• 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 Emirates Marketing Project ** Saturday 23 November 2024

SkipRat said:
The only kneejerk reaction here is to my post :tearsofjoy:

Seriously, what part of "That was a great win" is a kneejerk reaction?

And what part of pointing out being inconsistent for the last 30-35 league games with a win win/lose rate of roughly 50/50. a kneejerk?

Like I said, whilst being a great win, one that will be remembered, it is meaningless on the grand scheme of things if we go and lose the next game to Fulham... As it will still mean we are insanely consistent and being inconsistent and nothing would have changed.

And why are you bringing up Ange for? I have said nothing about him, and am I calling for him to be sacked? No

Even he says we need to be more consistent, so why is my post being labelled kneejeck, when Ange is saying the same thing? Is Ange kneejerking too?

If we lose to Fulham next week, then this week will just be a great win and that is it...

If we want this win to be something more than just "great" then we need to go and win the next league game.

Kneejerk?

rofl-498-x-403-gif-qou0jgzvy6idu9j8.gif
Click to expand...
your comment about needing to win the next one or this means nothing is kneejerk. Its a rapid, relatively negative reaction to what was an amazing performance and win for Spurs. This season is going to have more, its clear as we're a work in progress.

I think the rest, is probably two people arguing the same point slightly differently but to be clear I don't consider anything else you said to be kneejerk - just the above.
 
Surfless said:
your comment about needing to win the next one or this means nothing is kneejerk. Its a rapid, relatively negative reaction to what was an amazing performance and win for Spurs. This season is going to have more, its clear as we're a work in progress.

I think the rest, is probably two people arguing the same point slightly differently but to be clear I don't consider anything else you said to be kneejerk - just the above.
Click to expand...
It's a fairly typical comment. In one way it makes sense, if we don't get consistent results we won't achieve much.

But at the same time, take the Ipswich game instead of the Fulham one as we already know the result. Does the three points against City mean nothing because we lost against Ipswich. Clearly not. It's 3 points. And on a larger scale this win shows quality that we already knew was there, but shows it again and away to a big team.
 
thfcsteff said:
Not on Sat. And that is because everyone was focussed and bought in on their jobs. Deki was very important in that regard, and as great as Sarr and Biss were, Maddison doing the hard yards as well as the pretty ones was a difference maker. If we commit and focus we have a great system IMO...
Click to expand...
there were two very early where the positioning left first Savinho then Haaland free being frantically closed down as opposed to marked - it wasn't so prevalent after that but I do see it as an issue we need to consider - teams know they can go wide and overload up top to get around us.

Of course if the press works then they never get near the back line but that's dream world.
 
Surfless said:
your comment about needing to win the next one or this means nothing is kneejerk. Its a rapid, relatively negative reaction to what was an amazing performance and win for Spurs. This season is going to have more, its clear as we're a work in progress.

I think the rest, is probably two people arguing the same point slightly differently but to be clear I don't consider anything else you said to be kneejerk - just the above.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but your comment regarding "squad maturity", just because we one a game, as dood at it was, was more of kneejerk.

It's a laughable take.

We're a work in progress... Yeah, then lets see some progress then.

Otherrwise it's just meaningless. Regardless of how great the win was.

Kneejerk my ass.
 
Bishop said:
Absolutely, but that's what I mean. If we had conceded we would have the same complaints as we have had in previous games. Fortunately we weathered that storm and then just handled them perfectly. That's the only reason I'm giving that caveat because you might not have seen people talking as if the defensive problems are solved but I have. On another day Haaland finishes and we have the same complaints and maybe even lose the game.

I do think not conceding first is what gave us the platform to beat them. Obviously we fell apart against Brighton and Leicester but if we score first and not concede we can truly start to dominate games.

Something else I take from this game and its obviously situational but not having the lions share of possession and not being pushed up on the halfway line helped us massively. We played it fast and actually having space to play and run into really suits us. I think it would not do us any harm to not always be such a heavy possessional team and play a little bit more on the counter and in transition. Our strength really isn't breaking down deep set defensive blocks and how we play to beat them is very high risk.
Click to expand...
We don't have much of a choice in how others defend against us. Part of us having a lot of possession in some games is us pressing high and winning the ball quickly, which also can and has lead to chances and goals, including against City.

