Mauricio Pochettino - Sacked

[SpursNorway]

what about poch?

What about Poch? Do you feel he picked the wrong team? Did he do wrong with the subs?
For me he picked a good team. A team who would be good enough to beat Anderlecht away. And in the first 10-12 minutes we were a lot better than the home team. We could have buried them.
We didnt. And we then conceded a weak goal. But even then, at 1-1, I felt we could do it. And we created enough to win. Even in a not so good second half.
But the players stopped doing the running, winning challenges, stopped playing as a team. Even worse in the second half. Maybe the players felt they were too good to lose. If so, it's a lesson learned.
Maybe Onomah shouldnt been brought on, but I guess a few would have felt it wrong if he hadnt come on.

 

[Hemant]

Why is this one of the answers that people always bring up after a disappointing game?
If conventional wingers is the answer, how do you account for 99% of professional football managers disagreeing with you? And again stubbornness with the formation, I did not hear many people complaining about 4-2-3-1 after the City game, so why is it a problem after Anderlecht away?

The issue tonight was that the players started well, went ahead and then sat back. When Anderlecht upped their game, we could not do the same. It is very disappointing but this is a young side and they will make mistakes. We seem to accept that in theory and then forget it in the heat of the moment.

it doesn't matter if 99% of managers choose to play inverted wingers, 100% of lemmings decide to go over cliff, what matters is does it make sense?
I think you might agree that you need to get the ball into the box at some point to score more goals, occasionally a strike from outside goes in, inverted wingers are less likely to deliver accurately or as often with their weaker foot, so goals diminish.
Note their winger played on the left and was left footed, he won them the game. It is not just about mentioning when we lose, it is inherent. One game against City did not mean the second coming, it meant a good performance, followed by 4 poorer performances. We hope to improve but after how many seasons are we going to accept our goals rate is declining and we are finding it more difficult to break teams down, as most managers aren't totally stupid, they can find ways to make it difficult for us, to not change tactics at all and repeatedly follow the same basics with different people who have the same limitations is not going to progress us, despite any amount of blind loyalty from us.

 

[metalgear]

What about Poch? Do you feel he picked the wrong team? Did he do wrong with the subs?
For me he picked a good team. A team who would be good enough to beat Anderlecht away. And in the first 10-12 minutes we were a lot better than the home team. We could have buried them.
We didnt. And we then conceded a weak goal. But even then, at 1-1, I felt we could do it. And we created enough to win. Even in a not so good second half.
But the players stopped doing the running, winning challenges, stopped playing as a team. Even worse in the second half. Maybe the players felt they were too good to lose. If so, it's a lesson learned.
Maybe Onomah shouldnt been brought on, but I guess a few would have felt it wrong if he hadnt come on.

poch insisting on his system and playing square pegs in round holes is hurting our performance, and stopping our players from excelling in areas where they naturally can.

our boys break their back out there, but I am not sure if they are really enjoying their football at the moment, and if there is good team spirit on the pitch.

its not just player selection or availability. poch has to think about evolving his system to fit the players he has. to make the right gambles; to even take route 1 football if it means us winning a game today to ease some pressure off tomorrow.

in this regard poch is very similar to avb, promoting a football philosophy than going for results.

for example with njie and townsend and away to an average team playing on the counter makes better sense. that space up front would feed on lamela and eriksen's creative instincts, and we don't take risks with trippier or davies by keeping a compact back four.

 

[braineclipse]

it doesn't matter if 99% of managers choose to play inverted wingers, 100% of lemmings decide to go over cliff, what matters is does it make sense?
I think you might agree that you need to get the ball into the box at some point to score more goals, occasionally a strike from outside goes in, inverted wingers are less likely to deliver accurately or as often with their weaker foot, so goals diminish.
Note their winger played on the left and was left footed, he won them the game. It is not just about mentioning when we lose, it is inherent. One game against City did not mean the second coming, it meant a good performance, followed by 4 poorer performances. We hope to improve but after how many seasons are we going to accept our goals rate is declining and we are finding it more difficult to break teams down, as most managers aren't totally stupid, they can find ways to make it difficult for us, to not change tactics at all and repeatedly follow the same basics with different people who have the same limitations is not going to progress us, despite any amount of blind loyalty from us.

So while comparing most managers to lemmings going over a cliff you point out that most managers are not stupid?

