***TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR vs West Ham United OMT***

[SpurMeUp]

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Watching that match live never did I feel like we battering them in terms of quality of attacks. Nor did I feel like we missed some gaping chances (even Richy's was a very good chance but you see them missed every now and then, plus it's Richy who is a poor finisher). I just don't recall any other chances were looking back I feel like fudge we really should have scored that one. My feeling after Villa was totally different we genuinely tore them apart at times and were a pass away from open goals multiple times. Yesterday I just didn't feel that with my eyes and the stats don't support it either.

You think poor finishing I think they were poor quality of chances in the first place. Also remember xG is a cumulative stat, 23 "chances" that add up to 1.78 is just a poor ratio, very poor. That's 0.07 xG per chance. Give that Richarlison's chance was relatively high in xG the actual rate for the rest of the chances is even lower. They just weren't quality chances.

Now I'm not a stats merchant I'm all about the eye test but I'll use stats to query what I see with my eyes so ultimately all the xG chat in the world isn't going change my opinion that what I saw with my eyes were few chances and few of any quality.

Hmm not sure your logic makes sense. If you are using stats and probability we’re close to scoring 2 on chances created. True?

If we take out whams two highly lucky openings that led to goals, statistically we should have won. True? They did have a header at the back post and a few other openings but without the back pass and lucky double ricochet their XG would be a lot lower.

If a team employ a low block - as we used to - the whole point is it limits chances. Lower chances at goal is to be expected. Statistically in terms of probability we’ve done enough to win if we take out their two pretty lucky openings they scored from.

you have used stats to back up your point and then tried to remove it again! Live by the sword and all that

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Wouldn’t say we battered them but I still don’t know how’ve we played like that against Aston Villa and West Ham but have zero points to show for it. I think the forwards need to do better when we’re on top in games. Should have been out of sight against Chelsea too.

There was a quote on teletext last night which I liked

If that was under conte or Mou the defence would be to blame

Because it’s under Ange and the football is different it was all on the attack

 

[Bishop]

Hmm not sure your logic makes sense. If you are using stats and probability we’re close to scoring 2 on chances created. True?

Yah.

If we take out whams two highly lucky openings that led to goals, statistically we should have won. True? They did have a header at the back post and a few other openings but without the back pass and lucky double ricochet their XG would be a lot lower.

Not sure if I agree that we should take their two goals away. They happened and they scored from them. If we are making fantasy scenarios then anything can happen. Maybe Bissouma hits his shot lower and it ripples the net or maybe Romero's header canons off the post? Kind of pointless in analytical terms imo.

If a team employ a low block - as we used to - the whole point is it limits chances. Lower chances at goal is to be expected. Statistically in terms of probability we’ve done enough to win if we take out their two pretty lucky openings they scored from.

We don't disagree apart from I don't get the logic of removing two factual moments from the game in our favour but at the same time having all the moments in our favour still happen?

Otherwise I don't disagree on the difficulty in playing a low block. I wouldn't necessarily expect 5+ xG against West Ham. What i would say though is that is something you have to play against and so you need to devise a means to penetrate said defensive shapes. With a fit Maddison, Bentancur and Sarr I think we do, as the passing will be far more incisive than what we saw yesterday. We likely get Son on the ball a lot more and he is a great finisher even of chances that are of low probability.

you have used stats to back up your point and then tried to remove it again! Live by the sword and all that

I dunno why you think I'm removing stats? I wasn't I was just being clear I'm not relying on stats alone to make my argument, they just back up what I saw with my own eyes.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Watching that match live never did I feel like we battering them in terms of quality of attacks. Nor did I feel like we missed some gaping chances (even Richy's was a very good chance but you see them missed every now and then, plus it's Richy who is a poor finisher). I just don't recall any other chances were looking back I feel like fudge we really should have scored that one. My feeling after Villa was totally different we genuinely tore them apart at times and were a pass away from open goals multiple times. Yesterday I just didn't feel that with my eyes and the stats don't support it either.

