MATCH THREAD v Villa 11 th March 13-00 ko | Page 11 | Vital Football

MATCH THREAD v Villa 11 th March 13-00 ko

It was a great result which I thoroughly enjoyed but I'm just not buying in to the premature euphoria. Villa were clearly knackered and as Madison said, were there for the taking, especially down to 10 men.. Despite that, we could easily have been behind at halftime having gifted them the best chances. That would have buoyed them and bolstered their resistance. We cannot be satisfied with the poor first halves we've played lately. Our game in hand is no gimme and our run in is tough. I remain optimistic and more than pleased with the progress made but pragmatic enough to recognise that we seem easy to defend against whilst taking risks at the back.
 
Love totty said:
It was a great result which I thoroughly enjoyed but I'm just not buying in to the premature euphoria. Villa were clearly knackered and as Madison said, were there for the taking, especially down to 10 men.. Despite that, we could easily have been behind at halftime having gifted them the best chances. That would have buoyed them and bolstered their resistance. We cannot be satisfied with the poor first halves we've played lately. Our game in hand is no gimme and our run in is tough. I remain optimistic and more than pleased with the progress made but pragmatic enough to recognise that we seem easy to defend against whilst taking risks at the back.
Click to expand...
Villa’s most threatening moments in the first half were long balls to Ollie Watkins, which Micky van de Ven was always able to deal with. For all the questions about our leaky defence, this makes it two games in a row in which they faced just one shot on target, and then Vicario had almost nothing to do in open play, and I mean, nothing.

So to be brutally honest, I can't agree with a word you say about them having the best chances!?

We controlled the narrative, we controlled the game - away from home against a top side. Admittedly we took no chances after they were surprising starting the game with 5 at the back; so we had to be patient and wait for our opening - which we did and we took it with style.

What's not to like?
 
Last edited:
The thing i liked most about yesterdays game was everything went to plan. The last time i felt like this was when we were top of the league after 10 games. The team was playing well, learning Anges system and everyone looked like they were contributing. Thats what yesterday felt like.

IMO it went completely to plan. Yes Villa were tired. Is that not allowed? Are we not allowed to use that as a weakness? We maintained possession to such an extent they were even more knackered chasing shadows. At one point i think they had 15% possession figures. Their attacks basically 2nd division long punts to run onto. Biss looked class and Sarr was even better despite the HOME ref giving an unbelievable early booking to him based on his legs tangling with a villa player. This alone could have derailed us. Our defence was in control and i was particularly impressed with Porro making sure Vicario didnt have to do much. Porro is a very quick defender who is very good at nipping in at the last second.

We broke them down, we outplayed them and we came out for the second half knowing we could either maintain it or even increase it if needed with our bench. We scored some lovely goals away to our nearest rival. They also went and lost their captain for 3 games.

I really think Ange will feel like this is the first day back at school after the capitulation at Chelski.
 
Littlest Hobo said:
The thing i liked most about yesterdays game was everything went to plan. The last time i felt like this was when we were top of the league after 10 games. The team was playing well, learning Anges system and everyone looked like they were contributing. Thats what yesterday felt like.

IMO it went completely to plan. Yes Villa were tired. Is that not allowed? Are we not allowed to use that as a weakness? We maintained possession to such an extent they were even more knackered chasing shadows. At one point i think they had 15% possession figures. Their attacks basically 2nd division long punts to run onto. Biss looked class and Sarr was even better despite the HOME ref giving an unbelievable early booking to him based on his legs tangling with a villa player. This alone could have derailed us. Our defence was in control and i was particularly impressed with Porro making sure Vicario didnt have to do much. Porro is a very quick defender who is very good at nipping in at the last second.

We broke them down, we outplayed them and we came out for the second half knowing we could either maintain it or even increase it if needed with our bench. We scored some lovely goals away to our nearest rival. They also went and lost their captain for 3 games.

I really think Ange will feel like this is the first day back at school after the capitulation at Chelski.
Click to expand...

And it is the reason they went down to 10 mean - we were in such complete control they couldn't lay a glove on us and couldn't get on the ball - so Magin lost his shit and his head in the red mist; just what you want to achieve - frustrate them to the point of losing the plot.

I laughed my head off.
 
