Martin Samuel: We have wasted talents of Tom Huddlestone the pass master

[mawspurs]

Source: Daily Mail

Tom Huddlestone may solve a little problem for Fabio Capello this summer, which is nice. He could have solved a major one for English football, however, which would have been nicer.

Add his name to the list of English players in recent years who might just have been game-changers for the national team. Joe Cole or Paul Scholes, encouraged to open up the play through the middle, Rio Ferdinand, required to use the ball from the back or step into midfield the way great sweepers do; now Huddlestone, whose physical presence gave him the raw materials to be England's Gilberto Silva, and then some.

Instead, he has emerged as the prime candidate to replace the injured Gareth Barry as Capello's holding midfield player. Capello will know it is hardly the most inspired use of his talents but those are the limits historically imposed by the English system.

Harry Redknapp, manager of Tottenham Hotspur, says Huddlestone is the best passer at the club and this is a team that includes Croatia's playmaker Luka Modric, remember. Huddlestone's physique also makes him as commanding as any centre half, although defence is not his primary skill.

It did not have to be that way, though. Defensive football can be coached more readily than a striker's instinct or the nimble ball skills of a winger; indeed, some of its greater exponents were converted to the role. John Terry did not start as a centre half, neither did Jamie Carragher. One imagines Huddlestone's frame made him an obvious choice in defence but his range of passing carried him further forward.

Yet why could he not do both? Why does English football think in such regimented lines? Gilberto Silva of Brazil, Marcel Desailly of France, both played a role that enabled them to step in and out of defence as the game demanded. Neither could hit a pass like Huddlestone. His dual qualities, physical presence and vision, could have made him an exceptional weapon, just as Ferdinand's technique was worthy of a player who did more than repel.

As a teenager, Ferdinand's hero was Matthias Sammer of Germany and he sought to emulate him. What happened to that dream? It foundered on the straight-line logic of the English game.

Our football is littered with its victims, players who had the raw talent to be more. Ledley King and Carragher could both, with coaching, have played in central defence or holding midfield. Players like that change a team. If Huddlestone could step into the back four on occasions it would enable both full backs, Ashley Cole and Glen Johnson, to attack at the same time, as the Brazilians do.

When Gilberto slipped into defence, Cafu and Roberto Carlos sprang forward, causing havoc by starting from deep positions, making them harder to pick up. It would not be so radical for England to play this way: the blueprint is already there.

All that would be required is imagination. It is too late now, though. It always is.

[vitamin32]

go on thud good luck to you.. you have impressed me this season in your application and subsequent improvement :clap:

[UbeAstard]

About a year ago discussion on this board about TH would get comments ..'squad player at best, sell him to Everton, not good enough, not mobile enough.'
Noticed we still get comments from some of you guys with the expert eye on young players potential. O'hara 'squad player at best, not good enough.'

[davidmatzdorf]

About a year ago discussion on this board about TH would get comments ..'squad player at best, sell him to Everton, not good enough, not mobile enough.'
Noticed we still get comments from some of you guys with the expert eye on young players potential. O'hara 'squad player at best, not good enough.'

Indeed, I have just contributed a detailed post on the "O'Hara" thread making exactly this point. I even used Huddlestone as an example. Great minds, etc.

We had people here and on SO insisting with great certainty, as recently as last Summer, that Huddlestone would soon find his level at a Championship club.

It's especially common for young players who lack pace to be underestimated.

It's a peculiar article, though. I assume that what he's trying to say is that "England have missed their chance" for this Summer's World Cup, but he doesn't actually say it. So it reads as if Huddlestone's career is nearly over and his potential has been wasted forever. A eulogy delivered before the baptism, if you see what I mean.

[Shirtfront]

Indeed, I have just contributed a detailed post on the "O'Hara" thread making exactly this point. I even used Huddlestone as an example. Great minds, etc.

We had people here and on SO insisting with great certainty, as recently as last Summer, that Huddlestone would soon find his level at a Championship club.

It's especially common for young players who lack pace to be underestimated.

It's a peculiar article, though. I assume that what he's trying to say is that "England have missed their chance" for this Summer's World Cup, but he doesn't actually say it. So it reads as if Huddlestone's career is nearly over and his potential has been wasted forever. A eulogy delivered before the baptism, if you see what I mean.

No-one who knows anything about football wrote Huddlestone off. His talent and age made his potential obvious for anyone who was not wilfully blind to see (So at least half this Board then). Indeed, when my Spammer mate was in the away end for Huddlestones first (give or take) match, he commented that of all of our players he was the one he would like to take off us (including Lennon, who was tearing it up that season).