The first goal is usually massive. And I think some of our problems this season and last have come from conceding first. Some of that is Ange's tactics and strategy, but some of that is more coincide/luck imo. In this one we got lucky, but on the whole I think we've been more unlucky than lucky this season.
 
braineclipse said:
We don't have much of a choice in how others defend against us. Part of us having a lot of possession in some games is us pressing high and winning the ball quickly, which also can and has lead to chances and goals, including against City.

The first goal is usually massive. And I think some of our problems this season and last have come from conceding first. Some of that is Ange's tactics and strategy, but some of that is more coincide/luck imo. In this one we got lucky, but on the whole I think we've been more unlucky than lucky this season.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, there's lots of analysis that the most reliable indicator of end league finish is goal difference. We currently have the 2nd best goal difference (Liverpooll are on 16 and we are on 14). There's then quite a jump down to Arsenal and Chelsea on 9, then a further jump down to Emirates Marketing Project and Brighton on 5. Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Forest both have 2 and that's your lot for positive GD in the division.

So that does suggest that our league placement does not reflect our overall performances to some extent.

Although at the same time unsure any of our defeats could be labelled as being anything other than "got what we deserved" so there's a bit of "damn lies and statistics"/pinch of salt.

Certainly we've demonstrated the ability to dismantle anyone on our day and when we click we tend to win big.
 
Kompakted said:
Interestingly, there's lots of analysis that the most reliable indicator of end league finish is goal difference. We currently have the 2nd best goal difference (Liverpooll are on 16 and we are on 14). There's then quite a jump down to Arsenal and Chelsea on 9, then a further jump down to Emirates Marketing Project and Brighton on 5. Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Forest both have 2 and that's your lot for positive GD in the division.

So that does suggest that our league placement does not reflect our overall performances to some extent.

Although at the same time unsure any of our defeats could be labelled as being anything other than "got what we deserved" so there's a bit of "damn lies and statistics"/pinch of salt.

Certainly we've demonstrated the ability to dismantle anyone on our day and when we click we tend to win big.
Click to expand...
I think to some extent our league placement is a little low compared to what our performances have "deserved" (though that's a loaded term people read rather different things into I think). I think "xG tables" show a similar thing, though not too much should be read into them.

Think several of our defeats quite easily could have been draws at least. All of them actually. Not saying drawing all our lost games would have been what we "deserved", but fine margins imo.

Ultimately we've been too inconsistent. Mostly that's a problem for Ange, the squad and players to sort out. But some of it imo is also bad luck.
 
braineclipse said:
We don't have much of a choice in how others defend against us. Part of us having a lot of possession in some games is us pressing high and winning the ball quickly, which also can and has lead to chances and goals, including against City.

The first goal is usually massive. And I think some of our problems this season and last have come from conceding first. Some of that is Ange's tactics and strategy, but some of that is more coincide/luck imo. In this one we got lucky, but on the whole I think we've been more unlucky than lucky this season.
Click to expand...
In my mind at least I think the aim should be to play quicker, whenever we've done that this season we've looked very, very potent. That's obviously easier said than done but it means more vertically inclined passes, sometimes long er passes (which I think it's fair to say we have been doing more of recently, Bissouma in particular) and maybe even periods where we are willing to sit a bit more in a mid block which would allow the opposition to come on to us a bit more and conversely open the space for transitions.

I'm not anti heavy possession football at all, it's arguably my favourite style of play but I don't think we have the players right now for that system and to play it as effectively as it needs to be. City are similar and we saw on the weekend and this season in general really, any little hiccups to the form of key players and the whole system can become quite stodgy and un-penetrative.