Spursex said:
And it is the reason they went down to 10 mean - we were in such complete control they couldn't lay a glove on us and couldn't get on the ball - so Magin lost his shit and his head in the red mist; just what you want to achieve - frustrate them to the point of losing the plot.

I laughed my head off.
Click to expand...
Even his teammate pointed to his head as though to say "you were warned not to lose the head"
 
I haven't watched much of Villa this season, though the few games that I have followed, they seem a front foot team, with a lot of energy all over the place. The game yesterday, not only being Sunday after the Thurs event, I thought they had set up not to lose or catch us on the break. Based on my past viewings, to me it looked as if they just weren't accustomed to playing a pragmatic style, almost a Mou/Conte ball. Saw Emery intructing them to calm things down quite early on against a relentless pressure from us. Their plan nearly worked with couple of early through/over the top balls which led to either a poor final execution or a great defensive handling by us. We spent majority of the time in their half and produced more than the usual 20% Angeball!

Seemed Fatigue and setup was their downfall, but taking nothing away from some of the very exciting moves/control and execution from our lads, not least the handling of the physicality of their thugs. Hope VDV is OK and that let's hope the training this week ends injury free!

Big tests await.
 
Spursex said:
Villa’s most threatening moments in the first half were long balls to Ollie Watkins, which Micky van de Ven was always able to deal with. For all the questions about our leaky defence, this makes it two games in a row in which they faced just one shot on target, and then Vicario had almost nothing to do in open play, and I mean, nothing.

So to be brutally honest, I can't agree with a word you say about them having the best chances!?

We controlled the narrative, we controlled the game - away from home against a top side. Admittedly we took no chances after they were surprising starting the game with 5 at the back; so we had to be patient and wait for our opening - which we did and we took it with style.

What's not to like?
Click to expand...
I guess I was referring to the offside breaks which of course could be good defending but undoubtedly risky. My main point, which is only what Ange himself says, that our forward play does not yield the rewards our possession should. His response is to keep trying whilst I worry that it could jeopardize our finish position. It worked out fine against a poorly set up Villa or one set up to conserve energy. Let's see how we fare against Fulham who should be fresh.
 
Spursex said:
Villa’s most threatening moments in the first half were long balls to Ollie Watkins, which Micky van de Ven was always able to deal with. For all the questions about our leaky defence, this makes it two games in a row in which they faced just one shot on target, and then Vicario had almost nothing to do in open play, and I mean, nothing.

So to be brutally honest, I can't agree with a word you say about them having the best chances!?

We controlled the narrative, we controlled the game - away from home against a top side. Admittedly we took no chances after they were surprising starting the game with 5 at the back; so we had to be patient and wait for our opening - which we did and we took it with style.

What's not to like?
Click to expand...

Villa probably should have had the best chances (statistically) in the first half. I think there were a couple of mistakes by Romero and Biss, and there were a couple of "too late" passes that played them offside. There were also a couple of poor choices by them in key moments. I felt the same as LT, being able to transcend the difference between stats and Venom's non activity versus the 1st half I actually watched with the naked eye. Our vulnerability at the back was massively reduced though, but still there.

We also made poor choices offensively in key moments. I think I read a report where Madds was berating BJ for not playing him in. There were a fair few other moments where we should have tried the more elaborate pass versus the sideways and even backwards movements. The pressing from the front was my favourite part of that 1st half. No way we were going to let them play out from the back. We swarmed them at times and forced those longer balls that VDV ate up.

Now we need to figure out how we improve the first halves, if we do have that winner's mindset.
 
Love totty said:
It was a great result which I thoroughly enjoyed but I'm just not buying in to the premature euphoria. Villa were clearly knackered and as Madison said, were there for the taking, especially down to 10 men.. Despite that, we could easily have been behind at halftime having gifted them the best chances. That would have buoyed them and bolstered their resistance. We cannot be satisfied with the poor first halves we've played lately. Our game in hand is no gimme and our run in is tough. I remain optimistic and more than pleased with the progress made but pragmatic enough to recognise that we seem easy to defend against whilst taking risks at the back.
Click to expand...
Adding to that, we should have buried them and Spam in the reverse fixtures.

We pressed VERY well (like teams often do to us), which left them with options of hoofing it to Watkins and hoping for a dodgy bounce (like we did under Conte plenty of times).