O'Hara is in a very different category. Huddlestone clearly had the ability, but there were question marks around his mobility and application. My view was that maturity would take care of both, and it has.

O'Hara's mobility and application are his strengths. But he lacks the outright talent (of a Huddlestone or Modric) or quicksilver speed (of a Lennon) and that is not something that will come with time.

Having said that, I rate O'Hara precisely because of his attitude and application. You need players who act as the glue for a side, who play "above themselves" every week even when more talented players go missing.

Add to that his versatility and his decent left peg, and I would definitely say we should keep him.

But the same half of the Board that wanted Huddlestone sold before his time probably have O'Hara sold and replaced with Sandro, a player they have never seen play before.

[thewolfman]

Martin Samuel seems to have missed the fact that there is a player in the provisional squad who is more than capable of playing in that holding midfield role and indeed, did so for Spurs for 2 seasons to a very high level in Carrick. The problem is that Michael Carrick went from being the fulcrum in a Spurs side that played to his strengths, to fitting in to a Man U side that demands more mobility and box to box play from their CMs (which Fletcher now does so well)

Overall, it's a very strange article. Especially the point he make that if a centre back is good with the ball at his feet, he should be pushed into the middle of the park. I would imagine if that was the case, he would have written a article asking why our central defenders aren't as good with the ball as those on the continent.

[Coolpudge]

Martin Samuel is probably right about Joe Cole but I think Paul Scholes hasn't had his talent wasted. He has been one of Manchester Uniteds best players over the last 15 years. He possibly has with England but that was down to him not wanting to play for England.

[StokeSpur]

I think the article is saying more about the formation that England play and how rigid it is..

I think he has a point that Hudd could, now and again at the right times, drop back to make a 3 man defence and allow the full backs to attack, he mentions that is something that Brazil do well and he is right, they do it fluently and without thinking.

I'm not convinced that the English could adapt to it though, we seem to like our roles and cant seem to adapt to anything like that easily.

[bigspurs]

About a year ago discussion on this board about TH would get comments ..'squad player at best, sell him to Everton, not good enough, not mobile enough.'

I have said in the past that he is too slow and doesn't tackle. This was and still is true, so what's your point?! The guy however is a fantastic passer of the ball and can take a mean shot on goal, which are his strengths. Whats changed now is his consistency, which now makes him an asset to the team, rather than a hindrance.

[spurs_viola]

No-one who knows anything about football wrote Huddlestone off. His talent and age made his potential obvious for anyone who was not wilfully blind to see (So at least half this Board then). Indeed, when my Spammer mate was in the away end for Huddlestones first (give or take) match, he commented that of all of our players he was the one he would like to take off us (including Lennon, who was tearing it up that season).

O'Hara is in a very different category. Huddlestone clearly had the ability, but there were question marks around his mobility and application. My view was that maturity would take care of both, and it has.

O'Hara's mobility and application are his strengths. But he lacks the outright talent (of a Huddlestone or Modric) or quicksilver speed (of a Lennon) and that is not something that will come with time.

Having said that, I rate O'Hara precisely because of his attitude and application. You need players who act as the glue for a side, who play "above themselves" every week even when more talented players go missing.

Add to that his versatility and his decent left peg, and I would definitely say we should keep him.

But the same half of the Board that wanted Huddlestone sold before his time probably have O'Hara sold and replaced with Sandro, a player they have never seen play before.

Good post, agree with all the points. Would add that in Sandro we have a potentially higher quality than O'Hara, but that is yet to be seen in EPL and his performance will depend on issues off-the-pitch as well as on the pitch.

[davidmatzdorf]

I have said in the past that he is too slow and doesn't tackle. This was and still is true, so what's your point?! The guy however is a fantastic passer of the ball and can take a mean shot on goal, which are his strengths. Whats changed now is his consistency, which now makes him an asset to the team, rather than a hindrance.

Anyone who has closely watched Spurs this past season would have seen that it is no longer true at all. So that's our point: he isn't too slow and he tackles frequently, forcefully and usually effectively.

It's the tackling that I think is the main area of improvement. Getting more experience would always have enabled Hudd to compensate for his lack of acceleration. His overall speed is about average, once he gets his legs going, and it has rarely caused him problems this past season, because he thinks the game so much better.

