Poor selection

[nogbad van 50]

22 hours ago, deanoakaram4life said:

Lampard got it wrong today, it's alright fluttering your eyelids at the Chelsea job but you have to learn your trade. It took Brian Clough 3 years before he managed in the old first division. Starting Mason Bennett up front and not Marriott was suicide. All the best to Villa, let's start again with a fresh youthful squad next year. Up the Fuc#ing Rams! 

I get your point re Lamps but “Old Big Head” arrived in 1967 and got us up in his second season ? 

[RoyMac5]

2 hours ago, Alpha said:

He didn't get lucky. He bought Marriott. He then brought him on. He helped developed the mentality we have

We lost.

[Shaftesbury st]

1 hour ago, KCG said:

Look you'll learn that we all have to be happy clappers, and that even if we are making a reasonable judgment, based on the way we have seen the game, we are the enemy. Even had one idiot calling me something very unpleasant. Not sure he'd do it to my face!

I find it incredible that an opinion that let’s face it is probably shared by the masses can be so divisive. 

Mum never going to be a happy clapper and I’m never going to be a moaning whinging soon and gloom merchant either 

[Dcfcsr92]

6 hours ago, Anon said:

It's an error from Bogle on the first, but let's not pretend it was an easy cross to deal with or that it hadn't been coming. We were constantly overloaded on our flanks in the first half. Johnson was almost playing as a second left back to help cover. The Villa player was left completely open and uncontested to pick his spot for the cross. Putting the blame on Bogle ignores the real failings that led to Villa's opening goal.

He runs straight past bogle, bogle should use his body and block him bogles had a good season but hes at fault for this

[Alph]

35 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

We lost.

Against Leeds. 

[RoyMac5]

13 minutes ago, Alpha said:

Against Leeds. 

Lol. So why not do the same against Villa if it worked. Oh yeah I know cos Villa aren't L**ds! 

Starting with Huddlestone and not Marriott, plus no width played into Villa's hands - we should have been more than two down they had more chances. 

[nogbad van 50]

22 hours ago, ilkleyram said:

As everyone's allowed an opinion, wrong or not, mine is that Frank got selection spot on today. Not only does he know more than anyone on here whether players are actually fully fit or not (rather than just appearing to be 'hungry' in their 20 minutes on the pitch) but he also appears to appreciate that a football match is played over 90+ minutes and you can win through the efforts of those that start but not necessarily finish the game.

I thought Mason Bennett as a lone striker gave their centre halves a difficult time. He ran in behind, muscled them, won headers and generally gave them an uncomfortable afternoon. Marriott and Waghorn benefitted from that work later on.

Huddlestone had an effective first half, less so in the second and was taken off; Bradley consistently effective throughout; Bogle a nervous first 15/20 and settled into the game; Cole steady throughout despite carrying a knock of some sort; Mount excellent; Roos made a mistake for the second and Bogle for the first - two young, inexperienced players in the biggest game of their careers so far. If you're  going to knock young players for making mistakes then next season won't be much fun for you when Bird, Thomas, Sibley and co start to make more appearances.

Frank's a young manager too. Yet he made some effective decisions and changes in personnel and system through the match. The players clearly responded and for the last 20 minutes there was only one team in it. This against a side full of experienced players who have scored 7 goals against us this season without reply. Today we pushed them.

And all this from a club that a year ago was knocked out in the play off semi final with fans and team and management in internal strife playing a brand of football that was, at best, workmanlike. The transformation in a single season has been significant. That side would not have beaten Leeds in the second leg.

So, if you're cheesed off tonight go away and have a summer off. Keep your negativity to yourself and be quietly proud instead of how far we've come, because in about 10 short weeks it starts all over again.

Love this post !! Frank said after the game that Waghorn has been injured for three weeks and that he didn’t feel that he or Marriott could last 90 mins of a high intensity game.It never ceases to amaze me that someone who sees the players on a daily basis and is aware of all their strengths and weaknesses gets criticised by these experts on forums ffs!! We’re all disappointed with the result but it was a daft mistake by Roos and Bogle for the first goal( neither going for it properly) and poor goalkeeping for the second.Waghorn and Marriott could have come on as their defence tired and perhaps won it but ,due to the mistakes,we’ll never know.I’m always open to hearing constructive comments but I think peoples’ disappointment is clouding their objectivity.Villa thrashed us in the previous two games but it was never going to happen yesterday.Lessons learned,squad improvements imminent,move on please!!

