• 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

*** Tottenham Hotspur vs Canning Town Caravan Club OMT ***

Jurgen the German said:
I guess we just have different views on this. We looked the more positive side and they were content with sitting back and trying to nick a draw or possibly an unlikely win on the counter attack. I don't believe that merely being more positive and having more of the ball in the opposition side means you deserve to win the game. Other than Dier's header, I'm struggling to think of any real chances we created.

You could say exactly the same thing for the Leicester game for example i.e. we were more positive and were the side most likley to win but that doesn't mean we deserved to win that game either.
Click to expand...

Again I would say we did vs Leiceter

They had one shot in the whole game and it came from our mistake. You don't deserve anything if you don't actually have shots

And before the header there was Rose shot, there wasn't much else though but we were camped outside their area for a big chunk of the game and played the positive football. They didn't at all hence why I dont think theh deserve anything
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Again I would say we did vs Leiceter

They had one shot in the whole game and it came from our mistake. You don't deserve anything if you don't actually have shots

And before the header there was Rose shot, there wasn't much else though but we were camped outside their area for a big chunk of the game and played the positive football. They didn't at all hence why I dont think theh deserve anything
Click to expand...

Ok fair enough. I think it sounds a bit similar to something Fabregas would say so I'll have to disagree.
 
Jurgen the German said:
Ok fair enough. I think it sounds a bit similar to something Fabregas would say so I'll have to disagree.
Click to expand...

I think it's something most managers would say

I've never heard Fabregash say anything to be fair

No coincidence that Bilic hasn't come out and said we deserved the 3 points (from what I've read)

But hey let's agree to disagree, I'm fine with that
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I think it's something most managers would say

I've never heard Fabregash say anything to be fair

No coincidence that Bilic hasn't come out and said we deserved the 3 points (from what I've read)

But hey let's agree to disagree, I'm fine with that
Click to expand...

I just think that you don't necessarily deserve to win because one team shows less ambition than the other. I wouldn't have said we were unlucky had we lost or drawn yesterday put it that way. All the same, think we both agree we need to play much better if we are going to get anything from Monaco or Chelsea.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I just think that you don't necessarily deserve to win because one team shows less ambition than the other. I wouldn't have said we were unlucky had we lost or drawn yesterday put it that way. All the same, think we both agree we need to play much better if we are going to get anything from Monaco or Chelsea.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not

Every game has to be taken on it's merits. I thought yesterday was a dire game but a great result. I've seen us play better and only get a draw

You have to say with the quality do the opposition we wouldn't get away with playing as bad but football is strange
@Jurgen the German you need to see the Canning Town thread in the non Spurs forum on here. Plenty agree with me around what they deserved
 
Last edited:
I agree we've not reach the heights of the City game but since that game we've made at least 3/4 changes each game and also altered the system, that along with the international break hasn't helped in getting any sort on rhythm or continuity in the side. Hopefully we can get back to having a settled side with minor changes.
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
I agree we've not reach the heights of the City game but since that game we've made at least 3/4 changes each game and also altered the system, that along with the international break hasn't helped in getting any sort on rhythm or continuity in the side. Hopefully we can get back to having a settled side with minor changes.
Click to expand...

The injuries we have had have all come at once to key players

It's not unusual but it would effect any side.

Someone described it as City two years ago when they lost Aguero and Komany together
 
This is priceless!
Jumby on Sun Nov 20, 2016 1:49 am

I cannot describe my anger.

In 1996 I smashed up a radio when we lost to Stockport.

In 1998 I smashed up that radios replacement when we lost to Wimbledon after leading 3-0.

I can't pinpoint it but there was another game where I put my fist through a framed picture of Trevor Morley, and I Iove Trevor Morley.

I'm fuming and if I'm ever diagnosed terminally ill I will hunt down Simone Zaza and skuĺlf**k his wife in front of him as he lays there slowly bleeding to death from his missing legs that I badly hacked off.

Get me more tequila
Click to expand...
 
Jurgen the German said:
I guess we just have different views on this. We looked the more positive side and they were content with sitting back and trying to nick a draw or possibly an unlikely win on the counter attack. I don't believe that merely being more positive and having more of the ball in the opposition side means you deserve to win the game. Other than Dier's header, I'm struggling to think of any real chances we created.

You could say exactly the same thing for the Leicester game for example i.e. we were more positive and were the side most likley to win but that doesn't mean we deserved to win that game either.
Click to expand...

Janssen's belter which was parried outdoor Winks to score.
Son's cross which Kane out away.
As you correctly mentioned that Dier header.
Winks first-half snapshot from edge of the box.
Do we count Eriksen's very very marginal offside goal (the ball from Dier was excellent, Tobyesque)?

The main thing which cost us a hatful IMO, was Eriksen. He once again regressed into a Wilkins/Samways crab, when he always had 5 yards of positive space to turn and run into. Instead he played it off as quickly as possible. If he plays even 80% closer to his capacity in the first-half, we kill them! Instead, his ineffectiveness made the shape look terrible. Credit Poch for the changes!
 
thfcsteff said:
Janssen's belter which was parried outdoor Winks to score.
Son's cross which Kane out away.
As you correctly mentioned that Dier header.
Winks first-half snapshot from edge of the box.
Do we count Eriksen's very very marginal offside goal (the ball from Dier was excellent, Tobyesque)?