You think poor finishing I think they were poor quality of chances in the first place. Also remember xG is a cumulative stat, 23 "chances" that add up to 1.78 is just a poor ratio, very poor. That's 0.07 xG per chance. Give that Richarlison's chance was relatively high in xG the actual rate for the rest of the chances is even lower. They just weren't quality chances.

Now I'm not a stats merchant I'm all about the eye test but I'll use stats to query what I see with my eyes so ultimately all the xG chat in the world isn't going change my opinion that what I saw with my eyes were few chances and few of any quality.

100% agree that against Villa we created better chances
But yesterday we played prettier football although both had a high bar on that front
What both games have in common is we couldn’t turn dominance into goals

 

[spurspinter1]

Hmm not sure your logic makes sense. If you are using stats and probability we’re close to scoring 2 on chances created. True?

If we take out whams two highly lucky openings that led to goals, statistically we should have won. True? They did have a header at the back post and a few other openings but without the back pass and lucky double ricochet their XG would be a lot lower.

If a team employ a low block - as we used to - the whole point is it limits chances. Lower chances at goal is to be expected. Statistically in terms of probability we’ve done enough to win if we take out their two pretty lucky openings they scored from.

you have used stats to back up your point and then tried to remove it again! Live by the sword and all that

It's quite likely you take out the oppositions goals and keep ours you'll statistically win pretty much every game, it's definitely a tactic we should employ. I'm not a mathematician but from my calculations as long as we score at least one it'd be a 100% success rate. Think of all the hypothetical trophies we'll win!!!

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I'm not here to play good football I'm here to win", to be clear that's an Ange quote, not a Conte / Jose one and i don't he's said that because he's caught up in the emotion of one isolated game. That said we've got 1 point from 5 games and being easy on the eye at times doesn't change those results.

There's nothing wrong in enjoying the style of play but I don't think Ange thinks we carried it out well last night, at times it was a training exercise in keeping the ball but not doing much to threaten with it, when you add the lapses in defending (bad luck on the Davies block granted) it's not a great combination, particularly against teams like West Ham. Plaudits are great and all but points would be nice as well.

Even during the run of losses he was quite happy to talk about his reflections on the teams performance and how good our football was.

Furthermore I think he's here to 'play good football AND win'? ....I'm not sure why he wants to shut down the good football side of the equation when it has very much been front and centre of his own mantra since arriving.

It's a given that we all want to win football matches, perhaps it's jarring him that the way he goes about that isn't yielding results?

 

[Bishop]

100% agree that against Villa we created better chances
But yesterday we played prettier football although both had a high bar on that front
What both games have in common is we couldn’t turn dominance into goals

I likewise think we played well just not in the final third against West Ham. The quality of the actual chances was low. There was little penetration and I don't really think it was due to great defending from WH, too often we over played or waited to long to play the pass or simply didn't see the pass that was on.

Son made a couple of great runs in the first half and we just never tried to the pass. Kulu had numerous times he could have tried to play a pass through the lines but instead dallied.

It's kind of anonying that from the Villa and WH games we only managed two goals, one a deflected shot and the other from a corner.

 

[Raziel]

I likewise think we played well just not in the final third against West Ham. The quality of the actual chances was low. There was little penetration and I don't really think it was due to great defending from WH, too often we over played or waited to long to play the pass or simply didn't see the pass that was on.

Son made a couple of great runs in the first half and we just never tried to the pass. Kulu had numerous times he could have tried to play a pass through the lines but instead dallied.

It's kind of anonying that from the Villa and WH games we only managed two goals, one a deflected shot and the other from a corner.

So agree with the main point

Disagree re the quality of the two goals, a well worked corner and a well taken shot from the edge of the box (deflection is part of the calculation) are better goals than the goals we gave up against City & West Ham (mistake or fluke vs. opposition worked through us via play/patterns)

Your point around the runs is a combination of no Maddison and lack of playing time of the players out there in the system together.

