*** OMT Tottenham Hotspur v Ipswich Town FC ***

[Muttley]

Getting into tinfoil hat territory mate. Refs make mistakes, they’re human and it’ll keep happening no matter how many clubs release statements to protest.

Yeah, I've always been tolerant to human error. Goes with the game. The point of introducing tech was to help the officials with that so it doesn't impact football so much. It was with best intent that they got a leg up by having tech alongside them.

The problem is they don't want to use tech to help apply the laws. They are on another agenda and I would love to shake Webb's team to the core to get them back to where they need to be. They would be the ones wearing tin hats.

 

[Muttley]

Just watched the game.
If sons challenge in the centre circle on 10 mins is a foul then that challenge on danso is a pen.
You can make mistakes but there is no excuse for a lack of consistency.

Johnson second is not a tap in, that's a fine finish.

Archie and Bergvall, that's why you watch football.

Spence is just phenomenal.

Spence is phenomenal, but.......

I've only watched the first half so far. It's so abundantly clear to me that we shouldn't be winning 2-1. Spence's side of the pitch is getting slaughtered by a relegation team.

In the first minute of the game, the inverted full-back nonsense almost led to going a goal down immediately. I'm trying my best to understand the rationale why you would have a set of players in those positions and then get battered down the wings. I'm struggling with it.

 

[glasgowspur]

Spence is phenomenal, but.......

I've only watched the first half so far. It's so abundantly clear to me that we shouldn't be winning 2-1. Spence's side of the pitch is getting slaughtered by a relegation team.

In the first minute of the game, the inverted full-back nonsense almost led to going a goal down immediately. I'm trying my best to understand the rationale why you would have a set of players in those positions and then get battered down the wings. I'm struggling with it.

And yet our first goal came from Ipswich trying to switch play to that side.
Once archie figured delap out in the first 15 mins Vic barely had a save to make.

 

[Muttley]

And yet our first goal came from Ipswich trying to switch play to that side.
Once archie figured delap out in the first 15 mins Vic barely had a save to make.

It's actually not quite what you said. The first goal was just an orthodox ball along the ground from Phillips on the right half way line to Delap who was in a central area in between Bents and Gray. Spence was out of the game defensively on the half way line and had Delap got it, that right back area was exposed with Kulu in a foot race with Clarke as the proxy RB. It wasn't quite the right pass and Gray intervened and did the rest working with out forwards Son and Johnson. Great ball actually from Archie.

Where you are definitely right is that something happened tactically in the game that made us tighter as the game progressed. Getting hold of Delap was part of it. I think them losing that player to injury played in our favour as well. There were probably a few things that swung it back in our favour.

Personally, I just don't want to see us starting games this way. I think the guys should play more orthodox positions until they've got their rhythm. Definitely not the first time we've been talking about how we should have conceded 2 or 3 in the early exchanges of games. We've often conceded the first goal. Ange does need to sort this out.

 

[glasgowspur]

It's actually not quite what you said. The first goal was just an orthodox ball along the ground from Phillips on the right half way line to Delap who was in a central area in between Bents and Gray. Spence was out of the game defensively on the half way line and had Delap got it, that right back area was exposed with Kulu in a foot race with Clarke as the proxy RB. It wasn't quite the right pass and Gray intervened and did the rest working with out forwards Son and Johnson. Great ball actually from Archie.

Where you are definitely right is that something happened tactically in the game that made us tighter as the game progressed. Getting hold of Delap was part of it. I think them losing that player to injury played in our favour as well. There were probably a few things that swung it back in our favour.

Personally, I just don't want to see us starting games this way. I think the guys should play more orthodox positions until they've got their rhythm. Definitely not the first time we've been talking about how we should have conceded 2 or 3 in the early exchanges of games. We've often conceded the first goal. Ange does need to sort this out.

Not sure it was tactical, I think grey just realised that delap isn't so effective if you don't get into battles with him.
Had to laugh at the calls for delap to get into the England side, he is not getting away with that anywhere else but English football, he'd constantly giving away freekicks at international football.

 

[braineclipse]

Spence is phenomenal, but.......

I've only watched the first half so far. It's so abundantly clear to me that we shouldn't be winning 2-1. Spence's side of the pitch is getting slaughtered by a relegation team.

In the first minute of the game, the inverted full-back nonsense almost led to going a goal down immediately. I'm trying my best to understand the rationale why you would have a set of players in those positions and then get battered down the wings. I'm struggling with it.

Very little to do with "inverted full back nonsense" (first minute chance). We're pressing (gegenpressing) high and the press gets bypassed. Spence being deeper and wide would just leave an even bigger gap in the middle and we'd be in trouble anyway.

Tell me about a system that doesn't leave a team exposed when a high press gets bypassed like that.

Our high press in that situation isn't great imo. That's where there's room for improvement for me.

