• 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 CHELSEA - CAPITAL ONE CUP FINAL

Overall Chelsea have better players than us. But they didn't play that well today. Neither did we unfortunately.

Where Chelsea are much superior is the gamesmanship. player like Ivanovic and Costa are streetwise masters of niggly, dirty fouls on the blindside fo the ref or away from the ball. They know how to rile players and knock them psychologically off of their game, they also know how to slyly injure players.

Costa deliberately ran into the back of Walker, injured him, and then, once he was injured, tried to isolate him one on one. Costa also stamped on Rose towards the end when they collided and ended up on the ground -by which time the ball had moved on and the ref wasn't watching. Ivanovic barged straight into one of our players - I think it was Mason, without any intention of playing the ball - no booking. He pulled Dembele's shirt in the box.

It is constant niggling like that from players that gets a response from the opposition, then bookings and psychological advantage.

Allied to a high level of skill and it is really difficult to play against. (Interestingly Lamela knows how to look after himself, the odd stray elbow, misplaced foot etc. Dier too a bit. i think it comes from playing on the continent.)
 
DubaiSpur said:
There's no doubt that Lamela is just as skilled technically as Eriksen, as in he can do magnificently outre things with the ball at his feet if he chooses to. In my opinion, he's let down horribly by his decision-making - he rarely gets into the positions where his technical skills can do damage to the opposition, and when he does he usually just dribbles into a blind alley or something. So I guess I'm just using a very narrow definition of 'technically skilled', if that makes any sense at all.
Click to expand...

I hear you. He has some party tricks, like Bentley's stepovers, that may come off well in training. Other than the cheeky rabona a few months ago, I'd much rather have him doing the simple things well.
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
Costa also gouged Bentaleb twice in one incident, but the ref gave nothing
Click to expand...

I bet you that there was lot more that we didn't see. I've played against players like that, and it is tough to focus on your game and not get involved, especially if you don't get any support from the officials.
 
ringo said:
Overall Chelsea have better players than us. But they didn't play that well today. Neither did we unfortunately.

Where Chelsea are much superior is the gamesmanship. player like Ivanovic and Costa are streetwise masters of niggly, dirty fouls on the blindside fo the ref or away from the ball. They know how to rile players and knock them psychologically off of their game, they also know how to slyly injure players.

Costa deliberately ran into the back of Walker, injured him, and then, once he was injured, tried to isolate him one on one. Costa also stamped on Rose towards the end when they collided and ended up on the ground -by which time the ball had moved on and the ref wasn't watching. Ivanovic barged straight into one of our players - I think it was Mason, without any intention of playing the ball - no booking. He pulled Dembele's shirt in the box.

It is constant niggling like that from players that gets a response from the opposition, then bookings and psychological advantage.

Allied to a high level of skill and it is really difficult to play against. (Interestingly Lamela knows how to look after himself, the odd stray elbow, misplaced foot etc. Dier too a bit. i think it comes from playing on the continent.)
Click to expand...

yeah, they are experts at that, it's an obvious hole in our armoury, we need to be more professional
 
What I like about the 'Special One' is that he adapts his tactics beautifully. He's anti-football, but a winner. He would have seen how everything goes through Kane and he responds by playing three, big powerful defenders. There was always one, sometimes two on his hammer. Hhe would have also seen how Eriksen and Chadli have been out of goal scoring form of late. Townsend and Lamela no threat and our fullbacks rarely score. Great tactics which squeezed the life out of or forward play. Simple, but effective. As someone stated earlier, Fibreglass barely went over the half way line. I actually forgot that the was on the pitch at one stage.
 