My opinion, both Johnson and Deki did not have a good game yesterday and we didn't have a real goal threat option off the bench (Richi should have scored that header), broader point is we need someone else other than Son who can get to around 15 goals a season.

 

[spurspinter1]

Even during the run of losses he was quite happy to talk about his reflections on the teams performance and how good our football was.

Furthermore I think he's here to 'play good football AND win'? ....I'm not sure why he wants to shut down the good football side of the equation when it has very much been front and centre of his own mantra since arriving.

It's a given that we all want to win football matches, perhaps it's jarring him that the way he goes about that isn't yielding results?

I think it's more the notion that if you lose 4 out of 5 then it's not good football even if there's some nice bits and bobs throughout those games. Obviously I might be wrong, only the manager knows, when we were winning he wasn't dismissing the praise because it was good football, because we were winning? I'm only speculating here but maybe Ange doesn't want to be seen as a novelty and sees the compliments about style a bit patronizing if we're on a dreadful run.

The example that comes to mind is Swansea, they played a style which was very easy on the eye but in the season they got relegated it wasn't fantastic football because it didn't work (in that season). There were lovely moments if you like tika taka with Leon Britton looking like Xavi at times but they weren't good.

The Spurs PR chap is literally there to just find the positives in everything so it did seem a bit of a harsh shutting down of the question from a social media everything is awesome perspective, but I personally like it. The manager believes he can get more out of these players and whilst I'm not suggesting he should be throwing boots at them or eviscerating individuals in press conferences, I think he's going to be pretty blunt with them over the next few days on the training ground and we'll see a reaction on Sunday.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Yah.



Not sure if I agree that we should take their two goals away. They happened and they scored from them. If we are making fantasy scenarios then anything can happen. Maybe Bissouma hits his shot lower and it ripples the net or maybe Romero's header canons off the post? Kind of pointless in analytical terms imo.



We don't disagree apart from I don't get the logic of removing two factual moments from the game in our favour but at the same time having all the moments in our favour still happen?

Otherwise I don't disagree on the difficulty in playing a low block. I wouldn't necessarily expect 5+ xG against West Ham. What i would say though is that is something you have to play against and so you need to devise a means to penetrate said defensive shapes. With a fit Maddison, Bentancur and Sarr I think we do, as the passing will be far more incisive than what we saw yesterday. We likely get Son on the ball a lot more and he is a great finisher even of chances that are of low probability.

I dunno why you think I'm removing stats? I wasn't I was just being clear I'm not relying on stats alone to make my argument, they just back up what I saw with my own eyes.

It is simple, without two unlucky goals conceeded, 2 expected goals scored for us is far from terrible against a side sitting deep in a low block. You used xg suggesting they deserved it and we didn't create. Which is really not the case. We were dominant but not clinical - in either box. Which was partly misfortune (hitting the bar, richottes etc) and partly needing to be better/have key players back.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Moyes couldn't believe their luck. All credit to him for playing the only way they could to get a result. We had similar performaces under Conte.

"Nearly every team is looking for a Number 9!" | David Moyes Post Match | Tottenham 1-2 West Ham

David Moyes reacts to West Ham United's second-half comeback against Tottenham at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium.SUBSCRIBE TO AMAZON PRIME VIDEO SPORT: https:...

youtu.be

With a depleted squad we've played pretty well. We've missed quality/depth in the backline and in attack. Which is to be expected with our recent injuries and suspensions.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I do think we struggle when Hojberg starts
Not because he plays poorly but because we have been better when he has come on later to get us over the line

 

[SpurMeUp]

I do think we struggle when Hojberg starts
Not because he plays poorly but because we have been better when he has come on later to get us over the line

Yes we do need reinforcements - players who can come on around the hour mark and strengthen us. PEH was doing that well.

Johnson has the unwanted never won whilst he’s started stat. He’s done okay but yesterday the pressure after his crosses didn’t find Son was clear to see. His head dropped, and he never got his mojo back after that.

