OMT Spurs - Fulham

[Finney Is Back]

I checked who scored and they only show 13 shots total?

If I'm wrong on numbers my point was that we still made good chances in the second half, and I did originally say (possibly in another conversation) that we made more chances when winning than we did when drawing.

And! Bloody hell have you seen the xG?

What were the 'good' chances in the second half? There was the Son one that was a very good chance (though that only came about because the Fulham player fell over, it wasn't really from us doing any actual attacking). There was also Winks' rather weak shot from Fulham clearing a corner, I don't remember anything else?

After Fulham scored we at least looked like we started trying to score again and finally had a few touches of the ball in the last third but we can't keep on giving ourselves only a few minutes to get the winner after sitting back for so long and inviting an equaliser.

 

[braineclipse]

I was completely behind the appointment and have been staunchly until recent weeks I have grown privately a little concerned at the tactics.

But last night was a massive tipping point for me. I have gone from being privately a little concerned to being absolutely furious.

Picking that side and choosing those tactics for fudging fulham at home is totally unacceptable imo.

So much so I would want him formally warned by the Chairman.

The players and tactics he chose saw us outplay Fulham and creating enough chances to be at least two goals up at half time.

We weren't good enough in the second half, but if the player selection was that bad how on earth did we produce that first half?

 

[Mr Gogolak]

In a usual season the argument wouldn't be we should be top or challenging for the league it would be wherever the number of points we have tinkled away would have us (probably the difference between sitting in the top 8 to sitting in the top 4)

The team, with whatever problems you feel it has, is certainly better than the dropped points that have been discussed of late - forgetting the table for a moment I'd argue the manager and his approach has cost us somewhere in the 6-10 point range so far snd that's unsustainable.

I get your point but that's the basics of a league system. You drop points here and there, you get a few others at other places and you see where you end up. We've also grabbed a few unexpected wins or, at least, we've fared better than usual against some big teams. It's only at the end of the season that we will know if his approach was the right one or not.

Some people (not necessarily you) seem to imply it's an unmitigated disaster. If you're looking for fun and panache, fair enough but as far as competitive football is concerned, we're doing ok-ish (I think).

 

[billyiddo]

Fwiw i wasn't happy with the appointment in light of how negative he played at Chelsea & United (yes yes he some trophies i know) but i allowed myself to be won over by the New Man = New Philosopy clap trap and was even quite excited after a while after getting used to the idea.

The football post lockdown knocked me well and truly back down to earth and despite a brief 3-4 week period where we looked great early this season it has been more of the same.

He's got till the end of the season to show me something to invest in otherwise i want him out. Because next season will get ugly if it continues down this path.

The players and tactics he chose saw us outplay Fulham and creating enough chances to be at least two goals up at half time.

We weren't good enough in the second half, but if the player selection was that bad how on earth did we produce that first half?

We were playing Fulham, at home, with Son, Kane and Ndombele in the team.

 

[Finney Is Back]

He played Sissoko RW ( wrongly) to help Aurier but he didn't. He was at fault for the goal because he should have been on the left back but instead Aurier went there while he took Lookman , wrong way round but no disaster but then he did something again that ruined what could have been the best footballing day of our lives ....he pointed!
He fu**ing pointed to Sanchez or a.nother to pick up Lookman when he should have been doing it!
He was still nearer to Lookman than anybody else but he shirked the responsibility or couldn't be bothered. Freeze the game at that point and you will see him marking NOBODY and Sanchez has now been pulled out of position and not in position to help Dier deal with the cross . Sissoko would have probably prevented that cross coming in anyway , as he couldn't have made a bigger hash of it than Sanchez did.
This goal was mostly down to Sissoko (and of course Sanchez ) who was only on the pitch to PREVENT something like that happening because he sure doesn't offer the slightest thing at the other end of the pitch. Absolutely nothing came from him and he wasn't involved in any of our numerous chances. He hides behind opposition players so he can't receive the ball. He seems to be undroppable which is on Mourinho. He has to take the blame for this as well.

How on earth does Dier seem to get away with completely missing his header in the box in so many people's thoughts on where the blame lies for their equaliser last night? Fulham literally only had one player in the box, standing right in the centre and yet still completely free. After choosing not to be close to the opponent, Dier then still managed to miss a completely free header. I don't think any half reasonable centre back would've missed that header. I think even half of us on this forum wouldn't have missed it.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Sanchez isn't even capable of passing a ball or heading a ball or anything else.
Almost everybody to a man were horrified when they saw Sanchez's name on the team sheet. That's on Jose.
He shouldn't have been anywhere near the starting eleven and playing Sissoko where he did and not changing it at half time or earlier in the second half was criminal or perhaps you enjoyed Sanchez's long punts up towards Sissoko in the centre forward role hiding behind their centre backs. It was painful to watch and Mourinho got what he deserved!

