Chelsea v Aston Villa Match Thread - 11/9 - 5.30pm | Page 40 | Vital Football

Chelsea v Aston Villa Match Thread - 11/9 - 5.30pm

Played well with 3-5-2 yesterday and have the personnel to play that way .Likewise we have the firepower for Deano's preferred 4-3-3 and the criticism of Deano last season was his inflexibilty to change formation. We do look now to have plenty of options and competition for places now , when you think of who is available next week , there are a lot of combinations you could pick.
 
I definitely prefer the look of a proper midfield three playing closer to each other. Some of their interplay through Chelsea's middle was excellent. Think that'll more often be a 4-3-3 but the 3-5-2 definitely works.

Unfortunately if two of that back three choose to shit the bed you're going to have problems but hopefully that's our mistakes out the way for a while.
 
Platypus said:
I definitely prefer the look of a proper midfield three playing closer to each other. Some of their interplay through Chelsea's middle was excellent. Think that'll more often be a 4-3-3 but the 3-5-2 definitely works.

Unfortunately if two of that back three choose to shit the bed you're going to have problems but hopefully that's our mistakes out the way for a while.
Click to expand...

Yes the combination of Luiz , Super John and Ramsey was very good .
 
Cash and Targett as wing backs don't offer enough. I wonder if we're going to go the entire season struggling to settle on the best team/ system.

Smith classically is a 4-3-3 guy yet Ings is signed for him and is a player of the calibre such that he's not here to sit around on the bench and be a rotation option.
 
Pangloss said:
Cash and Targett as wing backs don't offer enough. I wonder if we're going to go the entire season struggling to settle on the best team/ system.

Smith classically is a 4-3-3 guy yet Ings is signed for him and is a player of the calibre such that he's not here to sit around on the bench and be a rotation option.
Click to expand...

That was my point, we seem to have flexibilty now and can change formation to match or counteract whoever we are playing. I certainly think matching up with Chelsea worked .
 
We have half a team suited to 3-5-2 yet we’ve got some players such as Bailey and Bert who don’t fit into a narrow system.

I do agree with the point above, Targett and Cash are solid players most of the time, but they’re not a Chilwell or AAT in terms of attacking output so over the course of a season, I don’t think it’s the right system against weaker teams or even those who are slightly better than us.

I’m not sure from what I’ve seen how the new signings Bailey, Buendia and Ings fit in with Ollie but that really is first world problems and it’s great to actually have options and quality on the bench.
 
danvilla2 said:
We have half a team suited to 3-5-2 yet we’ve got some players such as Bailey and Bert who don’t fit into a narrow system.

I do agree with the point above, Targett and Cash are solid players most of the time, but they’re not a Chilwell or AAT in terms of attacking output so over the course of a season, I don’t think it’s the right system against weaker teams or even those who are slightly better than us.

I’m not sure from what I’ve seen how the new signings Bailey, Buendia and Ings fit in with Ollie but that really is first world problems and it’s great to actually have options and quality on the bench.
Click to expand...

Yup. We certainly didn't have that choice last season. There is more depth to the squad for sure.
 
I'm still disappointed this morning how the result flattered Chelsea but they took their chances and we didn't and that's really the bottom line.

The last time we played Chelsea we beat them 2-1 at Villa Park in the final fixture of last season.

The Chelsea chav manager Thomas Tuchel publicly berated the referee that day Mr. Stuart Atwell.

So we should have known what to expect from the utterly incompetent Atwell yesterday as he went out of his way not to upset Tuchel or the Chelsea players and they soon caught on and got away with loads of fouls and blatant blocking.

It's almost as if he was given the game to make up for upsetting Tuchel/Chelsea and Atwell certainly done that with a shockingly biased performance against the villa players but then the cynical in me has come to expect that we play a "Big 6 team"
 
Last edited:
So if we park the term ‘plucky’ to me what actually happened yesterday was so Premier league. A team below a sky 4 club in terms of quality giving it a good go but a depressingly familiar and inevitability about the result that will be repeated this season time and again and we have seen time and again.
Going there more in hope than expectation and after 10 mins its realistically game over. Not capitalising on the chances and then the sky 4 club being able to sort themselves out and winning.

