*** Tottenham Hotspur Vs Forest *** OMT

[Welshspur60]

If I had to place a bet on where we'll finish, at this point I'd probably say 14th. Finally getting the likes of Kuluševski and Maddison back might lift us a few places higher (I don't honestly see Solanke having a major impact on things) and .there's always the hope we might bring one or two in in January that aren't just more sack-the-manager fodder, but right now, I'm thinking around about 14th. There's plenty more horror shows like today's in this lot, if you ask me.

An up to speed Kulu will be a big help. Not sure we will see Maddes this season. Always thought an ACL rebuild was a full year out?
Just out of curiosity, are there many top players who have had thatbop and came back as good as before?

 

[thfcsteff]

Here's the thing.

In ALL the 'we must have patience' discussions, the bit which is NOT ever considered is WHAT we're having patience FOR.

If a supporter wants a stronger, better version of non-possession, counter-attacking, wing-driven football (aka Brentord+) then power to them and their desires; he would most certainly deserve patience.

If a supporter wants us to play a more possesion-based game which involves passing and moving in the 'need a passing 8' model, then they should be aware that the SIGNS are Thomas Frank does not want to play that style.

If a supporter thinks the return of Deki will make a large difference to the season, I think it is worth looking at what evidence there is this will happen.

It is about so much more than simply 'doing the right thing' or 'whether we're winning or losing'. Nothing is ever that direct obviously, but I do think it is worth considering the above before arriving at conclusions about the manager's status.

 

[thfcsteff]

I don't care whether he wants one, I WANT one!

Just like with Ange I wanted one then and he foolishly decided he didn't need one or a 6. Whether the manager thinks we need a passing 8 or not the football we are trying to play REQUIRES one. Period.

Now Frank might be a madman and might try and play this way and without a passing 8. This will fail and he will be sacked. Simple.

Important differential here. I (and it appears you too) believe football needs passers/passing 8s. I don't see anything in the system he appears to favour which necessarily requires that.

 

[Gutter Boy]

An up to speed Kulu will be a big help. Not sure we will see Maddes this season. Always thought an ACL rebuild was a full year out?
Just out of curiosity, are there many top players who have had thatbop and came back as good as before?

The usual is 6-9 months. Bentancur and Dragusin seemed to take longer for some reason.

Van Nistelrooy, Baggio, Roy Keane, Xavi, Totti, Ibrahimovic, Shearer, Del Piero and van Dijk are a few who had them early or mid career and had no noticeable negative effect.

 

[DubaiSpur]

In ALL the 'we must have patience' discussions, the bit which is NOT ever considered is WHAT we're having patience FOR.

If a supporter wants a stronger, better version of non-possession, counter-attacking, wing-driven football (aka Brentord+) then power to them and their desires; he would most certainly deserve patience.

If a supporter wants us to play a more possesion-based game which involves passing and moving in the 'need a passing 8' model, then they should be aware that the SIGNS are Thomas Frank does not want to play that style.

Well, the caveat here is that supporters often think they want a possession-heavy style of play, but then moan when we implement one.

I remember the jibes thrown AVB's way for prioritising possession - I don't think I've ever seen more use of the word 'sterile', outside of a laboratory. Same for late-stage Poch, when people would bemoan our tippy-tappy, sideways passing.

The early and peak Poch sides did *not* rely on possession. They could certainly use it to their advantage, but the biggest strength those sides had was their absolutely monstrous press, which absolutely smothered teams in an era before everyone adapted to high pressing.

In this style, passing for passing's sake wasn't really a thing. In many cases, passing it around was done with the hope that we would lose it, because then we could counterpress and hopefully win it in a high area with the opposition out of position.

So, folks need to be clear on what they want, too - it's easy to say Frank should prioritise more possession, without understanding what that means, and how much that goes against what even our greatest manager since Bill Nick (imo) wanted to do tactically.

 

[thfcsteff]

Well, the caveat here is that supporters often think they want a possession-heavy style of play, but then moan when we implement one.

I remember the jibes thrown AVB's way for prioritising possession - I don't think I've ever seen more use of the word 'sterile', outside of a laboratory. Same for late-stage Poch, when people would bemoan our tippy-tappy, sideways passing.

