for criticism, but an area of the team that seems to be getting overlooked is the midfield. Bentancur, Maddison, Sarr and Bissouma have all been pretty poor this season. None seem capable of taking any game by the scruff of the neck and bossing the centre of the park. All 4/10s best for the season in my book.
I am not even sure what the best midfield is anymore. Ill discipline and just general passive performances from all four of them have not helped. Yesterday it was crying out for one/two of them to get in amongst the Wolves midfield. Start to win some 50/50s, but they mostly were nowhere to be seen, especially 2nd half. Maddison came on, but contributed next to nothing. The whole four of them seem incredibly weak, not up for the fight. And their service to Solanke is non existent. He is feeding off scraps.
Next season this is another area that needs addressing as a matter of urgency. Need a few strong engines in there. Players that don`t mind getting a few knocks and bruises. I think yesterday, I cannot remember a 50/50 Spurs actually won in the middle of the park.
There is going to be a huge job for any new incoming manager, whoever it is. Levy is going to have to open up the pursestrings again for another huge spend I suspect.
COYS
The defence has rightfully come in
posted 2 days, 17 hours ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 2 hours, 44 minutes ago
We do need to improve the squad but I'm not going to fully write off any players until they play under another manager, apart from Werner.
We've pretty much transitioned to a whole new back line in the last couple of years or so. I refuse to believe it's worse with these players now than it was with Sanchez and Dier leading it, and yet we've been conceding goals for fun for the past year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our woeful defensive record has nothing to do with that backline. As you say, it's a tactical issue. Maybe we're short on a really commanding centre back that'll really tower over everyone and take care of set pieces, because, despite his height, VDV isn't great in the air. Then there's the difficulty in determining just how good Porro and Udogie are at defending. Is it the system that's exposing them? They can't be in two places at once. Or do they just both naturally switch off defensively when it matters.
It's a real struggle to work out how much of it is Ange and how much of it is personnel. Either way, the one thing you can be sure of is that we're leaking goals, or at least golden chances, greater than any spurs side I can ever remember, yet our manager isn't going to change a thing. Let's just think about that. So if we lose 3-4 at home, Ange wants us to score more to win 5-4 rather than stop those 4 going in in the first place. I can't get my head around that. If that's what he's saying doesn't need to change then what the feck are we even doing? What are we hoping the unchangeable changes into?
I think we're all sitting here waiting for the penny to drop. We're all hoping that he has this grand masterplan which will see us score more and be more robust in defence but does he even have that? Does he even want that? I'm confused as to what his goal is because after every defeat we get a really vague message like "that's who we are mate". No reporter is asking him if his ultimate goal is to score more or concede less? That would give us a better idea of his priorities.
The biggest problem I have is that players aren't held to account for defensive frailties. Where is the message that conceding goals and chances isn't tolerated? It seems to me that Ange never really talks about mistakes at the back. He always talks about being wasteful up top, which is crazy. We have one of the best numbers in the league going forward. We all know what the problem is but defence is his blind spot.
What worries me more than anything is that he's said time and again he won't change a thing. How can a manager say that with the run we're on? If we don't change then we won't turn this around. What is he doing? Waiting for Levy to write the cheques for a queue of the best players in world football? That's the only way his football can be successful. On our budget, pragmatism is essential. That's why the lower down the league you go, the more teams will sit in and protect. Ange plays Madrid football without Madrid players. It can't ever work.
Ange is just Russell Martin with a better squad. There's absolutely no difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even though we scored from a corner kick, I'm not very convinced we work much on them. I think it's more a case of just hit the ball into the box and hope. The free kicks are even worse. Our players just decide on the spot to play it short sometimes or pass it around, as if a free kick is an extension of having possession of the ball mid flow, when it should be a chance to put a dangerous ball into the box to give yourself more chance of scoring. I said before, you see how Wolves worked their free kick and you know it's something they did in training. We never do free kicks like that or give the impression we do any training on them.
It has me thinking it points to a wider problem of Ange not putting enough emphasis on details in training, which includes the overall defending. I don't want to believe an experienced manager can be that negligent and clueless when it comes to this stuff but if he's only been managing in leagues where you can probably get away with it, then maybe it's true?
posted 2 days, 16 hours ago
Spurtle,
Completely agree. It speaks of a certain arrogance I’d associate with those managers too long in the tooth to believe that someone younger might have some answers. He might be new to British football but he’s nearly 60. That’s old enough to dismiss new ideas. His dismissal of the very notion of a set piece coach reminds me of Sam Allardyce whining about not getting a top job because he’s English, rather than it actually being about the fact he plays such direct, old fashioned football. At least Big Sam was open to data. Ange seems dismissive of everything he hasn’t come up with himself. He often seems really offended by reporters questioning his approach and that right there is his whole approach summed up. That’s why he won’t change. A strong, single-minded approach when you’re winning is perfect. When you’re losing it’s suicide.
