Mikey10
John Lacy
History suggests they won’t stick with it. It also suggests they won’t go out and spend £100 million on a transformative player (e.g. Rice).
-
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 Arsenal FC ***
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
braineclipse
Willie Hall
History suggests that we haven't been in this situation for very long so history can't tell us that much about what will happen.
Agree completely with this. I think Ange has dropped the ball massively with the allocation of rolls in the front 3. It seems really simple for me. Richy has to play - he was flying post injury - and now we’re only seeing him in fits and starts.
Son is and will always be better than Werner on the left, mainly because he does actually score, whereas Werner doesn’t.
Johnson should never be seen on the left again. So fights with Kulu for the role on the right.
As soon as Werner was injured today, Richy should have been on and Son should have been moved back to the left.
We’re continually playing large parts of the games with 2 out of 3 players not in their best positions.
Also - I made a point to my mates pre game that Sarr had to start today - he’s the only one of our midfield that covers ground quickly when we lose possession - those breaks that led to the 2 corners and the Saka goal could have easily been stopped at source.
Mikey10
John Lacy
I love a bit of wilful ignorance.
stratnumberone
Reto Ziegler
I despise conspiracy theories. However, I cannot avoid the seeming inevitability that there is something odd going on in the refereeing and VAR world. Every single week there are unexplainable decisions that affect key games. Every week. And every week the system that has been put in place to correct them, fails.
On a macro level, I can only surmise that giant, powerful and influential betting syndicates are at play.
On a micro level, I can only only assume that absolutely everyone (except us) is sick of City winning the league every year and wants to try to manufacture an alternative.
I know: it’s very weak and I’m embarrassed to even be thinking it. But I’m fresh out of ‘sane’ answers to explain what the PL has become. How else can the staggeringly low quality of decisions made by officials - as beautifully personified by Oliver yesterday - be explained? Surely it’s impossible to be that inept?
As an aside, the BBC match reports have all failed to mention Oliver’s performance yesterday. Although they have rightly mentioned our abysmal defending of set pieces, I’d like to think that - in the interests of objective journalism - they may at least manage a passing mention that he failed to spot one of the clearest penalties ever seen in the history of football, despite it occurring 3 yards in front of him, when he was looking directly at it… It’s time for clubs to call these clowns out. Could it drive people like him out of the game? Yes. Would that be a loss? No.
On a macro level, I can only surmise that giant, powerful and influential betting syndicates are at play.
On a micro level, I can only only assume that absolutely everyone (except us) is sick of City winning the league every year and wants to try to manufacture an alternative.
I know: it’s very weak and I’m embarrassed to even be thinking it. But I’m fresh out of ‘sane’ answers to explain what the PL has become. How else can the staggeringly low quality of decisions made by officials - as beautifully personified by Oliver yesterday - be explained? Surely it’s impossible to be that inept?
As an aside, the BBC match reports have all failed to mention Oliver’s performance yesterday. Although they have rightly mentioned our abysmal defending of set pieces, I’d like to think that - in the interests of objective journalism - they may at least manage a passing mention that he failed to spot one of the clearest penalties ever seen in the history of football, despite it occurring 3 yards in front of him, when he was looking directly at it… It’s time for clubs to call these clowns out. Could it drive people like him out of the game? Yes. Would that be a loss? No.
glasgowspur
Nayim
Because you said the problem is we aren't scoring, when actually the problem is we cannot defend set pieces, and it's been going on too long for it not to have been a addressed.
Bedfordspurs
Arthur Rowe
We don’t need to do that yet
That’s in another seasons time when the squad is properly set up
Then we may well do that
We may not of course
But the fee is IMO always irrelevant. It should never be about the fee and should always be about the right player
Jurgen the German
Tommy Harmer
Wasn’t their stadium paid off by then? Different scenario to us who still have to pay ours off.
I think get CL qualification every year and you have a job for life at Spurs, even if you don’t win anything or challenge for anything.
Bedfordspurs
Arthur Rowe
No
Their owner took on the debt direct and loaned the club the money to pay off the loan. But they owe much much much less than us on it if anything now. Our payments are also very low. The stadium financing is a risk but minor
Our killer is how much we owe now on transfers. It’s one of the highest in the league and that has to be factored into everything
What’s key is said building. It takes time
Pool built over 3 years before making the BIG buys that changed them. Arsenal 4 years.
