• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

*** OMT Tottenham Hotspur v Chelsea Rent Boys F.A Cup SF ***

It wasn't that long ago that Poch was claiming that the smaller pitch at WHL was a hindrance because it made it easier for opponents to sit back and soak up pressure.

I think that we need to stop looking for excuses at Wembley. It was individual mistakes and poor refereeing that cost us the game yesterday, our form was fine and if we can play like that in most of our home games next season, we will have nothing to worry about.
 
Last edited:
Bedfordspurs said:
BBC talked about the pitch yesterday
It's 400 m2 bigger than white hart lane and we can change it to what size we want
Oh and shearer said Wembley had a very different surface and bounce to white hart lane
Click to expand...

I suspect that the BBC were talking gonads about us being able to make the pitch smaller.

We should be able to do something about the length of the grass though, if we are playing all of our home games there next year.
 
The big issue with Wembley is we haven't played average teams there

We have played teams that are top class and have taken their chances

We played Monaco off the park and they scored 2/3 shots

Bayer was simaikr but less dominant

We played a poor CSKA side an won

We battered genk and drew but played with 10 men

Yesterday they almost scored every brick despite being outplayed - much like the Monaco game
 
Bedfordspurs said:
BBC talked about the pitch yesterday
It's 400 m2 bigger than white hart lane and we can change it to what size we want
Oh and shearer said Wembley had a very different surface and bounce to white hart lane
Click to expand...
Clearly the BBC pundits need to read the current Premier League handbook:
https://www.premierleague.com/publications

milo said:
It wasn't that long ago that Poch was claiming that the smaller pitch at WHL was a hindrance because it made it easier to sit back and soak up pressure.

I think that we need to stop looking for excuses at Wembley. It was individual mistakes and poor refereeing that cost us the game yesterday, our form was fine and if we can play like that in most of our home games next season, we will have nothing to worry about.
Click to expand...
Indeed, remember this article...
https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/oct/29/pochettino-pitch-size-does-matter
 
milo said:
I suspect that the BBC were talking gonads about us being able to make the pitch smaller.

We should be able to do something about the length of the grass though, if we are playing all of our home games there next year.
Click to expand...

BBC talking b*llocks? Shirley not.

I do wonder what control we will have over the pitch. I'm sure it must be something that will have been discussed but Wembley will have their own ground staff won't they who will be working to different directives?
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I do wonder what control we will have over the pitch. I'm sure it must be something that will have been discussed but Wembley will have their own ground staff won't they who will be working to different directives?
Click to expand...

You would hope that we would have a lot more control over grass length and how it is treated in the lead up to a game when it is our home ground. You can understand why we can't have this when it is a neutral venue like yesterday.
 
milo said:
We play about 40% of our games on larger pitches already. I am sure it will be fine.
Click to expand...
If it weren't for all the home fixtures we drew in the FA Cup this season, we might've actually ended up playing over 50% of our matches on UEFA standard pitches this season!

23 Premier League games (WHL + Anfield + Goodison + Selhurst + Stamford Bridge)
2 League Cup (WHL + Anfield)
4 FA Cup (3x WHL + Craven Cottage)

Fixtures on UEFA standard pitches
15 Premier League (W:6 D:6 L:3)
6 Champions League (W:2 D:1 L:3)
2 Europa League (D:1 L:1)
1 FA Cup (L:1)
 
Lies, damned lies and SF statistics ...

Was proper narked by the oft repeated statistical bollox we were force-fed yesterday by inane BBC commentators who seemed to revel in the chance to trumpet before and during the game that we had lost all six of our SFs since 1991. Selective date of course, carefully chosen to suit their negative narrative.

They conveniently chose to pretend that the League Cup does not exist. Yet it's a competition roughly parallel to the FA Cup nowadays inasmuch as almost all clubs reaching the SF stage are from the four League divisions and more often than not the majority are from the top six of the time. But it hardly suits their book to mention that in the League Cup we have won five of the seven SFs we've competed in over that self-same period.