I just can’t see this changing with a manager that won’t change.
posted 2 days, 16 hours ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 19 minutes ago
Spurtle,
Completely agree. It speaks of a certain arrogance I’d associate with those managers too long in the tooth to believe that someone younger might have some answers. He might be new to British football but he’s nearly 60. That’s old enough to dismiss new ideas. His dismissal of the very notion of a set piece coach reminds me of Sam Allardyce whining about not getting a top job because he’s English, rather than it actually being about the fact he plays such direct, old fashioned football. At least Big Sam was open to data. Ange seems dismissive of everything he hasn’t come up with himself. He often seems really offended by reporters questioning his approach and that right there is his whole approach summed up. That’s why he won’t change. A strong, single-minded approach when you’re winning is perfect. When you’re losing it’s suicide.
I just can’t see this changing with a manager that won’t change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes there is something of that old school arrogance about him wanting to stick to his guns, and if you've only succeeded in crappy leagues then you're not going to think you need to adapt your style. A smarter, better manager would be open to it.
The more you think about our appointment of Ange - success only in Championship or worse standards of leagues, no experience in strong European leagues, refusal to adapt a style, the more you wonder how we arrived at this decision. Other than Levy being incompetent on the football decisions side of things of course.
posted 2 days, 15 hours ago
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 19 minutes ago
Spurtle,
Completely agree. It speaks of a certain arrogance I’d associate with those managers too long in the tooth to believe that someone younger might have some answers. He might be new to British football but he’s nearly 60. That’s old enough to dismiss new ideas. His dismissal of the very notion of a set piece coach reminds me of Sam Allardyce whining about not getting a top job because he’s English, rather than it actually being about the fact he plays such direct, old fashioned football. At least Big Sam was open to data. Ange seems dismissive of everything he hasn’t come up with himself. He often seems really offended by reporters questioning his approach and that right there is his whole approach summed up. That’s why he won’t change. A strong, single-minded approach when you’re winning is perfect. When you’re losing it’s suicide.
I just can’t see this changing with a manager that won’t change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes there is something of that old school arrogance about him wanting to stick to his guns, and if you've only succeeded in crappy leagues then you're not going to think you need to adapt your style. A smarter, better manager would be open to it.
The more you think about our appointment of Ange - success only in Championship or worse standards of leagues, no experience in strong European leagues, refusal to adapt a style, the more you wonder how we arrived at this decision. Other than Levy being incompetent on the football decisions side of things of course.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah it’s a hard one because on the face of it, this should be a wise appointment. He was, after all, first choice option for Brighton whilst he was at Celtic. He said no and they ended up with Di Zerbi, which didn’t go too badly. They don’t tend to get appointments wrong so you have to assume he’s just not a good fit for us. Don’t know. I hope he still gets it right but this next run of fixtures look likely to be the final nails in his coffin.
The part I find bizarre is that for over a year now he’s been talking about long term growth, which is great, but shouldn’t we be seeing the fruits of that labour now? We’re 1.5 years in and we’ve regressed since he first joined. Surely that can’t be right? Where is this growth he’s promising and when does it translate into results. I just think he’s a bit of a salesman personally. That whole “when we succeed it’ll be glorious” stuff fast turning into the kind of bullshiiiiit spiel you hear when an estate agency trying to flog a tiny bedsit, says it’s cosy and intimate.
We’re getting outplayed by those above us and we’re getting out-smarted by those below. That’s the truth about Ange ball. We’ve all worked him out.
posted 2 days, 15 hours ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 19 minutes ago
Spurtle,
Completely agree. It speaks of a certain arrogance I’d associate with those managers too long in the tooth to believe that someone younger might have some answers. He might be new to British football but he’s nearly 60. That’s old enough to dismiss new ideas. His dismissal of the very notion of a set piece coach reminds me of Sam Allardyce whining about not getting a top job because he’s English, rather than it actually being about the fact he plays such direct, old fashioned football. At least Big Sam was open to data. Ange seems dismissive of everything he hasn’t come up with himself. He often seems really offended by reporters questioning his approach and that right there is his whole approach summed up. That’s why he won’t change. A strong, single-minded approach when you’re winning is perfect. When you’re losing it’s suicide.
I just can’t see this changing with a manager that won’t change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes there is something of that old school arrogance about him wanting to stick to his guns, and if you've only succeeded in crappy leagues then you're not going to think you need to adapt your style. A smarter, better manager would be open to it.
The more you think about our appointment of Ange - success only in Championship or worse standards of leagues, no experience in strong European leagues, refusal to adapt a style, the more you wonder how we arrived at this decision. Other than Levy being incompetent on the football decisions side of things of course.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah it’s a hard one because on the face of it, this should be a wise appointment. He was, after all, first choice option for Brighton whilst he was at Celtic. He said no and they ended up with Di Zerbi, which didn’t go too badly. They don’t tend to get appointments wrong so you have to assume he’s just not a good fit for us. Don’t know. I hope he still gets it right but this next run of fixtures look likely to be the final nails in his coffin.
