• 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***** Tottenham Hotspur vs. West Bromwich Albion - 26/12/13: 3pm

Feared the worst when I heard on the radio they were playing 3-6-1, or as Durham suggested 5-4-1. Had a feeling we might struggle to break them down.
20 shots on goal sounds decent , but only 3 on target tells a different story.

So much for being level with Liverpool come New Years Eve...is its May yet?
 
We were even worse today than we've been against similar teams under AVB this season, and I have been very critical of the way we played under him at home. Today we scored a goal from a free kick, and we created one other clear goalscoring opportunity all game long. That was Soldado's header from a corner late on. We had nothing to offer from open play. That is even less than we used to create under AVB.

We were perhaps a bit more direct today, but the end result was very much the same. We do have a lot of injuries at the moment, though. The team we had out there today was a midtable team.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
Creating proper chances means putting the ball in a position so the finisher can finish. A proper chance to me is receiving the ball in a good position at a good angle and being able to get the shot away. If we are lumping it in all game and requiring our top class international footballers to 'control it better' I don't class that as good chances being created. It's more pleasing to the crowd to see the ball flung into the mixer but it isn't actually any more effective. The other problem is we can't get shots away when the chance isn't a proper chance because there are too many players surrounding the finisher.

You're damn right I'm angry. I expected us under Sherwood, if we were going to be more 'up and at them' that we would at least win our winnable home games without too much trouble while maybe sacrificing some of our away consistency. In my backing of Sherwood this week I absolutely did not expect what I saw today. It may well get better under Sherwood once he's had time, but it just makes clear what a ****ing joke it all is, because he is the guy that was in the ear of the chairman and briefing to prominent members of the football media precisely when the previous Head Coach needed time himself. It's a joke.
Click to expand...

On that, I entirely agree. Full-time Tim's actions last season (undermining AVB before the United game) and his evident power over Levy are both things that make me uneasy. But what we can we do but support him? He's in charge now, the least he deserves is a bit of time, even if you don't think the previous coach was given enough of said time.

In terms of chance creation (the last bit of your first paragraph), we weren't able to get shots away under AVB either because...you guessed it, because there were too many players surrounding the shooter and he had no one to pass to in an advanced position because AVB insisted on everyone staying back in case the attack broke down. The point I'm trying to get at is this: under AVB, this crowding out of the shooter tended to happen outside the box, meaning we had even less of a chance to score because of the distance to goal. Under Tim, it's happening inside the box, which gives us a greater chance of scoring just by the closer proximity to goal. Sure, it requires a bit of skill to get the shot away, but these 'top-class international' footballers couldn't control anything today, and when compared to the first touch under pressure displayed by, oh, say, Coutinho when he scored the first goal today against City, it is clear that they are either rusty or just not very good to begin with. Probably the former. Hence, if they just controlled it a wee bit better, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.

And, as an addendum, I believe Tim is fully aware of what you're talking about (our players getting crowded out). Our faster passing and more direct approach play is geared around getting the ball to our strikers quickly, giving the opposition less time to react should they bring it down and turn towards goal and also allowing fewer opposition players the chance to get back and crowd out the shooter than a more measured, slow approach (a la AVB). So, in that sense, it is being rectified.
 
I'm finding the pinball every bit as tiring to watch as some of the dourest and most flaccid ѕhіte we played under AVB post-Bale. I felt like I was watching wave after wave of identical attacking moves, each failing identically to the last. We can't pass for toffee and we are still looking highly vulnerable to simple through-balls on the counter. With a little bit better finishing, West Brom could have had all three points sewn up before half-time. Maybe it'll improve as time goes on, but is the quality really there? I'm not sure.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
Creating proper chances means putting the ball in a position so the finisher can finish. A proper chance to me is receiving the ball in a good position at a good angle and being able to get the shot away. If we are lumping it in all game and requiring our top class international footballers to 'control it better' I don't class that as good chances being created. It's more pleasing to the crowd to see the ball flung into the mixer but it isn't actually any more effective. The other problem is we can't get shots away when the chance isn't a proper chance because there are too many players surrounding the finisher.

You're damn right I'm angry. I expected us under Sherwood, if we were going to be more 'up and at them' that we would at least win our winnable home games without too much trouble while maybe sacrificing some of our away consistency. In my backing of Sherwood this week I absolutely did not expect what I saw today. It may well get better under Sherwood once he's had time, but it just makes clear what a ****ing joke it all is, because he is the guy that was in the ear of the chairman and briefing to prominent members of the football media precisely when the previous Head Coach needed time himself. It's a joke.
Click to expand...

No, you and the other impatients are the joke with some of your comments. Sherwood has had three games in barely a week. Lets be realistic here.

The forwards were really poor both individually and collectively. Ade was the Mk2 version and Soldado is totally out of form and confidence. We were without how many first choice first teamers? Verts, Sandro, Lennon, Townsend, Paulinho, Kaboul, Dembele to name a few. The ball didn't run for us but we had a virtual second string out there today.

Absolutely cretinous to judge Sherwood by today's game.
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
Yes it was ordinary, but I'm starting to think it has less to do with the coaching and more to do with a lack of quality in some of our players. To me, they just don't look very good. It's all well and good to say well they need to settle in but even in that instance you can see something in a player. I dont see much in Holtby, Siggursson and Chadli. I fear we may have wasted a lot of money on some lemons, it does happen.
Click to expand...

