Poor selection

[RoyMac5]

5 minutes ago, Alpha said:

I give up

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

I don't think Roos would have saved a penalty. But Marriott might have scored more and at least had more than one shot on target in 55 minutes!

[R@M]

30 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

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.

You mean after Mings got cramp, was injured and couldn’t run, dropping Villa back, after being battered for 70 minutes by Bennett?

Do you really think you can compare a side with Lawrence, Mount and Wilson to any of the poo we saw last season? And if you are purely criticising ‘reactive tactics’ surely that is the only thing he could do having lost 2 previous games 3/4 - 0 !!!

[eddie]

What I hate about a fair proportion of our fanbase is the rather pathetic, sneering, churlish "I told you so" attitude when something doesn't work out, coupled with the "Any fool can see xyz" statements they use to justify their permanent sense of self-congratulatory correctness. Sod off.

[curb]

37 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

Did you actually watch the game, or do you form all of your opinions listening to Ramage and talksport?

[Shaftesbury st]

17 minutes ago, curb said:

Did you actually watch the game, or do you form all of your opinions listening to Ramage and talksport?

No I was there fella, just like all but two home games and half a dozen away, is that good enough for ya

[LeedsCityRam]

2 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

So it worked we won then! #hurrah

You've been quiet recently Roy - been enjoying our end of season surge I take it?

[curb]

5 minutes ago, Shaftesbury st said:

No I was there fella, just like all but two home games and half a dozen away, is that good enough for ya

Yes, thanks for the confirmation

[KCG]

1 minute ago, LeedsCityRam said:

You've been quiet recently Roy - been enjoying our end of season surge I take it?

Someone levelled the same allegation at me yesterday and I've been posting regularly throughout. Seems people only notice if they don't like your opinion.

[RoyMac5]

39 minutes ago, R@M said:

You mean after Mings got cramp, was injured and couldn’t run, dropping Villa back, after being battered for 70 minutes by Bennett?

He got cramp stretching to tackle Waghorn, nowt to do with Bennett.

[RoyMac5]

5 minutes ago, KCG said:

Someone levelled the same allegation at me yesterday and I've been posting regularly throughout. Seems people only notice if they don't like your opinion.

Yeah. If you say owt while the sun is shining you're a killjoy. If you say owt when it's raining you're a killjoy. ?

We might not have been so unlucky yesterday if we'd mustered more first half shots on target than a Rowett team! ?

[Shaftesbury st]

15 minutes ago, curb said:

Yes, thanks for the confirmation

Your welcome.

 

[curb]

9 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

We might not have been so unlucky yesterday if we'd mustered more first half shots on target than a Rowett team! ?

 

We did, one ?

[R@M]

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

He got cramp stretching to tackle Waghorn, nowt to do with Bennett.

Cramp during physical exertion is due to the overuse and or dehydration of a muscle. You don’t just get cramp because you strained a bit. That surprisingly is call a muscle strain (or tear if you like).  But you continue to fabricate facts to fit your agenda of proving to everyone that you are the managerial messiah.  ?

 

[RoyMac5]

10 minutes ago, R@M said:

Cramp during physical exertion is due to the overuse and or dehydration of a muscle.

Cramp is another common injury for athletes at all levels and affects hard working muscles such as the calves in runners and the arm in tennis players.

But despite being able to cure all kinds of killer diseases, scientists still don't know what causes it!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/health_and_fitness/4275144.stm

[DavesaRam]

Well here is my two pennies worth:

Frank and Jody (let's not forget his contribution to this season) are between a rock and a hard place. There have been lots of great contributions, and a fair bit of emotion, but whichever way Frank had tried to tackle the job yesterday he'd have faced criticism.

The immediate history is that Villa have beaten us twice, with an aggregate of 7 - 0, suggesting that they can over run our midfield. So does he tighten up the midfield, or take the game to Villa to force them onto the back foot? It might do to them what we did to Leeds, or it might be 7 - 0 in one match! And who does he play up front? We have Waghorn who can do great hold-up play, and has started to find the net, and Marriott who is a natural poacher, and we have Mason Bennett, who is not necessarily an out and out striker, but gives passion and effort, and a degree of pace to disturb defences. Which one or two do we go with? Oh, and by the way, none of these guys has got 90 minutes in them? 

In addition Holmes, who was very important to the diamond which blew Leeds to bits, is injured. Have we got anyone who can do a "Holmes" for us? Errrr            no.