City… well we know
We need to address depth and quality but you can’t do it all at once unless you do a Chelsea and then cause yourself other issues
What worries me is the lack of youth integration. We have an amazing youth team. As good as we have ever had yet we’re seeing Gil on the bench
tommysvr
Justin Edinburgh
I didn't say the problem is we aren't scoring. I said it's that we're not punishing teams when we're on top. Most of our goals come after we've conceded. It's also possible for more than 1 thing to be an issue. I completely agree on our set piece defending. Here are 3 posts from this very thread where I mentioned them.
Pre-match:
Post-match:
And even in the post you quoted:
Junior19
Øyvind Leonhardsen
It has taken time, and it has taken a lot of back and forth, but the straw that broke the camels back finally came yesterday.
Now, many may think that it was the Kulu-pen not given or the Van de Ven-offsidegoal that was the straw? No, not alone.
But yesterday summarized both everything VAR was supposed to fix, but has not, _and_ the new issues it has created.
1. Not a level playing field: At one point in the game, the norwegian commentators claimed that Michael Oliver had been good, he had been "very close to every and all big situation where he had to make a call". True. He was close to the situations. But each and every one of them up untill the VAR penalty went Arsenals way.
In a thightly contested game like yesterday you would expect these to be more equally distributed. Not neccessarily 50/50, but closer. I can't remember a single one prior to the VAR penalty going against Arsenal.
So has VAR leveled the playing field? Nope. If anything, it has made it _easier_ for the ref to just take the route of least resistance.
2. The offside goal: One of the main arguments used about VAR was to remove the "endless discussion" about was it/was it not offside. As yesterday (and many many other days) show, we're _still_ discussing was it/was it not, _and_ we're discussing VAR itself. So we've not removed anything, we've just added yet another stupid distraction point.
3. Absurd situations: Arsenal are deadly on corner/free kicks. In about the 53th minute Vicario made a brilliant save, and the ball went out to a corner. In the situation leading up to the corner, the Arsenal-player may/may not have been equally much offside as VdV was. However, since Vicario saved, no VAR check. If Arsenal had scored on the resulting corner, we would have been better off if he had just let the ball go past him on the first attempt, for VAR to go back and remove it. Of course, no sane person would do that, but it just shows that VAR has leveled nothing, solved nothing.
4. The Kulu-pen: For as long as I can remember, the mantra about clipping heels by accident has been that it is the player crossing behind who is "responsible" for not causing the player in front to clip his heel. However, yesterday, it was more a "OH, but he didn't really mean it, and he _barely_ touched him. The ref clearly thought it was not enough." So a subjective decision made by the onfield ref, not overturned by VAR because it was not "big enough" an error. Arsenal scored on the breakaway instead. If that is not a "big enough" error, nothing ever is.
VAR has to die. In it's present form, it has got to die. Violently, and in flames. It has brought the game ZERO gain, but plenty pain.
I'm a tech guy. I love technological solutions to all problems, even those where you'd think tech had no right to even think about the problem.
But in this matter the tech is wrong.
Scrap it in its present form. Go back to the drawing board, bring back a new, improved, shiny VAR 2.5, where the tech is removed from the onfield ref. Give each team two or three challenges they can use in each game. If you challenge a decision on the pitch, the VAR steps in, and gives a verdict within 2 minutes. If it can't, the onfield decision stand. If the challenge is successful, the team keeps all three challenges. If it is unsuccessful, it "costs" you the challenge.
No more 8 minute waits for a decision, no more "delayed decision, since VAR will check it anyway." and no more armpit offsides.
I think the main problem is that the cost of developing VAR makes it more or less imperative that it is "visible" in the game. The system above would not be visible to the viewers, thus not create any publicity.
Now, many may think that it was the Kulu-pen not given or the Van de Ven-offsidegoal that was the straw? No, not alone.
But yesterday summarized both everything VAR was supposed to fix, but has not, _and_ the new issues it has created.
1. Not a level playing field: At one point in the game, the norwegian commentators claimed that Michael Oliver had been good, he had been "very close to every and all big situation where he had to make a call". True. He was close to the situations. But each and every one of them up untill the VAR penalty went Arsenals way.