The early and peak Poch sides did *not* rely on possession. They could certainly use it to their advantage, but the biggest strength those sides had was their absolutely monstrous press, which absolutely smothered teams in an era before everyone adapted to high pressing.

In this style, passing for passing's sake wasn't really a thing. In many cases, passing it around was done with the hope that we would lose it, because then we could counterpress and hopefully win it in a high area with the opposition out of position.

So, folks need to be clear on what they want, too - it's easy to say Frank should prioritise more possession, without understanding what that means, and how much that goes against what even our greatest manager since Bill Nick (imo) wanted to do tactically.

I'll be clear on my part.

Yes, we did use young aggressive pressing, but we also had a lot of possession in games and (critically) players who could both play a passing game too.
The high-press was a key in those early days, yet once we got the ball we kept it and used it. Very similar to Emirates Marketing Project in their prime.

What I want is something akin to peak-Poch-meets-later-Poch. Which is absolutely possession football along with an aggressive press. Ironically, the reason we did not manage to ever win the league under him is precisely because he could never break down the 'smaller' sides, who would sit deep and exploit that part of our game/challenge us to pick the lock; Eriksen could sometimes.

Sir Bill? He (like Arthur Rowe) wanted fast, fluid quick touch football built through midfield. Now, you can say that isn't necessarily 'keeping the ball', but it is possessing it and using the bloody thing to entertain, to attack, to score goals and try to win football. So in THAT sense it is possession football. It is not dissimilar at all to what Poch wanted, and did.

Poch's average possession stats were 57% with us (average stats generated by some ai thing).

Postecoglu's possession average was 60-62% (average stats generated by some ai thing).

Frank with Brentford in the Prem was approximately 41 to 48% possession (average stats generated by some ai thing). With us it is currently 53%.
We are currently averaging 9.5 shots per game, our lowest in the Prem since 2003/04.

There are doubtless more of these things to be found and used whichever way anyone wants (context is crucial for sure)...

 

[Bishop]

Important differential here. I (and it appears you too) believe football needs passers/passing 8s. I don't see anything in the system he appears to favour which necessarily requires that.

Having a player of this profile will elevate the football played even if not by design. The simple nature of having a player whose primary skillset is the quality of their passing and the way that passing will interweave with the movements of others will by definition improve us.

People ask all the time how come Sunderland are able to play better football than us consistently, I look at their setup and I see Xhaka and I say of course they can when I think of our options. I know as a group due to our Arsenal hatred we won't accept what he can do and his quality as a player but he's a conductor, a spreader of the ball. He switches things, he slows the game down when it needs to be slowed, he speeds it up when it needs tempo. That's the player we do not have and it's the player we MUST have with Frank or without Frank.

Simply adding a player of this type will have a bigger impact imo than trying to train these players into a play style they either don't have the attributes for or they don't have the ability to perform well.

I believe having the player profiles and suitable attributes is more important than whoever the coach is. If we want control and passing quality in midfield then we are going to have a get a player in who has those qualities.

 

[braineclipse]

Another game I wasn't able to watch having also missed the Arsenal game. Another game I won't bother watching back. Reading comments on here, listening to the pod I get a feeling of what I would see if I did.

 

[Lemonade Money]

Here's the thing.

In ALL the 'we must have patience' discussions, the bit which is NOT ever considered is WHAT we're having patience FOR.

Teething problems. If there weren't any teething problems, you wouldn't need any patience.
Without any patience, you might never see the end goal. Without seeing the end goal, you won't know WHAT you were having patience for.

Having said all that, I think we backed the wrong horse in the first place.

 

[thfcsteff]

Having a player of this profile will elevate the football played even if not by design. The simple nature of having a player whose primary skillset is the quality of their passing and the way that passing will interweave with the movements of others will by definition improve us.

People ask all the time how come Sunderland are able to play better football than us consistently, I look at their setup and I see Xhaka and I say of course they can when I think of our options. I know as a group due to our Arsenal hatred we won't accept what he can do and his quality as a player but he's a conductor, a spreader of the ball. He switches things, he slows the game down when it needs to be slowed, he speeds it up when it needs tempo. That's the player we do not have and it's the player we MUST have with Frank or without Frank.

Simply adding a player of this type will have a bigger impact imo than trying to train these players into a play style they either don't have the attributes for or they don't have the ability to perform well.

