I think it could have been like Benitez in the ECL final. Sandro would have protected our right flank and give more freedom to Walker and Andros.
Paulinho looked a bit lost 2nd half.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Match ratings vs Cheslki
- Thread starter Kingdawson
- Start date
I think it could have been like Benitez in the ECL final. Sandro would have protected our right flank and give more freedom to Walker and Andros.
Paulinho looked a bit lost 2nd half.
How is Chadli more prepared for a game like this than Lamela??
Also my thinking behind Sandro is we were second to almost everything in the second half. Every challenge every second ball. Sandro is probably one of the best readers of the game we have. And he is ferocious in the tackle, I think he would have done wonders for us. He and Dembele would have been a solid base and with Holtby I think we could have done better against Lampard, Ramires and Mata.
It's too simple to think Sandro doesn't score goals. You need to think about the bigger picture. Where we can get a foothold in the game and get our more dangerous players the ball.
I agree. First half Chelsea barely had a sniff. They came back strongly second half but even though he went eventually they were very fortunate the officials didn't see Torres' scratch on Vertonghen's face earlier on.
Spursalot
Jimmy McCormick
True, but in my mind Vertonghen could very easily have been sent off too.
The challenge on Ramires that eventually led to the Chelsea goal, i am pretty much sure he was the last man. Ramires was through.
Yeah you could say we were fortunate but we will always get the benefit of the doubt in that one because it wasn't a clear goal scoring opportunity as it was practically on half way and we had defenders running back...I'd have backed Walker to sprint back to put a challenge in for example...you couldn't be certain Ramires would have been left 1 on 1 so ref was never gonna show red. Torres was nailed on red for a scratch to the face though!
Spurs7891
Jermaine Jenas
Funny thing is Vertonghen didn't hold his face when being scratched by Torres but did so after being hardly tackled which resulted in the second yellow card for Torres. Thought Vertonghen should have complained to the ref or atleast hold his face in virtual pain after getting scratched.
Spursalot
Jimmy McCormick
Thought it was halfway between the box and the halfway line myself.
Put it this way, would have sent him off had it been me refereeing. Ramires was in full flow and our defenders were all pretty much stationary.
Klinsmann suggested diving school, now is it acting lessons?
Of the 3 behind Soldado, I thought Townsend was the brightest and, as we were 1-0 up and coming under pressure, more suited to the game for hitting them on the break. At the time, we were being over-run in midfield and Eriksen was poor and offered nothing in the 2nd half. He would have been the first player I'd have subbed.
We were increasingly having to hit long balls and neither Soldado nor Eriksen could do anything with them. I would have liked our first sub to have been Sandro for Eriksen, with Paulinho pushed further forward. Then Lamela for Sig and Defoe for Soldado. Townsend going over to the left flank to have a run at Ivanovich (and hopefully get him a 2nd yellow). We could have set up as a team to play more without the ball and disrupt their midfield play:
---------sandro---dembele
-------------paulinho
----lamela-----defoe-----townsend
We had lost our grip on the game by the end of the first half and this continued in the second. The only sub we made before they scored (Chadli for Townsend) did nothing to change the game in our favour, it was a pointless sub.
Fortunately, for us and AVB, Vert got Torres sent off and we got control of the game again. I don't know if making the midfield more solid and playing on the break would have worked for sure, but it would have made more sense than the Chadli/Townsend sub. I saw no logic in that whatsoever, and even if you wanted Townsend off at that point, why wouldn't his replacement be Lamela? Lamela has played in the Rome derby hasn't he? It was a waste of a sub.
chancer
Gudni Bergsson
Totally agree with that.
The best you can say is that there's a reasonable argument that Sandro should have come on. But there's an equally reasonable argument that staying offensive was the correct call. You cannot be so definitive as to say that AVB definitely made a mistake, which some people are close to doing.
No one can definitely say he made a mistake, it's all hypothetical of course. But in hindsight, we can see how ineffective Chadli and Defoe were once they came on. I think a change in tactics even if it appears to be defensive could very much change the balance and could see us retain it a lot better
Hootnow
Jermaine Jenas
But we weren't staying offensive, the subs made little to no impact and in my view, it was relatively obvious that this is what would happen. In the second half, Dembele and Paulinho lost control of the centre, rendering our 4 more attacking players basically useless and out of the game. Putting on more players in those positions, like for like wasn't going to help the underlying problem and indeed, just like the players they replaced, they were all out of the play because we couldn't get a good foothold in the game.