[cheron85]

1) Not sure about all these armchair-managers and their vast and wonderful array of knowledge - But has anyone mentioned the very obvious fact that Lampard set out to specifically stop Villa's midfield? Midfield diamond with Mount and Johnson on McGinn and Grealish and Wilson pushing on Hourihane leaving Huddlestone free to play - He then played the only fully fit CF we have (Bennett) to win any aerial balls we had to pump forward - And decided a fully fit Lawrence would provide more as a number 10 than a half-fit Waggers or Marriott - Waggers and Marriott were both then incredibly effective coming on at the end when Villa were tired

Now, you can rant and rave about rights and wrongs with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight but the logic of the above approach is sound - No battle plans survives first contact with the enemy - Or if you want Mike Tyson's take on it "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth"

2) Have some pandas and calm down

 

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, cheron85 said:

..) Not sure about all these armchair-managers and their vast and wonderful array of knowledge - But has anyone mentioned the very obvious fact that Lampard set out to specifically stop Villa's midfield? Midfield diamond with Mount and Johnson on McGinn and Grealish and Wilson pushing on Hourihane leaving Huddlestone free to play...

So it worked we won then! #hurrah

[Anag Ram]

2 minutes ago, cheron85 said:

1) Not sure about all these armchair-managers and their vast and wonderful array of knowledge - But has anyone mentioned the very obvious fact that Lampard set out to specifically stop Villa's midfield? Midfield diamond with Mount and Johnson on McGinn and Grealish and Wilson pushing on Hourihane leaving Huddlestone free to play - He then played the only fully fit CF we have (Bennett) to win any aerial balls we had to pump forward - And decided a fully fit Lawrence would provide more as a number 10 than a half-fit Waggers or Marriott - Waggers and Marriott were both then incredibly effective coming on at the end when Villa were tired

Now, you can rant and rave about rights and wrongs with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight but the logic of the above approach is sound - No battle plans survives first contact with the enemy - Or if you want Mike Tyson's take on it "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth"

2) Have some pandas and calm down

 

Without armchair managers this forum would be largely pointless.

I could take all of your points if a football match was all about negating the opposition.

Fact is, being hassled by Wilson and Mount is not too onerous and Lawrence didn't offer more than a half fit anyone.

But that's just an opinion.

?

 

 

[cheron85]

7 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

So it worked we won then! #hurrah

I'd say it was working okay in a cagey first half - They looked the better side for the first 15 but we came back into it - The goal was some poor defending and these things happen unfortunately

Half time they obviously adapted to it - Notably Hourihane started ignoring Wilson and he and McGinn started closing down Huddlestone (who has struggled under pressure all season) - They killed us for the first 10-15 mins of the half because they'd worked out how to stop us - I was checking the touchline and at around 55 mins Lampard had sent Marriott out so he seemed about ready to make the change already - It wasn't a reaction to the 2nd goal but to the way Villa had countered our first half set up

Did it work? In the end obviously not - But football is a game of fine margins and pointing fingers and whining and moaning about how you'd have done it so much better is nonsense - Try and find the positives for once in your grumbly existence

2 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

Fact is, being hassled by Wilson and Mount is not too onerous and Lawrence didn't offer more than a half fit anyone.

Fact? No - That's your opinion - It worked against West Brom

Lawrence? Benefit of hindsight - And you have no idea - Fit Villa CBs against Waggers and Marriott first half may well have had a field day - However they were lightning against a tired Villa defence at the end, when half-fit players would likely have struggled

[RoyMac5]

9 minutes ago, cheron85 said:

Did it work? In the end obviously not - But football is a game of fine margins and pointing fingers and whining and moaning about how you'd have done it so much better is nonsense - Try and find the positives for once in your grumbly existence...

At least I don't resort to personal comments because you have a difference of opinion. Opinion not backed up by the result.

[curb]

The meltdown on here would have been very funny if we'd have played Johnson or Hudds on their own in the middle and got beat 4-0. (ooh I say frank's got a lot to learn hasn't he). 