But his reluctance to tackle was making him a liability when we didn't have the ball. From what has been said, by Hudd and by Redknapp, clear words were exchanged on this topic last Summer and Huddlestone took them to heart. The increase in the frequency and effectiveness of his tackling has been so obvious that I can only conclude that you're one of those people who forms fixed opinions about players and then cannot alter them in the face of changing facts.

His "consistency" hasn't suddenly come from nowhere. It's a result of his improved tackling, his increased fitness and also his developing judgment, which has led him away from trying to play a 50m show-off pass every other time he is in space with the ball.

[Bus-Conductor]

Forgive me for not buying into this latest myth, but Huddlestone is the least effective passer of the ball of all of our central midfielders. He has a nice technique but under pressure (which it invariably is in the EPL) he gives more stray passes by considerable distance than Modric, Palacios & Jenas. He also creates less and scores less than Jenas.

If Redknapp thinks Huddlestone is our best passer, he's wrong. He doesn't pass the most and he doesn't pass most accurately. He doesn't even have the best creative vision.

He is a good footballer, I am glad we have him and wouldn't swap him for many of his piers at clubs in the EPL, and he may improve, but let's live in the real world.

[samways]

Forgive me for not buying into this latest myth, but Huddlestone is the least effective passer of the ball of all of our central midfielders. He has a nice technique but under pressure (which it invariably is in the EPL) he gives more stray passes by considerable distance than Modric, Palacios & Jenas. He also creates less and scores less than Jenas.

In the last 6 games in which he played we were out-possessed every single time (including Burnley & Sunderland) except marginally at home to Bolton (a 2% swing). Once by ten men. This is because Huddlestone's poor when the opposition have the ball.

If Redknapp thinks Huddlestone is our best passer, he's wrong. He doesn't pass the most and he doesn't pass most accurately. He doesn't even have the best creative vision.

He is a good footballer, I am glad we have him and wouldn't swap him for many of his piers at clubs in the EPL, and he may improve, but let's live in the real world.
What an absolute load of old tosh- if you bother watching anything more than motd highlights you would see tha nobody keeps the ball moving more consistently and fluidly than THudd- this has impressed me more than anything with his range of short/long/wide/sideways/forward and backward passes to keep the midfield ticking over. Its not just his tackling that has improved- its the fact that when he doesnt have the ball he puts himself in the best position to break up play therefore giving himself more chances to tackle

[Yidoinoz]

Forgive me for not buying into this latest myth, but Huddlestone is the least effective passer of the ball of all of our central midfielders. He has a nice technique but under pressure (which it invariably is in the EPL) he gives more stray passes by considerable distance than Modric, Palacios & Jenas. He also creates less and scores less than Jenas.

In the last 6 games in which he played we were out-possessed every single time (including Burnley & Sunderland) except marginally at home to Bolton (a 2% swing). Once by ten men. This is because Huddlestone's poor when the opposition have the ball.

If Redknapp thinks Huddlestone is our best passer, he's wrong. He doesn't pass the most and he doesn't pass most accurately. He doesn't even have the best creative vision.

He is a good footballer, I am glad we have him and wouldn't swap him for many of his piers at clubs in the EPL, and he may improve, but let's live in the real world.

Where are you getting these stats? so you blame Hudd for the teams possssion? If defoe missed a penalty is that Hudds fault too?

You're not all the ticket bus conductor - Sorry had to get that in!:-)

[bigspurs]

Anyone who has closely watched Spurs this past season would have seen that it is no longer true at all. So that's our point: he isn't too slow and he tackles frequently, forcefully and usually effectively

True he has definitely been a more physical presence this season, and about bloody time too. As for his speed, sorry but you are wrong. He is slow and on bad days appears to actually move in slow motion!

What we should all agree on though, is that he was a much more complete player and very consistent this season. A big improvement for the lad.

[DEFchenkOE]

One thing i'd like Hudd to do more, is play more through balls along the ground, remember he played a great through ball a while ago for Robbie Keane and he then chipped the keeper, can't remember who against. I think Hudd's long range passing is superb and next season I'd like him to improve his mid range on the ground passing. I think he has the ability to make Xavi style defence splitting passes on a regular basis.

[lilywhitecurtis]

Forgive me for not buying into this latest myth, but Huddlestone is the least effective passer of the ball of all of our central midfielders. He has a nice technique but under pressure (which it invariably is in the EPL) he gives more stray passes by considerable distance than Modric, Palacios & Jenas. He also creates less and scores less than Jenas.

In the last 6 games in which he played we were out-possessed every single time (including Burnley & Sunderland) except marginally at home to Bolton (a 2% swing). Once by ten men. This is because Huddlestone's poor when the opposition have the ball.

