AVB & Spurs Tactics and Formations discussion thread

[Gutter Boy]

Teams with systems tend to punch above their weight and become more than the sum of their parts (Barca, Ajax, Swansea, Arsenal, Germany, Holland), compared to buy great players and tell them to run about a bit clubs, who usually end up the opposite (traditionally: Madrid, Inter, Spurs).

 

[Golfball]

Yes, GHod forbid people having an interest in football going on a forum to talk about it.

Well done on missing the point (again).

To spell it out... 70 pages on AVB tactics... I was pointing out that 70 pages is a lot of a manager who seems to be completely lacking in the tactics area !

It was one of those "have a dig at a struggling manager" posts rather than telling people they shouldnt discuss it.

 

[Fhtagn]

i see what you mean, i think i prefer the more arcaic style of playing your strongest team when ever possible and to , you know...actually keep winning games..going on long streaks..challenging for the league..you know...stuff like that.

Old school style baby, if it aint broke..what are you fixing.

Because this is something that Spurs has done consequently lately?

And what about when something is broken? Is it not best to find something that's similar to fix it with instead of altering the whole thing by forcing pieces into unnatural or lesser positions?

 

[Jordinho]

Well done on missing the point (again).

:-s

To spell it out... 70 pages on AVB tactics... I was pointing out that 70 pages is a lot of a manager who seems to be completely lacking in the tactics area !

It's actually 70 pages of mostly generic tactics talk, as a lot of it pre-dates AVB's appointment. It's now the AVB & Spurs tactics thread.

It was one of those "have a dig at a struggling manager" posts rather than telling people they shouldnt discuss it.

Thank you for your lack of input on the subject.

 

[Golfball]

Teams with systems tend to punch above their weight and become more than the sum of their parts (Barca, Ajax, Swansea, Arsenal, Germany, Holland), compared to buy great players and tell them to run about a bit clubs, who usually end up the opposite (traditionally: Madrid, Inter, Spurs).

Yeah the thing that has impressed me most about Arsenals system is their ability to win so much without great players.

And can I just confirm that you understand the "run around a bit" was just a comment from Harry making a joke about Pavs lack of movement, and not his whole team talk. Well of course you know that, but I suppose if you want to irrationally hate a great manager then you have to just turn a blind eye to the facts.

But anyway, its very rare for clubs to actually plan a system from the start and instantly have the luxury to buy players that fit it and instantly be successful. Look at the squad Arsene Wenger first won the league with, doesnt really fit his system now.

Taking Arsenal as an example, the system developed over time. As Wenger is a good manager he was able to use the players he had to win matches and gradually with their growing reputation he was able to get his first choice players to the club.

Quite clearly AVB has a system in mind and is going to try and put square pegs in round holes right from the start. A good manager would play a system that suits his players, get results and over time try and develop it into something more long term. AVB is going to play his system regardless of whether it is right and then blame the whole world but himself just as he did at Chelsea.

 

[Golfball]

:-s



It's actually 70 pages of mostly generic tactics talk, as a lot of it pre-dates AVB's appointment. It's now the AVB & Spurs tactics thread.



Thank you for your lack of input on the subject.

Yes 70 pages of tactics talk... thats the reason I suggested someone send it to AVB....

Thank you for being such a great, non confrontational, fair, popular administrator.

 

[Jordinho]

Yes 70 pages of tactics talk... thats the reason I suggested someone send it to AVB....

Thank you for being such a great, non confrontational, fair, popular administrator.

I don't see how slagging off the manager fits in such a thread. A poor attempt at a joke would at least be remotely relevant.

 

[Golfball]

I don't see how slagging off the manager fits in such a thread. A poor attempt at a joke would at least be remotely relevant.

The forum is full of those sort of posts. I joked that someone should send AVB a link to this thread. The joke (no matter how unfunny you find it) is that he could do with some tactical help right now. I actually included AVB and tactics in this joke - how more relevant can a joke be to the AVB & Spurs Tactics thread !!!! Either way, what it certainly wasnt was a dig at people discussing football on a forum as your initial dig at me tried to suggest.