What I've wanted to see from Ange this season is adaption and proactiveness and since the Brighton game I think he largely has become a little more proactive in his thinking. Obviously that doesn't mean he will always get it right or that we will even win all of our games but changes like no Johnson in a match you don't foresee having the lions share of possession is brilliant to me. Kulu is stronger, better in possession, a far better runner with the ball and a better passer. I like that he looked at the game and weighed up our best strengths against their weaknesses. That however for me doesn't mean we necessarily play the exact same 11 against Fulham. It really should be players, shapes and system to fit the specific game and Ange seems to finding that out which I like.
 
braineclipse said:
I think to some extent our league placement is a little low compared to what our performances have "deserved" (though that's a loaded term people read rather different things into I think). I think "xG tables" show a similar thing, though not too much should be read into them.

Think several of our defeats quite easily could have been draws at least. All of them actually. Not saying drawing all our lost games would have been what we "deserved", but fine margins imo.

Ultimately we've been too inconsistent. Mostly that's a problem for Ange, the squad and players to sort out. But some of it imo is also bad luck.
Click to expand...
Think there's also a bit of judgement (or learning) as well as luck. As much as we dominated Saudi Sportswashing Machine, we left ourselves so open pushing up after getting the equaliser and they got in behind with a simple, straight ball that split our back line. That's unforgivable at this level, hence "we got what we deserved", even though, on balance of play, maybe we didn't.
 
Kompakted said:
Think there's also a bit of judgement (or learning) as well as luck. As much as we dominated Saudi Sportswashing Machine, we left ourselves so open pushing up after getting the equaliser and they got in behind with a simple, straight ball that split our back line. That's unforgivable at this level, hence "we got what we deserved", even though, on balance of play, maybe we didn't.
Click to expand...

A bit of that is absolutely correct, if you play 89 minutes of great football and 1 minute of nonsense at this level, you may get what you deserve.

The issue I have is in any real evaluation, you have to look at results, data and anecdotally (eye test), to me, it's very clear this years version of Spurs is better than the results suggest.

- Top scoring team in PL by a distance
- Only 3 teams have conceded less than us (big improvement from back end of last season)
- 7 players with more than 2 goals, 7 players with more than 2 assists (contributions from all over team)
- Solanke slotted right in, Gray, Bergvall, Moore, Spence even this early in season have contributed.
- Statement results, City (x2), United, Villa, West Ham
- Tactical tweaks (we are not as 1 dimensional as people spell out), decision to not start Johnson and to move Deck out of the position he has been flourishing in, plus playing Maddison is a huge tactical adjustment to opponent, add in, think it's been pretty clear this season at points the FB's sit just a little bit more than last.

To sit here and say this team/manager can't do it is laughable at this point, the challenge is making the performances consistent, you now have your high bar, how often can you be close to it?
 
Bishop said:
In my mind at least I think the aim should be to play quicker, whenever we've done that this season we've looked very, very potent. That's obviously easier said than done but it means more vertically inclined passes, sometimes long er passes (which I think it's fair to say we have been doing more of recently, Bissouma in particular) and maybe even periods where we are willing to sit a bit more in a mid block which would allow the opposition to come on to us a bit more and conversely open the space for transitions.

I'm not anti heavy possession football at all, it's arguably my favourite style of play but I don't think we have the players right now for that system and to play it as effectively as it needs to be. City are similar and we saw on the weekend and this season in general really, any little hiccups to the form of key players and the whole system can become quite stodgy and un-penetrative.

What I've wanted to see from Ange this season is adaption and proactiveness and since the Brighton game I think he largely has become a little more proactive in his thinking. Obviously that doesn't mean he will always get it right or that we will even win all of our games but changes like no Johnson in a match you don't foresee having the lions share of possession is brilliant to me. Kulu is stronger, better in possession, a far better runner with the ball and a better passer. I like that he looked at the game and weighed up our best strengths against their weaknesses. That however for me doesn't mean we necessarily play the exact same 11 against Fulham. It really should be players, shapes and system to fit the specific game and Ange seems to finding that out which I like.
Click to expand...
We pretty much always play quick when we can and are able to. It's fairly rare for us to pass up on a chance to attack quickly imo. I mean, it happens of course, but not more than other top teams imo.

When teams sit back purpose is more important than tempo imo. Then when getting into the dangerous areas up the tempo of course.

The most dangerous transitions are when you win the ball back high up the pitch. Like we did against City. We don't have to drop deeper to allow space for transitions imo.

