Villa Vs City Post Match Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Ducado
- Start date
East Level 2
Well-Known Member
ballinio said:
Surely this is more down to us scoring 27 fewer last season when compared to our title winning season?
If we played shit and lost, I'd be worried. We have been poor and outplayed against this likes of hull,stoke and Cardiff but since then, we actually looked really good. We should have won comfortably on sat and was so on top, we got complacent . I'm personally goin to put this one down to 'one of those games'. Yes, we've dropped points when we shouldn't but we can beat anyone in that league and it's up to us to now learn from it and press on.
I would say that that'll give us a kick up the arse but I said that about a dozen times last season .
I would say that that'll give us a kick up the arse but I said that about a dozen times last season .
Mancini's philosophy when we took a lead against a mid-lower table club was to defend the lead, score any additional goals by counter attacks.
Pellegrini's philosophy is to try to get a two goal lead.
Could it be that the players still haven't adjusted to the new philosophy? Caught between two stools?
It could be argued that Mancini's approach worked better against Villa, we won our last two games 0-1. But it was still a risky approach. We should have had a late penalty awarded against us last season and needed that magnificent Hart save to hang on to the points the year before.
Despite yesterday's result I still prefer Pellegrini's approach. 9 times out of 10 we would have got the two goal lead the way the two teams were playing. Yesterday was the 10th.
But could it be that we haven't quite got the balance right yet?
Pellegrini's philosophy is to try to get a two goal lead.
Could it be that the players still haven't adjusted to the new philosophy? Caught between two stools?
It could be argued that Mancini's approach worked better against Villa, we won our last two games 0-1. But it was still a risky approach. We should have had a late penalty awarded against us last season and needed that magnificent Hart save to hang on to the points the year before.
Despite yesterday's result I still prefer Pellegrini's approach. 9 times out of 10 we would have got the two goal lead the way the two teams were playing. Yesterday was the 10th.
But could it be that we haven't quite got the balance right yet?
St Helens Blue (Exiled)
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 May 2011
- Messages
- 14,648
cibaman said:
Sorry mate but the stats don't lie...Defeats at both Cardiff and Villa and a turgid draw at Stoke..Nothing to do with balance,it's because champs league is his and the clubs priority.
BlueMoonie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 1,187
I don't buy the we lost because we rested players excuse
We scored two goals away at villa and let in 3, us losing that game had nothing to do with the players which pellers rested. The players which were left out most noticeably Aguero wouldn't have stopped us conceding 3 goals. Defensive errors cost us that game, 2 pieces of shoddy defending and a needless freekick. It happens move on and stop trying to point the finger.
We scored two goals away at villa and let in 3, us losing that game had nothing to do with the players which pellers rested. The players which were left out most noticeably Aguero wouldn't have stopped us conceding 3 goals. Defensive errors cost us that game, 2 pieces of shoddy defending and a needless freekick. It happens move on and stop trying to point the finger.
St Helens Blue (Exiled)
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 May 2011
- Messages
- 14,648
Re: I don't buy the we lost because we rested players excuse
3 wins in 10 away from home tells me you are wrong.
BlueMoonie said:
3 wins in 10 away from home tells me you are wrong.
jimharri
Moderator
Re: I don't buy the we lost because we rested players excuse
P.S. Sorry about all the ''may well's''!
Aguero may well not have stopped the three goals, that is true. However; he may well have stuck away one or two of the chances that fell to other players yesterday. If we had got a couple of goals ahead, Villa's heads may well have dropped and we'd probably have won the game fairly comfortably.BlueMoonie said:
P.S. Sorry about all the ''may well's''!
prestonibbo_mcfc
Well-Known Member
Re: I don't buy the we lost because we rested players excuse
You could argue, that if Aguero had started, we might have scored more and therefore could've
afforded the 3 goals conceded.
BTW I don't.
You could argue, that if Aguero had started, we might have scored more and therefore could've
afforded the 3 goals conceded.
BTW I don't.
BlueMoonie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 1,187
Re: I don't buy the we lost because we rested players excuse
I wasn't aware we had played 10 away games this season, or are you that desperate to have a pop you're seriously adding in pre-season games. Cardiff and Stoke may have been different but the villa game had nothing to do with resting players, the team put out there should have won and aguero wasn't the reason we didn't.
I wasn't aware we had played 10 away games this season, or are you that desperate to have a pop you're seriously adding in pre-season games. Cardiff and Stoke may have been different but the villa game had nothing to do with resting players, the team put out there should have won and aguero wasn't the reason we didn't.
Ardwick Green Blue
Well-Known Member
shadowyu said:
First Villa goal was offside but the free kick was legit as Nasty caught the Villa player with a clumsy attempt at a tackle.
What can you say about the third other than it was pathetic defending you wouldn't expect to see at any professional level.
Ardwick Green Blue said:
For the free kick, the villa player had already played the pass before he was fouled (might even have been obstruction in which case the free kick should have been indirect). The villa player wasn't impeded in playing the pass but was if Going for the return ball, however the original pass was intercepted by a city defender (not sure who) therefore he wasn't impeded at all - no free kick and at the very worst it was indirect
Robbed by the match officials for the first two goals
samharris said:
ok what is going to be the points needed for 4th place this season
if you take it that the top 6 will be fighting each other and take points of each other is there going to be a lower or high points total than last season
my bet the 4th place will need over 70 points and it could be 75 that gets you in 4th place and the gap from 1st to 4th will be lower than 10 points
if we don't sort out the away form and start taking 3 points of the lower to middle teams away from home then 70 points will be very hard to fight for with the games we have away
still got to play the top 6 away and the points wont or don't come easy
our new manager is playing the wrong game if he thinks lets get the champions league groups sorted out before the winter break then start to play in the premier league and see from there
FromPollockToSilva
Well-Known Member
ancoats said:
I'm not particularly worried about playing the top six away, the players will more than likely be able to motivate themselves for those games. Our record in big domestic games over the last few seasons (home and away) has generally been very good.
Our big problem has really come against 'lesser' teams and has been largely due to a mixture of complacency, profligacy and a basic lack of effort. While I didn't really see any signs of the third issue yesterday, we were certainly guilty of the other two.
A
A
Anonymous
Guest
shadowyu said:
Maybe .....
but we had much more possession , far more corners , and far more shots than Aston Villa , yet only managed the two goals ...... and one of those came from a midfielder !
If we'd been a bit more clinical in front of goal , as Liverpool have been at Sunderland , we might just have got away with our kamikazi defending ...... there are many that say you make your own luck !