ENIC

[Bedfordspurs]

No I'm clearly talking about how they rested their stars for an hour and had Poch not tickered we had a much stronger starting 11 and didn't take advantage.

Maybe I am losing my marbles but didn't we beat their strongest side 2-0 and if I recall were very good for that result in the season? So maybe your analysis of their weakened side is over egging the difference in quality and the underdogs tag. We had 3 players score 20 goals that season, GHod knows what Eriksens contribution to goals and assists was but I bet it was substantial. We were second in the league that year so can we stop making out we were not a good side and its a made up rhetoric that we were

Maybe it's because Chelsea are in a final today and the Spurs self loathing in you has come to the fore

We could have beaten them

we had already outplayed their strongest team as you say

But we bottle their games a lot now

 

[Grays_1890]

We could have beaten them

we had already outplayed their strongest team as you say

But we bottle their games a lot now

We were a fcking good side that year, thats the title that got away for me not Leics as I thought we were at the peak of our powers, lost 4 time that year and TBH the only loss in the run in to West Ham made no difference. Making us out to be massive underdogs is history reimagined

Had they played their strongest side in the SF their bench would have been weaker as someone mentioned earlier.

 

[Bishop]

No I'm clearly talking about how they rested their stars for an hour and had Poch not tickered we had a much stronger starting 11 and didn't take advantage.

Maybe I am losing my marbles but didn't we beat their strongest side 2-0 and if I recall were very good for that result in the season? So maybe your analysis of their weakened side is over egging the difference in quality and the underdogs tag. We had 3 players score 20 goals that season, GHod knows what Eriksens contribution to goals and assists was but I bet it was substantial. We were second in the league that year so can we stop making out we were not a good side and its a made up rhetoric that we were

Maybe it's because Chelsea are in a final today and the Spurs self loathing in you has come to the fore

We were a very good side at the time, but so were they. Sure we beat them at home but we also lost to them away. Yes you're underestimating how good they were by thinking that we would just beat them if we had played our own game, you're underrating the quality of their squad and the impact it had on their ability to win both the cup and the league. If we had, had a squad with as much depth as theirs, maybe we could have also rested some of our better players and brought them on at the critical juncture like they were able to.

We scored 86 that season, Chelsea scored 85. Yes we had 3 20+ goal scorers, but so what? Does that win you individual matches? This is why I'm pointing our that its your bias that isn't letting you see the reality. A team that got more points than us and team we split results against were able to beat us in the semi with their very strong squad.

 

[Bishop]

We were a fcking good side that year, thats the title that got away for me not Leics as I thought we were at the peak of our powers, lost 4 time that year and TBH the only loss in the run in to West Ham made no difference. Making us out to be massive underdogs is history reimagined

Had they played their strongest side in the SF their bench would have been weak as someone mentioned earlier.

A bench with Willian, Pedro, Terry, Batshuayi is not weak.

 

[Grays_1890]

We were a very good side at the time, but so were they. Sure we beat them at home but we also lost to them away. Yes you're underestimating how good they were by thinking that we would just beat them if we had played our own game, you're underrating the quality of their squad and the impact it had on their ability to win both the cup and the league. If we had, had a squad with as much depth as theirs, maybe we could have also rested some of our better players and brought them on at the critical juncture like they were able to.

We scored 86 that season, Chelsea scored 85. Yes we had 3 20+ goal scorers, but so what? Does that win you individual matches? This is why I'm pointing our that its your bias that isn't letting you see the reality. A team that got more points than us and team we split results against were able to beat us in the semi with their very strong squad.

I am not underrated them at all its just you are purposely missing my point to create you own bias.

I have not said anywhere that we would just beat them, so you have added that in for weight, my point is our first 11 as shown in the game against their strongest 11 could beat them, yes we lost to them too, they were also a good side, but the comparison on games was, given that we beat their strongest 11 in the league you would expect a better showing from us in the SF given they rested their stars for an hour. Im also saying we made it harder for ourselves tinkering with a side that was doing very well for itself....I never said we should just have won the game, I am saying we should have taken advantage of them resting players and we should have.

As for the goals part, it was an example of the threat we had as a team as with the defence who conceded less, the reason I gave that example is you keep parroting out the underdog line like we were massively out on in the odds....we weren't BTW

 

[Bishop]

I am not underrated them at all its just you are purposely missing my point to create you own bias.

