- Feb 1, 2005
- 55,633
- 205,491
- Admin
- #1,461
Yes, in games that last for 20 minutes
Which by the way, ended 0-0. So we drew. Yay.
Match Threads Spurs vs Wolves - Match Thread
- Thread starter Bulletspur
- Start date
Which by the way, ended 0-0. So we drew. Yay.
King of Otters
Well-Known Member
- Jun 11, 2012
- 10,751
- 36,094
Yes, in games that last for 20 minutes
Which by the way, ended 0-0. So we drew. Yay.
Ah, so a point for us then? Oh no, we got beat and went away with fuck all because we failed to register a single shot in response to Wolves taking the lead.
cjbyid
Well-Known Member
- Jan 4, 2009
- 7,401
- 25,514
Nobody. Which is why we need a DM in the summer to replace the likes of winks.
spud
Well-Known Member
- Sep 2, 2003
- 5,850
- 8,794
Well, unusually for me lately, I'm not too unhappy with that. I obviously didn't like the result (although I expected it) and it seems that we need to score at least three if we're going to win a game, but it was much better than I expected.
For a start, we actually came to play. I'm sick of what has been a completely passive approach with us hoping to score rather than trying to, but we didn't see that today. We started brightly and the first twenty minutes was better than I could've hoped. We controlled that part of the game and looked like a team for once rather than a collection of individuals. It didn't last, but it was a pleasant surprise.
Nor can I be too critical of Mourinho. His rationale for playing Sanchez and Tanganga (they are our fastest centre backs) was sound; and while you could argue that Alderweireld should've been between them instead of Dier, Toby hasn't exactly been pulling up trees lately so I don't really have a problem with Dier's selection - I think he is a centre back rather than a midfield player. Plus, I thought he had quite a a good game.
I wouldn't blame the defence for the Wolves goals either. The first was an unluckly deflection off Tanganga and although the second was a clusterfuck, the defence wasn't the problem. The problem was, and is, that we don't protect the defence. With Dier recently unable to play as a defensive midfielder and Wanyama perma-crocked, coupled with the absence of Sissoko, we don't have anybody who can shield the back four (or five). Ndombele might be able to if he were fit, but he apparently isn't; and Winks needs help to do it. So we had the Wolves players running straight on to our defence. The result of that was predictable.
This also affects our attacking. Le Celso is probably our most creative midfielder, but he is - probably of necessity - playing too deep to be effective going forward. In the absence of somebody who can feed the front players (again, Ndombele's absence hurts us here) we are, as usual, not creating chances. The continued lack of a coherent plan to do so in the absence of Kane and Son (this is where I do criticise Mourinho and his staff) means that for all our remaining attacking talent, good chances (and therefore, on average, goals) will continue to be relatively scarce. If we are relying on the full backs to create chances from crosses, we're screwed: Davies can't cross and Aurier is too erratic (although his crossing was pretty good today).
So, all in all, a disappointing result but a relatively heartening display. It makes me think that we might actually win a few games before the end of the season.
For a start, we actually came to play. I'm sick of what has been a completely passive approach with us hoping to score rather than trying to, but we didn't see that today. We started brightly and the first twenty minutes was better than I could've hoped. We controlled that part of the game and looked like a team for once rather than a collection of individuals. It didn't last, but it was a pleasant surprise.
Nor can I be too critical of Mourinho. His rationale for playing Sanchez and Tanganga (they are our fastest centre backs) was sound; and while you could argue that Alderweireld should've been between them instead of Dier, Toby hasn't exactly been pulling up trees lately so I don't really have a problem with Dier's selection - I think he is a centre back rather than a midfield player. Plus, I thought he had quite a a good game.
I wouldn't blame the defence for the Wolves goals either. The first was an unluckly deflection off Tanganga and although the second was a clusterfuck, the defence wasn't the problem. The problem was, and is, that we don't protect the defence. With Dier recently unable to play as a defensive midfielder and Wanyama perma-crocked, coupled with the absence of Sissoko, we don't have anybody who can shield the back four (or five). Ndombele might be able to if he were fit, but he apparently isn't; and Winks needs help to do it. So we had the Wolves players running straight on to our defence. The result of that was predictable.