 

[alekaras]

Where are you getting those numbers? I've looked through 6 different live score services, and all of them lists 16/17 shots, 5 on target and 4 chances. A 1 in 4 conversion is average. Their xG was 0.96

Fotmob has it at 1.15. And considering BJ's goal was a tap-in worth 0.89 xG the rest of our xG was less than 1. Overall I think the result flatters us. 4-1 implies a thrashing, but we weren't that much better. Only marginally. And against Ipswich, at that.

 

[alekaras]

The league or even a decent position is gone, all I want is for Ange to be replaced in the summer. I'll take whatever results is required.

I would agree, if we have identified a suitable candidate. But if it's slim pickings, giving Ange one more season with a more robust squad might not be the worst option. Maybe it'll take him 3 years in the PL instead of 2. If he even slightly fixes the defensive issues we'll be a top team. I mean we're the 2nd highest scoring team as is and have the 3rd best goal difference. We're really not a 12th place team, just have been very unlucky in the league.

 

[Kandi1977]

Fotmob has it at 1.15. And considering BJ's goal was a tap-in worth 0.89 xG the rest of our xG was less than 1. Overall I think the result flatters us. 4-1 implies a thrashing, but we weren't that much better. Only marginally. And against Ipswich, at that.

View attachment 18940

We have more quality players than them, and quality players make the difference, and regularly outperform the actual xG. 4 goals was maybe 1 goal more than we "deserved", but to imply that we were lucky to win, as some did, is utter nonsense.

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

We need better logarithm players

 

[parklane1]

We need better logarithm players

Dont you start, enough stat junkies on here as it is. .

 

[Muttley]

Very little to do with "inverted full back nonsense" (first minute chance). We're pressing (gegenpressing) high and the press gets bypassed. Spence being deeper and wide would just leave an even bigger gap in the middle and we'd be in trouble anyway.

Tell me about a system that doesn't leave a team exposed when a high press gets bypassed like that.

Our high press in that situation isn't great imo. That's where there's room for improvement for me.

What I'm actually saying is that I don't want to see it at all at the start of games. For the opposition to be 6 on 4 after 20 seconds is not a good look for Ange. The old way of defending this would be for the left back to be pressing up on the side where the ball was (Destiny was) and for the RB to slot in alongside the RCB who shifts over with the LCB becoming the LB. You form the back 3 with the number 6 shielding and you keep it tight. What we did was make Bents the LB and he couldn't get into the middle quick enough to shut down the runner who became the passer after one straightforward square ball. Spence is even on the LB side of the centre circle to start with. So with 2 passes they took 8 of our players out of the game. How is that a smart tactical system?

Is is inverted full-back nonsense to me when played this way.

 

[braineclipse]

What I'm actually saying is that I don't want to see it at all at the start of games. For the opposition to be 6 on 4 after 20 seconds is not a good look for Ange. The old way of defending this would be for the left back to be pressing up on the side where the ball was (Destiny was) and for the RB to slot in alongside the RCB who shifts over with the LCB becoming the LB. You form the back 3 with the number 6 shielding and you keep it tight. What we did was make Bents the LB and he couldn't get into the middle quick enough to shut down the runner who became the passer after one straightforward square ball. Spence is even on the LB side of the centre circle to start with. So with 2 passes they took 8 of our players out of the game. How is that a smart tactical system?

Is is inverted full-back nonsense to me when played this way.

Not sure I understand you correctly...

It ends up 6 on 4, because we press high with 6 players, leaving 4 outfield players "deeper".

At the time it's 6 against 4 we're in real trouble. No matter how those 4 are set up.

What you're describing is a 3-1 setup with Bentancur, Gray and Danso with Spence ahead of them. What you're suggesting instead is a 3-1 setup with Gray, Danso and Spence with Bentancur ahead of them. I don't see much of a difference. Neither would be "solid".

What would make a difference would be not pressing with 6 players that high, or the 4 furthest back being more of a 2-2 with a couple of them being higher/more aggressive in their positioning.

Or, imo a better press in the first place.

To be fair it takes a brilliant pass from their right sided player inside to bypass that part of the press, high risk high reward stuff. We win the ball there and they're in trouble. To some extent this is a result of both team taking a fairly high risk high reward approach in this phase.

 

[Muttley]

Not sure I understand you correctly...

It ends up 6 on 4, because we press high with 6 players, leaving 4 outfield players "deeper".

At the time it's 6 against 4 we're in real trouble. No matter how those 4 are set up.

What you're describing is a 3-1 setup with Bentancur, Gray and Danso with Spence ahead of them. What you're suggesting instead is a 3-1 setup with Gray, Danso and Spence with Bentancur ahead of them. I don't see much of a difference. Neither would be "solid".

What would make a difference would be not pressing with 6 players that high, or the 4 furthest back being more of a 2-2 with a couple of them being higher/more aggressive in their positioning.

Or, imo a better press in the first place.