I have not said anywhere that we would just beat them, so you have added that in for weight, my point is our first 11 as shown in the game against their strongest 11 could beat them, yes we lost to them too, they were also a good side, but the comparison on games was, given that we beat their strongest 11 in the league you would expect a better showing from us in the SF given they rested their stars for an hour. Im also saying we made it harder for ourselves tinkering with a side that was doing very well for itself....I never said we should just have won the game, I am saying we should have taken advantage of them resting players and we should have.

As for the goals part, it was an example of the threat we had as a team as with the defence who conceded less, the reason I gave that example is you keep parroting out the underdog line like we were massively out on in the odd....we weren't BTW

I 100% agreed that Poch fudged it up with the lineup and setup. I dunno if you missed that part despite me saying it multiple times.

This convo started because I was saying that we never have had the depth of squad that allows you to win these late in the season games and ultimately the competition, the argument was being made that we just bottled such games when I disagree. A weak squad was much more key to our issues than a supposed lack of mentality. Chelsea had that depth, Emirates Marketing Project have had always had it, Liverpool have had it etc. A strong 11 and just an 11 like we had is not enough, you need depth. You need alternatives, you need the ability to change it up, Conte did it that day because he started a still strong 11 that we hadn't expected, that 11 was not so weak that we would automatically beat them. It was still a damn strong team. We then helped fudge ourselves by playing a brick formation that didn't even suit the players we had.

 

[Grays_1890]

I 100% agreed that Poch fudged it up with the lineup and setup. I dunno if you missed that part despite me saying it multiple times.

This convo started because I was saying that we never have had the depth of squad that allows you to win these late in the season games and ultimately the competition, the argument was being made that we just bottled such games when I disagree. A weak squad was much more key to our issues than a supposed lack of mentality. Chelsea had that depth, Emirates Marketing Project have had always had it, Liverpool have had it etc. A strong 11 and just an 11 like we had is not enough, you need depth. You need alternatives, you need the ability to change it up, Conte did it that day because he started a still strong 11 that we hadn't expected, that 11 was not so weak that we would automatically beat them. It was still a damn strong team. We then helped fudge ourselves by playing a brick formation that didn't even suit the players we had.

If you can't take advantage of those situations when presented when a club plays a striker that scored 8 goals in 50 and a CB playing his 5th game of the season you don't deserve to win anything.

 

[P.D.]

Poch confirmed after the game it was "Tactical".

Also one thing that is massively taken for granted with that game IMO is that Chelsea obviously rested players, yes their bench was better but their starting line up was an invitation for that to not even being a factor. If we didn't biazzarely change our set up and went in as we had all season, we should have won that game before the subs became an issue.

Kane, Alli, Eriksen and Son off the bench, against Luiz and Ake (Ake of then not now)....

Son gave away a penalty as well that game I believe, made the issue of playing him there look even worse.

 

[Grays_1890]

Son gave away a penalty as well that game I believe, made the issue of playing him there look even worse.

I'm still shocked with it, he had 20 goals that year and he played him as wing back....that's called trying to be clever IMO. There will be managers and players of the last 10 years or so who will blame the owners for their lack of success and although there Is blame, although less than some fans drink up, some have to also look at themselves for their lack of success and medals.

 

[Bullet]

I'm still shocked with it, he had 20 goals that year and he played him as wing back....that's called trying to be clever IMO. There will be managers and players of the last 10 years or so who will blame the owners for their lack of success and although there Is blame, although less than some fans drink up, some have to also look at themselves for their lack of success and medals.

Son at LWB. Sheesh. Personally I would have played Lloris as #10, he had great vision and a perplexing touch

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I'm still shocked with it, he had 20 goals that year and he played him as wing back....that's called trying to be clever IMO. There will be managers and players of the last 10 years or so who will blame the owners for their lack of success and although there Is blame, although less than some fans drink up, some have to also look at themselves for their lack of success and medals.

Was a horrendous mistake
Square pegs comes to mind

 

[Bishop]

If you can't take advantage of those situations when presented when a club plays a striker that scored 8 goals in 50 and a CB playing his 5th game of the season you don't deserve to win anything.