The Kulusevski, Maddison and Johnson rotation move was a really good one. And one Ange would have gotten a lot of stick for if it hadn't worked out. I don't think it's more proactive than what we've seen from him before as such. Just that this one really worked out.
 
braineclipse said:
We pretty much always play quick when we can and are able to. It's fairly rare for us to pass up on a chance to attack quickly imo. I mean, it happens of course, but not more than other top teams imo.

When teams sit back purpose is more important than tempo imo. Then when getting into the dangerous areas up the tempo of course.

The most dangerous transitions are when you win the ball back high up the pitch. Like we did against City. We don't have to drop deeper to allow space for transitions imo.

The Kulusevski, Maddison and Johnson rotation move was a really good one. And one Ange would have gotten a lot of stick for if it hadn't worked out. I don't think it's more proactive than what we've seen from him before as such. Just that this one really worked out.
Click to expand...
To be honest, in this day and age most managers get stick for whatever decision they make not working out, even if it's the correct decision.
 
braineclipse said:
We pretty much always play quick when we can and are able to. It's fairly rare for us to pass up on a chance to attack quickly imo. I mean, it happens of course, but not more than other top teams imo.

When teams sit back purpose is more important than tempo imo. Then when getting into the dangerous areas up the tempo of course.

The most dangerous transitions are when you win the ball back high up the pitch. Like we did against City. We don't have to drop deeper to allow space for transitions imo.

The Kulusevski, Maddison and Johnson rotation move was a really good one. And one Ange would have gotten a lot of stick for if it hadn't worked out. I don't think it's more proactive than what we've seen from him before as such. Just that this one really worked out.
Click to expand...
I disagree on the pace of passing. The first 3 games of the season we played a lot of rondo's, but a lot of it going backwards and a lot of possession in non dangerous areas and a severe lack of shooting hence the lack of real penetration and danger against Leicester, Arsenal etc. I feel like there was a bit of a significant change in the pace of play since Brentford, a lot more vertical play and more tempo in our passing at least in my eyes.

Obviously you don't need to drop back but playing against City you will have less possession so there is more space for the transition versus against a Ipswich or Palace. I think back to the Saudi Sportswashing Machine game where we pressed high, so high that our defensive line was sitting on the halfway line to attempt to press them but we were destroyed by an incredibly simple ball over the top. That's where I think a a deeper setup could be beneficial, rather than giving the pacey team all the space for them to play into. Imo of course.
 
Bishop said:
I disagree on the pace of passing. The first 3 games of the season we played a lot of rondo's, but a lot of it going backwards and a lot of possession in non dangerous areas and a severe lack of shooting hence the lack of real penetration and danger against Leicester, Arsenal etc. I feel like there was a bit of a significant change in the pace of play since Brentford, a lot more vertical play and more tempo in our passing at least in my eyes.

Obviously you don't need to drop back but playing against City you will have less possession so there is more space for the transition versus against a Ipswich or Palace. I think back to the Saudi Sportswashing Machine game where we pressed high, so high that our defensive line was sitting on the halfway line to attempt to press them but we were destroyed by an incredibly simple ball over the top. That's where I think a a deeper setup could be beneficial, rather than giving the pacey team all the space for them to play into. Imo of course.
Click to expand...

We obviously like more open games (suits us), we also like to have a rhythm, pass the ball around, makes runs, pull the opponents out of shape.

What we don't like is stop/start games with lots of fouls and no chance to work the opponent, our front line is also more suited to running into spaces vs. carrying the ball through players (Deki the exception)

Clearly teams that are willing to compress the space and try to kill the game is something we have to improve against, what's interesting is the two games against City showed we can be comfortable with less possession and generally being a little deeper.
 
SkipRat said:
Sorry, but your comment regarding "squad maturity", just because we one a game, as dood at it was, was more of kneejerk.

It's a laughable take.

We're a work in progress... Yeah, then lets see some progress then.

Otherrwise it's just meaningless. Regardless of how great the win was.

Kneejerk my ass.
Click to expand...

I'd rather not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back