If Redknapp thinks Huddlestone is our best passer, he's wrong. He doesn't pass the most and he doesn't pass most accurately. He doesn't even have the best creative vision.

He is a good footballer, I am glad we have him and wouldn't swap him for many of his piers at clubs in the EPL, and he may improve, but let's live in the real world.

I've heard your statistical argument over Huddlestone OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I'm sure you know more than Harry, other coaches in and around Spurs and the England staff, just because you read up on his passing percentage. :whistle:

As politely as I can say it, I believe your the one who needs to get real, just because Huddlestone doesn't have sacks of assists and has a lower passing percentage than the rest of our midfield doesn't mean Jenas should replace him does it?

If points were handed out in the premiership for the teams with most possession your argument would be valid. However they aren't.

I prefer Huddlestone in our midfield over Jenas because he spreads play far more effectively, and we need that given our pace on the wings. The majority of our goals come indeed for wing play (see Bale and Lennon assist amounts if you need statistical proof.)

I'll take the odd misplaced pass, thank you very much. We finished forth, and and Huddlestone was integral. That isn't a statistic simply to support an argument, that my friend is a fact.

[spurs_viola]

One thing i'd like Hudd to do more, is play more through balls along the ground, remember he played a great through ball a while ago for Robbie Keane and he then chipped the keeper, can't remember who against. I think Hudd's long range passing is superb and next season I'd like him to improve his mid range on the ground passing. I think he has the ability to make Xavi style defence splitting passes on a regular basis.

I agree, but he would need more of Xavi's speed of movement and thought for that, as well as much better movement from our forwards/attacking players. I also wish he played more of the shorter through balls on the ground around the pen area. But he did have Crouch and Defoe as our main duo up front for most of the season, and neither of those two offer truly good movement, especially as with Crouch on the pitch the long ball from defence regularly bypasses midfield and it makes it harder for players like Hudd and Modric to provide proper service and create.

[DEFchenkOE]

Yea your right s_v, it's our movement up top that is often lacking. As you say this is not and will never be Crouch's strong point. Defoe's movement is also poor, it has improved over the years but he doesn't have the movement and make the runs of a truly top srtiker. Pav's movement is actually pretty good but he doesn't have the pace.

Still I see this season as Hudd's breakthrough year, it's really the 1st yr that he's been 1st choice all season. And he has had a great season nobody could argue that, still always room for improvement. I think if he can create himself some space a bit more in the middle of the pitch then he may not need Xavi's speed on the ball. The only problem is that we play 4-4-2 so he won't have that same freedom as Xavi does in a 3 man midfield.

[StuckinPoland]

absolutely ridiculous article. to me.

huddlestone is BORN to be an international player. just by his playing style. with the players we have available now, i believe he should start.

james
johnson, terry, king, a.cole
huddlestone
lennon, lampard, j.cole
gerrard
rooney

if the full backs bomb forward, like we all know they can, asking hudd to drop back is natural. i'd rather have him dropping back than "can't defend" carrick or "slow and probably injured" barry. parker is more mobile, but hudd's passing ability makes him

leave gerrard to play off rooney, like he does with torres and i think we have a very decent first eleven.

i'm excited already !

[asher]

I think Thudd is such an improved player this season and not only that he is such an important players in terms of giving the team a structure and fulcrum to base our game around. Thudd's quality is in that he controls and dictate's the play and can control a game. He can slow the game down if needed and is always there for a pass. I think he could be a dark horse for the World Cup starting 11 particularly in light of Barry's injury. I personally think he's had a much better season than Barry and is technically a better player with a great eye for a defence splitting pass and the odd thunderbolt which is still an element of his game he can improve upon in terms of adding more goals. I know we are a bit bias but I honestly think that having Daws, King, Thudd, Lennon and Defoe or Crouch in the England line up would give us a really strong team if you add in Lampard or Gerrard, Ashley Cole, Glen Johnson and Rooney. My England starting line up would be;

GK Hart
LB Cole
CB King
CB Terry/Daws
RB Glen Johnson
LM Milner
RM Lennon
CM Lampard
CM Huddlestone
CF Rooney
CF Crouch/Defoe or Gerrard (Gerrard playing behind Rooney)

[Chedozie]

Its true that Huddlestone is not a fast player, but he doesn't need to be, he is never running on to a through ball and he is never chasing Agbonlahor either.

A lot of central midfield players are not fast, Hoddle wasn't fast, Carrick isn't and neither is Barry.

