Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ricardo

Ricardo's proper report v Villa

Recommended Posts

[quote user="ricardo"]Booing when Redmond came off was pathetic. He was very ineffective today. It happens with young players.[/quote]
They weren''t booing Redmond, they were booing because they thought Snodgrass should have been the player leaving the pitch (so were booing Hughton''s decision)..... which is why the chant of "you don''t know what you''re doing" then rang out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="snake-eyes"]

It''s nice to have such informed and constructive criticism Ricardo!

 

Yes they did double team the other wing on occassion (so do most teams when defending wingers), but Redmond was clearly being shut down quick with at least 2 and on occasion 3 in very close proximity!

 

Snodgrass was getting more joy down the right because, Redmond managed to get the ball square or backwards then the play switched quickly. At this point Snoddy only had the fullback  on him as the right midfielder had ''tucked in''. This was the good play Norwich did today, but unfortunately the final ball and delivery left alot to be desired.

 

Why do you attack other posters Ricardo, just because they see a game differently from you? I know you love writing your reports, but what makes your opinion so special and make you believe you are always right? As I posted earlier I recorded the game and rewatched it when I got home so as to clarify my thoughts and opinions.  I stand by them!  Redmond was definately identified as the greater threat before the game and Villa clearly tried to nullify him.  Snoddy definately had more freedom than Redmond!

 

Please watch the game again with open eyes! I am sure you will see what I mean! Whether you agree with it is another matter!

 

Snake

[/quote]You are right, I totally disagree with it. Redmond''s contribution dried up the longer the game went on and CH did exactly the right thing taking him off. I would have had him off at half time, in fact I will go further and repeat I would have preferred Pilks from the start. Snoddy had more freedom because he was combining very well with Russell Martin. The fact that his crossing and general play was not up to his usual high standard certainly detracted from the end product. However, there was almost nothing coming in from the other side because Redmond was below par.You might not agree with my opinions but then again nobody is forcing you to. This thread expresses my opinion as can be quite readily seen from the title and nobody is stopping you from posting anything you disagree with. In fact it''s full of comments from people who disagree with me. I''ve been going to CR for 60 yrs and in all that time I have seldom found myself watching the same game as everybody else, but then that''s what most people think don''t they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="ricardo"]Booing when Redmond came off was pathetic. He was very ineffective today. It happens with young players.[/quote]
They weren''t booing Redmond, they were booing because they thought Snodgrass should have been the player leaving the pitch (so were booing Hughton''s decision)..... which is why the chant of "you don''t know what you''re doing" then rang out.
[/quote]I am aware that they were booing the decision and not Redmond. Personally, I think it was the right decision although I am also aware that others think it wasn''t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Now it''s urgency! A little more urgency and everything would be ok.

 

I think me and Rickyyyyy are to old to understand the game. We never had football manager to teach us. I reckon with a little urgency and persevering with Redmond and Elmander we''d have won by 3 or 4.

 

 

[/quote]Sadly I think you could be right Nigel, they pretty much got what they wanted, kicking Johno out and setting up in a more obvious attacking mode and still they aren''t happy. Every week there''s a new scapegoat or a new formation that should be tried. I might not be an expert on football manager but at least I did forecast BEFORE the match that playing without Johno or Tetty would result in no points. It''s at 3.24pm Friday on the Team for AVFC thread. I''m far from being always right but it looked pretty obvious today from the first minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting, then that you can see this Ricardo but our manager can''t? I''ve played Tettey and Fer in the centre for what it''s worth - but the real issue is that one shot on target is simply not good enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Highland Canary"]Interesting, then that you can see this Ricardo but our manager can''t? I''ve played Tettey and Fer in the centre for what it''s worth - but the real issue is that one shot on target is simply not good enough.[/quote]Yes, that''s the kind of defence you can play when you go one up away from home. I wonder how many Villa Fans are criticizing their team for dropping back for the best part of an hour. There must have been more than one shot on target because Guzan made a marvelous save plus the penalty. There were also a few blocked efforts due to Villa''s crowded penalty area and a couple of saves off defenders deflections that on another day would have gone in.Yes, we didn''t win and we didn''t score but you asked for an attacking line up, more attacking intention and that''s pretty much what you got.Me, I''d have been happy with keeping it tight and getting 3 points from a rather drab game, but that''s just me. [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Had the penalty gone in we would be discussing an entirely different

game. Most of the criticism today is merely disappointment at the

result. Villa certainly weren''t better than us but rode their luck, got

their goal and thanks to good fortune and a brilliant save from Guzan

they claimed all three points.The way some are going on you would think they played us off the park."

