• 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

Mousa Dembele

braineclipse said:
So it's naive to point out that we've lost control and the lead in games with him on the pitch. Because there are so many variable. But pointing the finger to him coming off and Mason coming on as the reason why we lost control yesterday is totally fine? No other variables? No reason to point out how we actually gave away chances through individual mistakes? Nope... The reason was... Dembele?

If it's really true that Dembele helps us hold control and the lead in a game we should see that in more than just one game. One games doesn't "prove it", for something like that to be true there should be an overall trend over many games. Now I'm not going to actually look through all our games and come up with numbers, but the examples going both ways I've presented are at least as much proof as the one game where he went off and we (some time later) lost control.

Dembele helps us hold possession in a close duel. Part of keeping the ball in a team under pressure is quick pass and move football to keep stretching the opponents and not let them close us down or force us into a clearance. Other players, like Mason, are rather good at that. Strengths and weaknesses and more than just the one factor...



I'll do my part :)
Click to expand...

It's not just the chances created, of which villa didn't have a great deal clear cut, it's the way we were unable to keep possession during that period as well and invited them on us, we were lucky it was villa. I honestly think we watched different games judging by the way you seem suspicious that we didn't actually play better before the sub? Every match report I've read mentions this phase of the game as well.

You can't have it both ways mate, you were the one ignoring variables and saying because in two other games we lost control when Dembele was on that he makes no difference to that aspect of our team, I simply replied in kind!

I'm not going to go back and look at individual games either and analyse each one for pro/negative Dembele moments/impacts, but from memory, his partnership with sandro was a main reason we dominated teams under avb (without necessarily creating chances) and his introduction in jan and feb of this year sparked our best performances last season, including possession if memory serves me? Obviously there's plenty of other contributory reasons for that but that's surely the simplistic correlation you are asking for?

Anyway, think we will go round in circles on this as we seem to be disagreeing on the basic point that we were worse when moussa went off, if we can't agree on that then we've no hope of agreeing on why.
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
It's not just the chances created, of which villa didn't have a great deal clear cut, it's the way we were unable to keep possession during that period as well and invited them on us, we were lucky it was villa. I honestly think we watched different games judging by the way you seem suspicious that we didn't actually play better before the sub? Every match report I've read mentions this phase of the game as well.

You can't have it both ways mate, you were the one ignoring variables and saying because in two other games we lost control when Dembele was on that he makes no difference to that aspect of our team, I simply replied in kind!

I'm not going to go back and look at individual games either and analyse each one for pro/negative Dembele moments/impacts, but from memory, his partnership with sandro was a main reason we dominated teams under avb (without necessarily creating chances) and his introduction in jan and feb of this year sparked our best performances last season, including possession if memory serves me? Obviously there's plenty of other contributory reasons for that but that's surely the simplistic correlation you are asking for?

Anyway, think we will go round in circles on this as we seem to be disagreeing on the basic point that we were worse when moussa went off, if we can't agree on that then we've no hope of agreeing on why.
Click to expand...

I'd be interested in where you think that @braineclipse has said that Villa did not come back into the game late on. What I think that he is questioning is whether it was a simple cause and effect as a result of Dembele coming off.
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
It's not just the chances created, of which villa didn't have a great deal clear cut, it's the way we were unable to keep possession during that period as well and invited them on us, we were lucky it was villa. I honestly think we watched different games judging by the way you seem suspicious that we didn't actually play better before the sub? Every match report I've read mentions this phase of the game as well.

You can't have it both ways mate, you were the one ignoring variables and saying because in two other games we lost control when Dembele was on that he makes no difference to that aspect of our team, I simply replied in kind!

I'm not going to go back and look at individual games either and analyse each one for pro/negative Dembele moments/impacts, but from memory, his partnership with sandro was a main reason we dominated teams under avb (without necessarily creating chances) and his introduction in jan and feb of this year sparked our best performances last season, including possession if memory serves me? Obviously there's plenty of other contributory reasons for that but that's surely the simplistic correlation you are asking for?

Anyway, think we will go round in circles on this as we seem to be disagreeing on the basic point that we were worse when moussa went off, if we can't agree on that then we've no hope of agreeing on why.
Click to expand...

