Taking stock: are we heading for another Chelski style car-crash ?

[africanspurs]

The run overall is obviously good and strong. But it's not some excellent move that takes him past Dawson, it's a pretty basic change of direction.

Those of you saying that Dawson didn't do anything wrong and it was all down to Morrison's ability do you think other centre backs we've had playing for in the last couple of years like Vertonghen, Kaboul or King would have done better in that situation? I think all of them would have been likely to do significantly better and based on what we've seen from Chiriches so far I think there's a very good chance he would have done better in that situation too.

i dont agree. verts gets turned inside out by wingers now and again when he plays at full back. who is to say that wouldnt have happened to him if ravel hadnt run at him

kaboul gets done as well there is no reason to assume they would have done better

 

[braineclipse]

i dont agree. verts gets turned inside out by wingers now and again when he plays at full back. who is to say that wouldnt have happened to him if ravel hadnt run at him

kaboul gets done as well there is no reason to assume they would have done better

You don't think Vertonghen and Kaboul are better one on one on the deck than Dawson? (if you do, please re-read the part of my post where I said "been likely to" - I didn't say that hey would always do the right thing).

You say Vertonghen gets turned inside out by wingers now and then when he plays at full back. How do you think Dawson would do at full back against wingers?

 

[Pirate55]

Can't see this as being an excuse really.



We dominated West Ham for 60 minutes and didn't take our chances. We didn't score when we were on top, this is why we lost.

But that's the whole point. We completely ran out of steam after about an hour and hardly created another chance after JD's one on one. Directly attributable to the Thursday trip IMO.

 

[Spursalot]

But that's the whole point. We completely ran out of steam after about an hour and hardly created another chance after JD's one on one. Directly attributable to the Thursday trip IMO.

Not really, I don't expect to dominate premier league matches for 90 minutes. That's just not how it goes, both teams will have their own attacking opportunities. The difference being that West Ham took theirs and we did not.


Anyone expecting the opposition to not have a decent spell where they create chances has unrealistic expectations.

 

[Pirate55]

Not really, I don't expect to dominate premier league matches for 90 minutes. That's just not how it goes, both teams will have their own attacking opportunities. The difference being that West Ham took theirs and we did not.


Anyone expecting the opposition to not have a decent spell where they create chances has unrealistic expectations.

A fully fit and motivated ( not jet lagged and carrying injuries) Spurs team should be totally dominating teams like wet Spam if we have top four aspirations.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Can't see this as being an excuse really.



We dominated West Ham for 60 minutes and didn't take our chances. We didn't score when we were on top, this is why we lost.

Dominated in what sense? We had plenty of possession but we didn't threaten their goal much. To me, having the ball lots but not creating chances isn't dominating. I remember when Redknapp said we dominated against QPR after we had lost 1-0 against them despite barely creating anything.

 

[braineclipse]

Dominated in what sense? We had plenty of possession but we didn't threaten their goal much. To me, having the ball lots but not creating chances isn't dominating. I remember when Redknapp said we dominated against QPR after we had lost 1-0 against them despite barely creating anything.

I agree. We created way too little, including in that first 60 minutes.

 

[Spursalot]

A fully fit and motivated ( not jet lagged and carrying injuries) Spurs team should be totally dominating teams like wet Spam if we have top four aspirations.

I disagree completely. Very few matches will go by in a season where one team totally dominates the other.


We should be beating these teams, yes. You do them a disservice.

 

[Spursalot]

Dominated in what sense? We had plenty of possession but we didn't threaten their goal much. To me, having the ball lots but not creating chances isn't dominating. I remember when Redknapp said we dominated against QPR after we had lost 1-0 against them despite barely creating anything.

The way in which we controlled the game. Dominated was perhaps too strong a word.



THey took the three chances that came their way, i think i recall at least three/four chances that came our way that we did not take. Which was the difference between the two sides.

 

[braineclipse]

The way in which we controlled the game. Dominated was perhaps too strong a word.



THey took the three chances that came their way, i think i recall at least three/four chances that came our way that we did not take. Which was the difference between the two sides.

What you describe here doesn't sound anywhere near good enough at home to West Ham. It shouldn't be a close game with a similar number of chances to each team.

 

[Spursalot]

What you describe here doesn't sound anywhere near good enough at home to West Ham. It shouldn't be a close game with a similar number of chances to each team.

The reason there becomes a similar number of chances was because we overcommitted in attack to try and recover the deficit.


We were victims of our own mentality more than we were outclassed by West Ham.



All imo of course.

 

[El Guepardo]

The reason there becomes a similar number of chances was because we overcommitted in attack to try and recover the deficit.


We were victims of our own mentality more than we were outclassed by West Ham.



All imo of course.

So we overcommitted in attacking West Ham, and this led them to having as many chances as us?

I can understand that West Ham could create more clear cut chances, in terms of the quality of chance created, but not more chances in total.

Otherwise our attacking play must be poor if we were really trying to attack West Ham and yet we created less chances,during our time of attacking bombardment, than we did when we were playing as usual from the start.

 

[Spursalot]

So we overcommitted in attacking West Ham, and this led them to having as many chances as us?