Pretty much my thoughts RicardoI didn''t see any of this lack of attacking intent, or delivery. Nor was there any sense of lack of urgency either. However if we are talking about what might have happened then the one question that hasn''t been asked is what would we be discussing if Benteke had stayed on the pitch ? Would it have been more than 1-0 ?Sadly todays game merely exposed Hughton''s limitations ....... yet again. It is all very well sticking with a game plan if it works or is working but to stay with it when it isn''t suggests limitations in the managers abilities as much in his range of tactics. Yes we could have scored with a couple of clear cut cances, but they only served to highlight the failings of lack of continuous goal threat.Hughton has certainly changed his approach. Gone is the old ''get the ball in their half then check and pass it back'' to all out attack down the wing. But the problem is that is about all it is. A very limited approach which seems to oblige the players to stick to that come what may. Which brings us back to the constant problem. Players are not moving off the ball and are remaining too static. This, I suggest, is a consequence of Hughton''s inability to adapt and change things around.For all his micro management of the players during the game he seems unable to see the bigger picture and switch things around. Subs that are brought on appear to be no more than direct replacements in te belief that nothing is wrong with his game plan, it just needs ''better'' players to implement it.Todays game plan seem to be to get the ball wide, get Snoddy or Redmond to run with it before crossing the ball. Nothing else, that was it. Nothing through the middle (which may well have explained why both Elmander and RVW looked out of sorts and were constantly dropping deep to look for the ball)  and possibly why Hoolahan is out of favour - he doesn''t stick to the game plan.Unfortunately City fans had three years of a manager who did mix it up, did change things round, and from what I gather, did allow the players to play ... their game. The point now is can someone change Hughton and get him to allow the players to play ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be encouraging that the starting line-up I''ve wished for was five players different from that which started today. So we do have some depth in the squad, We need new ideas and an ability to change tactics as circumstances dictate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The lady on the radio after the game who said she thought the last 2 games of last season the players decided to play their own game and not stick to the plan was an interesting point. We look to rigid at the moment with no flowing football, which is stopping us producing the goods for the forwards, I still think the wolf and Hooper should start as if they can click they could be very formidable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

City1st wrote: "Which brings us back to the constant problem. Players are not moving off the ball and are remaining too static."

 

City1st, good overall observations on your part. I absolutely agree that your point that I highlighted is the problem, particularly when we move forward. I have watched the game through twice completely and time and again you see one of our players moving forward with the ball while his colleagues are relatively static, resulting in the opposing defenders to have less concern than they otherwise would have against a team attacking with thrust and movement. Aston Villa have one of the weaker teams defensively so, in my opinion, this is cause for concern. I''m not sure why this is occurring ( you cite Hughton''s inability to adapt and change thins around ) but I agree that Hughton is ultimately responsible for correcting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I''m not sure why this is occurring ( you cite Hughton''s inability to adapt and change thins around )"

Is that suggested inability a given then ? As to me, the evidence is there game after game.You can see where it is not working yet nothing seems to change tactically.Certainly Hughton has changed in his approach. We no longer have to wait til around 80 mins for substitutes and the tactic of playing the ball backwards once you get into the opponents half has been abandoned.But there is still the sense that the players are stuck in a rigid formation and that is constraining them when a bit of flair and originality is needed.Can Hughton change further ................ and what caused the other changes ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What caused the other changes?

 

Well if it wasn''t Hughton then surely today he was a dead man walking. Because the inference is that someone over his head told him to change his style.

 

I thought we played much the same against Southampton. Difference being Bradley Johnson who gave us extra insurance defensively.

