Igor the Interim

[MartyFunkhouser]

Its crazy how we have forgotten this. Great midfields win championships, good ones finish high up the table and the shambles we have might just get us relegated. I said it on here the other day, I used to fudging cry at the thought of the Winks and Sissoko pairing, but my word that was more balanced than whatever rabble we try to put out now.

The issue we have here thought is we have massive numbers of CM, non of which are high enough quality to really be considered elite. I feel sorry for Tudor, what he has left at his disposal is rank bad in either quality or attitude. I know the situations dire but MVDV is showing no quality as a leader, looks to be having a massive sulk on, other than the worldly in the CL he has been as bad as anyone I have seen at CB for a while. We are in massive trouble

 

[mudshark]

4-4-2 with a diamond when Romero is back:

_____________Vicario
Porro__Romero__Danso__v. de Ven
____________Palhinha
______Gray_________Gallagher
___________Simons
_____Solanke___Richarlison/Tel

Rule number one is you will be professional. No flakes allowed. At the first sign anybody doesn't want to work or do as they're told, they're out. Dock their pay, take their ketchup away, whatever it takes.

 

[DubSpur]

4-4-2 with a diamond when Romero is back:

_____________Vicario
Porro__Romero__Danso__v. de Ven
____________Palhinha
______Gray_________Gallagher
___________Simons
_____Solanke___Richarlison/Tel

Rule number one is you will be professional. No flakes allowed. At the first sign anybody doesn't want to work or do as they're told, they're out. Dock their pay, take their ketchup away, whatever it takes.

What's the obsession many seem to have with getting VdV to LB when there is no indication that he would be any good there? He's not good at one on one defending, just relying on pace to get him out of trouble. Souza looked good when he came on at the weekend so why not try an actual LB at LB?
Gallagher has been rubbish and offered nothing since coming in. Would rather see Sarr in there who will cover ground and at least looks forward more than the rest of our available midfielders.

 

[mudshark]

What's the obsession many seem to have with getting VdV to LB when there is no indication that he would be any good there? He's not good at one on one defending, just relying on pace to get him out of trouble. Souza looked good when he came on at the weekend so why not try an actual LB at LB?
Gallagher has been rubbish and offered nothing since coming in. Would rather see Sarr in there who will cover ground and at least looks forward more than the rest of our available midfielders.

I don't know that there's any "obsession," but my own thinking is his recovery pace can still be an important asset, but his poor positioning is less likely to be a problem at LB than CB. At the same time, he also likes to go on forward raids, which he could readily do from there. As far as Gallagher v Sarr, I wouldn't have particularly strong opinions either way, except to say that I think we need to err on the side of defence primarily, and Gallagher seems to me to be the more disciplined player, so less likely to go missing and leave a gap from where someone could burst forward and aim a long-range shot at Vicario.

 

[Finney Is Back]

What's the obsession many seem to have with getting VdV to LB when there is no indication that he would be any good there? He's not good at one on one defending, just relying on pace to get him out of trouble. Souza looked good when he came on at the weekend so why not try an actual LB at LB?
Gallagher has been rubbish and offered nothing since coming in. Would rather see Sarr in there who will cover ground and at least looks forward more than the rest of our available midfielders.

I think his one on one defending out wide would be fine and his pace would be an asset against wide forwards. He is pretty poor with his positioning, which I think is less of an issue at full back then it is centrally. He has a left foot so can progress the ball down the line (either by running with it or passing) which is an improvement on Spence playing there (who always has to turn inside). Playing as left back also gives him more license to make those attacking ball carrying runs forward and those runs would open up space for others.

 

[Bishop]

I think his one on one defending out wide would be fine and his pace would be an asset against wide forwards. He is pretty poor with his positioning, which I think is less of an issue at full back then it is centrally. He has a left foot so can progress the ball down the line (either by running with it or passing) which is an improvement on Spence playing there (who always has to turn inside). Playing as left back also gives him more license to make those attacking ball carrying runs forward and those runs would open up space for others.

I'd try Souza first or at the least very seriously consider him. In the few minutes he has had so far he looks very competent on the ball and importantly seems very calm when hes in the final 3rd, hes not rushing around, he looks to pick out players with his crosses or passes.