Mumorn
Vic Buckingham
If you look closely you'll see that just prior to contact on the freekick Ivanovic starts pushing Dembele towards our goal the concequence of this is Dembele plays Terry onside.
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
Not sitting back is obviously positive - and make a defensive sub when you're in the lead can often be very negative and something us fans get equally upset about.
But in this case, it was seeing what was happening in the second half and taking appropriate action. We were becoming exposed, they were playing through our midfield. We needed to change around 55 minutes. In the end Chadli was brought on around 60 (?) which did nothing to shore up the middle. Sandro for Eriksen would have meant a change in formation, but we needed to bolster midfield. Maybe we'd have lost? Who knows.
But in this case, it was seeing what was happening in the second half and taking appropriate action. We were becoming exposed, they were playing through our midfield. We needed to change around 55 minutes. In the end Chadli was brought on around 60 (?) which did nothing to shore up the middle. Sandro for Eriksen would have meant a change in formation, but we needed to bolster midfield. Maybe we'd have lost? Who knows.
This. He was orchestrating everything for them in the second half and I feel that Sandro could've helped a lot to negate that. Absurd that Mourinho doesn't rate him or is using him as some sort of poster-boy for stamping his authority. He's a world class player and should be starting every game for them. Simple as that.
Not going to rate all the bodies but Dembele was absolutely superb. Best player on the pitch by a mile in terms of his performance and how he frightened direct opponents. Reminded me of his performance against Emirates Marketing Project last season at home when he totally dominated Yaya Toure.
The Moonlit Knight
Banned
"You might remember a dull game between Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Emirates Marketing Project at St James' Park towards the end of the 2011-12 season. City had to win this match if they were stay ahead of Manchester United in the title race. With the game goalless and less than half an hour remaining, it was easy to imagine the blue half of Manchester screaming at the TV to get another striker on. Instead, City manager Roberto Mancini took off Samir Nasri, one of his most attacking players, and replaced him with Nigel de Jong, a holding midfielder. A few City fans must have been scratching their heads in wonder and even the commentators were a little perplexed at first. The substitution, however, allowed City to push Yaya Toure, who had previously been screening the back four, into a more attacking role. Less than 10 minutes later, De Jong passed to Toure, who was now 20 yards further up the pitch. He played a one-two on the edge of the area with Sergio Aguero, before angling a shot into the bottom corner of the Saudi Sportswashing Machine net. Twenty minutes later he scored again."
It never ceases to amaze me how some fans seem to be utterly clueless about the balance of a football team. Against Chelsea we had lost possession. Ramires dropping further back had nullified Eriksen and Mata's arrival in the "hole" combined with our lack of holder meant he was getting into pockets of space and causing us havoc. Even an ignorant fan like myself could spot that within 10 minutes of the second half! Dembele and Paulinho are excellent all rounders, but neither are defensive midfielders. Sandro comes on, probably best in place of Eriksen, and Mata's threat is lessened. Ramires no longer has anyone to mark or if he is picking someone up it's the stronger more athletic Dembele who is now playing further forward and retaining possession. Once momentum has swung back in Spurs' favour as we have retaken midfield we take off one of Paulinho/Dembele and put on Holtby to really go at Chelsea for the last 20 minutes to secure victory.
Yes it's easy in principle but football is far from rocket science. Redknapp did a similar thing, that didn't quite work out but my word we battered them without scoring, against a 10 man Villa a few seasons ago. He brought on Parker when we were trying to get a goal and that basically freed up three other Spurs players to pour forward safe in the knowledge that someone had their back when they were out of position. It was the right tactical call, as was Mancini's De Jong sub, but so many of our fans just didn't get it and laughably actually were critical of Redknapp for it!
One of Jol's biggest faults at Spurs was his damning insistence on putting on as many forwards as possible when we were chasing a goal. Usually it would result in us losing the midfield, losing momentum and none of those forwards getting service anymore. We lost the midfield battle yesterday in the second half because Mourinho was tactically smart. We needed a change of system, but instead swapped like for like personnel and as a result we blew the chance to win against an extremely beatable Chelsea side (especially when they went down to 10 men) at home. We'll never know now, but Sandro on Mata and giving Ramires Dembele to worry about would have been a positive outcome in my opinion.
You can repeat that tosh about Parker ad infinitum but that was without doubt the worst sub in Spurs history.
Villa had no attacking presence in that game unlike Chelsea yesterday. Putting Parker in yesterday would have made sense. If he still played for us.