• 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 Brighton OMT ***

Glad to see Ange offer a plan B instead of crossing back from the byline.

We've missed Son's pace and he reminded us of his finessed when in full for the clinical assist . Johnson too, he's young and I think the pressure gets to him, but he already has very good movement.

Can't wait to see us start with son, sarr and bissouma. I doubt teams will attempt a full attack from the start with Son on the pitch.

Thank you Bentancur, Hojberg, Skipp and Davies for trying to keep up whilst we were missing our key players from suspensions, injuries and international games.

Looking forward to the next game.
 
Jurgen the German said:
Draw would have been fair personally, Brighton looked more dangerous in the last 20 minutes and missed some gilt edge chances.
Click to expand...
Draw would not have been fair. Brighton played some slick football at times, but they didn't create much of of it. They were in control only for about 1/3 of the game. They had 6 attempts to our 16 and the non-penalty xG was 1.62 - 0.45. 2-1 was a fair result.
 
TheQuest said:
I've seen it many times, one 10 to 20 minute exceptional period in a game can win it.
Click to expand...
Only their 10-20 minute period wasn't exceptional. They were just playing better than us, not playing us off the park and creating one quality chance after another. The only chance they had was the Fati one.
 
Baleforce said:
Yep all good.

I do disagree. It’s not foundation, it’s not about participation, it’s about points, there is a time and a place to play football, and a time and a place to stop any football being played.

Needs a balance between the two.

Also, we should scheme for the players we have, not the ones we want.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean here?
 
tommysvr said:
I honestly just cannot fathom anyone leaving early. I wouldn't do it at 3-0 let alone 1 fudging 1! That's insane. Not meant as a personal attack...but maybe it is. You spend all that time and money and miss THE moment we all live for as football fans to save what...at best 20 or 30 minutes??

But maybe that's because it takes me 2 days to get to the Lane. I would fudging give my left nut to have been there for the celebrations last night.
Click to expand...
Yes but would you stay put in your seat and tinkle in your trousers?
Some would I guess but it's just not @paxtonwolf style!
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
We weren't at our best and the players knew it, they lost confidence and weren't making the movement or picking the right pass, it will take a bit of time to get rhythm back in our play and for players to get to full fitness but we had the spirit to keep going. The stats demonstrate a different picture to how it felt at the game, that's why I think you can't look at them with the blind faith many do.
One stat I would like to know is that the first time a team has scored 3 penalties against us in a season?
My son said it was a SON winner, MaddiSON to RicharlSON to SON to JohnSON.
Click to expand...

Sunny Days, sunny, sunny days
Ain't nothing better in the world you know
Than watching Sonny lead Spurs in full flow.

www.youtube.com

Sunny Days

Provided to YouTube by Anthem Entertainment (Masters)Sunny Days · LighthouseSunny Days℗ 2008 Anthem Entertainment LPReleased on: 2008-01-01Auto-generated by ...
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
 
Kandi1977 said:
Totally agree! Real Madrid are equally good at playing teams off the park and shutting up shop. It doesn't have to be either or.
There are moments in games where there is a need to just kill off the game and being clever. That doesn't mean you have to play with the whole team camped at the 16 yard box. It's about slowing the game down, and passing without unnecessary risk to keep the ball, and if necessary, boot it away, try to win it back, and if not, make a simple foul, preferably high up the pitch.
Click to expand...

I think managing the game is important, and I think it's funny that Angeball has the dubious 'honour' of being seen as not taking any of that on. Everything you've said above in bold is exactly what we tried to do at both Wolves and Everton away this season when in winning positions going into the 90th minute. On each occasion we went into that 90th with 3 points. From the two scenarios we got one point. We certainly have shut teams down this season/shut up shop, but by playing our way. The bloke said it at the start of the season, you have to be the best, not just look at them and 'aspire' to it on paper.

This whole discussion, BTW, has arisen in the Brighton thread, a match where we were never ahead. We had to come from behind. It was literally impossible to kill off a game we won in the 94th/5th minute???
 
Baleforce said:
On Johnson, you can’t play on the flank without a huge defensive responsibility.

On Conte, where it is similar is that we give away cheap turnovers, the difference is where. Under Antonio, we coughed it up in their third. Under Ange, it’s coughing it up in our third that hurts us.
Click to expand...

In the spirit of debate...

Let me give you my univited opinion. Conte gaslit us all for a while. Me included. Without Kane you wouldn't have ever seen him even drum up the courage to flimflam us like he did. I made one declaration about Conte when he was hired, which was we'd fine out exactly how much Levy 'fudges over managers' because at the first whiff of not getting whathe demanded, Conte would surely call him and the club out and leave. The moment we signed Spence and Conte effectivelty said it wasn't his signing and he didn't want him, I realized he was using us. He continued to. I felt sorry for him between losing Ventrone (his ballast) and getting ill, and I have more to say on that, but another day. In the end, every time I see his name mentioned here as an example of perceived 'security' I can only think of how many awful performances he presided over, how he did not stand up to anyone more than sat at a mic and threw various people under various busses, and walked away from us with a fat redundancy cheque.

