The Limp Struggle to Sneak into the top 4 2021/22

[harr1984]

We gave them a 3-month head start and 3 points in a pathetic performance at the Emirates under Nuno. We've done pretty well to get here, albeit if we don't get 4th we will lament Soton, Wolves, and Brighton at home as games we should have won.

We gave them a 3 month head start? Nuno got manager of the month for the first month of the season, and we were four points off Arsenal after Conte's first game in charge. Remind me how many points off Arsenal we are now? Lets not pretend its all Nuno's fault we arent in the top 4.....

 

[tommysvr]

We gave them a 3 month head start? Nuno got manager of the month for the first month of the season, and we were four points off Arsenal after Conte's first game in charge. Remind me how many points off Arsenal we are now? Lets not pretend its all Nuno's fault we arent in the top 4.....

No blame on Nuno in my post other than the game at the Emirates. But we had a completely disrupted pre-season, a good month and then 2 rough ones. To be where we are is quite good, is the point I was making.

 

[glasgowspur]

We gave them a 3 month head start? Nuno got manager of the month for the first month of the season, and we were four points off Arsenal after Conte's first game in charge. Remind me how many points off Arsenal we are now? Lets not pretend its all Nuno's fault we arent in the top 4.....

We were top and they were bottom of the table at one point if i remember correctly.
Then the first NLD of the season we had a chance to pile on the misery but didn't turn up.

 

[parklane1]

I don’t think we should lament any specific matches if we miss out. We should look to improve as a team, to be better and to be so more often. You can say we lost against each of those sides, but equally we picked up a full six points against Emirates Marketing Project. So really it’s about improvement still needed and consistency.

Learn from those matches, of course, we should always be seeking to learn win, lose, or draw, there are always lessons to be learned. But we shouldn’t blame individual matches when it’s the collective results over the course of a full season that are what really matter.

Amen to that.

 

[metalgear]

I started to write a post in agreement with that, but then I got thinking. Is it really? Or is it just a lazy cliché that all of us use?

I mean, the current Liverpool and Emirates Marketing Project teams have a very high bar. Let's say that their top-level performance is a 10. At that level, they're destroying most teams and, to be honest, capable of beating any team in world football. But sometimes they drop to 8. They'll still beat most teams but, against better opponents (or ones that have a particularly inspired day), they might drop points. Consistency for those two teams means hitting a 9 every week.

On that scale, I'm going to put Spurs at 8 on a decent week. We drop down to 7, sometimes 6 (Brighton, Burnley). Sometimes we hit a 9, and I feel that's our current ceiling. A few years ago it was clearly a 10 -- on form, we could (and did!) beat anyone.

So consistency for the current Spurs team is hitting that 8 (or better) every game. That cuts out most of the annoying defeats and probably gets us top 4, just. To become title challengers, we have to raise our ceiling too. Become an 8-10 team rather than a 6-9 one.

Of course, it's more complicated than that -- there are two teams on every pitch, and sometimes one just won't let the other play. At Anfield last week, were Spurs and Liverpool both at 8? Or 9, with us getting marked up for executing a gameplan and the Scousers matching it? Were we that bad against Brighton, or did they play well?

When the objective of football is to score and you get zero or one shot on target in an entire match, that's going to be a fail or a 4/10. Yes we are that inconsistent or volatile... Not losing to the top two is excellent and at least 8/10 so we are really quite inconsistent

Sent from my SM-T865 using Fapatalk

 

[Lemonade Money]

Consistency is the key. Liverpool and City are the evidence of thar, and set the bar.

Is custard the right consistency? Maybe that's where we're going wrong.

 

[FatBloke]

When the objective of football is to score and you get zero or one shot on target in an entire match, that's going to be a fail or a 4/10. Yes we are that inconsistent or volatile... Not losing to the top two is excellent and at least 8/10 so we are really quite inconsistent

Sent from my SM-T865 using Fapatalk

I did say it was complicated! On Saturday, Liverpool managed 3 shots on target, as did we. Was that a 5/10 from both teams?

Don't get me wrong -- dour football isn't what I want to see regularly from Spurs -- but a team putting in a very good defensive performance is no bad thing. No matter what Klopp says.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I started to write a post in agreement with that, but then I got thinking. Is it really? Or is it just a lazy cliché that all of us use?

I mean, the current Liverpool and Emirates Marketing Project teams have a very high bar. Let's say that their top-level performance is a 10. At that level, they're destroying most teams and, to be honest, capable of beating any team in world football. But sometimes they drop to 8. They'll still beat most teams but, against better opponents (or ones that have a particularly inspired day), they might drop points. Consistency for those two teams means hitting a 9 every week.