A good system could turn average players into a better one while no matter how many quality / better players you have but without a system they could just look even worse than a league.2 player.
 
DubaiSpur - thank you very much for replying to BoL in such a considered manner, you are a good man.

For me this was much better than recent AVB performances, our forward players did not click and our full backs did not cross well, but I'm not sure how people can blame Sherwood for a player having a 10 yard touch or cutting the ball back inaccurately.

Against Soton we piled forward and the 2nd goal (own goal) and 3rd goal (lucky bounce) went in because we had a lot of players in the box, so statistically it was more likely to fall for us.

With AVB we would have 1 or 2 men in the box and very rarely threatened. Yes it was more controlled and sophisticated, but it was less likely to result in goals IMO.
 
scaramanga said:
They were pretty open in the first half though.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed…we were open the entire match as well, due to an awful CB performance today (from both) and a midfield which had Sigurdsson, Holtby and Chadli. Good Lord, Holtby and Sig together in the same midfield is awful, and I am beginning to wonder if Chadli is (in fact) Sasha Baron Cohen's latest comedy project. Bentaleb made a big difference with regards to simple ball retention when he came on, and with Lennon and Townsend hurt, Sherwood should either play Lamela or loan him out; MY preference would be to play the boy. he has great talent but needs confidence and faith...
 
Sitting in the freezing cold watching that crap. So so frustrating. Ruined my day. Dawson loves a hoof, but decides to give the ball to Eriksen when under pressure. Pathetic Sunday league quality football today.
 
The truth is the game could have gone either way today. I reckon we just about shaded it, but if we hd been up against a decent team I think we would have lost.For example if any half decent striker had the chances they had they would have scored a couple. We had a few half chances but their chances were more clear cut than ours.
I think the teams around us would have beaten the Baggies today, i.e. Saudi Sportswashing Machine Everton etc. I think the quality of the prem is very over rated at the moment cos even though I think Spurs have been poor this season so far we are still not too far off 4th. But I actually think it will be a miracle if we do achieve it this year. The truth is we have lost some real quality players over the last 2 to 3 seasons and we have only replaced them with very average players so far, bar some exceptions like Vertonghen. Just hope we can hold onto him at the end of the season.
I know we are missing a few players but i cannot see what Chadli brings to the team, seen him in a few games now and dont get what others see. Like i said we have some poor quality now, for example I cannot see the hype about Townsend either, another Huddlestone I reckon promises so much but delivers so little, no wonder he was loaned out to Championship clubs the last couple of seasons. He wouldn`t get near the first team of any of the present top 6 in the prem, and thats Spurs problem now, a distinct lack of quality all round. I would be surprised if any manager would be able to turn it around.
And just to set the record straight I couldn`t stand the way AVB set us up to play but sacking him at this stage of the season makes no sense.Should have given him to the end of the season.
The analogy of Spurs is like the England team. Never ever go for the right manager so even though there is a squad of good players they never quite achieve quite what you hope they will at the start of the season
 
DubaiSpur said:
On that, I entirely agree. Full-time Tim's actions last season (undermining AVB before the United game) and his evident power over Levy are both things that make me uneasy. But what we can we do but support him? He's in charge now, the least he deserves is a bit of time, even if you don't think the previous coach was given enough of said time.

In terms of chance creation (the last bit of your first paragraph), we weren't able to get shots away under AVB either because...you guessed it, because there were too many players surrounding the shooter and he had no one to pass to in an advanced position because AVB insisted on everyone staying back in case the attack broke down. The point I'm trying to get at is this: under AVB, this crowding out of the shooter tended to happen outside the box, meaning we had even less of a chance to score because of the distance to goal. Under Tim, it's happening inside the box, which gives us a greater chance of scoring just by the closer proximity to goal. Sure, it requires a bit of skill to get the shot away, but these 'top-class international' footballers couldn't control anything today, and when compared to the first touch under pressure displayed by, oh, say, Coutinho when he scored the first goal today against City, it is clear that they are either rusty or just not very good to begin with. Probably the former. Hence, if they just controlled it a wee bit better, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.

And, as an addendum, I believe Tim is fully aware of what you're talking about (our players getting crowded out). Our faster passing and more direct approach play is geared around getting the ball to our strikers quickly, giving the opposition less time to react should they bring it down and turn towards goal and also allowing fewer opposition players the chance to get back and crowd out the shooter than a more measured, slow approach (a la AVB). So, in that sense, it is being rectified.
Click to expand...

AVB would only be keeping certain players back if we were in a phase of the game where we are looking to control. If we are looking to score, we were getting players forward and getting players into the box. Give me a Hull, West Ham or Liverpool at home and I'll give you a Norwich, a Man United, a Swansea or pretty much every away game we've played save for City where we've got men in the box.

I think Tim is aware of what we're discussing too. I'm sure the quick tempo will get us goals at some point. We won't always be as bad as today (I hope). But my problem is that he has clearly manouvered his position, and a lot of fans have taken to it, that AVB was the problem, AVB's system was the problem, all we need to go is get the ball forward quickly and stop trying to control the game, because football is simple and overcomplicated by young guys with Ipads and PowerPoint presentations. As if the quicker tempo solves all our problems and brings with it no negatives. Clearly the board bought into it too, and it really annoys me. Of course Sherwood needs time, but I find it hilarious that he will now trot that excuse out while directly contributing to the circumstances that meant the previous Head Coach didn't get that time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back