It seems that Frank went for a safe approach with two DMs in order to put limits on what Villa's midfield, Grealish in particular, could do to us. At the same time use Bennett's energy, commitment and energy to work the Villa defence, which is known to be suspect, before unleashing Wagofn and Marriott on them once they were tiring.

It nearly worked, with Grealish in particular not achieving very much, but we were undone by a couple of bits of sloppy play. Ohhhhh so close!

But: deciding our midfield didn't need a third hand-made backside by playing two DMs ignored the fact the Mount didn't play in those two matches, while Grealish did, and now Mount was back. I would therefore concur that we were too cautious in our approach. And although it is part of modern tactical thinking to set your team up to address the strengths of the opposition, the other adage is to set your team up to play to your own strengths and give the other team the problem of dealing with us. We didn't have the resources to go smash Villa for 90 minutes, and if our midfield was too lightweight we may well get mullered again., so two DMs it is

Going the way we did was OK given the circumstances and limitations, but it should have been alongside aiming to move the ball much more quickly, especially in the transitions. We took far too long, and seemed more determined to demonstrate that we were playing the ball out from the  back than we were to beat the Villa. Secondly, the much needed boost to our firepower came too late, effectively after the game was already gone.

Once we did lose a DM and go two up front, we were all over the opposition, and our play was fast and incisive, and seemed to show just what we are capable of when we press and play on the front foot. However, this has to be balanced with the fact that Villa were now sitting back on a 2 - 0 lead with most of the  match gone. However, once we did that, it was only a matter of time before their defence gave way, so with an other ten or twenty minutes it may well have produced the winner. BUT if we hadn't gifted the second goal, or allowed room for the header for the first, or the ref had actually given the foul in the same way that he penalised Derby for virtually every challenge we made, it may well have been a different story.

In reality we got the chance to swing the bat at the ball which the EFL had bowled when we shouldn't have really had the  bat in our hand in the first place, such were the vagaries of the season. And on the other hand, Villa were beatable, and were there for the taking if we had chosen to put their defence under pressure.

These are only my own, personal views but they do echo what has been put throughout the thread, but there will be lots of you who will disagree with me.                                 GOOD. That is what football is all about, and it is what forums are for.

 

Last summer we had a manager who had never managed before, an assistant who had never assisted before, at least not at this intensity, and a squad which was about 60 - 70% new and had therefore never played together before. Add in the torpor of how we played last season meaning that there had to be an absolutely total change in playing ethics, and we ought to have been happy to even be in the top 10 in the division. We finished 6th, and played some great football (we did some absolute tosh as well!), finished 6th and got to play at Wembley, ending up really close to Premier League football next season. What's not to like?

[MikeS]

On 27/05/2019 at 17:23, Papahet said:

Bennett is league one standard at best. He’s been one of  Lamps favourites since day one for some reason, decent lad but nothing special at this level come on. He should never be leading the line in a game of this magnitude 

Two Weeks to plan for the game and starting Bennett and Huddstone, what a balls up 

Absolutely right.  The worst thing was it took 70 minutes to change it when it clearly wasn't working from well before halftime.

[sonofmidnight]

Generally I enjoy being on this forum but it does sadden me when people have different opinions and because they can't agree it then becomes a slanging match. Surely if someone can back up their opinion with facts it is better to say let's agree to disagree and move on. This approach always works for me. In today's world people seem to have this desire to convert other people to their opinion and then resort to being aggressive if they can't!

[R@M]

2 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Cramp is another common injury for athletes at all levels and affects hard working muscles such as the calves in runners and the arm in tennis players.

But despite being able to cure all kinds of killer diseases, scientists still don't know what causes it!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/health_and_fitness/4275144.stm

I could suggest you read all sorts of medical journals and papers, but I thought a BBC bitesize key stage 3 revision page is more poetic.

https://www.bbc.com/bitesize/articles/ztdmrwx

The reference to scientists not knowing what causes it is lazy journalism, they know the various contributions but do not definitively know why cramp occurs, as in its purpose. 

[sonofmidnight]

17 minutes ago, ronnieronalde said:

 

Sorry to hear you were a victim of bullying. It must have been very unpleasant for you. I've no experience of that which is surprising when you consider I'm a ginger who wears glasses.

[VulcanRam]

1 hour ago, DavesaRam said:

Well here is my two pennies worth:

Frank and Jody (let's not forget his contribution to this season) are between a rock and a hard place. There have been lots of great contributions, and a fair bit of emotion, but whichever way Frank had tried to tackle the job yesterday he'd have faced criticism.