As a central midfield player, you have be able to read the play, his passing to our wide players is good and his short passing to Modric is also good. Huddlestone is still a young player, he is going to get better and with more experience will come greater consistency.

[ealingspur]

Forgive me for not buying into this latest myth, but Huddlestone is the least effective passer of the ball of all of our central midfielders. He has a nice technique but under pressure (which it invariably is in the EPL) he gives more stray passes by considerable distance than Modric, Palacios & Jenas. He also creates less and scores less than Jenas.

In the last 6 games in which he played we were out-possessed every single time (including Burnley & Sunderland) except marginally at home to Bolton (a 2% swing). Once by ten men. This is because Huddlestone's poor when the opposition have the ball.

If Redknapp thinks Huddlestone is our best passer, he's wrong. He doesn't pass the most and he doesn't pass most accurately. He doesn't even have the best creative vision.

He is a good footballer, I am glad we have him and wouldn't swap him for many of his piers at clubs in the EPL, and he may improve, but let's live in the real world.

The perfect example of why the game needs to be watched, and not just read about.

[Bus-Conductor]

I've heard your statistical argument over Huddlestone OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I'm sure you know more than Harry, other coaches in and around Spurs and the England staff, just because you read up on his passing percentage. :whistle:

As politely as I can say it, I believe your the one who needs to get real, just because Huddlestone doesn't have sacks of assists and has a lower passing percentage than the rest of our midfield doesn't mean Jenas should replace him does it?

If points were handed out in the premiership for the teams with most possession your argument would be valid. However they aren't.

I prefer Huddlestone in our midfield over Jenas because he spreads play far more effectively, and we need that given our pace on the wings. The majority of our goals come indeed for wing play (see Bale and Lennon assist amounts if you need statistical proof.)

I'll take the odd misplaced pass, thank you very much. We finished forth, and and Huddlestone was integral. That isn't a statistic simply to support an argument, that my friend is a fact.


See, the thing is, by and large the teams that win everything and finish highest in the EPL (not to mention Spain, Italy, Germany & France) are those that dominate possession in games.

So it would appear that points are in fact handed out this way.

I am a season ticket holder who has been watching football for four decades. The only difference as I can tell from most lemmings on here is that I don't apply internal bias to what I'm watching. I judge a player by what he does (win, loose or draw). My opinion of Huddlestone is mostly formed from purely watching him. Over the season I have given examples of what and how Huddlestones weaknesses manifest in various games.

I can see in games when Huddlestone makes a pass and then stands there and admires it instead of moving onto space to receive it again (try approx the 60-62 min of the ManC game). I can see how easy it is for the opposition midfield to have and move the ball in midfield when he plays. I can see how flustered and inaccurate his passing becomes under pressure which results in us surrendering possession of the ball. I can see that he is incapable of accelerating away from an opponent with the ball.

I can also see than invariably when Huddlestone gets near the oppositions box he invariably over hits his throughballs (like three times against Bolton) and misses with his shots.

But the stats are just a fairly simple lemming proof way of backing up that opinion. The stats which tell us that he gives the ball away more than any other CM (despite being "the best passer at the club") the same stats that tells us the Jenas provides more killer balls and goals when he gets to the business end of the pitch.

Just because I don't believe he is as valuable to our team as Palacios, Modric or Jenas doesn't mean I think he's bad player. I actually think that it is more a ringing indictment of the others. So please, don't all top yourselves.

[RodSpur]

Its not just his tackling that has improved- its the fact that when he doesnt have the ball he puts himself in the best position to break up play therefore giving himself more chances to tackle

Spot on. :clap::clap::clap: Huddlestones work in closing down the opposition when they have the ball has been the key to his overall improvment in my opinion

[bigspurs]

Its true that Huddlestone is not a fast player, but he doesn't need to be, he is never running on to a through ball and he is never chasing Agbonlahor either.

A lot of central midfield players are not fast, Hoddle wasn't fast, Carrick isn't and neither is Barry.

As a central midfield player, you have be able to read the play, his passing to our wide players is good and his short passing to Modric is also good. Huddlestone is still a young player, he is going to get better and with more experience will come greater consistency.

I don't think people had a major issue with his actual lack of pace, rather his overall lack of agility, making him seem sluggish. He can't really improve on his lack of agility, but the rest of his game is more than making up for it now. Probably got the training staff to thank for this I reckon!

[Chedozie]

See, the thing is, by and large the teams that win everything and finish highest in the EPL (not to mention Spain, Italy, Germany & France) are those that dominate possession in games.

