4-4-2 at home is the way forward for Spurs

[Jamturk]

The problem we face with inconsistency, which is all we are suffering from at the moment isn't formations or the ability of the players or the manager. Not the board or the shitty support we have at the lane.

Its mentality and experience, I am glad the manager has highlighted this as it shows me he knows what is wrong and that means he will be able to try and fix it.

 

[spurs9]

It's the Tottenham way. Think how many we've had over the years. We're famous for our strikers.

It's time for another strike partnership at the lane...enough with this Adebayor one lump up front guff.

Our most famous side, the double winning side that cemented "the Tottenham way" played with 1 striker (Smith). We also had 2 wingers and 2 inside forwards, 1 creative (White) and 1 goal scoring (Allen and a few seasons later, Greaves).

 

[Blake Griffin]

i really liked the way west ham split their two strikers against city. fat sam with that tactical revolution

 

[THFCSPURS19]

fat sam

Racist.

 

[Sevens]

i really liked the way west ham split their two strikers against city. fat sam with that tactical revolution

Isn't Teddy there at the moment as an attacking coach?

 

[only1waddle]

Isn't Teddy there at the moment as an attacking coach?

Yes.

 

[slartibartfast]

I love the way some are saying we cant go 442 because we dont have the right players to play that way.
Are you seriously trying to tell me we currently have the players to play 4231???
Yes its going swimmingly.
There is a saying in engineering, if it aint broke don't fix it.
Seems some believe if it is broke carry on regardless.
Why would you play 1 up front at home against a team leaking goals at the bottom of the table?
I would argue we do not have the players to play 1 up front and back it up with 2 years of total shit since AVB, and better performances and results playing 442 prior to that and with Sherwood.
You can take your wonderful new philosophies, dimensions, possesion, stats and powerpoint presentations and shove them.
This type of football is shit, period.
People seem to have forgotten you need to score goals to WIN a football match. Not possesion. Goals. And you make it harder to score with only one striker on the pitch. You may make it harder to get beaten with 451 or whatever but youre supposed to be trying to win not not lose.
Especially at home against a shower of shit. We make it so easy for the oppositions defence playing this narrow crap.
I'm proper fu#ked off with this trying to be bloody clever tactical shit. Its bollox. Its football not bloody chess.
Its Spurs through and through to try and be flashy and f in clever with a shiny young foreign manager and a dof when the whole thing is really a totally embarrassing balls up.
We're a bloody laughing stock and I guess whats most surprising is that once Redknapp was sacked anybody thought we'd go in any direction other than that where we now find ourselves. Thanks Levy, f in genius.
BTW Qpr just beat Villa with a 442. Scored 2 and kept a clean sheet. But how can this be.??? Surely they got over run in midfield, oh hang on, the goals are still at the bloody end of the pitch right, not midfield?
Be interesting to see how we get on.
Apologies for rant but Ive had enough of people telling me this utter shit I keep watching is the way forward. As I said, bollox.

 

[LexingtonSpurs]

Its not working though is it? What we are doing? For now I'd be more content giving up possession to have more of a goal threat on the pitch. I'd takle 40% possession and 10-12 shots on goal over 60% possession and half of those chances.
While Poch figures out which players he can rely on and confidence grows within the squad, I think the team would benefit from having two strikers on the field. Perhaps 4312 with Lamela behind Soldado and Adebayor. We need more of a goal threat in home games.

Do you know how many teams are averaging 12 shots on goal? None

How about 10 shots on goal? None

8 shots on goal? None

6 shots on goal? None

Man City leads the way with 5.9 shots on goal per game.

Spurs average 3.8

If you mean just shots, your data is still way off - Spurs already average 12.1 shots per game.

 

[Syn_13]

I've got it!

The problem isn't having enough strikers. It's having too many.

4-6-0. That'll fucking learn 'em.

 

[SpursDave88]

I love the way some are saying we cant go 442 because we dont have the right players to play that way.
Are you seriously trying to tell me we currently have the players to play 4231???
Yes its going swimmingly.
There is a saying in engineering, if it aint broke don't fix it.
Seems some believe if it is broke carry on regardless.
Why would you play 1 up front at home against a team leaking goals at the bottom of the table?
I would argue we do not have the players to play 1 up front and back it up with 2 years of total shit since AVB, and better performances and results playing 442 prior to that and with Sherwood.
You can take your wonderful new philosophies, dimensions, possesion, stats and powerpoint presentations and shove them.
This type of football is shit, period.
People seem to have forgotten you need to score goals to WIN a football match. Not possesion. Goals. And you make it harder to score with only one striker on the pitch. You may make it harder to get beaten with 451 or whatever but youre supposed to be trying to win not not lose.
Especially at home against a shower of shit. We make it so easy for the oppositions defence playing this narrow crap.
I'm proper fu#ked off with this trying to be bloody clever tactical shit. Its bollox. Its football not bloody chess.
Its Spurs through and through to try and be flashy and f in clever with a shiny young foreign manager and a dof when the whole thing is really a totally embarrassing balls up.
We're a bloody laughing stock and I guess whats most surprising is that once Redknapp was sacked anybody thought we'd go in any direction other than that where we now find ourselves. Thanks Levy, f in genius.
BTW Qpr just beat Villa with a 442. Scored 2 and kept a clean sheet. But how can this be.??? Surely they got over run in midfield, oh hang on, the goals are still at the bloody end of the pitch right, not midfield?
Be interesting to see how we get on.
Apologies for rant but Ive had enough of people telling me this utter shit I keep watching is the way forward. As I said, bollox.

Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund, Chelsea, Arsenal, the German national side.

What do all these teams have in common?

They all play with one centre forward in a 4-5-1/4-3-3 formation!

That was Harry Redknapp's second win of the season!!!!

Seriously do bore off!

As I have said already, people make out that having more strikers on the pitch makes you a better or more attacking team. Clearly it is absolute rubbish.

 

[slartibartfast]

So what you're saying is, that football boils down to more strikers = more goals? It's that simple?

Yeah thats exactly what he's saying, not.
Scoring goals is the hardest part of the game.
Its why strikers cost so much. If midfielders could do the job they'd be pulling huge trsnsfer fees as well.
So yeah, having one less on the pitch makes it less likely you'll score and also a piece of piss to mark him out of the game.
Its why when you're chasing a game the subs are strikers. Why is that I wonder?
Can we go back to setting up a team that is going to cause the oppositions defence as many problems as possible rather than making it a walk in the park?

 

[slartibartfast]

Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund, Chelsea, Arsenal, the German national side.

What do all these teams have in common?

They all play with one centre forward in a 4-5-1/4-3-3 formation!

That was Harry Redknapp's second win of the season!!!!

Seriously do bore off!

As I have said already, people make out that having more strikers on the pitch makes you a better or more attacking team. Clearly it is absolute rubbish.

Other than they cost about 4 times more than ours?
You're comparing our squad to the best teams in europe.
It works for them so we can play like that???
Get real ffs.

 

[SpursDave88]

You're comparing our squad to the best teams in europe.
It works for them so we can play like that???
Get real ffs.

You are clearly a complete and utter moron. Or a troll. I'm not sure which.

 

[slartibartfast]

You are clearly a complete and utter moron. Or a troll. I'm not sure which.

Because I disagree?
I think you're a moron for comparing us to Barcelona and Real Madrid but hey ho.

 

[raymundo-iow]

I think a 4132 could suit our game. Capoue or Dembele in there to break up the play. And I'm torn between eriksen or lamela behind the strikers, which player cuts the mustard there we will need to replace either left or right forward. And a true beast striker like Benteke and soldado up front.

 

[slartibartfast]

I think a 4132 could suit our game. Capoue or Dembele in there to break up the play. And I'm torn between eriksen or lamela behind the strikers, which player cuts the mustard there we will need to replace either left or right forward. And a true beast striker like Benteke and soldado up front.

Id go with that.
Didnt mention in my rant that I do believe there is a time and place for only having 1 upfront.
Just not at home against a shower of shit.

 

[stov]

41221 is the way forward. DM allows fullbacks to get forward, control of midfield, no number 10 getting in the way of the inverted wingers, will allow paulinho to get in to the box (something he is actually good at).
I would play this team next weekend
Lloris

Rose
Vertonghen
Kaboul
Naughton

Capoue

Mason
Paulinho

Eriksen
Lamela

Kane

 

[Blake Griffin]

Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund, Chelsea, Arsenal, the German national side.

What do all these teams have in common?

They all play with one centre forward in a 4-5-1/4-3-3 formation!

That was Harry Redknapp's second win of the season!!!!

Seriously do bore off!

As I have said already, people make out that having more strikers on the pitch makes you a better or more attacking team. Clearly it is absolute rubbish.

do you think if they were to start playing with two strikers they'd all tumble down the league?

 

[prawnsandwich]

Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund, Chelsea, Arsenal, the German national side.

What do all these teams have in common?

As I have said already, people make out that having more strikers on the pitch makes you a better or more attacking team. Clearly it is absolute rubbish.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/fa_cup/6415115.stm

Chelsea came back from 2 goals down to draw with 3 strikers on the pitch at the end.

 

[prawnsandwich]

Our most famous side, the double winning side that cemented "the Tottenham way" played with 1 striker (Smith). We also had 2 wingers and 2 inside forwards, 1 creative (White) and 1 goal scoring (Allen and a few seasons later, Greaves).

Ok-so Jimmy Greaves was not a striker?