Facts are facts, we got it right yesterday.
 
muttley said:
Villa probably should have had the best chances (statistically) in the first half. I think there were a couple of mistakes by Romero and Biss, and there were a couple of "too late" passes that played them offside. There were also a couple of poor choices by them in key moments. I felt the same as LT, being able to transcend the difference between stats and Venom's non activity versus the 1st half I actually watched with the naked eye. Our vulnerability at the back was massively reduced though, but still there.

We also made poor choices offensively in key moments. I think I read a report where Madds was berating BJ for not playing him in. There were a fair few other moments where we should have tried the more elaborate pass versus the sideways and even backwards movements. The pressing from the front was my favourite part of that 1st half. No way we were going to let them play out from the back. We swarmed them at times and forced those longer balls that VDV ate up.

Now we need to figure out how we improve the first halves, if we do have that winner's mindset.
Click to expand...
:shake:
 
muttley said:
Villa probably should have had the best chances (statistically) in the first half. I think there were a couple of mistakes by Romero and Biss, and there were a couple of "too late" passes that played them offside. There were also a couple of poor choices by them in key moments. I felt the same as LT, being able to transcend the difference between stats and Venom's non activity versus the 1st half I actually watched with the naked eye. Our vulnerability at the back was massively reduced though, but still there.

We also made poor choices offensively in key moments. I think I read a report where Madds was berating BJ for not playing him in. There were a fair few other moments where we should have tried the more elaborate pass versus the sideways and even backwards movements. The pressing from the front was my favourite part of that 1st half. No way we were going to let them play out from the back. We swarmed them at times and forced those longer balls that VDV ate up.

Now we need to figure out how we improve the first halves, if we do have that winner's mindset.
Click to expand...
It is a bit of a conundrum. We really can't afford to be too speculative with the killer through balls as interceptions can leave us exposed to the counter.
 
I thought Bissouma got better as the game progressed. For such a good player and so comfortable on the ball i have felt he has been hesitant lately. That disappeared as he went and the progression from defence to attack sped up considerably. I am hoping this will help return him to early season form where imo he looked the best in the league in his position
 
Love totty said:
It is a bit of a conundrum. We really can't afford to be too speculative with the killer through balls as interceptions can leave us exposed to the counter.
Click to expand...

Totally, but they might just work OR we could recycle possession of the 2nd ball if only half cleared. It doesn't need to be as black and white as you paint it. We could do some crazy shit like mark their players and fill the right holes to block the counter passes. We could have one or two less players go gung ho and focus defensively.

The pattern is clearly emerging that we save our risk taking until after the half time cuppa.
 
muttley said:
Totally, but they might just work OR we could recycle possession of the 2nd ball if only half cleared. It doesn't need to be as black and white as you paint it. We could do some crazy shit like mark their players and fill the right holes to block the counter passes. We could have one or two less players go gung ho and focus defensively.

The pattern is clearly emerging that we save our risk taking until after the half time cuppa.
Click to expand...
Is that such a bad idea? I think we struggle when we take too many risks early on and get done by a silly goal (or 2). We then spend so long trying to break down teams, wasting energy etc its so hard to watch. I quite like outworking, pressing and playing neat football for 45 mins then opening it up against tired legs in second half. Its the way Ange wants us to play and it puts trust in the bench.
 
Walthamstow wanderer said:
Trust you to move house on a day when you could have sat back and watched a great performance !!!!

Hope it’s all gone well mate .
It truly was a great game .

The first of many over the run in …. Villa just looked lost . Completely outplayed .
Click to expand...

Thanks brother!! Yeah all went well...so far. I plan on watching the game when the replay pops up on Peacock here.
 
How The Atlantic saw it: an extract - full article here: https://theathletic.com/5323645/2024/03/10/aston-villa-0-tottenham-4-spurs-analysis/


Aston Villa 0 Tottenham 4 – Stirring Sarr and McGinn’s ugly red as Spurs close the gap​


Sarr's cross
He showed that with his goal against Brighton last month, making that kind of dart in behind, receiving the pass, and finishing after his first attempt to cross was blocked onto the post. Here, he made a similar run, received a pass from Dejan Kulusevski, burst down the right and then whipped over a perfect cross for Maddison to convert.

