the change a lot wanted and we were probably better going forward. If we''d have won 2-1 the Villa goal wouldn''t have been such an issue. However it stuck out like a sore thumb for me because BJ saved us in a similar situation against Southampton.

 

Maybe Fer/Tettey will work best? I''m not sure. But I think the central midfield pairing is crucial. Fer/Howson and Fer/Johnson both worked to a degree. What do you think buddy?

 

 

[/quote]Spot on the money NigelA pity so few are able to see it.

[pablofarmer 0]

I agree Nigel,

I had thought a midfield of 2 wingers then Johnson, Fer and Tettey in the middle might work.

Maybe not enough going forward, unless the wingers really can go down the flanks well and get the crosses in?

[ReadingCanary 0]

Didn''t think there were many BJ fans on this forum.

[pablofarmer 0]

Are you lowering the tone Reading?

[Yellow Shirt 17]

I don''t think you can really say we missed him or didn''t.Defensively we were easier to catch out but not hugely so and what positives there were are maybe due to having a better player on the ball in Howson.The problem is really not the holding 2- Fer and any of BJ, AT, JH or DF will work but the ''front'' 4 are not firing or creating.

[mastoola 183]

maybe we should play jonno behind a central pair of howson and fer with no "traditional number 10"?  allowing fer and howson to get forward whenever possible.

[CDMullins 436]

CH cant win, he drops the holding midfield play Howson, Fer and Elamnder and people moan that we didnt play BJ or Tettey!

[Yellow Shirt 17]

[quote user="CDMullins"]CH cant win[/quote]He doesn''t set up to ;)

[nutty nigel 7,506]

[quote user="pablofarmer"]I agree Nigel,

I had thought a midfield of 2 wingers then Johnson, Fer and Tettey in the middle might work.

Maybe not enough going forward, unless the wingers really can go down the flanks well and get the crosses in?[/quote]

 

There were a couple of encouraging signs where the wide players got balls into the box and clever movement got the strikers on the end of it. Either or both would have been goals on another day. We''ve done ok with Johnson and Tetty before. We probably only need one with Fer. But I''d like to see BJ or Tetty start everytime.

 

 

[vos 155]

We fielded a much more attacking unit which in general worked out quite well. It was the correct tactics knowing that the Villa defence is very average and they rely on three fast forwards who our back four should have coped with.

We put several good moves together and despite the critics Snodgrass and Martin generated several good moves down the right. The problem time and again was the final delivery and general lack of confidence near the penalty area to some extent due to our normal reliance on defensive play. IF we had scored from the penalty it could well have been an emphatic win.

At Stoke I would retain the same team with Ryan Bennett and Hooper starting.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

On the subject of Ryan Bennett, thought he continued where he left off last season, he''s really starting to realise that potential and I can see him being a first choice by the end of the season.

[JF 694]

Another thread that didn''t live up to the title!

[ricardo 7,336]

A BJ can sometimes disappoint on so many levels[;)]

[nutty nigel 7,506]

Now Rickyyyyyyy...

 

There''s a prominent poster on here who''s been known to lift a comment from here and put it on the timeline of the posters nearest and dearest!

 

I hope Mrs Rickyyyyyyyy isn''t on Facebook..

 

 

[ricardo 7,336]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Now Rickyyyyyyy...

 

There''s a prominent poster on here who''s been known to lift a comment from here and put it on the timeline of the posters nearest and dearest!

 

I hope Mrs Rickyyyyyyyy isn''t on Facebook..

 

 

[/quote]LOL[:D]

[Olly 0]

I thought for the most part, the Howson/Fer midfield partnership worked well on Saturday.

Do feel the best would come from both if they had someone sitting behind them, allowing both to burst forwards however.

[ron obvious 1,495]

Then again, somebody asked Rick Wakeman to describe just how bad the worst example of (whatever it is we''re talking about) felt.

"Fantastic!" He replied.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]On the subject of Ryan Bennett, thought he continued where he left off last season, he''s really starting to realise that potential and I can see him being a first choice by the end of the season.[/quote]

Ryan Bennett did alright but he didn''t really have all that much to do. Villa didn''t carry much threat down the middle.

 

Which was similar to some of the games he got a lot of praise in towards the end of last season. The WBA game being a good example, he was heavily credited with keeping Lukaku quiet when actually it was rarely his responsibility to deal with Lukaku. He was operating out wide or being dealt with by Bassong when he was more central.

 

He''s looking a little more useful than he did a year and a half ago but he''s still a way off getting Turner or Bassong out of the team.

[chicken 2,604]

I think the game was a very weird one in that we probably played better, overall in terms of possession and creating chances.

Their goal was a horrendous defensive mix up. We had enough players getting back to cover it. If you watch the replay you''ll see that Garrido runs back but stops rather than moves to anticipate - Turner (I think) turns round and gives him an earful.

The biggest issue for me was that we appeared to be trying to create chances from wider areas by getting crosses in early. However with Redmond and Snodgrass constantly cutting inside it made it far easier to defend - especially for Guzan who was taking balls out of the air for fun.

They should have been switched around. Redmond''s pace and delivery is wasted on the left hand side - I''d love to see him given a chance down the right where he can motor past players at will. If used properly he could do for us what Walcott does for Arsenal (although maybe not as effectively yet).

I can''t help but feel that if a couple more crosses were whipped in away from goal we would have had a goal.

At the end of the day though, people have taken fault with the result, I feel, rather than the performance.