Alderweireld: We discussed playing longer balls at half-time

mawspurs

Staff
Staff
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
26,731
Thread starter #1
Toby Alderweireld revealed that Tottenham Hotspur discussed going “a bit longer” with their play at half-time on Saturday, as they lost 2-0 at Liverpool.

Read the full article at Squawka
 

Shirtfront

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
1,247
#2
At half time? You mean 30 minutes after we were lucky to be just 2-0 down?

Happy to put this down as a one off, but the tactics were totally wrong against Liverpool.

They have struggled (understatement) against sides packing the defence and hitting them on the break with long balls in behind their press, getting at their dodgy defence quickly. Even Chelsea went with that tactic. And Hull won with it!

Why on earth Poch decided to go toe-to-toe with them, and play a high line, when they had Mane back and we had Davies in for Rose, I will never know. Perhaps he thought we could beat them at their own game. Bad call, but fair enough. But when you see Davies getting murdered time after time down the left hand side, and you leave Son so far up he is more like a second striker and giving Davies absolutely no protection from Mane and Clyne - well that is just insane. Why not tell Son to get back and tuck in a bit? Or go to a back three to give Davies some protection?

Likewise why you would keep trying to play it out from the back when their entire attacking plan hinges on you doing exactly that and winning the ball back off you early, high up the pitch, and while you are out of position.

I could not believe what I was seeing on Saturday. It was like Poch had not seen Liverpool play this season. Changing it at half time was way too little too late - and I am not sure it was that much better.

Sure - the players let him/themselves/us down; but he had a shocker as well.

Terrible day at the office. Now let's go and win the rest of our matches!

COYS!
 

Everlasting Seconds

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
10,085
#4
Wouldn't have helped. The most obvious change to implement in the world of football under those circumstances. Klopp would have been prepared and countered.
 

jolsnogross

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
2,229
#5
That second half beggared belief - you can put up with the fact that we were blitzed for a period of the first half and needed to weather that to keep the score at 2-0. But to come out and leave Mignolet and their center-halves completely untested in the second half was terrible.

Nothing might have worked given that we were second to the ball all game, but you'd have hoped for a bit more attacking aggression in the second half, even if it was more about diagonals into the edge of the area and trying to get into crossing positions.
 

TottenhamMattSpur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
8,921
#6
The way the front 3 passed the ball back to Liverpool players under no pressure at all, the only way we'd have got anything from long balls would have been for Hugo to score from his own box.
 

ERO

The artist f.k.a Steffan Freund - Mentalist *****
Joined
Jun 8, 2003
Messages
5,384
#7
Wouldn't have helped. The most obvious change to implement in the world of football under those circumstances. Klopp would have been prepared and countered.
Agreed. Klopp would have this covered. He's really good at countering obvious moves.

8 Jan - FA Cup Third round
Liverpool
0 - 0

FT
Plymouth


11 Jan - Football League Cup Semi-final, Game 1
Southampton

1 - 0
FT
Liverpool

15 Jan - Premier League
Man United

1 - 1
FT
Liverpool

18 Jan - FA Cup Third round
Plymouth
Video Recap

0 - 1

FT
Liverpool


21 Jan - Premier League
Liverpool

2 - 3
FT
Swansea City

25 Jan - Football League Cup Semi-final, Game 2
Liverpool

0 - 1
FT
Southampton

28 Jan - FA Cup Fourth round
Liverpool
Video Recap

1 - 2

FT
Wolves


31 Jan - Premier League
Liverpool

1 - 1
FT
Chelsea

4 Feb - Premier League
Hull City

2 - 0
FT
Liverpool
 

tcyrus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
1,153
#8
Going off the subject,
is anyone going to talk about those snakes Under Armour

Even Steph Curry wants to get away from the 35mil deal he has with them.
 

1882andallthat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
1,204
#9
At half time? You mean 30 minutes after we were lucky to be just 2-0 down?

Happy to put this down as a one off, but the tactics were totally wrong against Liverpool.

They have struggled (understatement) against sides packing the defence and hitting them on the break with long balls in behind their press, getting at their dodgy defence quickly. Even Chelsea went with that tactic. And Hull won with it!

Why on earth Poch decided to go toe-to-toe with them, and play a high line, when they had Mane back and we had Davies in for Rose, I will never know. Perhaps he thought we could beat them at their own game. Bad call, but fair enough. But when you see Davies getting murdered time after time down the left hand side, and you leave Son so far up he is more like a second striker and giving Davies absolutely no protection from Mane and Clyne - well that is just insane. Why not tell Son to get back and tuck in a bit? Or go to a back three to give Davies some protection?

Likewise why you would keep trying to play it out from the back when their entire attacking plan hinges on you doing exactly that and winning the ball back off you early, high up the pitch, and while you are out of position.

I could not believe what I was seeing on Saturday. It was like Poch had not seen Liverpool play this season. Changing it at half time was way too little too late - and I am not sure it was that much better.