I actually didn't think Sanchez was particularly poor last night. Yes, he got beat for the goal where he should've been tighter, but in every other team in the premier league the centre back partnering him would've just made the simple header and got Lookman's cross clear.

 

[Mr Gogolak]

I have disliked Jose for years. And wasn't happy when he replaced Poch. I was grudgingly happy when we were top to the league playing his defensive/counter attacking style, but if felt dangerous to me (if Emirates Marketing Project had not missed a hatful we'd have been stuffed). But making the same mistakes over and over again, resulting in two wins from 8 games (including 2 defeats), letting in late goals and then attacking, with Jose blaming the players for how the played AND NOT CHANGING IT is frustrating beyond words.

Then again, who does? I can't really think of any manager who completely changes his plans on the back of a string of disappointing results. Ferguson used to change his ways every couple of season, but I believe that's because he also changed his whole set-up (and never was a great tactician himself).

Klopp and Guardiola, for instance, made exactly zero adjustments despite a miserable start to the season (according to their high standards). Same goes for Tuchel at PSG, even when the writing was on the wall.

Again, I'm not having a go at you, but I do feel that the increased access to tactical knowledge and analysis has blurred the line. Today's football is all about routines and training (although that's just my opinion). I can't even remember the last manager I saw chopping and changing his side depending on the opposition. Fabio Capello famously did that with AC Milan against Cruyff's Barcelona in a CL final in the early 90s (I think) but that was a one-off.

Empirical evidence suggests once you've decided on a set-up for you team, you can only make minor alterations during the course of a season. At least, it seems to me that's what everybody does.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I think that’s a separate issue in that had we taken our chances we would have won comfortably

The game should have been out of site by half time

But it wasn't..... and then despite only being 1-0 up we retreat into our shell, let Fulham have a majority of the ball and don't look to actually get ourselves forward (until they equalise). We have now done this in several games, against average opposition, costing us several points.

 

[billyiddo]

Then again, who does? I can't really think of any manager who completely changes his plans on the back of a string of disappointing results. Ferguson used to change his ways every couple of season, but I believe that's because he also changed his whole set-up (and never was a great tactician himself).

Klopp and Guardiola, for instance, made exactly zero adjustments despite a miserable start to the season (according to their high standards). Same goes for Tuchel at PSG, even when the writing was on the wall.

Again, I'm not having a go at you, but I do feel that the increased access to tactical knowledge and analysis has blurred the line. Today's football is all about routines and training (although that's just my opinion). I can't even remember the last manager I saw chopping and changing his side depending on the opposition. Fabio Capello famously did that with AC Milan against Cruyff's Barcelona in a CL final in the early 90s (I think) but that was a one-off.

Empirical evidence suggests once you've decided on a set-up for you team, you can only make minor alterations during the course of a season. At least, it seems to me that's what everybody does.

Then surely we're in trouble because this is no way to play football and ultimately is the same blueprint that lost him his last two jobs in this country?

For him to succeed here it needs to be with a new approach, surely

 

[DeanoAustin]

How on earth does Dier seem to get away with completely missing his header in the box in so many people's thoughts on where the blame lies for their equaliser last night? Fulham non-figuratively only had one player in the box, standing right in the centre and yet still completely free. After choosing not to be close to the opponent, Dier then still managed to miss a completely free header. I don't think any half reasonable centre back would've missed that header. I think even half of us on this forum wouldn't have missed it.

Watch it again. They had two players in the box. Dier starts in a good position because he's marking the space where a centre back should be particularly as his partner is covering right back. Reguilon has two players in the left back position (should a midfielder be helping out there?). At that stage Reguilon should be bawling Dier out of it to tell him to pick one up. Maybe he was. Dier looks over his shoulder so by now, he should realise the danger and adjust his position to pick up one of the two. He doesn't. I don't think it's fair to say he missed an easy header. The ball was just too high for where he was positioned so he's at fault for being in the wrong place. Reguilon, in my book, is potentially guilty of not getting Dier in position to mark one of the two players he had. Sanchez is the most guilty because how he can get turned like that still makes no sense to me.

 

[braineclipse]

We were playing Fulham, at home, with Son and Kane in the team.

Ah yes, I forgot. Fulham are just so bad. Someone really should tell Leicester, Liverpool and Southampton.