This also affects our attacking. Le Celso is probably our most creative midfielder, but he is - probably of necessity - playing too deep to be effective going forward. In the absence of somebody who can feed the front players (again, Ndombele's absence hurts us here) we are, as usual, not creating chances. The continued lack of a coherent plan to do so in the absence of Kane and Son (this is where I do criticise Mourinho and his staff) means that for all our remaining attacking talent, good chances (and therefore, on average, goals) will continue to be relatively scarce. If we are relying on the full backs to create chances from crosses, we're screwed: Davies can't cross and Aurier is too erratic (although his crossing was pretty good today).
So, all in all, a disappointing result but a relatively heartening display. It makes me think that we might actually win a few games before the end of the season.
Last edited:
- Feb 1, 2005
- 55,633
- 205,491
- Admin
- #1,466
We got beat because we were poor at the back, allowing them to literally walk their goals in. Not because of anything else. But I like this splitting the game up business, you could be onto something. That last 20 minutes of yours we were obviously defensively solid as we didn't concede. It looks like we've ironed out our problems at the back now
King of Otters
Well-Known Member
- Jun 11, 2012
- 10,751
- 36,094
We got beat because we were poor at the back, allowing them to literally walk their goals in. Not because of anything else. But I like this splitting the game up business, you could be onto something. That last 20 minutes of yours we were obviously defensively solid as we didn't concede. It looks like we've ironed out our problems at the back now
Defensively solid because Wolves had the three points in the bag. For the rest of the game, not so much.
Ionman34
SC Supporter
- Jun 1, 2011
- 7,182
- 16,793
And I don’t Ron.
I haven’t seen the match, so I have no comment to make on it either way, but I’ve noted that it’s the same people time and time again who offer nothing constructive, just a constant diatribe against the manager, the chairman or both. Funnily enough they disappear when we’re performing well, not a peep from them, nothing. The only time they’ve commented on the wins is to claim they’re “lucky” and we should have lost, AFTER we’ve lost any subsequent match.
NO ONE is happy with where we currently are, NO ONE. But repeating the same angry whining time after time after a bad result.
It makes this place a nasty, unpleasant place to visit where being a “supporter” has you labelled a “happy clapper” by some. I think I’ll give it a miss for a while.
- Feb 1, 2005
- 55,633
- 205,491
- Admin
- #1,470
Ah so now its the rest of the game. OK, I think I've realised what the rules are now. Thanks for putting me straight.
King of Otters
Well-Known Member
- Jun 11, 2012
- 10,751
- 36,094
No worries. If you’re still having trouble you can borrow my scientific calculator.
- Feb 1, 2005
- 55,633
- 205,491
- Admin
- #1,472
But only for 20 minutes?
King of Otters
Well-Known Member
- Jun 11, 2012
- 10,751
- 36,094
But only for 20 minutes?
For as long as it takes for you to come back with a response without being patronising.
I’ll wait.
- Feb 1, 2005
- 55,633
- 205,491
- Admin
- #1,476
Don't bother, emotionally stunted stupidity drags it out of me like a vet with his arm up a cows vadge trying to pull a calf out.
Oops
Last edited:
rez9000
Any point?
- Feb 8, 2007
- 11,942
- 21,098
Don't let them grind you down, Ionman. You're one of those who speaks sense.
How was he fine? He should’ve cleared the cross away for the first goal but instead ended up on his arse. Basic defending!
Ronwol196061
Well-Known Member
- Apr 9, 2018
- 3,925
- 3,646
Brilliant assessment Bozza!!!!!!!
Ronwol196061
Well-Known Member
- Apr 9, 2018
- 3,925
- 3,646
I agree with what you say Ionman. The only thing was that one talked about negativity and Im all against chronic negativity but each poster is different....its shoving everyone that has a negative thing in the soup with it is the point I wanted to make that point.Thats why it's best to make a point even to me ir anyone else and I or them then can at least discuss it with you and explain my POV.
I dont like blanket accusations because who can defend that?