On that scale, I'm going to put Spurs at 8 on a decent week. We drop down to 7, sometimes 6 (Brighton, Burnley). Sometimes we hit a 9, and I feel that's our current ceiling. A few years ago it was clearly a 10 -- on form, we could (and did!) beat anyone.

So consistency for the current Spurs team is hitting that 8 (or better) every game. That cuts out most of the annoying defeats and probably gets us top 4, just. To become title challengers, we have to raise our ceiling too. Become an 8-10 team rather than a 6-9 one.

Of course, it's more complicated than that -- there are two teams on every pitch, and sometimes one just won't let the other play. At Anfield last week, were Spurs and Liverpool both at 8? Or 9, with us getting marked up for executing a gameplan and the Scousers matching it? Were we that bad against Brighton, or did they play well?

So you're saying consistency is the key, but each team sets its own standard?

Consistency comes from refining the controllables to as near to perfection as possible (so no goalkeeping howlers, defensive brainfarts etc), so at best, nothing 'you do' stops you winning. The uncontrollables, are just that, the ref being a prick, ronaldo having a ronaldo day, a shot bouncing in off a balloon, a goalie having a blinder. And in reality they are not common events. Your ceiling is then set by quality of player and depth of squad to rotate in similar quality to rest or replace your main men.

I think Contes coaching approach is all about consistency, and truth be told if he establishes that, it'll be the annoying results (saints h&a, burnley, wolves, bha, etc) that get sorted out first, that would mean 3rd or 4th quite easily, as we will always have our way of playing against Liverpool and Emirates Marketing Project that can yield results.

 

[Spur of the moment]

I was thinking in terms of the co-effient thing. Isn't ours quite good?

Experience suggests if there's a way to fvck us over they'll find it

Unfortunately you're too right! Heard on radio this morning that the new CL rules will totally dispense with the whole co-efficient thing. It will cease altogether.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

So you're saying consistency is the key, but each team sets its own standard?

Consistency comes from refining the controllables to as near to perfection as possible (so no goalkeeping howlers, defensive brainfarts etc), so at best, nothing 'you do' stops you winning. The uncontrollables, are just that, the ref being a prick, ronaldo having a ronaldo day, a shot bouncing in off a balloon, a goalie having a blinder. And in reality they are not common events. Your ceiling is then set by quality of player and depth of squad to rotate in similar quality to rest or replace your main men.

I think Contes coaching approach is all about consistency, and truth be told if he establishes that, it'll be the annoying results (saints h&a, burnley, wolves, bha, etc) that get sorted out first, that would mean 3rd or 4th quite easily, as we will always have our way of playing against Liverpool and Emirates Marketing Project that can yield results.

Consistency by definition has to be by your own standards as each team is different
Consistency for us is equaling last years points total. We are going to exceed it so we have outdone ourselves through being better and having better players and staff
Next year that’s the benchmark

 

[FatBloke]

So you're saying consistency is the key, but each team sets its own standard?

Consistency comes from refining the controllables to as near to perfection as possible (so no goalkeeping howlers, defensive brainfarts etc), so at best, nothing 'you do' stops you winning. The uncontrollables, are just that, the ref being a prick, ronaldo having a ronaldo day, a shot bouncing in off a balloon, a goalie having a blinder. And in reality they are not common events. Your ceiling is then set by quality of player and depth of squad to rotate in similar quality to rest or replace your main men.

I think Contes coaching approach is all about consistency, and truth be told if he establishes that, it'll be the annoying results (saints h&a, burnley, wolves, bha, etc) that get sorted out first, that would mean 3rd or 4th quite easily, as we will always have our way of playing against Liverpool and Emirates Marketing Project that can yield results.

I'm saying that consistency is a lazy cliché, and that it must be considered alongside a team's ceiling.

I think we have different definitions of consistency. Your definition is perfection (or close to it), while mine is maintaining the same level every week. Which could be anywhere from bloody brilliant to Accrington Stanley.

You argue that making a defensive brainfart is being inconsistent -- but then, so is scoring a worldie. Unless you do that every week.

I think we also disagree on ceiling, come to think of it. For me, a team's ceiling is the very best that they can perform, with their strongest XI on the pitch, whereas you're including squad depth.

However, we can agree that the ideal scenario is that a team plays consistently (!) close to their ceiling every week. For me, the truly consistent team would perform almost as well with a handful of players injured or rotated -- thanks to a well-coached system, good backup players, etc.