And while complaining about how people blindly support Poch and his system you claim that the benefits to the system you prefer are inherent?

 

[braineclipse]

poch insisting on his system and playing square pegs in round holes is hurting our performance, and stopping our players from excelling in areas where they naturally can.

our boys break their back out there, but I am not sure if they are really enjoying their football at the moment, and if there is good team spirit on the pitch.

its not just player selection or availability. poch has to think about evolving his system to fit the players he has. to make the right gambles; to even take route 1 football if it means us winning a game today to ease some pressure off tomorrow.

in this regard poch is very similar to avb, promoting a football philosophy than going for results.

for example with njie and townsend and away to an average team playing on the counter makes better sense. that space up front would feed on lamela and eriksen's creative instincts, and we don't take risks with trippier or davies by keeping a compact back four.

Most teams I see that succeed at outperforming their financial limitations over some time seem to do so with a pretty clearly defined system/philosophy. This seems to be the best way to get players to perform at a level that's higher than the sum of their parts might indicate. Usually this takes time to implement.

Look at the changes in personnel and style in 18 months since the Sherwood. Look at how young our team is. Look at the relative success in terms of results last season.

To me this very clearly points towards patience rather than impatience.

 

[milo]

it doesn't matter if 99% of managers choose to play inverted wingers, 100% of lemmings decide to go over cliff, what matters is does it make sense?
I think you might agree that you need to get the ball into the box at some point to score more goals, occasionally a strike from outside goes in, inverted wingers are less likely to deliver accurately or as often with their weaker foot, so goals diminish.
Note their winger played on the left and was left footed, he won them the game. It is not just about mentioning when we lose, it is inherent. One game against City did not mean the second coming, it meant a good performance, followed by 4 poorer performances. We hope to improve but after how many seasons are we going to accept our goals rate is declining and we are finding it more difficult to break teams down, as most managers aren't totally stupid, they can find ways to make it difficult for us, to not change tactics at all and repeatedly follow the same basics with different people who have the same limitations is not going to progress us, despite any amount of blind loyalty from us.

I'd love to see some data to support that less chances are created with inverted wingers than conventional ones. If you could find some, you might just convince me that you are right.

 

[milo]

poch insisting on his system and playing square pegs in round holes is hurting our performance, and stopping our players from excelling in areas where they naturally can.

our boys break their back out there, but I am not sure if they are really enjoying their football at the moment, and if there is good team spirit on the pitch.

its not just player selection or availability. poch has to think about evolving his system to fit the players he has. to make the right gambles; to even take route 1 football if it means us winning a game today to ease some pressure off tomorrow.

in this regard poch is very similar to avb, promoting a football philosophy than going for results.

for example with njie and townsend and away to an average team playing on the counter makes better sense. that space up front would feed on lamela and eriksen's creative instincts, and we don't take risks with trippier or davies by keeping a compact back four.

Which of our players is a square peg in a round hole at the moment or being asked to play a position or role that they are unfamiliar with?

 

[metalgear]

Townsend, njie to begin with. They aren't suited to the congestion in midfield. They will excel with counterattacking play.

 

[milo]

Townsend, njie to begin with. They aren't suited to the congestion in midfield. They will excel with counterattacking play.

Neither were being asked to play unfamiliar positions though.

If we do have any players who are only suited to counter attacking football (and I cannot think of any) they are going to find their opportunities limited because you cannot play counter attacking football against teams that sit back and play for a point which is the problem we face in most of our games.

 

[Bullet]

I'd love to see some data to support that less chances are created with inverted wingers than conventional ones. If you could find some, you might just convince me that you are right.

Inverted wingers can work. But if there is no space so they just turn into trouble every time, and the full backs are not supporting fully, one of those things must change or we are nullified

 

[milo]

Inverted wingers can work. But if there is no space so they just turn into trouble every time, and the full backs are not supporting fully, one of those things must change or we are nullified

That's why it is important to have a ball player in central midfield and to try and press high up the pitch because this allows you to create chances when the defence is not set.

It does not matter whether you are playing with traditional or inverted wingers. It is very difficult to find your way through a well organised defence with eight men behind the ball.

 

[Spurs7891]

I think Pochettino must improve the long range shootings of the players. Now, we don't have anyone who can score from outside the penalty box. Eriksen can score from freekicks but other than that, he seldom hits the target from long range shootings. The others are simply shyte when it comes to long range shootings despite trying time and time again. It is time we practise on our shootings as it can help us score in tight matches.