It was a reminder of why Sarr is so special, why Tottenham rate him so highly, and why they have just given him a new contract. At 21 years old, he is one of the most promising young midfielders in world football.

Jack Pitt-Brooke

Villa went for solidity – but a back five backfired​

One of the tactical takeaways from the first meeting between Ange Postecoglou and Unai Emery in November was the change at half-time when the latter took off Matty Cash and replaced him with Leon Bailey.

Up until that stage, Villa had struggled down the right, with Ezri Konsa and Cash unsure of who should track Udogie into inverted positions. Emery’s change shifted momentum and was influential in his team eventually winning 2-1.



That decision seemed to form part of the Villa head coach’s thinking for this reverse fixture, with Cash and Konsa both deployed on the right but the former operating as a wing-back instead of a winger. This meant Villa operated from a 3-5-2 system — for the first time this season — designed to counter quickly and to stop the same threat they faced in that November meeting.


Crucially, however, it was also deployed to stop Tottenham’s build-up in central areas, with the inverted full-backs coming inside. It contributed to Villa having just 30 per cent possession in a stalemate first half, relying on transitions, with Bailey and Ollie Watkins the outlets. They were more pragmatic, using fewer passes to attack quickly and go more direct.

But the ploy also stumped Villa’s rhythm when they were in possession, with Konsa particularly struggling to play out from the back. Yet, it was not until early in the second half, when Spurs scored two goals inside a few minutes — Konsa gave the ball away cheaply for the second, failing to heed the warning signs — that Villa’s set-up needed to become more purposeful.



Did Villa look tired after their European exploits?​

Emery made three changes from the Europa League Conference last-16 first leg against Ajax in Amsterdam on Thursday night, believing his side were ready to return to the three-game-a-week grind. Yet Villa were oddly passive throughout, not in keeping with what their captain McGinn described as “the most important game in the club’s recent history” beforehand.


Emery’s approach invited caution from the outset, with his players seeming unable to lift themselves to go through the gears. Villa chances were fleeting even before McGinn’s red card midway through the second half, a careless, frustration-filled swipe at Udogie that rendered any hope of a comeback from 2-0 down futile.


Where does this result leave Villa and Spurs?​



Villa have recovered well from defeats previously this season, having not lost successive games in the league, but have begun to show vulnerability when playing against those around them, losing to Newcastle, Manchester United and now Spurs, all at Villa Park, this year.

From a Spurs perspective, this victory was key in increasing their advantage over sixth-placed Manchester United (now six points behind them, having played a game more). Within the wider context, winning on a rival’s turf will provide a psychological lift towards qualifying for the Champions League in fourth, inflicting damage on Villa’s hopes and swinging momentum in their favour.

Jacob Tanswell

What did Emery and Postecoglou say?​

Tottenham manager Ange Postecoglou to BBC Match of the Day: “We were outstanding in all facets. It was a big game with plenty of significance, so for us to perform like that was a big credit to everyone.

“I thought today, if we could impose our intensity and tempo on the game for 100 minutes we’d be hard to stop.

“It’s not easy, especially away from home, but I thought we handled ourselves really well.



“It means we’re one game closer, just 11 games to go. Everyone was billing this as a do-or-die for us. I assume we’re not dead yet.”

Postecoglou on Micky van de Ven’s injury: “He doesn’t think it’s anything too significant. So disappointing for him because he was outstanding again up until that point. Great for Radu (Radu Dragusin) to come in, his first significant game-time in a big game, and I thought he handled it really well.”
 
Updated total points prediction table.

The projected total is based on the average number of points won per game this season so far multiplied by the number of remaining games.

The table order is determined by those tracking closest to the projected score.


Tottenham's projected points total75
PosterPredicted totalTracking
Geofspurs76-1
Pompey Yid76-1
Greavswasthegreatest76-1
lijaboc74-1
spurs195472-3
totalspurs71-4
vinniecopenhagen80-5
Walthamstow wanderer80-5
muttley70-5
cobhspurs69-6
Gary Onedaysoon68-7
steveperryman68-7
SheringhamNo1067-8
Spursex66-9
USAFSPURS63-10
TQ2Spurs62-11
 
You must log in or register to reply here.