Tottenham Vs Arsenal: Match Thread
- Thread starter chrissivad
- Start date
BringBack_leGin
Well-Known Member
- Jul 28, 2004
- 27,719
- 54,929
But for their goalie we would have won this game.
mattyspurs
It is what it is
- Jan 31, 2005
- 15,280
- 9,893
That is correct, Chesny Hawkes make 3 excellent saves in the second half
WhiteStripe
Get out of my club you cretin!
- Aug 23, 2006
- 14,211
- 4,984
antiloqus
Dr. Rufus T. Barleysheath
- Aug 9, 2006
- 4,052
- 152
Gesundheit
Mr Pink
SC Supporter
- Aug 25, 2010
- 55,208
- 100,461
quite interesting:
http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8750_6887526,00.html
http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8750_6887526,00.html
mattyspurs
It is what it is
- Jan 31, 2005
- 15,280
- 9,893
WhiteStripe
Get out of my club you cretin!
- Aug 23, 2006
- 14,211
- 4,984
he had no right to sit on that one from Sandro
Had those 3 chances been fired at Gomes, he would have only saved one, not because of him being a worse keeper, but because he is not lucky.
Rout-Ledge
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2005
- 9,638
- 21,826
One of the things to note from that is how much better we are at defending corners under Redknapp. I remember under Jol I shat myself whenever we conceded a corner. Nowadays I'm confident we'll get it away.
Also, Nasri's pass rate is pretty special.
roosh
aka tottenham_til_i_die
- Sep 21, 2006
- 4,627
- 573
It's not really got anything to do with their size, it's all about their style of play; both generally look to get on the ball in whichever position they are, they offer themselves as an option to the man in possession. If both are in the same vicinity in midfield, both will be looking to get on the ball in areas very close to each other. I think there needs to be some distance between them so they can link up with each other, and not be right on top of each other.
I think in Sandro and Hudd make up part of our best midfield, and I don't think we need another two playmakers in there, one more would do, because we need an outlet further up the field.
VDV is tenacious enough to play CM, and Modric's ball control around the edge of the box could be incisive.
If you go with Hudd, Modric and VDV in CM then where is the defensive cover? Even with Modric, VDV and Sandro, I think it is a little light defensively.
roosh
aka tottenham_til_i_die
- Sep 21, 2006
- 4,627
- 573
a lot of people seem to be saying that a draw wasn't enough for us, but we are now 2 points behind City with them yet to play. Even if we had won, we would still have to go there and beat them, because of goal difference.
WhiteStripe
Get out of my club you cretin!
- Aug 23, 2006
- 14,211
- 4,984
Are people on here retarded? Why are our chances over now we didn't win? The fact we got a point means the situation is nigh on exactly the same as if we had got 3 points.
If we match Man City's results from here on in and beat them, we are 4th.
Hey, retards, wake up.
If we match Man City's results from here on in and beat them, we are 4th.
Hey, retards, wake up.
Welshiespursboyo
Banned
- Feb 19, 2009
- 17,009
- 2,830
How the fuck are people jumping to the conclusion that we have 'screwed' our chances of qualifying for the CL. 2 points behind city, same number of games played - but we still have to play them, ergo, our destiny is STILL in our hands.
Yes, our run in is tougher - but so fucking what! Anything can happen in this league - city could easily fuck up, they are shite away from home. And we are a good side who can certainly live with the best this league has to offer! We played some fucking lovely football against Arseholes, which is bound to put some confidence into the lads. (shame it hasnt put more into some of you miserable buggers).
I believe.
Yes, our run in is tougher - but so fucking what! Anything can happen in this league - city could easily fuck up, they are shite away from home. And we are a good side who can certainly live with the best this league has to offer! We played some fucking lovely football against Arseholes, which is bound to put some confidence into the lads. (shame it hasnt put more into some of you miserable buggers).
I believe.
Rout-Ledge
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2005
- 9,638
- 21,826
On the whole I agree, but if we had won yesterday and get a point against Chelsea, with City losing their game against, for example, Everton, it would have left us ahead of them only needing a point against them in Manchester.
As it stands, if that happens, we still need to win in Manchester. Which could be the difference.
Welshiespursboyo
Banned
- Feb 19, 2009
- 17,009
- 2,830
WhiteStripe
Get out of my club you cretin!
- Aug 23, 2006
- 14,211
- 4,984
Absolute nonsense because if we take all the variables we may only need to win 1 more game all season if we want to overtake them.
Taking the facts, last night a point or 3 points changes nothing.
Rout-Ledge
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2005
- 9,638
- 21,826
Nothing? If we end up one or two points behind them after 38 games it changes one minor detail...
I think the point is, it goes without saying that 3 points are better than 1, but a draw yesterday was far from a disaster.
roosh
aka tottenham_til_i_die
- Sep 21, 2006
- 4,627
- 573
I wouldn't say that it didn't change anything, as such, because 3 points would have meant that if City had dropped any points at all, then we would have been in a position to capitalise. As it is, I think most people were expecting us to have to go to City and beat them, so from that perspective nothing has changed.
WhiteStripe
Get out of my club you cretin!
- Aug 23, 2006
- 14,211
- 4,984
Yes 3 points are better than 1. But the point I am obviously failing to make is that before last nights game we needed to match Man City's results here on in (as a minimum) and then beat them. This still applies.
People last night, and today on here seem to think that the whole thing is now reliant on Man City fucking up. It isn't, and to almost the same extent, 4th place is STILL in our hands REGARDLESS of variables.
I happen to think we will be sitting here on Tuesday talking about being 1 point ahead with the same games played.