 

[glasgowspur]

Re counter attacking, Clinton maybe suitable and have the pace, but one thing this game did show us is andros is suited to it and doesn't have real pace.

 

[milo]

I think Pochettino must improve the long range shootings of the players. Now, we don't have anyone who can score from outside the penalty box. Eriksen can score from freekicks but other than that, he seldom hits the target from long range shootings. The others are simply shyte when it comes to long range shootings despite trying time and time again. It is time we practise on our shootings as it can help us score in tight matches.

I don't have the stats to hand but I seem to recall that we were amongst the teams that scored the most goals from outside the box last season

 

[Spurs7891]

I don't have the stats to hand but I seem to recall that we were amongst the teams that scored the most goals from outside the box last season

I think that is largely due to Eriksen's goals, especially from freekicks. Not sure why but we rarely had players who can score from long range shootings over the years.

 

[milo]

I think that is largely due to Eriksen's goals, especially from freekicks. Not sure why but we rarely had players who can score from long range shootings over the years.

I don't think that it included free kicks but I will see if I can find the data. Kane certainly scored a few from outside the box last season.

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

I don't understand how comments such as "the players are not enjoying their football" and "square pegs in round holes" can be possibly made. Our players are playing in positions familiar to them. Whether that is their best position is up for debate, but to suggest that we are playing players out of position is disingenuous. As for team spirit, I would say that the current team spirit seems obviously the strongest that it has been for a while because we have got rid of the trouble makers.

As has been mentioned a number of times on here, it is the fact that our team is young that is leading to the inconsistency rather than playing players out of position or them not enjoying their football. So a bit of perspective:

1. Our defence looks far more solid than it has done for a number of years;
2. We have lots of different options in midfield and despite a large number of injuries they have been a big part of why we are more solid;
3. Kane is out of form and is a vital cog in our goalscoring ability;
4. Son is injured and is a vital cog in our goalscoring ability;
5. Chadli is injured and contributed a number of goals for us;
6. Eriksen was injured for a long time and contributed a number of goals for us;
7. N'Jie is adjusting to our style of play and also the EPL.

I think criticising the team with the number of injuries, with the fact that we have the youngest players in the league and, most importantly when they are showing so much promise, is wrong. Just plain wrong.

 

[billyiddo]

I agree Gazza, very strange points being made in the wake of a poor defeat.

We're generally playing well this season, tight at the back and quite dangerous in attack now that we have a bit of pace about us, if Kane had his scoring boots on we'd be close to the top of the table (having played exactly the same way) and no one would be complaining about square pegs or inverted wingers, such are the fine lines

 

[Robspur12]

rut or groove, you have to agree that he has gone backwards under poch.

It does seem like you are always looking to find sticks to beat Poch with which is a shame. When you say "gone backwards" has Townsend ever been any different? I am struggling to remember when he was effective for us. He's fairly good at running and beating players but it seems to fall apart from there. His decision making is poor because he doesn't look up just keeps his head down and shoots often ignoring better options. He's like a poor man's Aaron Lennon without the brains- which is a frightening thought.

 

[parklane1]

I don't understand how comments such as "the players are not enjoying their football" and "square pegs in round holes" can be possibly made. Our players are playing in positions familiar to them. Whether that is their best position is up for debate, but to suggest that we are playing players out of position is disingenuous. As for team spirit, I would say that the current team spirit seems obviously the strongest that it has been for a while because we have got rid of the trouble makers.

As has been mentioned a number of times on here, it is the fact that our team is young that is leading to the inconsistency rather than playing players out of position or them not enjoying their football. So a bit of perspective:

1. Our defence looks far more solid than it has done for a number of years;
2. We have lots of different options in midfield and despite a large number of injuries they have been a big part of why we are more solid;
3. Kane is out of form and is a vital cog in our goalscoring ability;
4. Son is injured and is a vital cog in our goalscoring ability;
5. Chadli is injured and contributed a number of goals for us;
6. Eriksen was injured for a long time and contributed a number of goals for us;
7. N'Jie is adjusting to our style of play and also the EPL.

I think criticising the team with the number of injuries, with the fact that we have the youngest players in the league and, most importantly when they are showing so much promise, is wrong. Just plain wrong.

Great post mate and sums it up in a nutshell, some of the moans about where we are going wrong are flimflam ( imo).