The main thing which cost us a hatful IMO, was Eriksen. He once again regressed into a Wilkins/Samways crab, when he always had 5 yards of positive space to turn and run into. Instead he played it off as quickly as possible. If he plays even 80% closer to his capacity in the first-half, we kill them! Instead, his ineffectiveness made the shape look terrible. Credit Poch for the changes!
Click to expand...

Don't forget he also kicked it it twice when making a forward pass
 
thfcsteff said:
Janssen's belter which was parried outdoor Winks to score.
Son's cross which Kane out away.
As you correctly mentioned that Dier header.
Winks first-half snapshot from edge of the box.
Do we count Eriksen's very very marginal offside goal (the ball from Dier was excellent, Tobyesque)?

The main thing which cost us a hatful IMO, was Eriksen. He once again regressed into a Wilkins/Samways crab, when he always had 5 yards of positive space to turn and run into. Instead he played it off as quickly as possible. If he plays even 80% closer to his capacity in the first-half, we kill them! Instead, his ineffectiveness made the shape look terrible. Credit Poch for the changes!
Click to expand...

Sorry mate i usually agree with most of what you say, but blaming one man in Eriksen for us not winning by a " hatful" is REALLY over the top.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I don't think we deserved the win at all and only played well in short 10-15 minute bursts. The only chance I remember us creating was Dier's header. West Ham weren't great either but they had a couple of chances when they had 2 on 1 but bad decision making by Payet and Zaza cost them.

It was a performance of great spirit and determination to come from behind twice, but it wasn't a vintage performance by any stretch.

I'm still over the moon we won but we're going to have to play a hell of a lot better than that to stand a chance of getting anything at Monaco or Chelsea next week.
Click to expand...

The key is getting our best players fit.

It's no coincidence that we played better once dele and son came on.

We badly need to get toby, Davies (due to rose suspension), dele, son and lamela fit.

Hopefully we have some surprise news and some are fit for chelsea especially Toby and Davies.
 
Only going by the highlights but we looked decent value for the win without having played at our best.

As an aside, how clammish was that celebration by Antonio? Almost Sturridge-esque in its awfulness.
 
I have seen us lose a lot of games playing much better than we did over the weekend. The final two goals came from HUGE slices of luck as they committed ridiculous defensive howlers and it's not like we were relentlessly pressurising them to the extent that an error became inevitable.

The tactics were badly wrong on Saturday, there were a number of very below par individual performances and regardless of how poor West Ham were as well, we were lucky to come away with one point let alone all three. I really don't get how anyone can argue with any of those points.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I don't think we deserved th

e win at all and only played well in short 10-15 minute bursts. The only chance I remember us creating was Dier's header. West Ham weren't great either but they had a couple of chances when they had 2 on 1 but bad decision making by Payet and Zaza cost them.

It was a performance of great spirit and determination to come from behind twice, but it wasn't a vintage performance by any stretch.

I'm still over the moon we won but we're going to have to play a hell of a lot better than that to stand a chance of getting anything at Monaco or Chelsea next week.
Click to expand...

Going forward they played well in 1-2 minute bursts at best. They scored from their two first shots on target and it wasn't like they carved us open for those either, they got those chances from a couple of corners. It wasn't like they were putting us under pressure with set piece after set piece like we've seen Stoke and West Ham do previously in games. They had 5 corners to our 4. 2 goals from 5 corners is a ridiculous return and a statistical anomaly.

They had a couple of counter attacks when 2-1 up because we were pushing men forward and (correctly) throwing caution to the wind. This happens when one team is ahead and there's little time left, for me it's not a result of playing well.

I agree it wasn't a vintage performance. We continue to struggle with chance creation against teams that sit back like that. But we created more than West Ham, despite them somewhat fortuitously going ahead twice against the run of play from their first two shots on target. That makes us deserved winners in my book.
 
bennysleftfoot said:
Not only was it a quality feeling beating them the way we did, singing it's happening again back at them, got to meet this young fella too
Click to expand...


I always knew that you were a member here Ghod. Don't worry we won't say anything. what was that fellas name next to you? looks like a right mapper . ..
 
SUIYHA said:
I have seen us lose a lot of games playing much better than we did over the weekend. The final two goals came from HUGE slices of luck as they committed ridiculous defensive howlers and it's not like we were relentlessly pressurising them to the extent that an error became inevitable.

The tactics were badly wrong on Saturday, there were a number of very below par individual performances and regardless of how poor West Ham were as well, we were lucky to come away with one point let alone all three. I really don't get how anyone can argue with any of those points.
Click to expand...

I'll give it a go.

Huge slices of luck? An example of a huge slice of luck is an opposition defender mis-cueing a ball over his own goalkeepers head.

1st goal - Sonny produced a piece of quality that was normally lacking in the game and a delivery that was right in the mix and gave the keeper a lot to do - evidently too much to do and he couldn't get enough on to it. Yes it fell at Harry's feet but that what you get when you are in the right place and have a strikers instinct.

2nd goal - Another quality piece of play from Sonny, too much skill for the defender who dived in haplessly and was too late for the ball, and could only take Sonny's foot. No luck involved there for me, just a forward player getting the better of a defensive player.

I think people are getting clouded by the timing of the goals rather then their nature. Lets remember a game of football is 90+ minutes long and those 2 pieces of quality, had they arrived after 60 mins for example, would have been filed in the 'quality play' basket rather than the 'hugely lucky' basket - imo.

At most I would say goal 1 was a tiny bit fortunate, but no more fortunate than a mis-hit shot falling straight on a players head as he runs in toward goal, or a referee awarding a penalty for holding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back