I believe having the player profiles and suitable attributes is more important than whoever the coach is. If we want control and passing quality in midfield then we are going to have a get a player in who has those qualities.

Look, you're arguing the toss with someone who agrees we NEED THIS. What I am saying is that all the evidence thus far suggest he does not WANT one, and even if he has one, he will find a way to under-utilize it. BTW, the player we currently rely on the dictate our tempo is Romero, of course, you'd like at least another with that skillset and one who plays in the middle of the park.

Again, to your boldface line above, the coach is the reason such a player gets signed!

 

[braineclipse]

I'll be clear on my part.

Yes, we did use young aggressive pressing, but we also had a lot of possession in games and (critically) players who could both play a passing game too.
The high-press was a key in those early days, yet once we got the ball we kept it and used it. Very similar to Emirates Marketing Project in their prime.

What I want is something akin to peak-Poch-meets-later-Poch. Which is absolutely possession football along with an aggressive press. Ironically, the reason we did not manage to ever win the league under him is precisely because he could never break down the 'smaller' sides, who would sit deep and exploit that part of our game/challenge us to pick the lock; Eriksen could sometimes.

Sir Bill? He (like Arthur Rowe) wanted fast, fluid quick touch football built through midfield. Now, you can say that isn't necessarily 'keeping the ball', but it is possessing it and using the bloody thing to entertain, to attack, to score goals and try to win football. So in THAT sense it is possession football. It is not dissimilar at all to what Poch wanted, and did.

Poch's average possession stats were 57% with us (average stats generated by some ai thing).

Postecoglu's possession average was 60-62% (average stats generated by some ai thing).

Frank with Brentford in the Prem was approximately 41 to 48% possession (average stats generated by some ai thing). With us it is currently 53%.
We are currently averaging 9.5 shots per game, our lowest in the Prem since 2003/04.

There are doubtless more of these things to be found and used whichever way anyone wants (context is crucial for sure)...

Good posts Steff.

I don't care much about having a large share of possession. I care about what we do with the ball when we have it. If we can become good enough with the ball when we have it we'll end up dominating possession against quite a few teams as a byproduct, because other teams will ceede possession to us.

But if we have 40% possession and are really good when we do that's great.

I have said I want us to improve our possession game, but I just mean what we do in possession, not necessarily upping the amount of possession (though that will typically follow). Very much agree with you, entertain, attack, try to score goals and win. Not waiting for the other lot and all that.

 

[braineclipse]

Here's the thing.

In ALL the 'we must have patience' discussions, the bit which is NOT ever considered is WHAT we're having patience FOR.

If a supporter wants a stronger, better version of non-possession, counter-attacking, wing-driven football (aka Brentord+) then power to them and their desires; he would most certainly deserve patience.

If a supporter wants us to play a more possesion-based game which involves passing and moving in the 'need a passing 8' model, then they should be aware that the SIGNS are Thomas Frank does not want to play that style.

If a supporter thinks the return of Deki will make a large difference to the season, I think it is worth looking at what evidence there is this will happen.

It is about so much more than simply 'doing the right thing' or 'whether we're winning or losing'. Nothing is ever that direct obviously, but I do think it is worth considering the above before arriving at conclusions about the manager's status.

Some signs in the Brentford and Slavia games that Frank also wants more attacking football. Said this before, but trying to implement that mid season with two games a week, injuries, need for rotation, little time on the training pitch will be a swimming upstream kind of exercise.

You said on the pod we were back to the horseshoe. That I don't get. Why play Gray and Simons as two of three midfielders if we're not going to try to play through the middle?

 

[harr1984]

Teething problems. If there weren't any teething problems, you wouldn't need any patience.
Without any patience, you might never see the end goal. Without seeing the end goal, you won't know WHAT you were having patience for.

Having said all that, I think we backed the wrong horse in the first place.

Teething problems I would hope to see at this stage, but this isn't teething problems. Because you would then be seeing a semblance of a style of play, it's just not all perfectly being executed yet. We've seen twenty odd games of Franks team and no one here can understand what we are trying to achieve with the football beyond throw it in the box - and if that is his genuine tactic then he's in trouble, it's not going to work here. And to compound the lack of football, our defending is terrible. Right now the 'Give him time' comments are just coming across as blind faith, there has been next to nothing being shown for what we are giving time for.