By and large over a much longer period you might expect the odds of winning a SF to be roughly 50/50 and that's broadly how it's been for us. Since entering the FA Cup back in the 1890s we have reached 20 semi-finals all-told -including yesterday's - and won 9 of them. And of those nine finals, we went on to win all but one. It's a similar story in the other cups too. Overall in all the major cup competitions including European, we have reached 40 semi-finals and won 22 of them.

And out of those 22 finals reached we have won 15. So the Beeb can put those stats in their pipes and choke on them.

.
 
Last edited:
GUTTED GUTTED GUTTED


I really believed/ thought we would beat them yesterday and had a very good chance of actually winning something again, we really need to do it soon otherwise we may be saying good bye to a couple of players. Next season is so importent now and we have to get a trophy.

I love Poch and still believe he will become a top manager but ( imo) he got the team wrong yesterday.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
The big issue with Wembley is we haven't played average teams there

We have played teams that are top class and have taken their chances

We played Monaco off the park and they scored 2/3 shots

Bayer was simaikr but less dominant

We played a poor CSKA side an won

We battered genk and drew but played with 10 men

Yesterday they almost scored every brick despite being outplayed - much like the Monaco game
Click to expand...

We were dominated by Bayer, mate. And they are mid-table (lower mid-table, iirc) in the Bundesliga, having sacked the coach that got the upper hand over Poch in that game (Roger Schmidt) due to a terrible run of form.

As for the rest, Gent were a Belgian mid-table team - there are few excuses for us going out the way we did to them. Monaco game, sure, they were clinical and got away with it. Chelsea game, they were clinical but we also shot ourselves in the foot somewhat by playing Son at left-back, a decision which I still find inexplicable a full day after it was made.

It's partly true, but by the same token, why are sides more clinical at Wembley than they are at WHL? When we beat Chelsea 2-0, what did we do differently at the Lane that we failed to do at Wembley?
 
DubaiSpur said:
We were dominated by Bayer, mate. And they are mid-table (lower mid-table, iirc) in the Bundesliga, having sacked the coach that got the upper hand over Poch in that game (Roger Schmidt) due to a terrible run of form.

As for the rest, Gent were a Belgian mid-table team - there are few excuses for us going out the way we did to them. Monaco game, sure, they were clinical and got away with it. Chelsea game, they were clinical but we also shot ourselves in the foot somewhat by playing Son at left-back, a decision which I still find inexplicable a full day after it was made.

It's partly true, but by the same token, why are sides more clinical at Wembley than they are at WHL? When we beat Chelsea 2-0, what did we do differently at the Lane that we failed to do at Wembley?
Click to expand...
We scored a goal just before half time, as opposed to allowing Chavski to do so in the fixtures at Wembley and Stamford Bridge!
 
DubaiSpur said:
Just a couple more steps, mate. ;) So why did we go with Son over Davies? I'm trying to figure out if we do things differently at Wembley, you understand - and why that would be the case.
Click to expand...
I can only assume that Davies had suffered a knock... otherwise I'm at a loss with that decision!

JerusalemMan said:
Uh, I thought it was TOby who fouled and conceded the free-kick from which Lloris made a bit of an error with his footing.
Son had no part to play in that early goal.
Click to expand...
Well not directly... but if Rose was playing then he probably would've been tracking Willian when Chavski were attacking (as opposed to Son who was stood in the middle of the pitch) which would've allowed Vertonghen to move across (you can see him looking over his right shoulder a couple of times whilst Pedro is getting the ball in his stride) and help Alderweireld deal with Dier's initial error in not tracking the runner from midfield... butterfly effect innit!
 
SteveAWOL said:
I can only assume that Davies had suffered a knock... otherwise I'm at a loss with that decision!


Well not directly... but if Rose was playing then he probably would've been tracking Willian when Chavski were attacking (as opposed to Son who was stood in the middle of the pitch) which would've allowed Vertonghen to move across (you can see him looking over his right shoulder a couple of times whilst Pedro is getting the ball in his stride) and help Alderweireld deal with Dier's initial error in not tracking the runner from midfield... butterfly effect innit!
Click to expand...

It's possible but tenuous. Can't rule it out though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back