The all new Striker thread..

[indianspur]

DO you guys think Levy is adopting a policy of not buying strikers until we get rid of Soldado and Adebayor? Becuase if he is it is pathetic, and if he is not then what is the reason for this freakin' delay?

i do, and i think its a pathetic policy too.

 

[indianspur]

no idea

but we employ plenty of smart people
so I'm confident we are trying

personally I'd rather we end up with no one and have to play chadli/coulthirst/dier up there when Kane isn't available than waste big money on the wrong guy

thats the thing though, we are not going to waste big money on the wrong guy because we wont be spending big money. Is Timo Werner a big money signing? Are we waiting for Ade to go before Werner comes in? Makes no sense to me

 

[NaijaSpurs]

no idea

but we employ plenty of smart people
so I'm confident we are trying

personally I'd rather we end up with no one and have to play chadli/coulthirst/dier up there when Kane isn't available than waste big money on the wrong guy

If we are unable to sign a suitable striker to play either alongside or in place of Kane then I would definitely question your assertion

 

[NWND]

If Soldado is off then we will have to sign a striker this week. If we don't then surely we are sacrificing the first few games of the season just to maybe save a couple of quid on late transfers.

Why would we be sacrificing the first few games of the season without signing a striker. Kane is fit and first choice, we've not lost any players so last season's team, with a strengthened defence is available. Sure, it could be improved and the squad depth needs improving too, but come on, its hardly sacrificing the first few games using last season's 5th placed team- how ridiculous

 

[parklane1]

also, if there is any fire to all of the berahino smoke the fact that WBA had a takeover fall through and have just concluded a couple of incomings themselves could delay things

we still have over three weeks of the window left, no need to panic

the work done on the D and the outgoings suggest a definite plan is in place to me

You are joking of course? we all know there are some who just love a good panic.

 

[Yiddo]

Why would we be sacrificing the first few games of the season without signing a striker. Kane is fit and first choice, we've not lost any players so last season's team, with a strengthened defence is available. Sure, it could be improved and the squad depth needs improving too, but come on, its hardly sacrificing the first few games using last season's 5th placed team- how ridiculous

And if Kane gets injured? What option have we got on the bench if Kane does not deliver? if we are 1-0 down with 10 minutes to go, who do we chuck on to try and get a goal?

 

[AVB]

And if Kane gets injured? What option have we got on the bench if Kane does not deliver? if we are 1-0 down with 10 minutes to go, who do we chuck on to try and get a goal?

...........chirpy?

 

[NWND]

And if Kane gets injured? What option have we got on the bench if Kane does not deliver? if we are 1-0 down with 10 minutes to go, who do we chuck on to try and get a goal?

The idea that you chuck on someone to get a goal is one of the old school British football mentality, it is very rarely effective. If Kane gets injured, we no doubt have a problem. Although it's still not a case of sacrificing games. It's not ideal, but Chadli and Lamela can play upfront at a push.

In terms of Kane not delivering for say 80 mins of a match, the kind of player Kane is, he's always more likely in my view to deliver in those last 10 minutes than any 'back-up' striker we might want to sign. You wouldn't take Kane off if you needed a goal in the last 10 would you? Anyway, we scored loads of late goals last season. Eriksen is the king of late goals

 

[indianspur]

The idea that you chuck on someone to get a goal is one of the old school British football mentality, it is very rarely effective. If Kane gets injured, we no doubt have a problem. Although it's still not a case of sacrificing games. It's not ideal, but Chadli and Lamela can play upfront at a push.

In terms of Kane not delivering for say 80 mins of a match, the kind of player Kane is, he's always more likely in my view to deliver in those last 10 minutes than any 'back-up' striker we might want to sign. You wouldn't take Kane off if you needed a goal in the last 10 would you? Anyway, we scored loads of late goals last season. Eriksen is the king of late goals

this approach never did Ferguson and Man Utd any harm....99 CL final is the biggest most famous example but there are many many examples of Ferguson throwing on an extra forward or two off the bench to rescue games.

 

[Pandy]

The idea that you chuck on someone to get a goal is one of the old school British football mentality, it is very rarely effective. If Kane gets injured, we no doubt have a problem. Although it's still not a case of sacrificing games. It's not ideal, but Chadli and Lamela can play upfront at a push.

In terms of Kane not delivering for say 80 mins of a match, the kind of player Kane is, he's always more likely in my view to deliver in those last 10 minutes than any 'back-up' striker we might want to sign. You wouldn't take Kane off if you needed a goal in the last 10 would you? Anyway, we scored loads of late goals last season. Eriksen is the king of late goals

I really do hate this phrase... It's as if everything before 2000 should be considered the dark ages and therefore rejected. I mean seriously.. Do you think managers like Clough, Shankley, Paisley and our very own Bill Nic would be useless today?

And anyway, putting on an extra striker is a tactic used consistently by top level managers to this day. Just because a team plays with 2 strikers does not make it a 1980s throwback. Especially when it is just for the last 10 minutes!