Sure - the players let him/themselves/us down; but he had a shocker as well.

Terrible day at the office. Now let's go and win the rest of our matches!

COYS!
Absolutely, I couldn't agree more and I have posted similar. Why do they continue to play this way against Liverpool ? I know some of this goes before Poch's time but in our last 10 games against them we have lost seven and drawn 3 winning none. That is an atrocious record by anyone's standards, it needs addressing, all the while they have this fast and high pressing attacking line up I never again want to see us deploy such suicidal tactics against Liverpool, it's beyond accidental naivety, it's frankly negligent. Not only that we have let one of our rivals for a top 4 walk straight back into the mix and they had to exert very little effort on their part to get back in the mix.

If you are up against quick high pressing teams like this there is absolutely no reason whatsoever why Davies couldn't be deployed in a three man centre back trio, he does a decent job of it for the Welsh national team surely Poch must have seen this, it would and should have been plainly obvious well before kick off if the dvd's of previous Liverpool and Spurs meetings had been studied and taken into proper consideration alongside games where they have struggled against opposition deploying far more sensible tactics. I think in truth this is where Davies' future lies, it's no mystery why Chelsea were sniffing round us for his services, he will be more effective there and there will be far less risks of him being hung out to dry. I think we should be looking at a longer term back up as a left wing back to Rose but I would retain Davies and deploy him in a trio of Centre backs if we play 3-5-2 or a similar variant.
 
Last edited:

shelfboy68

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2008
Messages
7,216
#10
We should have done what all the other teams who have had success against them recently and that was to sit deep and hit on the counter.
Instead we went out looked all at sea and couldn't hit a man with a pass in those opening minute's and then the game was over after 20 mins absmyl.
 

sak11

Active Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2005
Messages
916
#11
At half time? You mean 30 minutes after we were lucky to be just 2-0 down?

Happy to put this down as a one off, but the tactics were totally wrong against Liverpool.

They have struggled (understatement) against sides packing the defence and hitting them on the break with long balls in behind their press, getting at their dodgy defence quickly. Even Chelsea went with that tactic. And Hull won with it!

Why on earth Poch decided to go toe-to-toe with them, and play a high line, when they had Mane back and we had Davies in for Rose, I will never know. Perhaps he thought we could beat them at their own game. Bad call, but fair enough. But when you see Davies getting murdered time after time down the left hand side, and you leave Son so far up he is more like a second striker and giving Davies absolutely no protection from Mane and Clyne - well that is just insane. Why not tell Son to get back and tuck in a bit? Or go to a back three to give Davies some protection?

Likewise why you would keep trying to play it out from the back when their entire attacking plan hinges on you doing exactly that and winning the ball back off you early, high up the pitch, and while you are out of position.

I could not believe what I was seeing on Saturday. It was like Poch had not seen Liverpool play this season. Changing it at half time was way too little too late - and I am not sure it was that much better.

Sure - the players let him/themselves/us down; but he had a shocker as well.

Terrible day at the office. Now let's go and win the rest of our matches!

COYS!
Completely agree.

It was arrogant and naive by Poch. Simple as that.
Sometimes you just do what you have to and make no apology about it. Conte and Mourinho would both have no qualms about going to Anfield and shutting up shop and hitting on the break.

For some reason, with Liverpool's recent form Poch thought they were there for the taking without really paying attention to the tactics that the others teams have been playing - in addition to which Mane was back for Liverpool ... surely you would know that he would target our slower/weaker left side with him??

I just don't understand why he let our boys get bent over with his decisions. Baffling.
 

yankspurs

"We're not a selling club"
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
24,062
#12
The first half was shit and we were lucky to be down 2-0. But we also had a chance on goal, which turned out to be the only one of the game. The second was one of the worst, if not the worst half of the year(and there have been many awful halves). Nothing changed in reality except for desperate defending from us working out, tbh. It was absolute garbage from the beginning of it. And yet, it still almost took Poch until the 70' minute to make his first change. What I saw from that game was Poch's short comings when it comes to game planning coupled with his typical shocking ineptitude when it comes to in game management rolled all into a 90' shower of shit. It was clear as day what would happen in that game after 1 god damn minute if Poch didnt do anything and that is exactly what he did: nothing.

I hope Poch has learned his lesson but after 3 years of largely the same thing when up against top sides away and when how we're playing isnt working, Im not holding out much hope to be honest.
 

yido_number1

Spurs supporter, unlike some.
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
5,194
#16
Going off the subject,
is anyone going to talk about those snakes Under Armour

Even Steph Curry wants to get away from the 35mil deal he has with them.
Wrong place for this discussion and wrong for a company to back a politician. But when you look at the statement as follows there is no reason to exit underarmour.

Curry’s reaction prompted a statement from Under Armour clarifying Plank’s position on Trump, which included: “Under Armour and Kevin Plank are for job creation and American manufacturing capability. We are against a travel ban and believe that immigration is a source of strength, diversity and innovation for global companies based in America like Under Armour.”
 
Top