Are you going to tell everyone that does that sort of post they have made a lack of input to the thread? Or is it just me you are trying to provoke ? Maybe the sensible thing would be to put me on ignore, that way you wont have to try and interpret my posts differently to you would anyone elses. Im sorry that you seem to have taken my assessment of AVBs poor start so personally - i know after the Saudi Sportswashing Machine game you were in strong disagreement with my posts, but surely now you should look at that discussion and think "actually everything he said is alarmingly accurate" rather than get annoyed at the fact my assessment has got more vocal and much more support.

Dont worry I'm sure AVB will turn it around and then you can be more vocal about why AVB is a great manager.

 

[thfcsteff]

The forum is full of those sort of posts. I joked that someone should send AVB a link to this thread. The joke (no matter how unfunny you find it) is that he could do with some tactical help right now. I actually included AVB and tactics in this joke - how more relevant can a joke be to the AVB & Spurs Tactics thread !!!! Either way, what it certainly wasnt was a dig at people discussing football on a forum as your initial dig at me tried to suggest.

Are you going to tell everyone that does that sort of post they have made a lack of input to the thread? Or is it just me you are trying to provoke ? Maybe the sensible thing would be to put me on ignore, that way you wont have to try and interpret my posts differently to you would anyone elses. Im sorry that you seem to have taken my assessment of AVBs poor start so personally - i know after the Saudi Sportswashing Machine game you were in strong disagreement with my posts, but surely now you should look at that discussion and think "actually everything he said is alarmingly accurate" rather than get annoyed at the fact my assessment has got more vocal and much more support.

Dont worry I'm sure AVB will turn it around and then you can be more vocal about why AVB is a great manager.

After three games? Really? You're not serious are you mate?

 

[africanspurs]

Because this is something that Spurs has done consequently lately?

And what about when something is broken? Is it not best to find something that's similar to fix it with instead of altering the whole thing by forcing pieces into unnatural or lesser positions?

you work with the tools you have dont you? if you have pieces to fix it with something similar that YOU yourself created to the lack of gratitude of people that feed off the success you gave them, then you can use those peices. if you dont have those pieces you use whats at your disposal. what else can you do when the person the supplies the resources clearly has their own agenda that may contradict yours?

 

[africanspurs]

Wait, so when SAF rotates his squad he's doing it wrong?


I guess he'd appreciate the memo.

you're starting to sound like another poster that floods this place,

i didnt say that SAF did anything wrong did i? i didnt say that its bad to rotate did? infact i did say i understand what he meant.....i'm responding to his dig at he who shall not be named...who did nothing wrong

rotating is good if you feel you have the resources to carry out what you want, if you dont then rotating is done for the sake of it and hinders your chances

i dont know why but i feel i dont have to respond to this, yet i do.....LOL

when we were winning....that run that took us till the new year..who would you have dropped and why? please dont bring out broad sword "i dont know but..." etc ...tell me who you would have dropped and why?

 

[Eriktheviking]

Not sure if anyone has touched on this but in my opinion its Bale and Lennon who are the biggest problems for AVB. The fact is, they are not wing forwards. They dont have the movement, finishing and overall ability to play in that position. Its not their fault they have played most of their careers as wingers (if left back in bales Case)

I think it would be much better playing Bale at left back. He is too far up the pich to hage an impact and use his atributes properly such as pace and power. They both still want to hug the touchline and cross the ball, with the lone striker up front and the other guy on the oposite wing doesnt come into the middle (box) to make up numbers its never going to work.