I can 100% agree with you there, it was definitely an opportunity to take advantage and us not doing so is on us. For me Poch was the main cause for difficulties in that specific match. 3 at the back never suited us. However I will caveat what you said slightly, scoring wasn't an issue in that match it was our defence that conceded the goals. I will also add that you're fixating too much on specific names, remember Chelsea scored just 1 goal less than us that season despite only have 1 player who scored more than 20 in the league. That team got goals from all over the side. So whether it was Costa or Batshuyai, Cesc or Matic the quality of their performances and results didn't really waver. The dropoff was much more severe when we didn't have say an Eriksen.

 

[Bishop]

I'm still shocked with it, he had 20 goals that year and he played him as wing back....that's called trying to be clever IMO. There will be managers and players of the last 10 years or so who will blame the owners for their lack of success and although there Is blame, although less than some fans drink up, some have to also look at themselves for their lack of success and medals.

I don't think you can say that is down to the players though, that was the coach making a poor decision on that specific day.

 

[Baleforce]

I don't think you can say that is down to the players though, that was the coach making a poor decision on that specific day.

I think a lot is f it was, what did Kane and Eriksen do for us that day?

I still think a lot of our players have hid in crucial moments, doesn’t mean that others in the organisation haven’t bottled it too. It’s always a group effort.

 

[Bishop]

I think a lot is f it was, what did Kane and Eriksen do for us that day?

I still think a lot of our players have hid in crucial moments, doesn’t mean that others in the organisation haven’t bottled it too.

I think it's fair to say that Eriksen had weak mentality, he's not someone who has ever stood up and fought for the right to play. It's precisely the reason no one signed before we did. Barcelona looked at him on depth back in 2011 and the reports they got back suggested he was weak minded.

I don't agree re Kane, he's a striker he requires service (even moreso back in 2017) and if you're not providing that he wasn't going to go Roy of The Rovers and win it by himself despite how much you overrate his abilities.

I'm a broken record but its goes back into my argument re squad depth. If you have just 1 creative player (no other serious team does this) and that same player has weak tendencies then the obvious thing to do is to have another option, an alternative. Someone to compete with him or to supplement him. We didn't have that.

I look at our squad today and I see the beginnings of a different approach. We have Dragusin despite already have Romero and VDV and supposedly are still looking for more CB cover. We have Sarr, Maddison, Bentancur and Bissouma (Kulu, GLC) for midfield with Bergvall to join plus whomever else we bring in. We are finally cottoning on to the need for an actual squad.

 

[Baleforce]

I think it's fair to say that Eriksen had weak mentality, he's not someone who has ever stood up and fought for the right to play. It's precisely the reason no one signed before we did. Barcelona looked at him on depth back in 2011 and the reports they got back suggested he was weak minded.

I don't agree re Kane, he's a striker he requires service (even moreso back in 2017) and if you're not providing that he wasn't going to go Roy of The Rovers and win it by himself despite how much you overrate his abilities.

I'm a broken record but its goes back into my argument re squad depth. If you have just 1 creative player (no other serious team does this) and that same player has weak tendencies then the obvious thing to do is to have another option, an alternative. Someone to compete with him or to supplement him. We didn't have that.

I look at our squad today and I see the beginnings of a different approach. We have Dragusin despite already have Romero and VDV and supposedly are still looking for more CB cover. We have Sarr, Maddison, Bentancur and Bissouma (Kulu, GLC) for midfield with Bergvall to join plus whomever else we bring in. We are finally cottoning on to the need for an actual squad.

We’ll see.

I think this lot will bottle it at the first opportunity too.

 

[Caitano]

From a couple of years ago but looks good

 

[Baleforce]

From a couple of years ago but looks good

Can’t wait for us to take second spot and I’ll officially be a fan of the two biggest bottling organisations in sport.

 

[tommysvr]

We’ll see.

I think this lot will bottle it at the first opportunity too.

Your flippant use of ‘bottle’ makes me think you would think any loss in a big game is ‘bottling it.’

Either that or you’re just trolling as usual.

 

[Baleforce]

Your flippant use of ‘bottle’ makes me think you would think any loss in a big game is ‘bottling it.’

Either that or you’re just trolling as usual.

“Bottling it”, is allowing an opportunity to pass without taking advantage of it.