The immediate history is that Villa have beaten us twice, with an aggregate of 7 - 0, suggesting that they can over run our midfield. So does he tighten up the midfield, or take the game to Villa to force them onto the back foot? It might do to them what we did to Leeds, or it might be 7 - 0 in one match! And who does he play up front? We have Waghorn who can do great hold-up play, and has started to find the net, and Marriott who is a natural poacher, and we have Mason Bennett, who is not necessarily an out and out striker, but gives passion and effort, and a degree of pace to disturb defences. Which one or two do we go with? Oh, and by the way, none of these guys has got 90 minutes in them? 

In addition Holmes, who was very important to the diamond which blew Leeds to bits, is injured. Have we got anyone who can do a "Holmes" for us? Errrr            no.

It seems that Frank went for a safe approach with two DMs in order to put limits on what Villa's midfield, Grealish in particular, could do to us. At the same time use Bennett's energy, commitment and energy to work the Villa defence, which is known to be suspect, before unleashing Wagofn and Marriott on them once they were tiring.

It nearly worked, with Grealish in particular not achieving very much, but we were undone by a couple of bits of sloppy play. Ohhhhh so close!

But: deciding our midfield didn't need a third hand-made backside by playing two DMs ignored the fact the Mount didn't play in those two matches, while Grealish did, and now Mount was back. I would therefore concur that we were too cautious in our approach. And although it is part of modern tactical thinking to set your team up to address the strengths of the opposition, the other adage is to set your team up to play to your own strengths and give the other team the problem of dealing with us. We didn't have the resources to go smash Villa for 90 minutes, and if our midfield was too lightweight we may well get mullered again., so two DMs it is

Going the way we did was OK given the circumstances and limitations, but it should have been alongside aiming to move the ball much more quickly, especially in the transitions. We took far too long, and seemed more determined to demonstrate that we were playing the ball out from the  back than we were to beat the Villa. Secondly, the much needed boost to our firepower came too late, effectively after the game was already gone.

Once we did lose a DM and go two up front, we were all over the opposition, and our play was fast and incisive, and seemed to show just what we are capable of when we press and play on the front foot. However, this has to be balanced with the fact that Villa were now sitting back on a 2 - 0 lead with most of the  match gone. However, once we did that, it was only a matter of time before their defence gave way, so with an other ten or twenty minutes it may well have produced the winner. BUT if we hadn't gifted the second goal, or allowed room for the header for the first, or the ref had actually given the foul in the same way that he penalised Derby for virtually every challenge we made, it may well have been a different story.

In reality we got the chance to swing the bat at the ball which the EFL had bowled when we shouldn't have really had the  bat in our hand in the first place, such were the vagaries of the season. And on the other hand, Villa were beatable, and were there for the taking if we had chosen to put their defence under pressure.

These are only my own, personal views but they do echo what has been put throughout the thread, but there will be lots of you who will disagree with me.                                 GOOD. That is what football is all about, and it is what forums are for.

 

Last summer we had a manager who had never managed before, an assistant who had never assisted before, at least not at this intensity, and a squad which was about 60 - 70% new and had therefore never played together before. Add in the torpor of how we played last season meaning that there had to be an absolutely total change in playing ethics, and we ought to have been happy to even be in the top 10 in the division. We finished 6th, and played some great football (we did some absolute tosh as well!), finished 6th and got to play at Wembley, ending up really close to Premier League football next season. What's not to like?

That we lost?

Also, and I'm sorry to bring this up here, it isn't a criticism of you Dave, but I don't buy all this "we were lucky to be there", "it was a free hit", and "it didn't matter because we'd done well just to get there". It's a losers' mentality and I genuinely believe it affected the way the crowd supported the team. We earned our place and earned the shot through guts, determination and bloody hard work, and should not feel somehow lucky or undeserving for getting there. I expected to win yesterday and was not happy about how we approached the game. All that effort against Leeds and it counted for nothing because when it really mattered, we didn't bring our A game or play the way we know we can.

But that's life, and that's football. And I agree that there have been some good times this season. I've enjoyed it and I'm a big fan of Frank and Jody. The summer will be interesting in that we don't know whether they can build on what they've done so far or, given the potential high numbers of departures, have to start from scratch again.

Ultimately though we start back where we began. In the Championship for year 11 in a row.