Yesterday was no different to our first season back. Spuds away, Arsenal away, Manure away, Dippers at home. Brilliant and enjoyable as it was last season I think there does need to be an asterisk against some results against the sky wankfest clubs because of the unique nature of playing football in the pandemic empty stadiums.

So i am and will remain completely MEH about yesterday, Good performance or not , that was just routine predictable premier league fare yesterday in my humble. I really don’t take anything from a 3 nil defeat or look back fondly at my team being given a ‘didn’t they do well ‘ pat on the head in the sky studio. And I will go back to to my posts immediately after the play off final. I was not looking forward to the giving it a right go but losing games predictable nature of the league. I am consistent in this , I can’t be arsed with this league if we are just making up the numbers.

We are invested, we take more notice, we analyse more because it’s our team but if that was Burnley doing that yesterday i imagine most of us will be pretty scathing about them being a typical stereotype happy to give it a go mid table team. And cold light of day that was all that was yesterday. My prerogative but I really don’t take much from yesterday. We lost .Sorry.
 
Last edited:
danvilla2 said:
If you didn’t know the score and had to guess who won from the stats, you’d choose Villa.

Only one stat that matters granted, but it’s one of those games where individual errors cost us and on another day we could’ve had a decent point or a smash and grab.

The only thing that’s important now is we work as hard on next week’s game, as we did today’s game in order to get the three points.

View attachment 51735
Click to expand...

The positive from that game is that we have shown we can cause problems for even the reigning champions of Europe, so playing and beating most other teams should not be a concern and we can finish the season well despite Jack leaving. However, my worry is that we see Villa doing well against the top teams which creates positivity among the fans thinking we will do even better against the weaker teams, and then actually end up seeing us underperform and get beat or draw against teams we should be beating.
 
Not sure on the three at the back.

All over the place at times. Didn’t like seeing our centre backs being pulled out of shape and having to defend on the flanks so often . Could be easy to work out to exploit once the coaches of other clubs assesses it.
 
Not sure this is a problem but it's an observation Dean can't sub SJM or Ollie no matter what , I think this is a blinkered approach, even Scotland with their limited squad sub SJM.
I think John was very good at winning the ball but needs to start giving it to the nearest player as his passing results in the ball being given straight back.
Ollie wouldn't have scored in a brothel again Chelsea despite numerous chances but he subs Ings. Who could win you the game in a flash, let's be honest Ollie looked better than Lukaku last night but the big lump hit two shots two goals, Ings is that kind of striker too.

I think he needs to be less blinkered with his subs
 
Thomas Holte said:
I'm still disappointed this morning how the result flattered Chelsea but they took their chances and we didn't and that's really the bottom line.

The last time we played Chelsea we beat them 2-1 at Villa Park in the final fixture of last season.

The Chelsea chav manager Thomas Tuchel publicly berated the referee that day Mr. Stuart Atwell.

So we should have known what to expect from the utterly incompetent Atwell yesterday as he went out of his way not to upset Tuchel or the Chelsea players and they soon caught on and got away with loads of fouls and blatant blocking.

It's almost as if he was given the game to make up for upsetting Tuchel/Chelsea and Atwell certainly done that with a shockingly biased performance against the villa players but then the cynical in me has come to expect that we play a "Big 6 team"
Click to expand...

The ref was so bad it was untrue. Everyone around us said when Ramsey got booked early on that as long as he is consistent then fine , but unsurprisingly when the same thing happened to Ramsey nothing , not even a word and so it went on. Tyrone booked for a tackle , presumably because he went too ground , then Silva did the same and got an arm round his shoulders and a friendly pat on the back from the ref. The farce reached its height in the second half when Bert was fouled and landed on the ball , yet the drop ball was given to Chelsea. The Villa players actually laughed when that decision was made it was that obvious what was going on.
 