I know it is very fashionable at the moment to talk in technical jargon about slight changes in player positions and passing patterns etc etc, but sometimes football is simply a numbers game, and over academicising it achieves nothing.

/rant

 

[Finney Is Back]

Why would we be sacrificing the first few games of the season without signing a striker. Kane is fit and first choice, we've not lost any players so last season's team, with a strengthened defence is available. Sure, it could be improved and the squad depth needs improving too, but come on, its hardly sacrificing the first few games using last season's 5th placed team- how ridiculous

I think the issue here is that it is now extremely clear that Soldado has no future at Spurs (not travelling to the US or Germany and also not playing for the Spurs 11 teams). We are therefore effectively going into the season with just 1 first team striker.

 

[Finney Is Back]

...........chirpy?

To be fair he's probably an upgrade on Soldado.

 

[NWND]

I think the issue here is that it is now extremely clear that Soldado has no future at Spurs (not travelling to the US or Germany and also not playing for the Spurs 11 teams). We are therefore effectively going into the season with just 1 first team striker.

Yes, but it's also clear from Ade and Soldado's banishment that the club expect that situation to be rectified pretty soon.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I really do hate this phrase... It's as if everything before 2000 should be considered the dark ages and therefore rejected. I mean seriously.. Do you think managers like Clough, Shankley, Paisley and our very own Bill Nic would be useless today?

And anyway, putting on an extra striker is a tactic used consistently by top level managers to this day. Just because a team plays with 2 strikers does not make it a 1980s throwback. Especially when it is just for the last 10 minutes!

I know it is very fashionable at the moment to talk in technical jargon about slight changes in player positions and passing patterns etc etc, but sometimes football is simply a numbers game, and over academicising it achieves nothing.

/rant

Wenger does it all of the time and I'm not sure he would really ever be described as having an old school British football mentality?

 

[Finney Is Back]

Yes, but it's also clear from Ade and Soldado's banishment that the club expect that situation to be rectified pretty soon.

Let's hope so.... I wonder how many games into the season that will be however?.... Also I wonder how many training sessions Pochettino will want them to have before he thinks they are selectable?

 

[NWND]

I really do hate this phrase... It's as if everything before 2000 should be considered the dark ages and therefore rejected. I mean seriously.. Do you think managers like Clough, Shankley, Paisley and our very own Bill Nic would be useless today?

And anyway, putting on an extra striker is a tactic used consistently by top level managers to this day. Just because a team plays with 2 strikers does not make it a 1980s throwback. Especially when it is just for the last 10 minutes!

I know it is very fashionable at the moment to talk in technical jargon about slight changes in player positions and passing patterns etc etc, but sometimes football is simply a numbers game, and over academicising it achieves nothing.

/rant

Not that I disagree with your rant. My point isn't that it's an ideal situation having just Kane, my point is that last season who were you bringing on to get a goal in the last 10? Soldado and Ade? Please, as the guy says above may as well throw chirpy on and aim balls at his massive beak.

Its not a case of we haven't signed a striker so we will lose every game until we sign one is it?

 

[indianspur]

Yes, but it's also clear from Ade and Soldado's banishment that the club expect that situation to be rectified pretty soon.

well Ade has been completely banished all summer, Bob has just been running around a bit in training but not not selected for any friendly, so in effect all summer we have been down to one striker, Coulthirst early on and now Kane

Poch has made it clear very early where he stands so I think he would be disappointed the club havent got in at least one of his targets by now.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Taking it back a little more towards the topic.... With Roma signing Dzeko does it mean that Destro might be available?

Also which strikers around the World might be available if the right fee was offered (that we could afford) and which of those would suit Pochettino's system and would be good enough to play for the mighty Spurs...

Destro?
Lacazette?
Berahino?
Austin?
Hernandez?
Beric?
Balotelli?
Breel Embolo?
Icardi?

I'm sure there are at least 20 others as well....

 

[Pandy]

Not that I disagree with your rant. My point isn't that it's an ideal situation having just Kane, my point is that last season who were you bringing on to get a goal in the last 10? Soldado and Ade? Please, as the guy says above may as well throw chirpy on and aim balls at his massive beak.

Its not a case of we haven't signed a striker so we will lose every game until we sign one is it?

I agree that not signing a striker before Saturday is unlikely to make a massive difference to our season, you're right in saying we had no other competent options last year.

I am not particularly bothered by the lack of signings, and don't think it's something we can blame the club for. When a deadline exists it is natural for business to be pushed back by all parties, it is one of the perils of the transfer window.

I just hope Kane doesn't pull a muscle 5 minutes into the United game!!

 

[indianspur]

I agree that not signing a striker before Saturday is unlikely to make a massive difference to our season, you're right in saying we had no other competent options last year.

I am not particularly bothered by the lack of signings, and don't think it's something we can blame the club for. When a deadline exists it is natural for business to be pushed back by all parties, it is one of the perils of the transfer window.

I just hope Kane doesn't pull a muscle 5 minutes into the United game!!

no its not thats what Levy is trying to brainwash everyone into thinking, but many many deals get done way before the deadline....arrgghhhhhhhhhh