I'm not saying that either of us is right. If anything, I think we've got similar views -- your last paragraph is bang on the money for me. It's just our semantics that are different. Isn't arguing about semantics exactly what the internet was designed for?

 

[braineclipse]

I started to write a post in agreement with that, but then I got thinking. Is it really? Or is it just a lazy cliché that all of us use?

I mean, the current Liverpool and Emirates Marketing Project teams have a very high bar. Let's say that their top-level performance is a 10. At that level, they're destroying most teams and, to be honest, capable of beating any team in world football. But sometimes they drop to 8. They'll still beat most teams but, against better opponents (or ones that have a particularly inspired day), they might drop points. Consistency for those two teams means hitting a 9 every week.

On that scale, I'm going to put Spurs at 8 on a decent week. We drop down to 7, sometimes 6 (Brighton, Burnley). Sometimes we hit a 9, and I feel that's our current ceiling. A few years ago it was clearly a 10 -- on form, we could (and did!) beat anyone.

So consistency for the current Spurs team is hitting that 8 (or better) every game. That cuts out most of the annoying defeats and probably gets us top 4, just. To become title challengers, we have to raise our ceiling too. Become an 8-10 team rather than a 6-9 one.

Of course, it's more complicated than that -- there are two teams on every pitch, and sometimes one just won't let the other play. At Anfield last week, were Spurs and Liverpool both at 8? Or 9, with us getting marked up for executing a gameplan and the Scousers matching it? Were we that bad against Brighton, or did they play well?

Very good post.

At the very least this is another important factor in addition to consistency.

Liverpool and City are so good that they can have a slightly off day up against a mid table team having a good day and still expect to win the game most of the time I think.

They still have inconsistent performances, but the fluctuations are at a higher level overall.

Now, that can be true and they can be more consistent than us at the same time of course. But I would argue that overall quality is more of an issue for us than inconsistency.

 

[90sSpursBook]

Spot on. This will not be easy at all, but all we can do is hope for this game and others to go our way.



Another spot on post. These games happen, just like the City games. At the end if we don't get top 4 we may have been unlucky, we may blame Nuno. But ultimately the only thing that can be done is improve, and improve to a point where a poor game or two doesn't make the difference between 4th and 5th.

Agreed. You could be here for the rest of time looking at where points were dropped. That's the beauty/heartache of football - for a low scoring game in one off matches, where small incidents have disproportionate consequences. You could assess the marginal moments Arsenal have gained from this season - the 94th minute equaliser at home to Palace; Fernandes' penalty miss; Chelsea treating their game like a testimonial etc.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I think we have different definitions of consistency. Your definition is perfection (or close to it), while mine is maintaining the same level every week. Which could be anywhere from bloody brilliant to Accrington Stanley.

Close to perfection only in the matter of controlling the controllables. Consistency in doing that.

You argue that making a defensive brainfart is being inconsistent -- but then, so is scoring a worldie. Unless you do that every week.

Yes, scoring a worldie would be on that list as well. It cant be relied on.

I think we also disagree on ceiling, come to think of it. For me, a team's ceiling is the very best that they can perform, with their strongest XI on the pitch, whereas you're including squad depth.

i'm talking about once the coach has done all he can the level a team can sustain is limited by the quality of its players and its back-ups (to keep that level).....compared to its peers.

However, we can agree that the ideal scenario is that a team plays consistently (!) close to their ceiling every week. For me, the truly consistent team would perform almost as well with a handful of players injured or rotated -- thanks to a well-coached system, good backup players, etc.

Agreed

 

[SpurMeUp]

I think a lot has to do with squad depth and having faith to be able to rotate when needed. That is a key difference Conte has to clip-klop and oil cash G.

 

[markysimmo]

I think Leeds will beat Chelsea tonight which really could bring 3rd into possible play

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I think a lot has to do with squad depth and having faith to be able to rotate when needed. That is a key difference Conte has to clip-klop and oil cash G.

100%
Conte only fancies 16 players on the squad and he would like to upgrade on 5 of them I reckon
So in reality is 11 ish that he really rates and wants
Pool now have options everywhere to swap in and out with minor dents to their capability.

 

[markysimmo]

I think Leeds will beat Chelsea tonight which really could bring 3rd into possible play

and Leeds start pathetically again

 

[Bedfordspurs]

and Leeds start pathetically again

They are an awful side but actually have some decent players

 

[mephitis]

They are an awful side but actually have some decent players

Which we will sweep in on........