 

[africanspurs]

Not sure if anyone has touched on this but in my opinion its Bale and Lennon who are the biggest problems for AVB. The fact is, they are not wing forwards. They dont have the movement, finishing and overall ability to play in that position. Its not their fault they have played most of their careers as wingers (if left back in bales Case)

I think it would be much better playing Bale at left back. He is too far up the pich to hage an impact and use his atributes properly such as pace and power. They both still want to hug the touchline and cross the ball, with the lone striker up front and the other guy on the oposite wing doesnt come into the middle (box) to make up numbers its never going to work.

very insightful

 

[braineclipse]

After three games? Really? You're not serious are you mate?

It seems that at least some people are...

I would be shocked, but my cynical side really expected as much.

 

[tynesidespur]

Re: Hugo Lloris

I think its 1, at least I think thats the intention.

I believe the buys will enable a very effective 4231 - and that right now we just need to support the team while they get used to it

I posted quotes from AVB a few pages back. He doesn't like 4-2-3-1. He believes that its too defensive as usually the 2 are 2xDMs. He acknowledges that Harry played Modric as one of the pair to make it more attacking. He would prefer to move us to 4-3-3. He basically views them as different systems.

I don't see 4-2-3-1 being around for very long - which is no bad thing if he continues to persist with Livermore/Sandro!

 

[tynesidespur]

Here's question simply in the interest of debate - what is the point of having a system? Is it worth it? ...What do you all think?

Its an interesting debate. Swansea/Goons seem to be the best British working examples. Goons have had one manager, whereas Swansea have brought in managers with a similar ethos.

I think to some extent we had a system under Redknapp. Okay it wasn't extremely detailed from a tactical sense but certainly the players around the first XI knew it and were comfortable with it. I would've preferred us to recruit someone who was looking to carry that on, add some tactical belt and braces to make us a little more strutured but keep the same ethos, rather than rip up and start again (which is what appears to be happening).

AVB's system has only successfully worked in Portugal so far. It is not proven in this country as his time with Chelsea showed.

Incidentally I read a book a few years ago - Dream On - covers 95/6 under Gerry Francis at Spurs. He also had a system which was employed throughout the club - first XI, reserves, youths all played the same way to enable players to move seamlessly between teams/squads. I really don't think we saw any benefits to that looking back.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I actually think any of your pro non-system comments do not apply to a system based approach. I think both your pro's and cons' serve a system based approach - and yet only the provs below serve a non-system based approach.

Which in itself is somewhat incorrect, as Harry had a system of play - its just that it wasnt the driving aspect of the team, it was 'loose'

On the other hand, is it not better to manage the way Harry does? If the kids are good enough then they are old enough, and can be thrown in when an opportunity arises. Players play to their strengths, and each one is told to do what they feel comfortable doing. This can smooth a transition for a new signing as they don't have to learn a system, and they can feel comfortable quicker. It smooths a transition for a new manager as he won't be making radical changes, and the players are happy that they play to their strengths. It also means there is a focus on signing proven quality and while this may be more costly, there can still be intelligent signings to be found and you can still identify certain qualities you may think you need. There is a focus on getting results in the here and now, and not theorising that in 5 years we will be ready to play with the big boys. This ensures that the long term future of the club takes care of itself. If it is successful, good and better players will want to join, and the success should continue.

- In ANY team if the kids are good enough they are old enough. See Arsenal playing 16 year old Fabregas.
- In any system based team players are there to perform a more specific role, alligned to their strengths. Hence they play to their strengths and are comfortable
- focus on signing proven quality? The same as any top team then? In fact, I would say a well based system will inform transfer policy. You will know exactly what you are looking for in players and so have more chance of turning out little gems yet to be proven as well as established quality.

The real downside is a less flexible approach, when something is truly engrained into how you operate it is really hard to shift away from.

The point of a system is two fold for me.
1) On field stability/continuity. On a bad day players know what they should be doing at any time instead of getting lost. On a good day it is a strong foundation from which they can really express themselves.

2) Organisation and planning. A system of play allows you to plan ahead. Allows you to plan succession of players. Allows you to know what you shoudl be doing way down the line and organise yourself/your policies/your strategy accordingly.