I can understand that West Ham could create more clear cut chances, in terms of the quality of chance created, but not more chances in total.

Otherwise our attacking play must be poor if we were really trying to attack West Ham and yet we created less chances,during our time of attacking bombardment, than we did when we were playing as usual from the start.

Yes, it's relatively simple. They scored the one good chance they had, we overcommitted in trying to get the equaliser leaving ourselves open to the counter for the second and third.


West Ham set out to drop deep and defend. They defended well.

 

[El Guepardo]

It's at times like that we need the likes of Sigurdsson, Holtby, Erikssen, Townsend etc to shoot from range. True, the shots won't always go in but we may get a fortunate deflection, we could get a rebound from the shot or we could even make good of the space as the opposition, knowing that we'll shoot from outside the area, elect to close our players down more and so defenders come forward to try to stem attacking play before the shot is taken.

Good movement, passing and vision will see us then move the ball quicker and punish any gaps that are left.

 

[Pirate55]

I disagree completely. Very few matches will go by in a season where one team totally dominates the other.


We should be beating these teams, yes. You do them a disservice.

So you don't think using over half the team on Thursday had anything to do with our performance on Sunday?

 

[Spursalot]

So you don't think using over half the team on Thursday had anything to do with our performance on Sunday?

Anything?

That's a rather vague question.


I do not think starting three players against West Ham who started on the thursday, and taking others with us, was the reason for us losing that game. As you haven't managed to work that out from my previous statements i think we're done.

 

[braineclipse]

The reason there becomes a similar number of chances was because we overcommitted in attack to try and recover the deficit.


We were victims of our own mentality more than we were outclassed by West Ham.



All imo of course.

This obviously influenced game flow after their goal, that's undeniable. I don't think they would have been as likely to score the 2nd or 3rd if not for that change in game flow (say if we were 2-0 up at the time they scored their first).

However, we still didn't create enough chances in my opinion. Highlighted perhaps by the difference in chances created in this game compared for example to the game against Cardiff.

I don't think we over committed personally, depending on how you use the term. We committed a lot of men forward, but that was called for when they scored their first goal.

I agree fully that we weren't outclassed by West Ham, only someone looking only at the scoreline in isolation should think that.

I agree that we were victims of our own mentality, but for we we were victims of our own mentality in that we didn't start the game sharply enough and with enough purpose and determination. Compare again to our better games against similar level opposition this season like Norwich and Cardiff, I thought our attitude was much better from the whistle in those games.

All of this obviously also just imo, would be pretty weird if I started posting someone else's opinion

 

[Spursalot]

This obviously influenced game flow after their goal, that's undeniable. I don't think they would have been as likely to score the 2nd or 3rd if not for that change in game flow (say if we were 2-0 up at the time they scored their first).

However, we still didn't create enough chances in my opinion. Highlighted perhaps by the difference in chances created in this game compared for example to the game against Cardiff.

I don't think we over committed personally, depending on how you use the term. We committed a lot of men forward, but that was called for when they scored their first goal.

I agree fully that we weren't outclassed by West Ham, only someone looking only at the scoreline in isolation should think that.

I agree that we were victims of our own mentality, but for we we were victims of our own mentality in that we didn't start the game sharply enough and with enough purpose and determination. Compare again to our better games against similar level opposition this season like Norwich and Cardiff, I thought our attitude was much better from the whistle in those games.

All of this obviously also just imo, would be pretty weird if I started posting someone else's opinion

I know, this is not directed at you but some people tend to get a bit ****y when it sounds like people are 'stating things as fact'.


I don't think it was that called for. There was still plenty of time in the game to get the goals, and the game could have opened up a bit as West Ham grew in confidence and tried to venture forwards a bit more.


We could have been better also, but the players won't have good games every week. It's an odd loss to a 'lower' team. Every team with top four aspirations has had one this season. We just have to try and ensure it doesn't happen too often.

 

[Pirate55]

Anything?

That's a rather vague question.


I do not think starting three players against West Ham who started on the thursday, and taking others with us, was the reason for us losing that game. As you haven't managed to work that out from my previous statements i think we're done.

Then we will obviously have to disagree on something I think has direct causality.

Wet Spam don't have one player I would want in our team. Player for player we should beat them into a ****ed hat. It wasn't as if we were all over them and were just unlucky. We were poor, dishevelled, knackered (especially Dembele and Sig) and Walker was plainly injured.

I only hope AVB can see the link even if you can't.

 

[Spursalot]

Then we will obviously have to disagree on something I think has direct causality.

Wet Spam don't have one player I would want in our team. Player for player we should beat them into a ****ed hat. It wasn't as if we were all over them and were just unlucky. We were poor, dishevelled, knackered (especially Dembele and Sig) and Walker was plainly injured.

I only hope AVB can see the link even if you can't.

Being better on paper doesn't mean you have the right to win every single game. Man United are man for man better than West Brom, yet West Brom beat them. Arsenal are man for man better than Villa, yet Villa beat them. Emirates Marketing Project are man for man better than Norwich and Villa..


I think you see where i am going with this, or at least i hope you do.