So it would appear that points are in fact handed out this way.

I am a season ticket holder who has been watching football for four decades. The only difference as I can tell from most lemmings on here is that I don't apply internal bias to what I'm watching. I judge a player by what he does (win, loose or draw). My opinion of Huddlestone is mostly formed from purely watching him. Over the season I have given examples of what and how Huddlestones weaknesses manifest in various games.

I can see in games when Huddlestone makes a pass and then stands there and admires it instead of moving onto space to receive it again (try approx the 60-62 min of the ManC game). I can see how easy it is for the opposition midfield to have and move the ball in midfield when he plays. I can see how flustered and inaccurate his passing becomes under pressure which results in us surrendering possession of the ball. I can see that he is incapable of accelerating away from an opponent with the ball.

I can also see than invariably when Huddlestone gets near the oppositions box he invariably over hits his throughballs (like three times against Bolton) and misses with his shots.

But the stats are just a fairly simple lemming proof way of backing up that opinion. The stats which tell us that he gives the ball away more than any other CM (despite being "the best passer at the club") the same stats that tells us the Jenas provides more killer balls and goals when he gets to the business end of the pitch.

Just because I don't believe he is as valuable to our team as Palacios, Modric or Jenas doesn't mean I think he's bad player. I actually think that it is more a ringing indictment of the others. So please, don't all top yourselves.


I don't think anyone on the site is going to commit suicide after reading your stat/non stat based opinion.

Though having watched both Jenas and Huddlestone, not for four decades but for a while, i cant understand why you think Jenas is the better player.

[C-oops]

Forgive me for not buying into this latest myth, but Huddlestone is the least effective passer of the ball of all of our central midfielders. He has a nice technique but under pressure (which it invariably is in the EPL) he gives more stray passes by considerable distance than Modric, Palacios & Jenas. He also creates less and scores less than Jenas.

In the last 6 games in which he played we were out-possessed every single time (including Burnley & Sunderland) except marginally at home to Bolton (a 2% swing). Once by ten men. This is because Huddlestone's poor when the opposition have the ball.

If Redknapp thinks Huddlestone is our best passer, he's wrong. He doesn't pass the most and he doesn't pass most accurately. He doesn't even have the best creative vision.

He is a good footballer, I am glad we have him and wouldn't swap him for many of his piers at clubs in the EPL, and he may improve, but let's live in the real world.

With your views on Dawson, Jenas and now Huddlestone I firmly belive you to be the member of Spurs community that talks the most rubbish. You cant watch Spurs regularly or in full just as you can not always read the posts of others in full before commenting on them. Its only recently Ive noticed this with you but your opinions really are laughable. You arent a plant are you? Jenas by any chance? Jermain? Hello?

[lilywhitecurtis]

Anyone up for a trip to the cliff?

[lilywhitecurtis]

Seconded. Us Lemmings need to stick together you know. :wink:

[wee_yid]

Let's go!

[samways]

I think a point we must all try to keep in mind is the potential he still has......we are talking about a 23(?) year old who has been an integral part of a top four team and has just had what I would regard as his breakthrough season really.I know he's been with us for a while but he has never really been a 'first teamer' in my eyes-with Jenas injured this has been his chance to show what he can do consistently and if what last summer was to go by in terms of self improvement and working on particular parts of his game is to go by then just imagine how much better he could be nxt season-especially if he makes it on the plane to South Africa! Also, and I've mentioned it on another thread, Lampard does not have any pace whatsoever-but he has timing.....if THudd can watch Lamps up close this summer or if 'Arry can sit him down with a few dvds of him and tell him to work on his runs into the box we could have a worlbeater

[lukadownthelane]

There is definitely something interesting in the article. If HR is considering playing 1 up front in a 4-3-3 I think Huddlestone could become that CMid who steps back and starts play. This would allow us to play Bale at LB and give him freedom to get forward and could be why we are being linked with Arda. Perhaps it really could be like watching Brazil??!!

[elDiablo]

True he has definitely been a more physical presence this season, and about bloody time too. As for his speed, sorry but you are wrong. He is slow and on bad days appears to actually move in slow motion.

I would just like to add that although i thought he was slow, i was surprised to see him CATCH tevez very early in the first half when we conceded possession in the centre circle. Both he and Benny went chasing and Hudd certainly didnt get left behind. Its his speed over 5 yards which is very slow, but can be compensated by anticipation and a quick mind.

Just thought i would add that observation :)

[Bus-Conductor]

I don't think anyone on the site is going to commit suicide after reading your stat/non stat based opinion.