 

[Baleforce]

What were the 'good' chances in the second half? There was the Son one that was a very good chance (though that only came about because the Fulham player fell over, it wasn't really from us doing any actual attacking). There was also Winks' rather weak shot from Fulham clearing a corner, I don't remember anything else?

After Fulham scored we at least looked like we started trying to score again and finally had a few touches of the ball in the last third but we can't keep on giving ourselves only a few minutes to get the winner after sitting back for so long and inviting an equaliser.

The Lamela play, but that was the after the equaliser, there were also a couple of breaks where we played a bad ball.

I agree we shouldn't be putting ourselves in that position. We need to stop conceding equalisers.

 

[billyiddo]

Ah yes, I forgot. Fulham are just so bad. Someone really should tell Leicester, Liverpool and Southampton.

Other teams under performing doesn't excuse our own failings

 

[Finney Is Back]

If this is a stage the team need to go through though, to become a really solid defensive unit, it’s worth it IMO, it would be a short sighted crowd that didn’t allow the building of such an obviously effective base.

Under Jose, Chelsea conceded single digit league goals in a season, I want some of that.

Also, looking at last night alone, Fulham had loads of the ball in our half before HT, sticking with the same tactics in the second wouldn’t guarantee the clean sheet either.

It's not the clean sheet that we want to guarantee, it is the win. It's clear that we struggle to keep clean sheets when we sit back deep defending and don't try to attack, therefore the best way we can go about winning is probably by continuing to attack and scoring a second goal.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Liverpool have drawn at home to West Brom, away to Fulham and lost to Southampton recently. United are riding the crest of a wave at the moment by the skin of their teeth but no one would be shocked to see them having a bad run. City I’ll grant you. Villa and Everton look good but can they keep it going? Ditto Leicester. We’re well in the race. For example, Everton lost to Leeds at home I think recently. I don’t know how a top team loses to Leeds with the way they play. There are a lot of strange and funny results going around.

But you have a very good point on the selection and tactics last night. I’m struggling to see the logic in some of it.

I'm not sure that any of those teams sit back deep in their own half, defending with 10 or 11 players..... You know what, if we carried on the same way as we were playing in the first half but continued to be really wasteful in front of goal and Fulham had got an equaliser on a counter attack I wouldn't mind nearly as much. I'm not asking us to go kamikazee and push both full backs high up at the same time, play with 3 out and out forwards and no defensive midfielder. I just want a team who can play with a modicum of creativity and bravery when ahead in games instea of trying with all our might to just hang on to it.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Without being in the tactical briefings we can't know what's being done. I think we are because thats what he's done in every other job he's had.

We don't need to be in the tactical briefings.... It is clear from watching our matches that Jose's tactics are to defend deep and with 10 players in the second half of games that we are ahead in.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I think that is clearly not the case, the attacking game plan is to score on the break, like the goal Son should have scored in the second half last night, like the goal he did score against Arsenal, or the ones we got against Southampton, United etc.

Fulham didn't look like scoring last night, they scored when both CB's fudged up, Dier needs to make that header, it was basic, easy, but he fudged it, there is a similar circumstance to pretty much every goal we have conceded of late, our problems are mental not tactical.

We've done this dance before, I can't be bothered to do it again. I am absolutely convinced, that this style, minus the mistakes, will win us the league. We fix this in the classroom and on the psychiatrist's couch, not on the chalkboard.

Was that 'on the break' though? Wasn't that just a Fulham player falling over and gifting us possession? We can't expect the opposition to present us with chances like that every week. You are right that Fulham didn't much look like scoring last night, but in that second half it seemed to me that they looked like scoring more than we did. Why can we not carry on attacking them like we did in the first half (when we looked very much like scoring and Fulham didn't really look like scoring much at all)?

 

[Finney Is Back]

Forces the opposition into an off day.

We still did good things last night after taking the lead, we created chances from which goals should be scored 99% of the time, sadly Son had a bad day.

First half we were fine. Second half we clearly retreated and went defensive.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Quite scary that the favourites to win the league this season have the best defence in City. Although everyone sees their attacking threat they have kept so many clean sheets

Do Emirates Marketing Project have the best defence because:

a) They surrender possession, sit really deep, get absolutely everyone behind the ball and defend for their lives

or

b) They look to dominate possession, attack the opposition, keep them penned back and limit the time that the opposition have the ball in their defensive third?

 

[Finney Is Back]

Brighton had plenty of ball yesterday
City defended well
What city did do was keep the ball at times like you say
We can’t do that with certain players.,, not their Jose favourites so they always play

Emirates Marketing Project had 65% possession in their game against Brighton....