 

Oh and Louis.. if  you''re still around.. did we lack urgency or not. Because i''m confused by your contradicting posts. And not for the first time!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was referring to when we played in that way before, not Southamprtonas to whether someone over his head told him something, then you may have egg on your face sooner rather than latter young nutty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you keep reading stuff into my posts that isn''t there buddy.

 

If Hughton has been told, at anytime, how to run the football team then from that moment he''s a dead man walking! You can''t have a marketing man or whoever it was running the football team. Other interferers at least bring in a football man under the guise of Director of Football.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That''s a bit rich as I never stated that anyone ''over his head'' caused him to change his tactics.That was your words, so I was merely commenting on what you said. Which was not infering but direct suggestion.For the record my thoughts were running on the line of was it that now he has a team mainly of his own players he can stop the passing back stuff and the last minute substitutions - or have they been abandoned because they are not working. The idea of the latter is that he can adapt.Because if he cannot adapt he is croissant (or something breakfasty)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

---- nutty nigel: Seriously if you read this thread. Redmond was ok, Snodgrass was ok, Elmander was ok, the central midfield were good. We played well as a unit. And all the problems we''d identified last season. AND.. to cap it all... we were all at the same game

When in actual fact, Elmander was rubbish and did nothing to show he can be our attacking midfielder, Snodgrass was all effort and no end product with the usual hysterics, and the central midfield were mediocre at best, with Fer drifting in and out of the game and Howson his usual 6/10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As has been said, if the penalty had gone in the game would have taken a different turn form our perspective.

All Villa had in their armory was counter attacking, even Lambert said it himself afterwards. Their defence was nervous all day long. We had 60%+ possession.

If our delivery of the final ball had been anything above poor, we would have walked it.

The RVW chance, the Villa defender''s wild slice that went a foot over his own bar, these things ''normally'' go in. Yesterday they didn''t.

Martin and Snoddy were ripping Luna apart time after time, it''s just that Snoddy had a mare with his delivery.

It was quality that was missing, not effort.

Redmond looked the busiest player in the first half, wanting to make things happen, Pilkington, didn''t really do a lot when he came on (down to service)

Fer seemed to be trying to fight the midfield battle on his own at times.

We were constantly saying through the game about the lack of movement from our players, offering options.

There does seem to be things appearing in our team that we have not seen for some years. Players having a go at each other (Pilkington twice on Garrido, Martin and Snodgrass having a dig). Lack of confidence (vs Everton, when we scored, we looked like World beaters, as soon as they scored , we retreated back into a shell). Little things that the manager has not had to deal with because of constant success, but now we have reached a plateau in our development, need to be addressed.

There was more right than wrong from Hughton yesterday, if the players (Snodgrass, far and away the worst offender) had more quality on the ball in the final third, we would have had a comfortable three points.

If Lambert had made the 2 attacking substitutions on 60 minutes, that Hughton did, and it didn''t work out, then we would have all said ''at least he tried''. Yet Hughton seems to be taking a slating for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did anyone suggest Howson as a holding midfield player in the potential team formations prior to the match? I''d be somewhat surprised to see a high frequency count for him in that particular position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a few occasions Howson got the ball centrally and ran at their defence, on both occasions he was making progress and getting attention from more than one of their players, thus earning some space for those who were running in support of him.

 

I wish he would do that more often, certainly on those two occasions he did in the second half it looked like something, briefly, might have come from it.

 

And that should be his position and role in the team, slotting the unit that is Elmander in there and expecting him to be the link and creator in chief is pushing the boundaries a little.

 

Mozart was once allegedly told "too many notes"-looking back at yesterday with us it seemed a case of "too many passes"-no one seemed to want to take the ball and make something happen with it, players got it and passed, usually you ''pass and move'' but with us its often a case of ''pass and run away''. And always looking to make things happen via the overlap and the cross from near the corner flag or just inside of it, do we know how to attack in any other way?

 

I think, in my naivety, the players we have fit a 4-3-1-2 formation better than any with Howson as the ''1''. But that''s not going to happen. Yesterday seemed a case of 11 busy individuals who haven''t yet been fitted together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Highland Canary wrote the following post at 22/09/2013 8:36 AM:

Did anyone suggest Howson as a holding midfield player in the potential team formations prior to the match? I''d be somewhat surprised to see a high frequency count for him in that particular position.

