Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Player ratings vs Villa



B

BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
How can people give marks of 7 and 8 . This was a very poor performance as we were 2nd best in every department and outplayed by a Villa side that Bruce had doing the basics right. They ruled our midfield and closed us down very quick to stop us playing.


Stockdale. 7 could be faulted for the goal but earned our point for us.
Bruno 6. Nothing good or bad
Duffy 6 not his best game
Dunk 6.5 reliable as usual despite a few lunges
Bong 6. Played a dufficult opponent well
Knockaert 5 Not at the races todaya
Stephens 5 too many misplaced passes and caught in possession
Sidwell 5 As per Stephens
Skalak 5 Achieved very little needs to go past his man some times
Murray 6 scored the goal but missed an easy header for a 2nd
Baldock 6 Harried but other than the pass for GM achueved very little.

Subs
Norwood & Murphy 6 made no difference or impact.


A generally poor performance for which we robbed Villa of a win. The sign of a good side that can play bad and still avoid defeat.
 




B

big nuts

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2011
4,866
Hove
Finchley Seagull said:
I'm bored of going through this. Every time we concede a goal it is blame Stockdale. The Newcastle and last night are both very harsh, Reading he was at fault but it took a deflection in front of him and Preston was a ridiculous back pass from Bruno. It is almost like people are waiting for us to concede to slag off Stockdale. As a key part of the best defence in the league, I am happy with him. But, as you and some others on here say, he clearly deserves no credit for that and all the blame if we concede.

I notice you ignore my point about our goal. It was a good cross and there were no defenders nearby. It could have been 2-0 but, partly thanks to Stockdale's interception and throw, it was 1-1.
Click to expand...

He spilled the cross when it was a fairly basic gather. I can't give him credit for that.

Distribution as always very good, but he doesn't command his area and gets beaten too often at the near post.
 




JCL666

JCL666

absurdism
Sep 23, 2011
2,190
Stockdale 7 great point blank save. Couple of other saves too. Good distribution. Downside = not as commanding as he has been.
Bruno 7 Decent. His ability to kill a ball with his first touch is insane.
Duffy 8 Beast of a centre back
Dunk 8.5 Classy. Baresi-like at times. MOTM for me.
Bong 5 torrid time against a decent winger.
Jiri 6 Worked hard but just can't run with the ball under pressure.
Knocky 6 Tried a bit too hard and must have been tough after recent events. Their left back was decent mind you.
Sidwell 7 Consistent.
Stephens 5.5 Passing wasn't as good as usual and dwelt on the ball a bit too much. Everyone has a bad day.
Baldock 7.5 Tireless. The interplay between him and Murray for the goal = slick
Murray 8.5 Another one who worked hard for the team. I've watched the goal over and over again on the highlights. What a finish. It's not often you see a low driven strike from outside the box as accurate as that. Which obviously more than makes up for that volley he shanked into the marina.

Murphy 6 decent effort late on. Think he should have started.
Norwood not much time and was ok.


Slow out of the blocks but overall I thought they played well against a decent side. The short passing and through balls just didn't flow and the majority of it I think is down to Villa rather than a lack of effort or ability.

Tough game and I think we were fortunate they didn't start with Ayew and Grealish.
 






F

Finchley Seagull

New member
Feb 25, 2004
6,916
North London
BensGrandad said:
A generally poor performance for which we robbed Villa of a win. The sign of a good side that can play bad and still avoid defeat.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Villa should be able to boss games. We didn't rob them. They hit the bar once but not a lot else. They couldn't finish despite their expensive strike force. Their team cost so much more than us but to say we were generally poor is harsh
 




JCL666

JCL666

absurdism
Sep 23, 2011
2,190
BensGrandad said:
How can people give marks of 7 and 8 . This was a very poor performance as we were 2nd best in every department and outplayed by a Villa side that Bruce had doing the basics right. They ruled our midfield and closed us down very quick to stop us playing.

A generally poor performance for which we robbed Villa of a win. The sign of a good side that can play bad and still avoid defeat.
Click to expand...

Very poor? If that was the case we would have LOST.

It was a hard fought game against a good side. Players can still play well and not win.
 




B

BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
JCL666 said:
Very poor? If that was the case we would have LOST.

It was a hard fought game against a good side. Players can still play well and not win.
Click to expand...

We were 2nd best in everything our passing was poor going to Villa player too often . Out tackling and ball winning was not as good as usual. Our midfield was non existent with no link up play to the front men. This was against a side that were premiership last season in name only and not ability and not typical of what we could face next season. Must give credit to Steve Bruce for sorting them out and it speaks volumes when CH comes out and says he was happy with a point. He at least appreciates we got more than we deserved.
 


W

Wardy's twin

Well-known member
Oct 21, 2014
8,440
I have said it before , it would be good if people were to give their seat location as I am sure this impacts your view of what goes on. So from WSU D, IMO it was a good game , tightly contested with Villa doing a better job than us. Bruce knows his stuff and with the squad he has at his disposal not surprised by their dominance.