To be fair it takes a brilliant pass from their right sided player inside to bypass that part of the press, high risk high reward stuff. We win the ball there and they're in trouble. To some extent this is a result of both team taking a fairly high risk high reward approach in this phase.

This is what most teams would have when the ball is down our left.

Spence, Gray, Davies
-----------Bents

So why does the 6 on 4 happen? Bents is not coming in from LB to stop their centre mid. Their player would be coming straight at Bents as the number 6 and have to take him on OR pass the ball earlier. More likely Bents holds him up and he pushes the ball out sideways rather to the LB rather than to a forward. Then you have a chance to get players back.

All I'm saying is why Ange can't adopt orthodox tactics in the early exchanges? With what we've seen this season, getting through the first 15-20 mins without conceding should be a priority. We know we should then get the ascendency and take control against most PL teams.

Let's be honest, only the woodwork and their player shooting at his own players back saved us from being 2 down. It was a very sub-optimal start to the game that we got away with. We probably deserved that luck though over a season.

 

[braineclipse]

This is what most teams would have when the ball is down our left.

Spence, Gray, Davies
-----------Bents

So why does the 6 on 4 happen? Bents is not coming in from LB to stop their centre mid. Their player would be coming straight at Bents as the number 6 and have to take him on OR pass the ball earlier. More likely Bents holds him up and he pushes the ball out sideways rather to the LB rather than to a forward. Then you have a chance to get players back.

All I'm saying is why Ange can't adopt orthodox tactics in the early exchanges? With what we've seen this season, getting through the first 15-20 mins without conceding should be a priority. We know we should then get the ascendency and take control against most PL teams.

Let's be honest, only the woodwork and their player shooting at his own players back saved us from being 2 down. It was a very sub-optimal start to the game that we got away with. We probably deserved that luck though over a season.

We have 6 players pressing high. The 6 on 4 happens from the time that high press is bypassed imo.

You think Bentacur would be significantly better at holding up play at that point than Spence? What's the difference between the two setups if both have the same number of players back there?

Pressing high from the start isn't exactly some new fangled Ange thing. Teams have been doing that for a long time.

 

[Muttley]

We have 6 players pressing high. The 6 on 4 happens from the time that high press is bypassed imo.

You think Bentacur would be significantly better at holding up play at that point than Spence? What's the difference between the two setups if both have the same number of players back there?

Pressing high from the start isn't exactly some new fangled Ange thing. Teams have been doing that for a long time.

Have a little look at Spence though. He doesn't engage as a 6 because if he does they have the overload on the left. McKenna has their LB doing exactly what I said. He first tucks in when the ball is on the other side so he can be the pivot. Then as they get possession he is soon wider and sprinting forward. Spence knows he's in trouble as Johnson is one of the 6 pressing and has gone into the middle. Spence is thinking like a full back who is out of position and exposed. Bents is thinking like a centre mid who is out of position and exposed.

I just think that other teams press in their positions better than we do. Poch's team was great at it. Walker and Rose did so much pressing in the wide areas. The front 4 did most of the rest. The double pivot midfield pressed intelligently taking in turns. They all sort of held their positions though. You didn't see gaps appearing in the way we do with Ange.

I'm actually all for pressing. I just see cracks when Ange's team do it and it is not all on the players.

 

[johnola]

Fotmob has it at 1.15. And considering BJ's goal was a tap-in worth 0.89 xG the rest of our xG was less than 1. Overall I think the result flatters us. 4-1 implies a thrashing, but we weren't that much better. Only marginally. And against Ipswich, at that.

View attachment 18940

But you are looking at the wrong stat. Goals are much more relevant than xG which is a contrivance of a data services firm.

 

[Muttley]

But you are looking at the wrong stat. Goals are much more relevant than xG which is a contrivance of a data services firm.

We shall see on this one. In the last 3 league games our goals results have been actual 7-1 vs xG 4.5-5.

Not sure whether I trust the xG system yet, but what I do know is that us only conceding 1 goal in 3 games is not representative of the 3 games I've watched with my own eyes. I'm definitely not declaring victory.

When we play City, B'mouth and Fulham it will be interesting based on their manager styles.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

We shall see on this one. In the last 3 league games our goals results have been actual 7-1 vs xG 4.5-5.

Not sure whether I trust the xG system yet, but what I do know is that us only conceding 1 goal in 3 games is not representative of the 3 games I've watched with my own eyes. I'm definitely not declaring victory.

When we play City, B'mouth and Fulham it will be interesting based on their manager styles.

But I can find many games this season where we should have scored more and concede less too
It’s swings and roundabouts which is how the data works

 

[Muttley]

But I can find many games this season where we should have scored more and concede less too
It’s swings and roundabouts which is how the data works

Tell me more.

Are you saying that xG has consistently looked higher for the goals we've actually conceded and vice versa for the goals we are scoring?