Player Watch: Kevin Wimmer

[DaSpurs]

And inverted wingers!

I immensely dislike the high line, but I don't understand why people still dislike inverted wingers in general. I don't personally think they should only be used and all the time, but the most successful sides in Europe are currently wielding them on both sides, so I don't understand why people view them as a problem. Clearly the evidence suggests otherwise.

Conversely, what there is no evidence to support is that a high line works in the EPL. Absolutely none. If anything, one could even suggest the very opposite.

 

[Shadydan]

I immensely dislike the high line, but I don't understand why people still dislike inverted wingers in general. I don't personally think they should only they should be used and all the time, but the most successful sides in Europe are currently wielding them on both sides, so I don't understand why people view them as a problem. Clearly the evidence suggests otherwise.

Conversely, what there is no evidence to support is that a high line works in the EPL. Absolutely none. If anything, one could even suggest the very opposite.

I think people don't like inverted wingers because our full backs are average, thry don't make use of the space they create quite simply.

 

[DaSpurs]

I think people don't like inverted wingers because our full backs are average, thry don't make use of the space they create quite simply.

Yeah fair point.

Personally, I think it's because we've used them along with the high line and no playmakers in midfield. As a result, we've collapsed their space, have no lock-pickers, they aren't quick enough themselves, and the fullbacks don't create enough problems with overlapping runs.

Point is though, inverted wingers are not the causative problem.

 

[shelfboy68]

I immensely dislike the high line, but I don't understand why people still dislike inverted wingers in general. I don't personally think they should only they should be used and all the time, but the most successful sides in Europe are currently wielding them on both sides, so I don't understand why people view them as a problem. Clearly the evidence suggests otherwise.

Conversely, what there is no evidence to support is that a high line works in the EPL. Absolutely none. If anything, one could even suggest the very opposite.

Agree its a very flawed system the evidence of 53 goals conceded will atest to it doesnt work for us.
We would be better off sit deeper and playing on the break as we dont have a defence good to accomadate the high line.

 

[DaSpurs]

Agree its a very flawed system the evidence of 53 goals conceded will atest to it doesnt work for us.
We would be better off sit deeper and playing on the break as we dont have a defence good to accomadate the high line.

Even beyond just us this season, Southampton had one of the worst late game records in the league last season (it exposes you more to balls played in behind fatigued legs), and it didn't entirely work for AVB either. There's just no indication it's a viable plan as of yet.

 

[Hotspur88]

Agree its a very flawed system the evidence of 53 goals conceded will atest to it doesnt work for us.
We would be better off sit deeper and playing on the break as we dont have a defence good to accomadate the high line.

The problem we have is that we don't have enough/any pace in the team to play on the break. We are so slow at attacking sometimes it's painful to watch.

 

[spursfan77]

I immensely dislike the high line, but I don't understand why people still dislike inverted wingers in general. I don't personally think they should only be used and all the time, but the most successful sides in Europe are currently wielding them on both sides, so I don't understand why people view them as a problem. Clearly the evidence suggests otherwise.

Conversely, what there is no evidence to support is that a high line works in the EPL. Absolutely none. If anything, one could even suggest the very opposite.

The reason why the most successful teams use them is because they have the best players who can carry out the roles. We have Lennon, chadli, lamela and Townsend. They struggle with it so shouldn't be playing that way.

I agree about the high line. It's silly basically because using it and not closing players down is pointless.

 

[DaSpurs]

The reason why the most successful teams use them is because they have the best players who can carry out the roles. We have Lennon, chadli, lamela and Townsend. They struggle with it so shouldn't be playing that way.

The successful teams were pointed to for the sake of indicating that clearly inverted wingers are not inhibiting factors. There are teams with far less quality than us using inverted wingers on both sides, they just have a much more balanced side and so it works.

I agree though, as things stand, given how incredibly static we are and slow to move the ball forward, we really should be playing with one traditional winger on his natural side to improve the crossing and provide better low passes. But the problem is with the system and the an unbalanced squad, not the fact we're using inverted wingers. Inverted wingers can be used very successfully if done right.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footb...ham-seal-transfer-cologne-centre-back-5710007

 

[We'llWinThePrem]

Wimmer is left footed right? I guess he'll be cover for Vertonghen.

I wonder if we'll look for another first team CB or stick with Dier who I think has been fantastic this season.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

Wimmer's Wikipedia page:

 

[Dharmabum]

Wimmer is left footed right? I guess he'll be cover for Vertonghen.

I wonder if we'll look for another first team CB or stick with Dier who I think has been fantastic this season.

Yes, he's a left-footer. It may be Jan that Wimmer will compete with, and hopefully push Jan to improve on this season's performances (i.e. stay more focused and be more resolute).

 

[Nine while nine]

Wimmer's Wikipedia page:
View attachment 18724

 

[Tobyisbest]

Completely agree we should improve our squad options, particularly considering we may well get rid of Chiriches, Kaboul and Fazio.

But if we have Dier, Vertonghen and Wimmer, we'll need someone a bit more experienced to go in alongside them.

Not sure who that is though.

 

[Tobyisbest]

Completely agree we should improve our squad options, particularly considering we may well get rid of Chiriches, Kaboul and Fazio.

But if we have Dier, Vertonghen and Wimmer, we'll need someone a bit more experienced to go in alongside them.

Not sure who that is though.

alderwielder

 

[Tobyisbest]

Shawcross would be a good signing if we didn't play a high line imo. But given that we do, he would be a liability in our defense imo. I think we need quicker, smarter defenders in our back line and a player with good distribution to sit in front of the back 4. In fact I think we could even get away with playing Dier and Vertonghen together, but if we play a high line the biggest issue for us imo is having a player who can read and dictate the game sitting in front of the back 4. Basically a Carrick/Busquets type player, but I have no idea if there is anyone with those qualities who is gettable for us.

I actually was hoping Capoue would be that player but he's frozen out of the team at the moment it seems like.

Wanyama

 

[Dharmabum]

http://www.espnfc.com/blog/scouts-n...ne-centre-back-who-could-blossom-at-tottenham




In case you speak German, well, here he is in an interveiw. And yes, German is the national language of Österreich (literally meaning "Easter Kingdom").

 

[Sweech]

alderwielder

No.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

I don't think there is anyway we'll get rid of Fazio. He's solid enough to be backup.

Fazio, Wimmer, Dier and Vertonghen is a good blend for next season I reckon.

 

[EastLondonYid]

Fazio solid?