Agree we backed the wrong horse, I think we dropped the ball not going for Glasner. But we are where we are now, I hope he can turn it around. Can't shake this nagging feeling that the players aren't really buying into him though, hope I'm wrong....

 

[thfcsteff]

Some signs in the Brentford and Slavia games that Frank also wants more attacking football. Said this before, but trying to implement that mid season with two games a week, injuries, need for rotation, little time on the training pitch will be a swimming upstream kind of exercise.

You said on the pod we were back to the horseshoe. That I don't get. Why play Gray and Simons as two of three midfielders if we're not going to try to play through the middle?

For me, it has to be a consistent trajectory at least, and it isn't.

It looked to me personally as though we tried to play using the middle in the first 30 mins, but due to the aggressiveness of Forest and our lack of cogently coached attacking patterns of play, we ended up running into walls and alleyways. This looked to lead us to abandoning that and instead trying to look long and go wide.
I think the next phase of the issue is that Frank is talking about playing more attacking players but without any further development on how they can work situations together. He is relying on them (it appears) to conjure when on the ball. I hope I'm wrong, and I hope there are deeper patterns I'm not seeing. Would love a sign or an education as to what I'm not seeing (and I mean that, if someone reading this can tell me where the attacking structures are - maybe misfiring but can be seen in shape - then I am all eyes).

 

[braineclipse]

For me, it has to be a consistent trajectory at least, and it isn't.

It looked to me personally as though we tried to play using the middle in the first 30 mins, but due to the aggressiveness of Forest and our lack of cogently coached attacking patterns of play, we ended up running into walls and alleyways. This looked to lead us to abandoning that and instead trying to look long and go wide.
I think the next phase of the issue is that Frank is talking about playing more attacking players but without any further development on how they can work situations together. He is relying on them (it appears) to conjure when on the ball. I hope I'm wrong, and I hope there are deeper patterns I'm not seeing. Would love a sign or an education as to what I'm not seeing (and I mean that, if someone reading this can tell me where the attacking structures are - maybe misfiring but can be seen in shape - then I am all eyes).

Said this before, but if we're trying to implement a more attacking style of play mid season it's at best going to take time and be a bumpy ride. For a while.

Being able to do so against teams that end up being more accommodating in that regard (Slavia, Brentford) and struggling against a team that is set up to stop that (Dyche team with a very strong midfield) isn't surprising.

Question for me being does Frank stick with that or revert back to defensive solidity first, horseshoe and set pieces when the going gets tough (not thinking this specific game, but over some games)? Is getting better at that the plan and focus now, or is that a "luxury" that can be scrapped.

If he scraps that the path to the kind of football we both want to see is imo either an absolutely storming January window or next season - giving Frank a preseason to work on that over time. There imo isn't a way to develop that way of playing mid season that doesn't include sticking with it when the going gets tougher.

 

[thfcsteff]

Said this before, but if we're trying to implement a more attacking style of play mid season it's at best going to take time and be a bumpy ride. For a while.

Being able to do so against teams that end up being more accommodating in that regard (Slavia, Brentford) and struggling against a team that is set up to stop that (Dyche team with a very strong midfield) isn't surprising.

Question for me being does Frank stick with that or revert back to defensive solidity first, horseshoe and set pieces when the going gets tough (not thinking this specific game, but over some games)? Is getting better at that the plan and focus now, or is that a "luxury" that can be scrapped.

If he scraps that the path to the kind of football we both want to see is imo either an absolutely storming January window or next season - giving Frank a preseason to work on that over time. There imo isn't a way to develop that way of playing mid season that doesn't include sticking with it when the going gets tougher.

You're not wrong at all.
Again, for me, it comes down to whether he will ever want that playing style or not.

 

[Junior19]

• Miyagi: Now, ready?
• Daniel: Yeah, I guess so.
• Miyagi: [sighs] Daniel-san, must talk.
• [they both kneel]
• Miyagi: Walk on road, hm? Walk right side, safe. Walk left side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later
• [makes squish gesture]
• Miyagi: get the squish just like grape. Here, karate, same thing. Either you karate do "yes" or karate do "no." You karate do "guess so,"
• [makes squish gesture]
• Miyagi: just like grape. Understand?

Lots and lots of infinite wisdom from Mr. Miyagi. Also applies to football. Right now we're in the middle of the road, trucks blazing down on us with full headlights. By the looks on the players faces yesterday they don't even know which road they are on, nor which way they are going, let alone if they should be on the left or the right side.