Melon Donkey said:
So if we park the term ‘plucky’ to me what actually happened yesterday was so Premier league. A team below a sky 4 club in terms of quality giving it a good go but a depressingly familiar and inevitability about the result that will be repeated this season time and again and we have seen time and again.
Going there more in hope than expectation and after 10 mins its realistically game over. Not capitalising on the chances and then the sky 4 club being able to sort themselves out and winning.

Yesterday was no different to our first season back. Spuds away, Arsenal away, Manure away, Dippers at home. Brilliant and enjoyable as it was last season I think there does need to be an asterisk against some results against the sky wankfest clubs because of the unique nature of playing football in the pandemic empty stadiums.

So i am and will remain completely MEH about yesterday, Good performance or not , that was just routine predictable premier league fare yesterday in my humble. I really don’t take anything from a 3 nil defeat or look back fondly at my team being given a ‘didn’t they do well ‘ pat on the head in the sky studio. And I will go back to to my posts immediately after the play off final. I was not looking forward to the giving it a right go but losing games predictable nature of the league. I am consistent in this , I can’t be arsed with this league if we are just making up the numbers.

We are invested, we take more notice, we analyse more because it’s our team but if that was Burnley doing that yesterday i imagine most of us will be pretty scathing about them being a typical stereotype team happy to give it a go mid table team. And cold light of day that was all that was yesterday. My prerogative but I really don’t take much from yesterday. We lost .Sorry.
Click to expand...

Absolutely Bang on Melon, we did what was expected of us
 
Villan57 said:
Not sure this is a problem but it's an observation Dean can't sub SJM or Ollie no matter what , I think this is a blinkered approach, even Scotland with their limited squad sub SJM.
I think John was very good at winning the ball but needs to start giving it to the nearest player as his passing results in the ball being given straight back.
Ollie wouldn't have scored in a brothel again Chelsea despite numerous chances but he subs Ings. Who could win you the game in a flash, let's be honest Ollie looked better than Lukaku last night but the big lump hit two shots two goals, Ings is that kind of striker too.

I think he needs to be less blinkered with his subs
Click to expand...

He subbed Ings because he was completely ineffective while Ollie was getting in and amongst them late in the second half still.

Ok take yesterday away because of the opposition but concerned already about the lack of service to our ‘guaranteed‘ striker .
 
Ings had a very quiet game which can happen to any player , not sure we didn't supply him though , we got the ball into their box plenty yesterday just that Ollie can fashion chances on his own , whereas to me Ings is going to need them laid on for him.
 
Melon Donkey said:
He subbed Ings because he was completely ineffective while Ollie was getting in and amongst them late in the second half still.

Ok take yesterday away because of the opposition but concerned already about the lack of service to our ‘guaranteed‘ striker .
Click to expand...

That's my whole point Lukaku had less touches than anyone but scored when it mattered. You'd have subbed him and left on Watkins , it's the same with Ings that's his game he scores goals he's never ever going to out work Watkins but he'll outscore him

Watkins and McGinn are always going to be more lively than the others but they can also be very ineffective
 
I thought McGinn had his best game for ages yesterday. Not sure his passing was too bad yesterday either.

I did like the combination of him Douglas and Ramsey.
 
The game for me had 3 distinct phases
1 Chelsea came flying out the traps , 3 corners hit the bar in the opening 10 and then get the goal on 14 mins.
2. Villa then took more control pressed really well and created 3 or 4 good efforts on goal we were the better team between the opening goal and HT
3. Stupid error and goal after the restart kills the contest and means the game plays out now with the result never in doubt.
Very poor from Mings at such a key stage
 
It's amazing to me how much Konsa is under the radar, he is better than Mings at everything other than shouting and pointing.

Mings' left-footed-ness is a massive advantage for him I suppose but comparing Mings to Konsa is like comparing an Alpha Romeo to a Rolls Royce.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.