Villa have a far better squad than us because they've had around £100 million thrown at them by the Premier League in the last three seasons. They've bought a multitude of midfielders who they've been able to swap around until they get the right combination. We blew our little spending spree a few years ago, none of that is lampard's fault, yet he's made the most of a crap squad and got us all a day out at Wembley against the odds.

A few weeks ago no-one thought we'd win at Bristol, no-one thought we'd beat West Brom and no-one thought we'd come from behind to beat Leeds. We took Villa to the wire, enjoy it for what it was, stop pointing the finger of blame and look forward to another roller coaster of a season in the most exciting league in Europe.

[LB_DCFC]

5 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

At least I don't resort to personal comments because you have a difference of opinion. Opinion not backed up by the result.

And of course we all know that the result paints the full picture of every football game ever. Would you say that your opinions of Rowett last season were wrong in the same respect, then? Especially those voiced when we were winning?

[1967Ram]

17 hours ago, Rammy03 said:

It was always that final pass. In the end we had enough possession and chances to at least draw level and take it to extra time but bad balls in and decision making stopped us getting the goals. For example Bogle having a shot instead of cutting back to waghorn for an empty net tap in. The goals we conceded were soft as well and should have been dealt with. All in all on the day it just looks like we weren't ready to make that big step yet, villa were and their experience showed that. Our team is full of young, good on the ball players and they will be better for this and learn. Hopefully this is just the start of something because I feel we've built a real foundation this season which we can build on and make that final step... Actually getting to the premier League.

Agree with almost all of this. The only part I'd disagree with is highlighted. On another day we wouldn't have made so many mistakes.

Roos was always going to be picked as keeper yesterday as he'd made the number 1 spot his own. No one could have foreseen him making such a sloppy error. Roos most of all will be so down about it. Personally I hope we give him a new contract as he's had a good season, shows a lot of potential and Frank obviously has faith in him. 

Also, Bogle could, and probably should, have blocked their player's run for Villa's first. It was a good goal mind (even if it did end up coming off his back/shoulder). Bogle also probably should have played an easy side foot pass to the edge of the box for Marriott or Waghorn instead of shooting in the second half (but of course if it had gone in no one would have complained!).

The problem with this beautiful game is you sometimes need a bit of good luck. Villa had it yesterday, we didn't. Good luck to them.

 

[eddie]

Don's know what happened there.

 

 

[RoyMac5]

21 minutes ago, LB_DCFC said:

And of course we all know that the result paints the full picture of every football game ever. Would you say that your opinions of Rowett last season were wrong in the same respect, then? Especially those voiced when we were winning?

Of course not, I said that if Rowett got us up then you couldn't argue with his negative tactics. 

IMO Villa were just as vunerable as we were, as evidenced by the last 15 minutes. Lampard chose to play the sort of reactive tactics that got Snake such a bad rap. It didn't work. Maybe if he'd concentrated on showing Villa what we could do from the start then who knows. We only pulled the game out the fire against L**ds because Marriott had to come on earlier than scheduled.

If you'd like to be happy about another failure at Wembley you go right ahead. Oh and how many shots on target before Marriott/Waghorn scored? Very Snake.

[KCG]

18 minutes ago, 1967Ram said:

The problem with this beautiful game is you sometimes need a bit of good luck. Villa had it yesterday, we didn't. Good luck to them.

 

We didn't lose because of bad luck, we lost because we lost the tactical battle in the first half and didn't change things until we were 2-0 down. Our defence was incredibly shaky yesterday. The pundits aren't wrong for pointing out our defensive frailties this season, we've hardly kept a clean sheet.

When I saw the team the optimism I had after our second half performance against Leeds quickly evaporated.

[SaintRam]

2 minutes ago, Shaftesbury st said:

 Clueless, get the radio on, Ramage saying same, Talk sport said same last night but you are right aren’t you.

of course we don’t know that would have happened but what we do know is the team he picked didn’t deliver, did you actually watch the game or did you sit there spinning your claxon. 

Clueless happy clapper

I am not wading into this argument, I don't care about the topic, I just want to point out that naming Ramage as a supporter of your opinion does not strengthen it.

[Alph]

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

Lol. So why not do the same against Villa if it worked. Oh yeah I know cos Villa aren't L**ds! 

Starting with Huddlestone and not Marriott, plus no width played into Villa's hands - we should have been more than two down they had more chances. 

I give up

If Marriott had started we'd have won 4-3 and Roos would have saved a penalty.