I did not ignore other factors. I simply pointed out that what happened last night (us losing control) has happened with Dembele too. Thus, in my opinion, invalidating the point that we lost control because Dembele went off. If anything I was encouraging thinking about more than just one simple factor by pointing towards other games with similar and dissimilar results. I'm not asking for a simplistic correlation. I'm arguing against the simplistic idea that because we lost control (a while) after Dembele went off we lost control because Dembele went off.

What happened is a pretty standard thing in football, particularly in the PL. The losing team goes all out to press, play direct and try to make something happen. As a result the leading team can't fully maintain control. It happens to just about everyone and it happens to us with Dembele on the pitch too.

Like I said in the omt, Mason actually had a solid impact after coming on for those first 10 minutes up until the error for the goal. He really helped us keep possession and some control. I suspect that was part of the reason he was brought on in the first place, it's part of what he does. But there's no individual player in our squad, or arguably the world, that allows a team like ours to just stay completely in control when a PL level club tries to put us under pressure like that.
 
Villa fans think Carles Gil came on at 65 minutes for Grealish and changed the game.
We think Dembele going off affected our ability to keep the ball.
Its down to the way we watch football in such a partisan way. We have no interest in the other team.
 
braineclipse said:
Will have to watch those 10 minutes again, but not how I remember it. Or how I see it looking at stats and the match report.

In those 10 minutes they did have two chances other than the goal. The shot right before and the chance after Dier gave it away to Gestede. But we also had chances with the Eriksen free kick and shot from Lamela. Their goal and the Gestede chance were both created by us making individual mistakes, not because we lost control. We had been playing it out from the back most of the night and the errors from Dier and Mason were just that, individual errors.
Click to expand...

@milo this is where I got that impression, apologies if I misunderstood?

Anyway, like I said, I really don't think we're gonna do anything than go round in circles if our interpretations of what happened to our performance are so different, even taking Dembele out of the equation.
 
Modric THFC said:
Villa fans think Carles Gil came on at 65 minutes for Grealish and changed the game.
We think Dembele going off affected our ability to keep the ball.
Its down to the way we watch football in such a partisan way. We have no interest in the other team.
Click to expand...

Gill did look good when he came on.
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
Gill did look good when he came on.
Click to expand...

He looks like a player much more suited to a good footballing side

He plays like mata and silva and at the right club would look great

He could do a job for us but wouldn't get they starts. Would be perfect for Swansea or Everton possibly
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
@milo this is where I got that impression, apologies if I misunderstood?

Anyway, like I said, I really don't think we're gonna do anything than go round in circles if our interpretations of what happened to our performance are so different, even taking Dembele out of the equation.
Click to expand...

I'm saying we lost control after Villa scored (for a while). That we actually kept playing alright except for the two individual mistakes after Mason came on for those first 10 minutes. And we did keep possession for quite a bit during those 10 minutes. And Mason did more for the team in those 10 minutes than Dembele did in the 10 minutes leading up to the sub.
 
I think the reason Villa got "at us more" towards the end was that we lost a bit of our defensive discipline. It is too simplistic to put this down to Dembele going off and Mason coming on. I did notice in the lead up to their goal we allowed more space between our defensive midfield and our back 4, into which villa loaded more players. This was reminiscent of our defensive problems last season and could have cost us the game. But both Mason and Dier were guilty of pushing too far up away from the defence. I am still not sure that Mason is suited to the defensive playmaker role and actually wonder if a like for like swap of positions with dembele would have been a better option. It seems to me that Alli while getting forward to support the attack well is also better than both Mason and Dembele at getting back into his defensive position. ( perhaps that is because he is younger and fitter).
 
Robspur12 said:
I think the reason Villa got "at us more" towards the end was that we lost a bit of our defensive discipline. It is too simplistic to put this down to Dembele going off and Mason coming on. I did notice in the lead up to their goal we allowed more space between our defensive midfield and our back 4, into which villa loaded more players. This was reminiscent of our defensive problems last season and could have cost us the game. But both Mason and Dier were guilty of pushing too far up away from the defence. I am still not sure that Mason is suited to the defensive playmaker role and actually wonder if a like for like swap of positions with dembele would have been a better option. It seems to me that Alli while getting forward to support the attack well is also better than both Mason and Dembele at getting back into his defensive position. ( perhaps that is because he is younger and fitter).
Click to expand...

