Aston Villa - Great Expectations? (Heroes & Villains) | Page 2 | Vital Football

Aston Villa - Great Expectations? (Heroes & Villains)

The idea that we should play expansive, attacking football is a fallacy in football. Ask around any football ground in the country and you'll find fans with the same idea but it's wrong.

If you think back to the best of Fergie's Utd teams you'll remember the amazing runs by Giggs and the spectacular goals by Scholes but Fergie's teams only did that on occasion. Those memories stick out because they were the exception. They usually did it towards the end of season against weaker opposition. The majority of their matches were grinding out win after win. Once they had got themselves on top they could bully lesser teams.

Barcelona play tippy-tappy football because the vast majority of their games are against very weak teams in Spain and in Europe. That and they have some of the best players in the world.

It's great to watch your team charging gung-ho against a terrified defense but it rarely happens in football and almost never in highly competitive games.

Mourinho knows this which is what has made him such an effective manager. The great Italian managers would never dare risk a game with such nonsense.

Football isn't about entertainment. It's about winning. It's wonderful when your team can totally dominate a game and stick it to the opposition but in a highly competitive league like The Championship, you are never going to dominate games to that degree.

Winning teams develop winning habits and as that habit develops they can play more and more expansive football but it's the winning that comes first, not the expansive football.
 
Bodybutter, you're right.
So many of the games during SAF's reign ended like this -
Manchester United 1 (Cantona 77), Anytown 0.
 
Nice to get the odd bit of entertainment though, especially when you aren't in it to win it competition wise so to speak.
 
McParlandTheGreat - 8/11/2017 22:00

OK Garde had nothing. Under Lambert Randy was putting in funds for transfers each year, figure of £20m comes to mind but I might be wrong. That was on top of the losses Randy was covering. Randy's biggest mistake was not putting in a CEO who understood running football clubs. The money he invested in Villa Park and Bodymoor does us good today. Can criticise Randy for lots of things, not putting money in isn't one of them. Often wondered what would have happened if he'd put Nicola Cortese in charge after he'd left Southampton.

DoL had nothing to spend in his final year, and not much before; no wonder he looked unhappy. Doug had locked the money box and thrown the key away.
Click to expand...

Neither worked out obviously but Randy lost around $200m. Doug made a fortune.

But Doug is now heralded as one of us, and a great Chairman. As you are also suggesting McParland, he was no such thing.
 
Doug was never one of us. Doug was for Doug and it grates every time I walk up Witton Lane and look up at that stand named after him as if he were some great Messiah, he wasnt.
 
BodyButter - 9/11/2017 08:21

The idea that we should pay expansive, attacking football is a fallacy in football. As around any football ground in the country and you'll find fans with the same idea but it's wrong.

If you think back to the best of Fergie's Utd teams you'll remember the amazing runs by Giggs and the spectacular goals by Scholes but Fergie's teams only did that on occasion. Those memories stick out because they were the exception. They usually did it towards the end of season against weaker opposition. The majority of their matches were grinding out win after win. Once they had got themselves on top they could bully lesser teams.

Barcelona play tippy-tappy football because the vast majority of their games are against very weak teams in Spain and in Europe. That and they have some of the best players in the world.

It's great to watch your team charging gung-ho against a terrified defense but it rarely happens in football and almost never in highly competitive games.

Mourinho knows this which is what has made him such an effective manager. The great Italian managers would never dare risk a game with such nonsense.

Football isn't about entertainment. It's about winning. It's wonderful when your team can totally dominate a game and stick it to the opposition but in a highly competitive league like The Championship, you are never going to dominate games to that degree.

Winning teams develop winning habits and as that habit develops they can play more and more expansive football but it's the winning that comes first, not the expansive football.
Click to expand...

Couldn’t agree more! I think we all have selective memories when it comes to past successful teams. I often read stuff about how incredibly entertaining we were in the old days. What I specifically remember about our 80-82 team (for example) is how fit, solid and we’ll-organized we were. The Morley goal at Everton was the exception not the rule...
 
Expansive, attacking football, as such, is a myth. However, the elements that would make such a thing possible are important.

a) you need to compete in midfield. Otherwise the opposition moves too far up the field and you end up with a packed defence, which tends to be error-prone unless you train specifically for parking the bus.

b) movement is hugely important. When you move forwards you do so as a team, otherwise you're not creating options in attack. Real creativity is more about how the team plays rather than individual "creative" players (if you do have such a player, they can't do anything unless other players are making the runs and giving them options).

c) timing is right. You can't play 90 minutes flat out. Games ebb and flow. You need to be on top of that timing.

d) fitness and speed matter. Fitness can give you the vital edge towards the end of the game; Spurs are good at that. Speed alone does nothing but add it into the other ingredients and you get a potent mix.
 
"So many of the games during SAF's reign ended like this -
Manchester United 1 (Cantona 77), Anytown 0"

I recall loads of United 1 [956th minute), Anytown 0
Fergie time
They never stopped, shut up shop or believed they'd lose
 
Why is it that people automatically assume that attacking football is just being Barcelona/tippy tappy stuff. We are one of the very few teams I've seen in this league who set up to not have a go at teams. Doesn't matter what formation or how many strikers it's solely safety 1st football and praying for some luck or some magic.

The few times I've seen Sheffield utd this season they've had a go at everyone from the off. They play at a high tempo and provide the strikers with plenty of chances. They certainly don't sit back and hope for the best and they don't play tiki taki. It seems to me that a large number of people who watch football have been tricked into thinking there's only 2 ways of doing things. That its either Peps tiki taka or pulisball. It's total bullshit. I'm sick of being told I have to watch boring, cowardly shite because it's the best way of getting up despite that being a complete lie.
 
I absolutely agree, JW. I think Steve Bruce is the man for the job but one of the criticisms I have of him is that we aren't playing to our strengths. I firmly believe that a team's style of play should be dictated by its strikers. If you play to their strengths, you'll get goals and yet we don't seem to have any recognised style of play. We put XI men on the pitch and hope we have enough quality to beat the opposition. Generally, we do but we get undone by teams like Wednesday who have better tactical nous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.