I was stuck with Alan Shearer's commentary. What a knob that man is. You would think that after so many years at the top level he would have some insight, anything vaguely interesting, or indeed relevant to say. No, he had nothing. Really spoilt my enjoyment of the match from the off.
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
What I like about the 'Special One' is that he adapts his tactics beautifully. He's anti-football, but a winner. He would have seen how everything goes through Kane and he responds by playing three, big powerful defenders. There was always one, sometimes two on his hammer. Hhe would have also seen how Eriksen and Chadli have been out of goal scoring form of late. Townsend and Lamela no threat and our fullbacks rarely score. Great tactics which squeezed the life out of or forward play. Simple, but effective. As someone stated earlier, Fibreglass barely went over the half way line. I actually forgot that the was on the pitch at one stage.
Click to expand...

There's a reason he wins everything there is to win. He's painted as a pantomime villain by most of the football world, but he is truly brilliant when it comes to winning, winning decisively, and winning via the dark arts. And the pantomime villain act he puts on only aids in these pursuits.
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
What I like about the 'Special One' is that he adapts his tactics beautifully. He's anti-football, but a winner. He would have seen how everything goes through Kane and he responds by playing three, big powerful defenders. There was always one, sometimes two on his hammer. Hhe would have also seen how Eriksen and Chadli have been out of goal scoring form of late. Townsend and Lamela no threat and our fullbacks rarely score. Great tactics which squeezed the life out of or forward play. Simple, but effective. As someone stated earlier, Fibreglass barely went over the half way line. I actually forgot that the was on the pitch at one stage.
Click to expand...

You are right but I find it depressing that the best (and richly assembled) team in the country are happy to put ten men behind the ball against us. If it was us two goals ahead we would have been screaming for a third.
 
milo said:
You are right but I find it depressing that the best (and richly assembled) team in the country are happy to put ten men behind the ball against us. If it was us two goals ahead we would have been screaming for a third.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but only because there is no way on Earth this Spurs side can look comfortable defending a lead - the only time we're in our element is when we're attacking. It's a tactical weakness, not a real strength, imo. Morally, of course, it's a different story.
 
surprised towsend started as hes done nothing for most of the season

If you had offered me a cup final, Kane on track to score thirty goals,
in the chase for a champions league place, a settled style of play, improvement in the core group of players
and sorting out which players the manager wanted and those which were surplus to requirements at the beginning of the season,
I would have betten your hand off.
 
milo said:
You are right but I find it depressing that the best (and richly assembled) team in the country are happy to put ten men behind the ball against us. If it was us two goals ahead we would have been screaming for a third.
Click to expand...

speak for yourself, I'd have been screaming at us to get it in the corner and to go down feigning death at every opportunity
 
milo said:
You are right but I find it depressing that the best (and richly assembled) team in the country are happy to put ten men behind the ball against us. If it was us two goals ahead we would have been screaming for a third.
Click to expand...


Absolutely, but there you have it, why didn't Poch respond? Like AVB and Harry before him, Poch just seems to stick with what he knows, even when it's clearly not working. Bringing Soldado on, was too little, too late. Eriksen also needed to play closer to Kane. He was too isolated up front. When Eriksen started coming deep for the ball, I knew the game was up.
 
milo said:
You are right but I find it depressing that the best (and richly assembled) team in the country are happy to put ten men behind the ball against us. If it was us two goals ahead we would have been screaming for a third.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine it was an easy decision for them to do so. Smart, sensible, and routine. We could have played until next week and never scored.
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
What I like about the 'Special One' is that he adapts his tactics beautifully. He's anti-football, but a winner. He would have seen how everything goes through Kane and he responds by playing three, big powerful defenders. There was always one, sometimes two on his hammer. Hhe would have also seen how Eriksen and Chadli have been out of goal scoring form of late. Townsend and Lamela no threat and our fullbacks rarely score. Great tactics which squeezed the life out of or forward play. Simple, but effective. As someone stated earlier, Fibreglass barely went over the half way line. I actually forgot that the was on the pitch at one stage.
Click to expand...

Just why I say I felt it was all but inevitable we'd lose today. Unless ours are all right on their game, our attacking play can be painfully one- and two-dimensional. Stop Kane, stop Eriksen and, nine times out of ten, you stop Spurs. Mourinho's shown everyone exactly how and, as a result, we've done next to nothing in the final third all game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back