 

[Kingdawson]

Re: Hugo Lloris

I posted quotes from AVB a few pages back. He doesn't like 4-2-3-1. He believes that its too defensive as usually the 2 are 2xDMs. He acknowledges that Harry played Modric as one of the pair to make it more attacking. He would prefer to move us to 4-3-3. He basically views them as different systems.

I don't see 4-2-3-1 being around for very long - which is no bad thing if he continues to persist with Livermore/Sandro!

Didn't we get some impressive results last season playing sandro and parker together? i remember WBA away being one game in particular.

 

[Kingdawson]

very insightful

but it's mostly incorrect imo.

Bale doesn't have the movement, finishing and overall ability to play as a wing forward? he sure does imo.

Bale still wants to hug the touchline? no he doesn't. In fact that's part of the problem at times (the fact that he likes drifting everywhere).

 

[BrainOfLevy]

I actually think any of your pro non-system comments do not apply to a system based approach. I think both your pro's and cons' serve a system based approach - and yet only the provs below serve a non-system based approach.

Which in itself is somewhat incorrect, as Harry had a system of play - its just that it wasnt the driving aspect of the team, it was 'loose'



- In ANY team if the kids are good enough they are old enough. See Arsenal playing 16 year old Fabregas.
- In any system based team players are there to perform a more specific role, alligned to their strengths. Hence they play to their strengths and are comfortable
- focus on signing proven quality? The same as any top team then? In fact, I would say a well based system will inform transfer policy. You will know exactly what you are looking for in players and so have more chance of turning out little gems yet to be proven as well as established quality.

The real downside is a less flexible approach, when something is truly engrained into how you operate it is really hard to shift away from.

The point of a system is two fold for me.
1) On field stability/continuity. On a bad day players know what they should be doing at any time instead of getting lost. On a good day it is a strong foundation from which they can really express themselves.

2) Organisation and planning. A system of play allows you to plan ahead. Allows you to plan succession of players. Allows you to know what you shoudl be doing way down the line and organise yourself/your policies/your strategy accordingly.

Fair enough, I was using Harry as an comparison to demonstrate the opposite ends of the spectrum. Not saying that Harry wouldn't have implemented a system or the other points...just that it's a different way of playing, a system implemented on a looser/different scale as you acknowledge and as Defoe has acknowledged this week with AVB's differences.

But so far what I see (and I'm actually broadly pro system) is that the supposed benefits don't actually offer anything that a looser system/individual freedom set up would offer. Teams with systems can have bad days even if they are well drilled to play it and will play badly and lose, just as the opposite style would see. Similarly an individual freedom team can play badly and win with a piece of individual flair just as a system team can play badly but win because they fall back on their rehearsed system play.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, I'm just worried we will spend all this time implementing a system, potentially writing off our season and even once we've implemented it, are we going to be so much better for it next season for example? I'm also worried that we haven't yet got the depth to go for this radically new way of playing. I worry that after the international break for example, we sort it out, we get the system working pretty well, but it's over-reliant on Dembele and if he gets injured, we then go back to playing a 4-2-3-1 with 2 holding midfielders which AVB has already acknowledged as too defensive and doesn't like to play. I'm almost certain that if Dembele would get injured, then it won't be similar replacement in Carroll put into the team to fill his role, it would be Livermore, and the whole style of play changes anyway, which surely isn't the point of having this system?

I understand that it has served Swansea very well and has allowed them to punch above their weight. It's also allowed them to reduce the settling in period for new manager's because they make the right appointments. Maybe for a team like Dortmund it has allowed them to punch slightly above their weight too, so it can work at the top of the league as well. I guess I'm questioning whether we can achieve our objectives this season by trying to implement a system without the depth to play it. I don't think we can, I think we will have to right off this season and I'm not sure Levy would be able to justify keeping AVB to the fans, who would demand him sacked if he doesn't make at least the top 6, which means he will sack him and right off the progress we will have made anyway.