• 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

OMT Spurs v City Sunday 4pm

Maltese Falcon said:
Before when? In Sherwood's days? In AVB's days? In Redknapp's days? We sure never did it in Poch's days? And this is it! Without wingers and with 4 CBs we risk being as toothless as a centenarian in a home for the elderly.
Click to expand...
So you would prefer an untried formation of a back 3 rather than a back four with Dier (who just got two assists playing right back against Soton and) and Verts (who has played left back for his country)?
 
90291Spur said:
So you would prefer an untried formation of a back 3 rather than a back four with Dier (who just got two assists playing right back against Soton and) and Verts (who has played left back for his country)?
Click to expand...

Yes... We are talking about a Premiership team not a Sunday pub side. Why shouldn;t a team of seasoned professionals with international experience cope with this slight tweak?
 
Jordinho said:
Why have QPR, ManU and Liverpool all reverted to a back 4?
Click to expand...

For goodness sake! I am not saying that we revert to it permanently. It would just be for this game and - as clearly stated - only if Rose does not make it.

People seem to have forgotten that even Sherwood - an incompetent behemoth for many - tried this out against Chelsea away last season and it worked; we dominated the first half and only lost due to three typical Spurs schoolboy defensive errors.

To Dare is To Do!
 
I can see where you are coming from with the potential lack of width without Rose/Walker and wing backs would obviously combat that - but we know Vertonghen is pretty capable on the left and comfortable with attacking in that position, as well so i think keeping the current set up with Dier/Fazio in the center, with Vertonghen on the left and either Yedlin or Chiriches on the right (where they would get some protection if Lamela starts) isn't a bad solution either - in fact it's probably the best for my money as you're keeping things the same bar a couple of exceptions (who know those roles anyway)
 
I just don't see the benefits of playing a formation that most of the players have probably never played in their life. We have more than adequate replacements available for our missing FBs.
 
Jordinho said:
I just don't see the benefits of playing a formation that most of the players have probably never played in their life. We have more than adequate replacements available for our missing FBs.
Click to expand...

That's the way I see it as well, going into a game ( we have to win) against one of the best sides in the country with a formation that the players have not worked on would be madness ( imo).
 
billyiddo said:
I can see where you are coming from with the potential lack of width without Rose/Walker and wing backs would obviously combat that - but we know Vertonghen is pretty capable on the left and comfortable with attacking in that position, as well so i think keeping the current set up with Dier/Fazio in the center, with Vertonghen on the left and either Yedlin or Chiriches on the right (where they would get some protection if Lamela starts) isn't a bad solution either - in fact it's probably the best for my money as you're keeping things the same bar a couple of exceptions (who know those roles anyway)
Click to expand...

I can see where you are coming from too. And yet there is a need to adapt to different scenarios. With this season (almost) a dead rubber, surely now is a good time to experiment with different formations and players. I suggested three at the back and wing backs for the reasons MF has indicated - pace and width - while at the same time offering cover for the wingback when they bomb forward. To me that makes more sense than just trying the same old 4231 all the time, which really hasn't delivered the type of football I would like to see.
 
glorygloryeze said:
Great news! I would have been VERY scared at the prospect of Navas vs Vertonghen...:eek:
Click to expand...

Great news indeed. I would then play him instead of Townsend as the LWB. He can then help out to neutralise Navas without being the last line of defence. Verts behind him would offer extra insurance and still leave two in the middle to cover.
 
The flying full-back suffered a tight hamstring at the end of our win at Saudi Sportswashing Machine on April 19.

That forced him out of the squad for last weekend’s draw at Southampton but he has trained this week and is back in Mauricio Pochettino’s plans - perfect timing after an unfortunate injury to his fellow full-back Ben Davies, who is now out for the season following shoulder surgery.

“Danny is back, he’s fit and he’s trained well this week,” Mauricio told us after training on Friday. “We have one more training session remaining on Saturday to assess him again but we’re happy with how he’s progressed.”

Kyle Walker (foot) is our only other absentee.
 
Pirate55 said:
I can see where you are coming from too. And yet there is a need to adapt to different scenarios. With this season (almost) a dead rubber, surely now is a good time to experiment with different formations and players. I suggested three at the back and wing backs for the reasons MF has indicated - pace and width - while at the same time offering cover for the wingback when they bomb forward. To me that makes more sense than just trying the same old 4231 all the time, which really hasn't delivered the type of football I would like to see.
Click to expand...

What is the benefit if a back 3 is not seen as a likely solution for next season?

Why not spend this time continuing to work towards what we're planning to do next season instead? We have the youngest team in Europe (tm), why not continue to give those players the chance to grow and gain experience in positions and roles they're now starting to become comfortable in? You really don't think there's a significant benefit to working towards consistency here?
 
I see you're talking about width, using that would be very effective against us. Our left-hand side is particularly weak, Clichy and Kolarov isn't exactly brilliant.

Also, Zabaleta has regressed on our right hand side and Sagna has been brick, so we're bad there too.

That being said, none of our centre backs are any good either. Fair to say I'm not confident.
 
SWP29 said:
I see you're talking about width, using that would be very effective against us. Our left-hand side is particularly weak, Clichy and Kolarov isn't exactly brilliant.

Also, Zabaleta has regressed on our right hand side and Sagna has been crude, so we're bad there too.

That being said, none of our centre backs are any good either. Fair to say I'm not confident.
Click to expand...
Lol, I think you've been spending to much time on here, you're starting to sound like us! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back