Our weak spots were AK , Baldock, Bong , the latter put us in trouble a number of times . Our strength were Dunk, Duffy, Sidwell, Bruno & Murray.

Stockdale made a couple of good saves BUT he really has to start catching the ball. The intense pressure from repeat corners is down to the keeper not catching the ball.
 


One Teddy Maybank

One Teddy Maybank

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Aug 4, 2006
21,624
Worthing
Finchley Seagull said:
To be fair, Villa should be able to boss games. We didn't rob them. They hit the bar once but not a lot else. They couldn't finish despite their expensive strike force. Their team cost so much more than us but to say we were generally poor is harsh
Click to expand...

I too thought they were ordinary, but we were poor.

I mean what did they create? Their goal was a little bit down to Stocko. Stocko pulled off one great save, they hit the bar and Grealish went relatively close..... I think that was it......


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 




S

saafend_seagull

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
13,891
BN1
Baldock was very good, in fact our most dangerous player.

Duffy would be one of the best centre backs in the prem if he had slightly more pace.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


JCL666

JCL666

absurdism
Sep 23, 2011
2,190
BensGrandad said:
We were 2nd best in everything our passing was poor going to Villa player too often . Out tackling and ball winning was not as good as usual. Our midfield was non existent with no link up play to the front men. This was against a side that were premiership last season in name only and not ability and not typical of what we could face next season. Must give credit to Steve Bruce for sorting them out and it speaks volumes when CH comes out and says he was happy with a point. He at least appreciates we got more than we deserved.
Click to expand...

Just not true. We had the ball more than Villa. Our pass completion was higher.

Our midfield non-existent? No they just sat too deep and the reason why our link up play was poor was down to Villa pressing high up the pitch.

Look at the heat map on this site. Sidwell and Stevens had more touches of the ball than the 3 Villa midfielders combined, but most of their touches were
just inside our half.

https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/1085109/Live/England-Championship-2016-2017-Brighton-Aston-Villa

It's true that we were ineffective with the ball. Skalak and Knockaert in particular.
 


B

BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
JCL666 said:
Just not true. We had the ball more than Villa. Our pass completion was higher.

Our midfield non-existent? No they just sat too deep and the reason why our link up play was poor was down to Villa pressing high up the pitch.

Look at the heat map on this site. Sidwell and Stevens had more touches of the ball than the 3 Villa midfielders combined, but most of their touches were
just inside our half.

https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/1085109/Live/England-Championship-2016-2017-Brighton-Aston-Villa

It's true that we were ineffective with the ball. Skalak and Knockaert in particular.
Click to expand...

We may have had more of the ball in midfield but gave it away nearly every time so less effective.
 




dazzer6666

dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
52,459
Burgess Hill
JCL666 said:
Just not true. We had the ball more than Villa. Our pass completion was higher.

Our midfield non-existent? No they just sat too deep and the reason why our link up play was poor was down to Villa pressing high up the pitch.

Look at the heat map on this site. Sidwell and Stevens had more touches of the ball than the 3 Villa midfielders combined, but most of their touches were
just inside our half.

https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/1085109/Live/England-Championship-2016-2017-Brighton-Aston-Villa

It's true that we were ineffective with the ball. Skalak and Knockaert in particular.
Click to expand...

Think this nails it. Our wingers had off days (or were well-marshalled by the Villa full backs, probably a bit of both).
 




M

Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
16,653
Fiveways
Goldstone1976 said:
This; in spades. You're about the only person who saw the same game I did. It's unusual for me to have such a different opinion from those with whom I tend to discuss the game afterwards, but last night I wondered if I was starting to totally lose any lingering ability to read a game. Your analysis has provided some comfort; thank you. Unless you're going mad too, of course.
Click to expand...

Don't think my ratings were too far off those of [MENTION=29619]sussex_guy2k2[/MENTION]
Most seem to think Stephens had a shocker, whereas I thought he ensured that we held on to possession, and he broke them down pretty well. Most claim that he gave the ball away too much. Anyone got any stats on this?
 






P

portslade seagull

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2003
17,609
portslade
Not sure what most have against Baldock. He run his socks off closing down the defender's. When he went off it was back to the walls time again. We need to defend from the front
 


One Teddy Maybank

One Teddy Maybank

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Aug 4, 2006
21,624
Worthing
Machiavelli said:
Don't think my ratings were too far off those of [MENTION=29619]sussex_guy2k2[/MENTION]
Most seem to think Stephens had a shocker, whereas I thought he ensured that we held on to possession, and he broke them down pretty well. Most claim that he gave the ball away too much. Anyone got any stats on this?
Click to expand...

Interesting. I gave him a '6' on the basis that he was average. His passing wasn't up to its normal standard, in fact a bit similar to when we played Derby (H) last season, but he wasn't awful, made some important tackles. I thought Duffy was more careless at times.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here