• 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

Spurs pre-season Perth, Australia

Personally, although I'm sure I am in a sizeable minority, I would sell Kane to fund a defensive rebuild (unless we can do it without selling him and still not compromise on quality). None of Sanchez/Dier/Davies/Tanganga are reliable CBs in this system and Romero is a bit of a liability (we need a calm presence, not hotheadedness and rash challenges). And I'd quite like to replace Richarlison if we could buy an Aguero-type in the box goal scorer, as we look like we will be playing high up the pitch with not a lot of space or time. (And if we keep Kane, then definitely replace Richarlison - I'd keep Son over Richarlison if only for the pace option that's useful in certain circumstances.)
 
Things didn't click, but this was our first real game with the new manager. Some things will take a few games.

But you could see there was a lot more energy and the pace of the passing was a lot better.

We probably had more shots today than we did in some months under the last couple of managers.

I'm glad we saw some bad errors at the back today. Should help push a few closer to the exit door.
 
Im not making a case here for Lo Celso because lifes too short on here, but its interesting how a change in football and more attacking intent to players strengths makes players look more in their wheelhouse. Maybe football that gives high risk players more chances to thrive helps than the turgid "you have one touch and you better not fcuk up" fear factor stuff we have played over the last 3 years
 
Grays_1890 said:
Im not making a case here for Lo Celso because lifes too short on here, but its interesting how a change in football and more attacking intent to players strengths makes players look more in their wheelhouse. Maybe football that gives high risk players more chances to thrive helps than the turgid "you have one touch and you better not fcuk up" fear factor stuff we have played over the last 3 years
Click to expand...

Always felt GLC would suit Ange's tactics. Question for him is whether he's had enough and its time for a permanent change

Also, if we need 4 options for number 8s in the squad, I'd say that Maddison and Bentancur are nailed on, and Sarr is probably another certainty too. Perhaps Devine is a 5th choice?

That leaves 1 spot remaining. Part depends on whether Skipp and Bisouma are viewed as 6s or 8s once Ange gets used to them and the system beds in, but I dont see either of those leaving
 
Grays_1890 said:
Im not making a case here for Lo Celso because lifes too short on here, but its interesting how a change in football and more attacking intent to players strengths makes players look more in their wheelhouse. Maybe football that gives high risk players more chances to thrive helps than the turgid "you have one touch and you better not fcuk up" fear factor stuff we have played over the last 3 years
Click to expand...

It's definitely the case that some players thrive with certain styles of play and not with others. I think if Ange intends to compress play into the opposition's half as much as possible it suits players like Lo Celso who have good one touch passing and movement in tight spaces. And looks as if there will be more passing options with players making short runs in behind. However, I think it might not suit players like Kulu as much, as he tends to take more touches and is a bit slower with the ball - partly because he is so one footed.
 
One thing which made me happy was in the first half when we got a free kick on the edge of their box. Expecting Kane to once again to take it and hit the wall, nice to see that Maddison took it and i hope it stays that way. Kane is a GREAT player but his free kick taking is crap ( and that is being nice).
 
Just home.

Second half was a world of difference to the first.

Davies, Udogie and Perisic worked really well together on the left.
Richarlison should have had a hat trick.
Lo Celso looked good.
 
I don't understand why everyone thinks our defense played badly. I'm not saying our defense is sorted and it does need strengthening, but we only gave up 4 shots the entire game even using two different defensive lineups. The fact that we conceded 3 goals from these 4 shots is more of a statistical anomaly than anything.
 
ringo said:
Personally, although I'm sure I am in a sizeable minority, I would sell Kane to fund a defensive rebuild (unless we can do it without selling him and still not compromise on quality). None of Sanchez/Dier/Davies/Tanganga are reliable CBs in this system and Romero is a bit of a liability (we need a calm presence, not hotheadedness and rash challenges). And I'd quite like to replace Richarlison if we could buy an Aguero-type in the box goal scorer, as we look like we will be playing high up the pitch with not a lot of space or time. (And if we keep Kane, then definitely replace Richarlison - I'd keep Son over Richarlison if only for the pace option that's useful in certain circumstances.)
Click to expand...
I would sell Kane too to fund a defensive rebuild. I know it is only one game, but if the second half showed us anything, it's that with this system and these players we can get goals without him. Even with Richie in the lineup, who I am sure will get us 15-20 goals once he shakes his hoodoo.
 
alekaras said:
I don't understand why everyone thinks our defense played badly. I'm not saying our defense is sorted and it does need strengthening, but we only gave up 4 shots the entire game even using two different defensive lineups. The fact that we conceded 3 goals from these 4 shots is more of a statistical anomaly than anything.
Click to expand...

We controlled most of the game.
The few times our defence needed to do some sort of job, they made mistakes most of the time.
 
Kandi1977 said:
Based on this i'd find it incredibly difficult to pick a squad, let alone a starting 11! Midfield and attack look loaded with options, and I think pretty much all of them played well. Defence on the other hand...
Royal and Udogie look nailed on starters though.
Click to expand...
This was the really great thing about this match: the "second XI" came in and there was barely a drop in performance. How many times have we seen a complete drop-off when the second string is on the pitch. In this match, it wasn't just a continuation from the first half, the performance actually improved! Will be very difficult to predict the starting lineup. Even Kane isn't nailed on, going by how much more free-flowing and creative we were in the second half!
 
ringo said:
It's definitely the case that some players thrive with certain styles of play and not with others. I think if Ange intends to compress play into the opposition's half as much as possible it suits players like Lo Celso who have good one touch passing and movement in tight spaces. And looks as if there will be more passing options with players making short runs in behind. However, I think it might not suit players like Kulu as much, as he tends to take more touches and is a bit slower with the ball - partly because he is so one footed.
Click to expand...
Wait…. You’re calling Kulu one footed but not Lo Celso?!?
 
alekaras said:
I don't understand why everyone thinks our defense played badly. I'm not saying our defense is sorted and it does need strengthening, but we only gave up 4 shots the entire game even using two different defensive lineups. The fact that we conceded 3 goals from these 4 shots is more of a statistical anomaly than anything.
Click to expand...

Look beyond stat's. Our defence was all over the place any time they attacked in the first half. But much better in the second.
 
alekaras said:
I don't understand why everyone thinks our defense played badly. I'm not saying our defense is sorted and it does need strengthening, but we only gave up 4 shots the entire game even using two different defensive lineups. The fact that we conceded 3 goals from these 4 shots is more of a statistical anomaly than anything.
Click to expand...

Their second goal. He should never be able to score from there.

screenshot_2023_07_18 _22.09.jpg
 
alekaras said:
I don't understand why everyone thinks our defense played badly. I'm not saying our defense is sorted and it does need strengthening, but we only gave up 4 shots the entire game even using two different defensive lineups. The fact that we conceded 3 goals from these 4 shots is more of a statistical anomaly than anything.
Click to expand...
Indeed…. The third was a lapse from Sanchez trying to play offside and the first two was us not getting out to a wide player after a corner kick and giving them lots of time to pick out a cross.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back