 

[DubSpur]

I think his one on one defending out wide would be fine and his pace would be an asset against wide forwards. He is pretty poor with his positioning, which I think is less of an issue at full back then it is centrally. He has a left foot so can progress the ball down the line (either by running with it or passing) which is an improvement on Spence playing there (who always has to turn inside). Playing as left back also gives him more license to make those attacking ball carrying runs forward and those runs would open up space for others.

I really don't see it with his one on one defending. The only positive I see for it is him going forward. I'd much prefer to see Souza, a proper LB, who has looked good at both going forward and defending (admittedly a small sample size). Maybe I'm just tired of seeing players played in their wrong positions when there are alternatives.

 

[DubSpur]

I don't know that there's any "obsession," but my own thinking is his recovery pace can still be an important asset, but his poor positioning is less likely to be a problem at LB than CB. At the same time, he also likes to go on forward raids, which he could readily do from there. As far as Gallagher v Sarr, I wouldn't have particularly strong opinions either way, except to say that I think we need to err on the side of defence primarily, and Gallagher seems to me to be the more disciplined player, so less likely to go missing and leave a gap from where someone could burst forward and aim a long-range shot at Vicario.

I don't mean you in particular with the obsession, have seen several saying it for months.

Gallagher hasn't done anything from a defensive point of view that I'd put him above Sarr. His best attribute is chasing and closing down players further up the pitch. Sarr can do that and he's better on the ball and gives more threat getting in and around the opponents box.

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

I really don't see it with his one on one defending. The only positive I see for it is him going forward. I'd much prefer to see Souza, a proper LB, who has looked good at both going forward and defending (admittedly a small sample size). Maybe I'm just tired of seeing players played in their wrong positions when there are alternatives.

There isnt a need for it at this stage either IMO. Just knuckle down and play people on their best positions and get real.balance.

 

[P.D.]

Agree with the sentiment, but gonna challenge this on one point only. Gallagher has played 7 games now for Spurs. What exactly has he done to deserve anything over and above Biss and Sarr? He is not even achieving their levels which, as you say, are inconsistent and not competitive enough for the situation we find ourselves in. Perhaps he needs to be moved centrally where he might fair better. That right channel seems to expose his lack of pace and sharpness. Interested in people's thoughts.

Tudor's problems start at the back for me. He's tried the Palhinha, Dragu, VDV back 3. He then switched to Dragu and VDV in a 2, and now has to make his mind up what next based on Romero still being a game away from playing again. If fit enough, Danso has to play and for me it's in the middle of the back 3. To @Robspur12 point above, we need to set ourselves up defensively for the rest of the season and tighten up. My eventual defensive setup would be....

Vic
Romero, Danso, VDV
Palhinha

So I would build it with this in mind.

As @Bedfordspurs also said, we're not close enough in midfield at all. I think we need to find a way to smother Palace's midfield and that may or may not include Gallagher in my mind. I like the idea of Palhinha and Gray as 2 of them though.

It's strange how we're not more compact in midfield given we've had a mix of Gallagher, Palinha, Biss, Sarr, Gray etc all playing in there yet we never close anyone down - so much space on the edge of the box for example with Iwobi's goal.

I guess it's just symptomatic of the lack of effort from pretty much everyone.

 

[braineclipse]

Regarding Danso, even if he’s NOT fit, I’d play him. Can he be worse than Dragusin has been?

Could be, but unlikely. But the likelihood of him being better is a very good reason not to rush him back and risk another injury.

Will have Romero back soon, but both Romero and VdV could pick up another injury/suspension and for a back 3 we need the two of them and Danso so rushing Danso back to see him injured would be a real concern.

 

[mudshark]

I don't mean you in particular with the obsession, have seen several saying it for months.

Gallagher hasn't done anything from a defensive point of view that I'd put him above Sarr. His best attribute is chasing and closing down players further up the pitch. Sarr can do that and he's better on the ball and gives more threat getting in and around the opponents box.

Maybe, yeah. As I said, I don't feel particularly strongly either way, I just feel Gallagher might be the more disciplined if told to do a specific job. But after all, it's about what Tudor thinks, not me.