I think that the Dier/Dembele is too defensive for Poch to select it consistently. The reason that he has always selected Mason when fit is because he is a good passer and plays quick incisive balls forward. I think that we do lose something as a side and become a little easier to play against without that in the middle.
 
milo said:
I think that the Dier/Dembele is too defensive for Poch to select it consistently. The reason that he has always selected Mason when fit is because he is a good passer and plays quick incisive balls forward. I think that we do lose something as a side and become a little easier to play against without that in the middle.
Click to expand...

I think some comparisons can be made with Poch's midfield at Southampton and the current one at Spurs (Mason and Bentaleb missing). Dier, Alli, Dembele can be compared to Wanyama, Schneiderlin and Davies I think. Much more similar than Mason and Bentaleb were last season at least.
 
A combination of a very good Gil coming on, a rusty Ryan Mason, a loss of concetration from Dier maybe due to having helped Walker with Sinclair all game while covering the centre of the pitch also and the Villa players knowing they are bottom of the table and desperately needing that point.

Good reasons for the comeback.
 
braineclipse said:
I think some comparisons can be made with Poch's midfield at Southampton and the current one at Spurs (Mason and Bentaleb missing). Dier, Alli, Dembele can be compared to Wanyama, Schneiderlin and Davies I think. Much more similar than Mason and Bentaleb were last season at least.
Click to expand...

I get that. I still think that he will revert to Mason/Dier being his first choice.
 
milo said:
I think that the Dier/Dembele is too defensive for Poch to select it consistently. The reason that he has always selected Mason when fit is because he is a good passer and plays quick incisive balls forward. I think that we do lose something as a side and become a little easier to play against without that in the middle.
Click to expand...
Poch doesn't always select mason when fit. He didn'tn't at the the start of the season. Also I disagree with your second statement, mason played most games last season at the time our defensive record was very poor. We look far more solid with dembele in the team imo. I like mason but don't think he I'd a defensive midfielder. His best position imo is interchanging with dembele in the midfield 3 behind Kane.
 
Last edited:
Robspur12 said:
Poch doesn't always select mason when fit. He didn'tn't at the the start of the season. Also I disagree with your second statement, mason played most games last season at the time our defensive record was very poor. We look far more solid with dembele in the team imo. I like mason but don't think he I'd a defensive midfielder. His best position imo is interchanging with dembele in the midfield 3 behind Kane.
Click to expand...

He started on the bench against United, but he was doubtful for that game because of a pre-season injury. He then started the next 4 league games including the one against Sunderland where he scored and got injured. Been on the bench twice now since returning from that injury, though that's pretty normal returning from an injury.

It might be putting ever so slightly too strongly to say that Poch always selects Mason when fit. But if so it's very slightly too strongly and really comes down to a definition of match fit and physical fitness. Last season he didn't have much real competition though. Alli, Dier and Dembele has made it harder for him to lock in a starting place this season. At the very least it's true that Pochettino has started him very regularly when fit and match fit.
 
braineclipse said:
I think some comparisons can be made with Poch's midfield at Southampton and the current one at Spurs (Mason and Bentaleb missing). Dier, Alli, Dembele can be compared to Wanyama, Schneiderlin and Davies I think. Much more similar than Mason and Bentaleb were last season at least.
Click to expand...

A good point. The designated holding mid, the box to boxer and the more attack minded individual as a trio are a much better balance than the Masaleb duo we had last year. Offers us much more flexibility too. We can play Dier as a "one" against those sides parking the bus, breaking the straight jacket of twodeep lying mids in those games -something I have called for for a long time. Pleased to see Poch is adapting. Most encouraging
 
Bedfordspurs said:
He looks like a player much more suited to a good footballing side

He plays like mata and silva and at the right club would look great

He could do a job for us but wouldn't get they starts. Would be perfect for Swansea or Everton possibly
Click to expand...

I have nothing against the player you are talking about I just feel we need to move pass the level of buying the caliber of players "that could do a job for us" and focus on players with serious potential like Dele Alli.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back