• 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 v Brentford OMT***

Bishop said:
I think the reality is he's an underdeveloped CM who needs some serious time in training to learn how to play his role. As it is he plays like the best kid in a 5 a side going up against semi pros. His usually tricks and running just doesn't work at this level. Given the choice you suggested I'd possibly do the same but I don't think Bergvall is any more suited to the AM role honestly.
Click to expand...

As a senior pro, Gallagher is more suited to be able to adapt his game. Since he's not creative anyway, playing in centre mid how he plays wouldn't effect his game at all.

Bergvall has very obvious limitations but also strengths. He can carry the ball and looks to play forward before anything else.

Having Gallagher further forwards didn't make sense during pre season and didn't today. Like all young players, play them where they can cause the least harm and do the least damage. I'd include Grey in that, he's learning his trade as a midfielder but plays right back
 
slimen75 said:
If all the bad habits from last year are still there, it means the players from last season aren't up to the required level.
Personally, I think Tel, Richarlison, and Bergvall are overrated.
The only times I’ve seen Richarlison play well were on the left wing back when he was at Everton.
Bergvall loses possession too often—we saw that with the second goal.
Tel is repetitive; it’s always the same dribble and the same feint. He takes ages to put a cross in, giving the Bees' entire defense time to get back into position.

Moore squandered his chances, but I don't hold it against him; he's still young.
Personally, I would have preferred a 3-5-2—I’ve said it before: we need to pack the midfield; that’s the foundation of football.
The proof is that we got overrun.

Three top-class center-backs.
Two good wing-backs.
Two box-to-box midfielders with a creative number 10 ahead of them, and two strikers to put pressure on the opposing defense.

But that’s just my opinion
Click to expand...
Mostly agree.
A couple of observations -
Moore is only young, yes. He's 19.
But Tel is only 21 and Bergvall 20. They are both still young too.
Tel - I don't see it.
Bergvall - clearly some ability, but he needs to work out what he is.
 
Ultimately it was a poor lineup and a deserved result. Van Hecke-Senesi, as a pairing, are two passers - both good at threading the ball upfield, but both slow and weak in the air. Brentford immediately played balls into the channels and pinned us back continuously, and we never recovered. Robertson out left was defensively weak, Gray out right was isolated because Moore looked too nervous to track back consistently, leaving Gray often doubled up two against one.

De Zerbi wanted a squad, he's getting it. But now he has no excuses - he owns the poor decisions, and today's lineup was a very poor decision.

Other minor tidbits -

- Kinsky needs to come out more - too often rooted to his line on corners and crosses. Needs to dominate the box more to help the team out when they're under pressure aerially.

- Richy - needs binning, but we knew that.

- Bergvall/Gallagher - think you'll struggle playing them two together. Needs to be one or the other, both together means a lot of positional indiscipline as they drift around and leave yawning gaps in the middle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back