Villa 2-0 West Ham

To say the football gods have been kind to us would be a bit of an understatement. At the same time, you can’t necessarily expect teams who’d been floundering with inconsistency to all of a sudden become well-oiled machines. New managers at Chelsea and United have definitely realized more of their potential, but they’re both still less than the sum of their parts, often as not. Liverpool, well, I dunno. I did come across some funny meltdowns, though.

And so it was that Villa were gifted a golden opportunity to stay firmly in the hunt for Champions League qualification again. The chasing pack stumbled, and Villa finally took their chance, whereas in the bad patch we were squandering those moments with draws or losses. We finally looked half-decent again.

The only criticism on the day is we should’ve had more. Some of that was down to bounces and blocks, the rest to hesitancy and overdoing things a bit. But. There were plenty of chances, finally, and only one side ever looked like winning.

You’re not going to be wrong if you say West Ham were poor. They were. But as we know all too well, it doesn’t really matter. That’s who was out there at the right time and place for us. A bit of balancing out.

What Changed?
Well, for one, we got the right kind of opponent in Lille. While the United result in between was disappointing if not unsurprising, we did manage to regain some poise, shape, and cohesion against a less-aggressive European opponent (something I’ll return to). Over the two legs Villa were pragmatic, organized, patient. Professional. They weren’t overwhelming performances, but they were just what we needed. Three goals, two clean sheets. A win away, a win at home. You’d hope this sets you up for better league performances, getting your heads straight and your rhythm back.

Two, McGinn returned, and I think it’s pretty clear he helps the side’s confidence—he’s a stabilizing influence and sets a tone. Never mind that he’s popped up with a couple vital goals. They’d all but dried up with Ollie still lost, Morgan looking a bit jaded, and Buendia out to sea.

Three, Villa looked better breaking quickly as we’d seen a bit against Lille. Some of that is maybe down to the ‘enforced’ change of formation on West Ham’s part just before the match. I haven’t done the analysis that others—who get paid to—have, but the assertion we struggle more with wingbacks, well, if the numbers support it, then there you go. The Hammers went with four at the back. C’est la vie.

Beyond McGinn, another factor was probably Rogers playing more from the left, which I’ve had mixed feelings about in the past. But it seemed to give him a bit more space and that changed the spacing elsewhere. Teams have been keying on him, and the Hammers were no exception. Cash adds more attacking impetus from the right, and Onana must be feeling better as he’s putting himself about more. Barkley’s shaking the rust off.

Seeing Youri again is obviously a big deal. Didn’t have anything to do with this result, but so much of what’s looked wrong comes down to his absence. His touch, quality, composure, and vision…we just don’t have anyone else like that. You have to start paying attention to him, not just Rogers. Kamara did a fairly good job masking his absence during the first spell out, but it’s been rough without them both. We’ll see how quickly he shakes off his own rust, but his ability to receive, turn, and attack or settle in the middle of the park has been at the heart of how we play best. He’s the guy that makes it tick. My guess is that Buendia, for example, will benefit from someone to play off of.

Overall
When games get stretched, it’s not really to our advantage unless the opponent’s doing the chasing. The pace just isn’t there. But West Ham were pretty passive in the first 45, we got our goal, and were able to take advantage as they tried to equalize.

I’d mentioned it earlier, but a piece I’d seen had the stats on attacks generated by countering or from playing possession. Villa were about dead even, which is the hallmark of the top teams. It probably doesn’t seem like it because a fast break fizzles quicker than a more sustained possession passage, but as I mentioned before, I assume the numbers don’t lie.

Given the kinds of sides we’ll likely be playing the rest of the way in the Europa, I like the balanced style. And I like it more with Youri and McGinn back. I really wouldn’t mind winning this because it can make for a huge mentality shift at a club. No guarantees (looking at you, Spurs), but with the right culture, it might mean a lot, getting over the hump.

So, don’t want to read too much into a single match. But taken with the cagey, tournament-savvy performances against Lille, Villa might just be steadying themselves and getting two key players back at exactly the right time. If Emery and Co. can pull off fourth and a trophy…That would be something truly remarkable. He’s got them to right about where he said he’d start paying attention to the table, and it’s 12 matches total (if I’m adding correctly) that Villa have to last, five of those for silverware.

Might both be bridges too far. But. It at least seems more plausible than it did a couple weeks ago.

Over to you.