I'll take this all day every day. Hopefully for years.
 
Johnson's an enigma. I'm rooting for him and hoping he kicks on, but I worry he's got a touch of Sessegnon Syndrome. Not sure whether he overthinks things, lacks self-belief, worries about injury or what, but he just doesn't look as though he fancies it half the time. Needs to show more balls, I think; get the crowd on his side.

Enjoyed our goals yesterday, but not much else.
 
Last edited:
Here's an interesting (and perhaps surprising) stat: we're currently top of a table of F/xG (ratio of goals for to expected goals), both overall and in terms of away games (1.13 and 1.41, respectively), which I suppose suggests we're either clinical or lucky (perhaps a mixture of both). We're doing fairly well on the 'opposite' measure too (goals against over expected goals against), so our opponents aren't doing brilliantly putting away their chances against us, either.

Code: 
xGRatio Table     F/xGF*   A/xGA    FH/xGFH  AH/xGAH  FA/xGFA  AA/xGAA   +/-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
01 Tottenham      1.1301   0.8199   0.9374   0.7428   1.4085   0.8941    +3
02 Aston Villa    1.1053   0.8897   1.2417   0.8371   0.942    0.9232    +3
03 Man C          1.1004   1.1221   1.3983   1.1312   0.8955   1.1161    -2
04 Nottm Forest   1.0787   1.186    1.1732   1.4451   0.976    1.0318   +12
05 West Ham       1.049    0.874    1.1681   0.672    0.9519   1.0073    +5
06 Wolves         1.042    0.8744   1.0383   0.9574   1.0459   0.8013    +3
07 Fulham         1.0322   0.8802   1.0329   0.7159   1.0309   0.9943    +5
08 Luton          1.0207   0.833    0.8978   0.9542   1.2215   0.7562    +5
09 Brighton       1.0125   1.0288   1.0196   0.885    1.0018   1.14      -2
10 Burnley        1.0093   1.0951   0.9059   1.3466   1.1516   0.8981    +9
11 Newc Utd       0.999    0.9386   0.9322   0.8974   1.1033   0.9634    -8
12 Liverpool      0.9967   0.7631   0.921    0.8913   1.137    0.6871   -10
13 Arsenal        0.9727   1.0387   1.0135   1.0587   0.9081   1.0195    -7
14 Sheff Utd      0.911    1.1234   0.7458   1.0954   1.2407   1.1549    +6
15 Crystal Palace 0.9022   1.0616   0.9543   1.1065   0.8481   1.0336    +2
16 Man Utd        0.9012   0.7935   0.8889   0.8802   0.9187   0.7042    -1
17 Bournemouth    0.8531   1.1239   0.7737   1.0672   0.9121   1.1628    -3
18 Brentford      0.8287   1.1467   0.8895   1.2548   0.7463   1.0204    -7
19 Chelsea        0.8113   1.0419   0.7194   1.1091   0.9454   0.9906   -11
20 Everton        0.6305   0.8803   0.535    0.9026   0.7674   0.8637    -2

(xG data courtesy of understat.com)

+/- expresses difference in position in the table above compared to one showing straight goals for/against.
 
Last edited:
mudshark said:
Here's an interesting (and perhaps surprising) stat: we're currently top of a table of F/xG (ratio of goals for to expected goals), both overall and in terms of away games (1.13 and 1.41, respectively), which I suppose suggests we're either clinical or lucky (perhaps a mixture of both). We're doing fairly well on the 'opposite' measure too (goals against over expected goals against), so our opponents aren't doing brilliantly putting away their chances against us, either.

Code: 
xGRatio Table     F/xGF*   A/xGA    FH/xGFH  AH/xGAH  FA/xGFA  AA/xGAA   +/-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
01 Tottenham      1.1301   0.8199   0.9374   0.7428   1.4085   0.8941    +3
02 Aston Villa    1.1053   0.8897   1.2417   0.8371   0.942    0.9232    +3
03 Man C          1.1004   1.1221   1.3983   1.1312   0.8955   1.1161    -2
04 Nottm Forest   1.0787   1.186    1.1732   1.4451   0.976    1.0318   +12
05 West Ham       1.049    0.874    1.1681   0.672    0.9519   1.0073    +5
06 Wolves         1.042    0.8744   1.0383   0.9574   1.0459   0.8013    +3
07 Fulham         1.0322   0.8802   1.0329   0.7159   1.0309   0.9943    +5
08 Luton          1.0207   0.833    0.8978   0.9542   1.2215   0.7562    +5
09 Brighton       1.0125   1.0288   1.0196   0.885    1.0018   1.14      -2
10 Burnley        1.0093   1.0951   0.9059   1.3466   1.1516   0.8981    +9
11 Newc Utd       0.999    0.9386   0.9322   0.8974   1.1033   0.9634    -8
12 Liverpool      0.9967   0.7631   0.921    0.8913   1.137    0.6871   -10
13 Arsenal        0.9727   1.0387   1.0135   1.0587   0.9081   1.0195    -7
14 Sheff Utd      0.911    1.1234   0.7458   1.0954   1.2407   1.1549    +6
15 Crystal Palace 0.9022   1.0616   0.9543   1.1065   0.8481   1.0336    +2
16 Man Utd        0.9012   0.7935   0.8889   0.8802   0.9187   0.7042    -1
17 Bournemouth    0.8531   1.1239   0.7737   1.0672   0.9121   1.1628    -3
18 Brentford      0.8287   1.1467   0.8895   1.2548   0.7463   1.0204    -7
19 Chelsea        0.8113   1.0419   0.7194   1.1091   0.9454   0.9906   -11
20 Everton        0.6305   0.8803   0.535    0.9026   0.7674   0.8637    -2