There are so many things that worries me right now. We have two very good central defenders, who have exceptional skillsets for certain ways of playing. They are however, not that exceptional in other areas. Not bad by any standard, but not at their best. So I'm confused. Are we planning to replace Van de Ven and Romero with Dan Burn-style defenders? Or are we doing a reverse Dier on them, by shoehorning them into a system not designed to utilize their strenghts? ( I'm being more then a little unfair to them, I know. They are quite a bit more suited to a low block defence than Dier was to the extreme high line Ange had him play!)

So what I'm most worried about is that Thomas Frank won't be decisive enough, that he will be tempted to walk in the middle of the road.

Now, I know very well which side of the road I want us to walk. I'd absolutely hate it for us to go totally to the other side. It is not our way, it is not what we're known for, and we've tried it several times. We hated it, more or less to a man.

I hope Thomas Frank can find it in him to come up with a system that utilizes those strengths that we still have in our squad in a way that points towards my side of the road, and that shows me that there will be a real place for a player like Maddison in this team and that we once again will be a place where the opponents may be dazzled and dizzy from our brilliant passing, rather then baffled and amused by our softness and headless-chicken-impersonations. If he shows the direction and ambition, I'd be prepared to forgive plenty of mistakes and sub-optimal results on the way.
Should he chose the other side, I'd hate it, but I'd understand it and to a certain extent support it. And if it brought success, I'd give him credit where due.

But right now I don't understand what he is trying to do, and that big truck heading down the road at us is getting rather big, rather fast.

 

[spurspinter1]

Not seen us play in a while but what was notable was a distinct lack of chemistry. What players could we say actually linked up well on Sunday?

I was quite hungover watching it on Sunday and it definitely seemed like the players were feeling it as much as I was. It was a fairly brutal watch, no misfortune whatsoever, just outperformed across the pitch.

 

[Bishop]

Look, you're arguing the toss with someone who agrees we NEED THIS. What I am saying is that all the evidence thus far suggest he does not WANT one, and even if he has one, he will find a way to under-utilize it. BTW, the player we currently rely on the dictate our tempo is Romero, of course, you'd like at least another with that skillset and one who plays in the middle of the park.

Again, to your boldface line above, the coach is the reason such a player gets signed!

I'm not so sure we can say he doesn't want one, we did try to sign Gibbs-White who plays at his best as a CM and somewhat has those qualities. We don't know exactly how he was planned to be used but considering we already had Maddison who was fit at that time and Kulu coming back CM might well have been the plan for him as he's otherwise not a great AM.

 

[glorygloryeze]

That has to be truly one of the worst performances and results in the PL era - and it's not like we haven't had a few bad ones, even recently.

We had an extra two days over them in terms of prep time and the fact they played in Europe aay on Thursday.
We looked like the team that had played Europa on Thursday even though we had played in CL AT HOME TWO DAYS BEFOREHAND.
We got absolutely schooled by a Sean Dyche team. We have lost the odd game here or there to him in the past, but NEVER been absolutely scholed by him. Utterly embarrassing.

Poor attacking movements, Kudus hogging the ball and not releasing it when men were free was the most annoying. Subs that made little sense (how did Porro and Richarlison stay on?? Full-backs of Porro and Davis against their attackers??). Players jogging around as though THEY were 2 goals up and as though THEY had less time to prepare for the game than Forest.
If the players are not actively trying to get Frank sacked then that actually is EVEN MORE EMBARRASSING for all of us. Never mind how clueless they looked, how about the minamalism in terms of effort, ability to pass the ball or even ability to control one??

I don't see where we as a club go from here. I guess all the years when we could have actually acted like a big club that wants to reach for the top have come home to roost. Never mind how good/bad Frank is as a coach it says something that when we had secured CL via that EL win, he was the manager that we hired. Would another big club who achieved CL do such a thing?
This follows on from hiring Ange, who whilst we should all be grateful that he got the trophy monkey off our backs, we have to ask how he got the job given where we were as a club.

I think we have to accept that in the football world we are really not attractive to those who have lofty ambitions and so hence the pickle we are in (e.g. who the bleep would want to join us in January and play under Frank as things stand??)
Back to the 90s here we go. Sigh