I don''t think they did Highland! I certainly didn''t. I was looking forward to seeing Fer and Tettey in mid field together with Pilks and Redmond, also Olson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn''t see if they did or not, but I do suspect they may have had a chat in the 7 days leading up to the game, or even had an inspirational talk in the changing room. The pre match huddle is for the fans only, not for some last , previously unsaid, words of tactical/inspirational wisdom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

crabbycanary wrote the following post at 22/09/2013 10:14 AM:

"had a chat in the 7 days leading up to the game, or even had an inspirational talk in the changing room"

Not sure how inspirational our changing room chats are, you would have hoped to see us come out all fired up for the second half, but for the first 6 or 7 minutes we didn''t seem to know where we were!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="crabbycanary"]As has been said, if the penalty had gone in the game would have taken a different turn form our perspective.

All Villa had in their armory was counter attacking, even Lambert said it himself afterwards. Their defence was nervous all day long. We had 60%+ possession.

If our delivery of the final ball had been anything above poor, we would have walked it.

The RVW chance, the Villa defender''s wild slice that went a foot over his own bar, these things ''normally'' go in. Yesterday they didn''t.

Martin and Snoddy were ripping Luna apart time after time, it''s just that Snoddy had a mare with his delivery.

It was quality that was missing, not effort.

Redmond looked the busiest player in the first half, wanting to make things happen, Pilkington, didn''t really do a lot when he came on (down to service)

Fer seemed to be trying to fight the midfield battle on his own at times.

We were constantly saying through the game about the lack of movement from our players, offering options.

There does seem to be things appearing in our team that we have not seen for some years. Players having a go at each other (Pilkington twice on Garrido, Martin and Snodgrass having a dig). Lack of confidence (vs Everton, when we scored, we looked like World beaters, as soon as they scored , we retreated back into a shell). Little things that the manager has not had to deal with because of constant success, but now we have reached a plateau in our development, need to be addressed.

There was more right than wrong from Hughton yesterday, if the players (Snodgrass, far and away the worst offender) had more quality on the ball in the final third, we would have had a comfortable three points.

If Lambert had made the 2 attacking substitutions on 60 minutes, that Hughton did, and it didn''t work out, then we would have all said ''at least he tried''. Yet Hughton seems to be taking a slating for it.[/quote]
Good observations Crabby. I agree.
According to the BBC we had 66% possession. Don''t think I have ever seen a stat that high for Norwich in this premiership run.
Despite some shortcomings I thought we opened them up enough to have won and comfortably. We could not have bought a break today. A penalty, RvW had two good chances the one off his chest that on another day could easily have gone in, and a good effort that was a whisker wide of the post. Leroy got clear on the left in the second half and really should have picked out a man for a straightforward goal, and Hooper didn''t get a good connection from 6 yards at the end - on another day he would have given Guzan no chance.
So it could actually have been very different and this board a different post match place. It is very disappointing because we could and should have won.
I was happy with the Pilkington substitution at the time but I felt his play lacked discipline. He was roaming all over the place when he could have given us more width by keeping shape on the left.
A big concern for me though was the remonstrating between players particularly Pilks and Garrido. Not a good sign. And if RvW is the designated penalty taker then its unacceptable that Snoddy overruled on the pitch.
COYY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can''t say ''if the penalty went in things wouldn''t been different''. Surely the fact it was never a penalty in a million years was more important

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People have commented on a lack of leadership. For Snodgrass to undermine Hughtons authority on the penalty thing is unacceptable. Does it demonstrate the players do not respect hughton as an authority figure? Possibly. Im not sure Hughton helped by making the captain situation unnecessarily complicated. Hughton should consider disciplining Snodgrass. By allowing him to openly defy his managers pre-match instructions and get away with it by saying Snodgrass felt confident just makes him look weak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You will see more penalties given, than not, this season for that exact situation.

The ball travelled at least 5 yards before the ball hit the outstretched arm. If it had happened for you, you would have been screaming for a penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...