Though having watched both Jenas and Huddlestone, not for four decades but for a while, i cant understand why you think Jenas is the better player.


Because Jenas gets around the pitch better, he is more dynamic. He passes the ball more often and with better accuracy. He operates under pressure better. When n the final third he delivers more assists and goals. He also tackles more (statistically) than Huddelstone.

As I have said on numerous occasions, If Huddlestone was this incisive, quick witted visionary who was slipping little through balls through or making clever defence splitting passes regularly then you could argue the trade off. But he isn't. And as we already have one of the best defensive midfielders in Palacios, I would rather a more dynamic box to box player like Jenas who offers more offensively without compromising us defensively.

In an ideal world I'd like to think we can improve on both, and on some occassions Modric has offered that improvement on both - but he's not always the answer defensively. For me, in a 442, with Palacios as the busy ****, out of Hudd and Jenas, I'd take Jenas, because my eyes and the facts tell me he's better for the team dynamic. People seem to forget we finished 5th (one place less) two years running with Jenas (once with two points less than this season, once with 7 less) but without players like Palacios, Modric, Bale, Corluka, Gomes, Crouch and with players like Defoe, Lennon & Dawson having had 4 years less experience.

What annoys me the most is when people talk crap. What ever peoples opinions are, the FACTS are that Modric, for example, passes the ball more intelligently than Huddlestone, does it better under pressure, and does it more accurately. So there is no criteria by which Huddlestone is the "best passer" at the club.

[ossibissa]

interesting discussion this one. my very limited take is this: I dont get to see him play every week but I've seen him a few times this season and he seems to be in control of the pace of the game for us the majority of the time. As far as I'm concerned whether he's statistically the 'best passer at the club' or not there's been a Hudd shaped hole in our midfield when he's not played. My Derby season ticket holding former house mate sent me an unrepeatable text when we signed him and ever since I saw him in a Spurs XI match at Aldershot I have said, and always will, that he is a class footballer. The very fact that he can play a ball with either feet stands him out for me by a long way. Regarding his development, I think I may be alone in the thinking that we actually should be thanking Senor Ramos for kick starting it by addressing the fitness/strength aspect of his game which has led to the rest of his skill set being let truly loose. I only hope no-one prises him away from us in the coming years because I honestly think he will be lethal in a couple more seasons time when he hits his prime.

[Shirtfront]

True he has definitely been a more physical presence this season, and about bloody time too. As for his speed, sorry but you are wrong. He is slow and on bad days appears to actually move in slow motion!

What we should all agree on though, is that he was a much more complete player and very consistent this season. A big improvement for the lad.

Your point was that he is "too" slow, not that he is slow. That begs the question, too slow for what?

The answer is probably, "too slow to keep up with Aaron Lennon" as opposed to "too slow to be an excellent central midfielder for Spurs and England".

So, the question really is, what is your point?

[Shirtfront]

Because Jenas gets around the pitch better, he is more dynamic. He passes the ball more often and with better accuracy. He operates under pressure better. When n the final third he delivers more assists and goals. He also tackles more (statistically) than Huddelstone.

As I have said on numerous occasions, If Huddlestone was this incisive, quick witted visionary who was slipping little through balls through or making clever defence splitting passes regularly then you could argue the trade off. But he isn't. And as we already have one of the best defensive midfielders in Palacios, I would rather a more dynamic box to box player like Jenas who offers more offensively without compromising us defensively.

In an ideal world I'd like to think we can improve on both, and on some occassions Modric has offered that improvement on both - but he's not always the answer defensively. For me, in a 442, with Palacios as the busy ****, out of Hudd and Jenas, I'd take Jenas, because my eyes and the facts tell me he's better for the team dynamic. People seem to forget we finished 5th (one place less) two years running with Jenas (once with two points less than this season, once with 7 less) but without players like Palacios, Modric, Bale, Corluka, Gomes, Crouch and with players like Defoe, Lennon & Dawson having had 4 years less experience.

What annoys me the most is when people talk crap. What ever peoples opinions are, the FACTS are that Modric, for example, passes the ball more intelligently than Huddlestone, does it better under pressure, and does it more accurately. So there is no criteria by which Huddlestone is the "best passer" at the club.

You know I think you're right. I think you might actually be the only unbiased person in the world, capably of true objectivity while other mere mortals are at the mercy of their own subjectivity.