In a thightly contested game like yesterday you would expect these to be more equally distributed. Not neccessarily 50/50, but closer. I can't remember a single one prior to the VAR penalty going against Arsenal.
So has VAR leveled the playing field? Nope. If anything, it has made it _easier_ for the ref to just take the route of least resistance.
2. The offside goal: One of the main arguments used about VAR was to remove the "endless discussion" about was it/was it not offside. As yesterday (and many many other days) show, we're _still_ discussing was it/was it not, _and_ we're discussing VAR itself. So we've not removed anything, we've just added yet another stupid distraction point.
3. Absurd situations: Arsenal are deadly on corner/free kicks. In about the 53th minute Vicario made a brilliant save, and the ball went out to a corner. In the situation leading up to the corner, the Arsenal-player may/may not have been equally much offside as VdV was. However, since Vicario saved, no VAR check. If Arsenal had scored on the resulting corner, we would have been better off if he had just let the ball go past him on the first attempt, for VAR to go back and remove it. Of course, no sane person would do that, but it just shows that VAR has leveled nothing, solved nothing.
4. The Kulu-pen: For as long as I can remember, the mantra about clipping heels by accident has been that it is the player crossing behind who is "responsible" for not causing the player in front to clip his heel. However, yesterday, it was more a "OH, but he didn't really mean it, and he _barely_ touched him. The ref clearly thought it was not enough." So a subjective decision made by the onfield ref, not overturned by VAR because it was not "big enough" an error. Arsenal scored on the breakaway instead. If that is not a "big enough" error, nothing ever is.
VAR has to die. In it's present form, it has got to die. Violently, and in flames. It has brought the game ZERO gain, but plenty pain.
I'm a tech guy. I love technological solutions to all problems, even those where you'd think tech had no right to even think about the problem.
But in this matter the tech is wrong.
Scrap it in its present form. Go back to the drawing board, bring back a new, improved, shiny VAR 2.5, where the tech is removed from the onfield ref. Give each team two or three challenges they can use in each game. If you challenge a decision on the pitch, the VAR steps in, and gives a verdict within 2 minutes. If it can't, the onfield decision stand. If the challenge is successful, the team keeps all three challenges. If it is unsuccessful, it "costs" you the challenge.
No more 8 minute waits for a decision, no more "delayed decision, since VAR will check it anyway." and no more armpit offsides.
I think the main problem is that the cost of developing VAR makes it more or less imperative that it is "visible" in the game. The system above would not be visible to the viewers, thus not create any publicity.
Mrs Vert
Bobby Mimms
He wouldn't have.
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
I’m starting to think that a new keeper might be more transformative for us. We are giving away numerous chances and pretty much a goal a game due to Vicario being absolutely awful dealing with inswingers directly into the 6 yard box. It is impossible to win competitions when giving the opponent a cheap goal a game in this way.
braineclipse
Willie Hall
It's probably partly a coaching issue.
I think it's also partly a squad buildup issue. We're a bit short and not a lot of our players are aggressive in how they deal with stuff in the air from set pieces. Think some of them can improve, but we're still a bit short even if they do.
Doubt we'll go for a new goalkeeper. Dominant in the box keepers are rare, finding one that's also good enough at all the other stuff is very difficult.
But I think it may impact our transfer activity elsewhere. A DM that's also fairly tall and a bit of a unit perhaps? A striker with real height and power?
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
No we didn’t, it was still higher.
metalgear
Nayim
lol
early days of poch era - we were good in defence with rose verts toby walker and loris
Mikey10
John Lacy
I’m wondering about that too.
We certainly need someone to really challenge Vic next season - and we need to then be dropping him if he does not improve his game.
He’s undoubtedly a great shot-stopper, but teams have quickly seized on his weaknesses. We’re seeing why he’s not Italy’s first choice.
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
It might not get worse with us having added European games. It means the squad will need to be used more and young players will also have to get a chance away from the ultra high pressure spotlight of the PL.
Bedfordspurs
Arthur Rowe
And ideally Ange can see these youngsters given game time
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
I’m not convinced that Romero’s English is good enough for that role. I agree though that we need a captain who will be in the ref’s ear a lot more. The whole team also need to be far more streetwise, Arsenal schooled us in that respect yesterday.