(xG data courtesy of understat.com)

+/- expresses difference in position in the table above compared to one showing straight goals for/against.
Click to expand...
Bit confused by your explanation. Doesn't that stat just show that we score and concede pretty much as expected goals would suggest?
 
alekaras said:
Draw would not have been fair. Brighton played some slick football at times, but they didn't create much of of it. They were in control only for about 1/3 of the game. They had 6 attempts to our 16 and the non-penalty xG was 1.62 - 0.45. 2-1 was a fair result.
Click to expand...

It really doesn’t matter either way, we won the game.
 
mudshark said:
Here's an interesting (and perhaps surprising) stat: we're currently top of a table of F/xG (ratio of goals for to expected goals), both overall and in terms of away games (1.13 and 1.41, respectively), which I suppose suggests we're either clinical or lucky (perhaps a mixture of both). We're doing fairly well on the 'opposite' measure too (goals against over expected goals against), so our opponents aren't doing brilliantly putting away their chances against us, either.

Code: 
xGRatio Table     F/xGF*   A/xGA    FH/xGFH  AH/xGAH  FA/xGFA  AA/xGAA   +/-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
01 Tottenham      1.1301   0.8199   0.9374   0.7428   1.4085   0.8941    +3
02 Aston Villa    1.1053   0.8897   1.2417   0.8371   0.942    0.9232    +3
03 Man C          1.1004   1.1221   1.3983   1.1312   0.8955   1.1161    -2
04 Nottm Forest   1.0787   1.186    1.1732   1.4451   0.976    1.0318   +12
05 West Ham       1.049    0.874    1.1681   0.672    0.9519   1.0073    +5
06 Wolves         1.042    0.8744   1.0383   0.9574   1.0459   0.8013    +3
07 Fulham         1.0322   0.8802   1.0329   0.7159   1.0309   0.9943    +5
08 Luton          1.0207   0.833    0.8978   0.9542   1.2215   0.7562    +5
09 Brighton       1.0125   1.0288   1.0196   0.885    1.0018   1.14      -2
10 Burnley        1.0093   1.0951   0.9059   1.3466   1.1516   0.8981    +9
11 Newc Utd       0.999    0.9386   0.9322   0.8974   1.1033   0.9634    -8
12 Liverpool      0.9967   0.7631   0.921    0.8913   1.137    0.6871   -10
13 Arsenal        0.9727   1.0387   1.0135   1.0587   0.9081   1.0195    -7
14 Sheff Utd      0.911    1.1234   0.7458   1.0954   1.2407   1.1549    +6
15 Crystal Palace 0.9022   1.0616   0.9543   1.1065   0.8481   1.0336    +2
16 Man Utd        0.9012   0.7935   0.8889   0.8802   0.9187   0.7042    -1
17 Bournemouth    0.8531   1.1239   0.7737   1.0672   0.9121   1.1628    -3
18 Brentford      0.8287   1.1467   0.8895   1.2548   0.7463   1.0204    -7
19 Chelsea        0.8113   1.0419   0.7194   1.1091   0.9454   0.9906   -11
20 Everton        0.6305   0.8803   0.535    0.9026   0.7674   0.8637    -2

(xG data courtesy of understat.com)

+/- expresses difference in position in the table above compared to one showing straight goals for/against.
Click to expand...


Clear as daylight.
 
thfcsteff said:
Not sure what you mean here?
Click to expand...
Play to the players strengths, if they are not as good on the ball in tight situations allow them to hit the channel, rather than risk a turnover around our box trying to play out on the floor.

I just want to see a little more saftey first and brickhousery from us.
 
I saw an aussie post a long post on Reddit about how Ange's teams usually always have a rough first season, before they really kick on in his second season. It's definitely not the finished article yet, but we can all see what we're trying to do and which way it seems to be going. Patience! We're getting there. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back