Like when you watch Huddlestone after he hits a pass to admire....rather than admiring the pass itself. Why do you do that BC? Why watch what Huddelstone does after he passes it, rather than watch the pass itself? It couldn't be that you have an axe to grind? A post to make the next Monday as to another piece in your objective jigsaw?

I'll tell you one thing Huddlestone (objectively) did that Jenas (objectively) didn't and couldn't - and that's hit that thunderbolt into the top corner against Bolton, effectively getting us Champions League football for the first time since, well, even you have been watching.

Still, far better to criticise him for the ones that go in Row Z than the ones that actually change the future of the club. Objectively, of course.

[Bus-Conductor]

You know I think you're right. I think you might actually be the only unbiased person in the world, capably of true objectivity while other mere mortals are at the mercy of their own subjectivity.

Like when you watch Huddlestone after he hits a pass to admire....rather than admiring the pass itself. Why do you do that BC? Why watch what Huddelstone does after he passes it, rather than watch the pass itself? It couldn't be that you have an axe to grind? A post to make the next Monday as to another piece in your objective jigsaw?

I'll tell you one thing Huddlestone (objectively) did that Jenas (objectively) didn't and couldn't - and that's hit that thunderbolt into the top corner against Bolton, effectively getting us Champions League football for the first time since, well, even you have been watching.

Still, far better to criticise him for the ones that go in Row Z than the ones that actually change the future of the club. Objectively, of course.


Jenas has scored great goals too (Arsenal away last season) curling a long range shot with his left peg after stripping Cliche of the ball and running half the length of the pitch. But, to be honest, I'd be just as happy with a tap in from six yards. That's the point. You seem to have decided Huddlestone is better than Jenas because he scored a 25 yard screamer. I'd rather a midfielder that scores and assists more than one who scores a screamer but scores less.

It's not about having an axe to grind. It's about having an opinion and articulating that opinion and backing it up with evidence.

The best you can seem to do is offer a pretty simplistic "Huddlestone must be a better footballer because he scored a long range screamer"

Is that really the most enlightening argument you have in Huddlestone's favour ?

[davidmatzdorf]

Huddlestone is a better footballer for Tottenham because he fits better into our team than Jenas. That's why he's been playing. We are a more effective team with Hudd and either Modric or Palacios than we are with Jenas and anyone.

When they are working well together, Hudd and Wilson are our best central midfield partnership. We control possession better and are harder to play through when they play together. We have won other important games with Hudd and Modric, but we conspicuously controlled the middle of the park less well.

At 23, Hudd is one of the two first-choice central midfielders for a top 4 club - probably the first choice central midfielder, judging by appearances. He was in nearly every single team that won 21 league matches and qualified for the Champions League. That's why he's better, not because he hit one long range goal. He's better because our team plays better when he's in it.

[spurs_viola]

....
Regarding his development, I think I may be alone in the thinking that we actually should be thanking Senor Ramos for kick starting it by addressing the fitness/strength aspect of his game which has led to the rest of his skill set being let truly loose. I only hope no-one prises him away from us in the coming years because I honestly think he will be lethal in a couple more seasons time when he hits his prime.

You are not alone. But it is almost a taboo on this site to say anything complimentary about Ramos. Far easier to ignore or deny his and Alvares' efforts in getting the team much fitter and more aware of modern diet etc. However, objective people could see that players like Huddlestone started to look leaner and fitter, which helped the team to play with faster pass-and-move style and avoid many of those muscle injuries we suffered so much before and after the "Spanish regime" and play with much better physical stamina throughout the season 2008-09 than we showed previously.

[battspur]

Jenas has scored great goals too (Arsenal away last season) curling a long range shot with his left peg after stripping Cliche of the ball and running half the length of the pitch. But, to be honest, I'd be just as happy with a tap in from six yards. That's the point. You seem to have decided Huddlestone is better than Jenas because he scored a 25 yard screamer. I'd rather a midfielder that scores and assists more than one who scores a screamer but scores less.

It's not about having an axe to grind. It's about having an opinion and articulating that opinion and backing it up with evidence.

The best you can seem to do is offer a pretty simplistic "Huddlestone must be a better footballer because he scored a long range screamer"

Is that really the most enlightening argument you have in Huddlestone's favour ?

I cant believe someone is promoting Jenas in a post about passing the ball well. The one player who for seasons has given the ball away like a powder puff headless chicken legged fairy, more than any other player in the side. In the final third he is clueless - running up to the opposing defenders and giving them the ball back like he does. You dont have to be bright to have a shot every now and then, but most of his attempts all round are week.
He is mentally week
And you are a Bus Conducter

[battspur]

Weak