The part I find bizarre is that for over a year now he’s been talking about long term growth, which is great, but shouldn’t we be seeing the fruits of that labour now? We’re 1.5 years in and we’ve regressed since he first joined. Surely that can’t be right? Where is this growth he’s promising and when does it translate into results. I just think he’s a bit of a salesman personally. That whole “when we succeed it’ll be glorious” stuff fast turning into the kind of bullshiiiiit spiel you hear when an estate agency trying to flog a tiny bedsit, says it’s cosy and intimate.
We’re getting outplayed by those above us and we’re getting out-smarted by those below. That’s the truth about Ange ball. We’ve all worked him out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't actually know that about Brighton wanting Ange so it sheds some light on the appointment. Brighton are a team who we have tried to copy in terms of using their data for recruitment. Levy obviously saw the club bring in these little known players and selling them for massive profits to the likes of Chelsea, and his eyes lit up with pound signs. Their current manager is hardly pulling up trees though so I'm not sure they always get it right.
We're no better now under Ange than we were at the end of last season. Same sort of form - regular losses and can only beat teams in terrible form. Back then we had our first team fit and available pretty much, this time we're missing some players. It doesn't really matter, the results are looking the same and this attacking football isn't even displayed half the time, as we get out-attacked by every other team.
I think we've been generous enough with the time Ange has been afforded but it's probably time for a new face and voice. Iraola strikes the most as being a Pochalike so could work.
posted 2 days, 13 hours ago
I think Spurs and Man Utd are probably the two best sides ever in the bottom half in terms of domination this season. Very strange season. It would be great to have a Spurs vs Man Utd EL final for winner takes the trophy and CL football.😂
posted 2 days, 11 hours ago
I am not as down on our midfield as Sandy is.
Bentancur put in a decent shift and Sarr always tries hard.
Maddison had only a Cameo appearance towards the end.
True, I could never understand why we bought Bissouma.
The squad as a whole has been weakened by injuries. And I am not sure that the manager is "inspirational".
The manager is where our problems start, I think.
posted 2 days, 9 hours ago
None of team is "set" during turnover of play. Nobody holds position properly which is why as i always say 3 passes and your in. That newcastle goal early in the season was the perfect example 3 passes and your in.
The midfield looks non-existant because of the gaps in the formation and they get played through.
The defensive are trying to set themselves but are forced to spread again leaving gaps to be played through or behind.
With the defense and midfield we are spread so far across and high we often get out numbered at full back and face lots of crosses because of that.
I used to love Jorge Sampaoli fantastic ideas but too complex he needs every player to buy in and be able to perform each role.
Big Ange is the opposite like a manager with a labotomy on the touchline. He is basic as you get. He wants us to get to the "red zone" a square area nearest the corner flag. Then get crosses or double up with inverted wing backs.
The defense is not as bad as it looks. Nor the midfield.
posted 2 days, 8 hours ago
Slightly off topic but I couldn’t be arrrsed to start a new article but I just watched the United v Newcastle game and everything about Newcastle’s approach is everything that’s wrong with Spurs under Ange. They took control and went 2-0 up and then spent the rest of the game stifling United with measured control. No desperation to score a third. They saw the game out professionally. We will never do that all the time Ange is here and it’s why we’ll never be anything other than inconsistent because of it. Call me old fashioned but you can have your philosophy but the point of football is to win games. If you entertain doing it, great but winning comes first. I can’t remember the last time we played a game like the one I’ve just seen where Newcastle didn’t give United a sniff. That’s how it’s done. Should have taken Howe when he was at Bournemouth.
posted 1 day, 19 hours ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 13 hours, 2 minutes ago
Slightly off topic but I couldn’t be arrrsed to start a new article but I just watched the United v Newcastle game and everything about Newcastle’s approach is everything that’s wrong with Spurs under Ange. They took control and went 2-0 up and then spent the rest of the game stifling United with measured control. No desperation to score a third. They saw the game out professionally. We will never do that all the time Ange is here and it’s why we’ll never be anything other than inconsistent because of it. Call me old fashioned but you can have your philosophy but the point of football is to win games. If you entertain doing it, great but winning comes first. I can’t remember the last time we played a game like the one I’ve just seen where Newcastle didn’t give United a sniff. That’s how it’s done. Should have taken Howe when he was at Bournemouth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They won that game for 3 simple reasons
1) United are shlt
2) They have a proper dynamic midfield who position themselves properly to defend their back 4 when needed, know when to press and are excellent in possession of the ball.
3) The FBs were excellent, First job was to defend, were never out of position against quick wingers and again, knew the right time (not EVERY TIME) to push up the field and join the attack.
I would hope Ange takes note, but he won't. Doesn't really matter as He'll see first hand what grown up / top level football looks like when they pump us at the weekend