 

[thfcsteff]

Yah I don't think Sarr is a Pirlo but his ball carrying and willingness take the ball into tight spaces and his general passing awareness is significantly above everybody else on midfield apart from Maddison and Bentancur.


We've basically missed out 3 best users of the ball in midfield for the last few matches and it has shown.

I love Sarr and agree we have greatly missed him both against Villa and last night. He is the closest we have had to Dembele, and continues to remind me of a developing Viera.

 

[thfcsteff]

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Watching that match live never did I feel like we battering them in terms of quality of attacks. Nor did I feel like we missed some gaping chances (even Richy's was a very good chance but you see them missed every now and then, plus it's Richy who is a poor finisher). I just don't recall any other chances were looking back I feel like fudge we really should have scored that one. My feeling after Villa was totally different we genuinely tore them apart at times and were a pass away from open goals multiple times. Yesterday I just didn't feel that with my eyes and the stats don't support it either.

You think poor finishing I think they were poor quality of chances in the first place. Also remember xG is a cumulative stat, 23 "chances" that add up to 1.78 is just a poor ratio, very poor. That's 0.07 xG per chance. Give that Richarlison's chance was relatively high in xG the actual rate for the rest of the chances is even lower. They just weren't quality chances.

Now I'm not a stats merchant I'm all about the eye test but I'll use stats to query what I see with my eyes so ultimately all the xG chat in the world isn't going change my opinion that what I saw with my eyes were few chances and few of any quality.

I think where there is a difference generally in views on last night's game is that some don't see very many good chances created, others see that there were many, many opportunities to create excellent chances that didn't happen because of an extra touch, lateral ball, or general hesitancy at vital moments. I am in the latter camp.

 

[thfcsteff]

See I don't think it was great defending by West ham in the first half, I don't think that was their game plan. If it was they really weren't doing it very well, we were cutting through them and at times they didn't know what direction they were facing they were so bewildered.

100% agree. In fact, for most of that first-half there was consistent space in the channels even inside the area, inviting someone to go for it and either draw the foul, get the shot off, or create a bit of further panic. I thought they were awful for the first 30 mins, and that with a bit more courage, we'd have been able to create several direct and perhaps easy goal scoring opportunities.

 

[DeanoAustin]

100% agree. In fact, for most of that first-half there was consistent space in the channels even inside the area, inviting someone to go for it and either draw the foul, get the shot off, or create a bit of further panic. I thought they were awful for the first 30 mins, and that with a bit more courage, we'd have been able to create several direct and perhaps easy goal scoring opportunities.

They were dreadful for 30 mins. There were gaps everywhere and they were just lashing the ball away to get a breather. I thought at that point, we were going to win very comfortably.

To be fair to Moyes, he gets a lot of stick, but he really tightened them up and sorted them out at half time. I've never thought he's as bad a manager as he's been painted the last 10 years.

 

[billyiddo]

There was a quote on teletext last night which I liked

If that was under conte or Mou the defence would be to blame

Because it’s under Ange and the football is different it was all on the attack

We never played like that under Mou or Conte tho - against teams that set out to protect the draw we were ponderous, slow and much deeper in possession.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

We never played like that under Mou or Conte tho - against teams that set out to protect the draw we were ponderous, slow and much deeper in possession.

That’s the joke
When we were playing balls deep the defence were failing
When we attack… it’s the attack that’s failing

 

[Bishop]

It is simple, without two unlucky goals conceeded, 2 expected goals scored for us is far from terrible against a side sitting deep in a low block. You used xg suggesting they deserved it and we didn't create. Which is really not the case. We were dominant but not clinical - in either box. Which was partly misfortune (hitting the bar, richottes etc) and partly needing to be better/have key players back.

Bro you're seeing things I didn't say. At no point have I said they deserved to win. I used xG to say that the quality of our individual chances was poor and that we didn't create many of them in the first place.