Supersi32
Well-Known Member
- Jul 23, 2008
- 2,525
- 2,754
Injured his hamstring in the warm up apparently...
███████ Match Ratings vs Chelsea ███████
- Thread starter OmarsComing
- Start date
Injured his hamstring in the warm up apparently...
phil
Well-Known Member
- Oct 25, 2004
- 2,038
- 1,239
Wouldn't have counted as the linesman flagged for offside.
When I played, warm-up generally meant smoking a fag in the centre circle and I don't remember any of us getting a hamstring injury.
Worrying that we now have Lennon, VdV, Defoe and Kaboul out with hamstring injuries at the busiest time of the season.
- Oct 2, 2004
- 48,250
- 47,294
- Staff
- #63
Friedel - 6 - Did nothing wrong in goal but at times needs to be a bit more sensible with his distribution. He put us on the backfoot a couple of times without needing to.
Walker - 6 - Not many defensive dramas but gave the ball away a bit too much. Completely isolated in the second half though so couldn't make the most of his attacking threat.
King - 7 - Solid as ever. Looks composed whoever he's playing against.
Gallas - 7 - Didn't put a foot wrong and looks back to his best.
BAE - 5 - Great up until the goal where he completely abandoned his marking. Pretty poor in the second half.
Modric - 6 - Never really got into the game after the first 15 minutes and Harry completely misused him in the second half.
Sandro - 8 - Immense as usual. If him and Parker can work out their roles they'll be invincible.
Parker - 6 - Not his usual self and looked very tired.
VdV - 5 - Not in the game at all and not sure where Harry was trying to play him.
Bale - 7 - Our most dangerous player even if he clearly wasn't fully fit.
Adebayor - 6 - Took his goal well and put in some great hold up play. Wasteful at times though.
Pav - 4 - Back to the old Pav. Terrible movement, terrible work ethic, terrible distribution. We should have known really.
Redknapp - 4 - Dropped a bollock with his half time substitution and then seemed reluctant to try and sort it out. If we'd lost it would have been down to his error and I hope he comes up with something for the next few games.
Walker - 6 - Not many defensive dramas but gave the ball away a bit too much. Completely isolated in the second half though so couldn't make the most of his attacking threat.
King - 7 - Solid as ever. Looks composed whoever he's playing against.
Gallas - 7 - Didn't put a foot wrong and looks back to his best.
BAE - 5 - Great up until the goal where he completely abandoned his marking. Pretty poor in the second half.
Modric - 6 - Never really got into the game after the first 15 minutes and Harry completely misused him in the second half.
Sandro - 8 - Immense as usual. If him and Parker can work out their roles they'll be invincible.
Parker - 6 - Not his usual self and looked very tired.
VdV - 5 - Not in the game at all and not sure where Harry was trying to play him.
Bale - 7 - Our most dangerous player even if he clearly wasn't fully fit.
Adebayor - 6 - Took his goal well and put in some great hold up play. Wasteful at times though.
Pav - 4 - Back to the old Pav. Terrible movement, terrible work ethic, terrible distribution. We should have known really.
Redknapp - 4 - Dropped a bollock with his half time substitution and then seemed reluctant to try and sort it out. If we'd lost it would have been down to his error and I hope he comes up with something for the next few games.
NickHSpurs
Well-Known Member
- Mar 14, 2004
- 13,636
- 11,909
Sandro and Bale our standout performers.
Ekotto's distribution was strange yesterday, they'd obviously identified a weakness and thought it would work, except it didn't.
I hope that was Pavlyuchenko's last performance for us. Good finisher, average footballer, all he's good at doing is putting his laces through the ball and shooting, he offered us absolutely nothing yesterday.
Sell Pav, get Hoilett, simples.
Ekotto's distribution was strange yesterday, they'd obviously identified a weakness and thought it would work, except it didn't.
I hope that was Pavlyuchenko's last performance for us. Good finisher, average footballer, all he's good at doing is putting his laces through the ball and shooting, he offered us absolutely nothing yesterday.
Sell Pav, get Hoilett, simples.
Wheeler Dealer
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2011
- 6,924
- 12,438
With the exception of the first 20 minutes, we struggled to get a hold of the game and were unable to gain any flow or pattern. Chelsea's defence was rarely troubled, which was my main concern.
ThorntonSpur
every away game is a home game
- Jan 21, 2011
- 2,440
- 645
friedel 8 played well again
walker 7
gallas 7
king 7
bae 5 poor game at fault for goal looks poor against top teams.
vdv 6
sandro 8.5 best player
parker 6.6
m0dric 6.5 off pace and out of position in second half
bale 7.5
ade 7.5 good game played well for team
pav 5 - no service and it looked like no desire.
walker 7
gallas 7
king 7
bae 5 poor game at fault for goal looks poor against top teams.
vdv 6
sandro 8.5 best player
parker 6.6
m0dric 6.5 off pace and out of position in second half
bale 7.5
ade 7.5 good game played well for team
pav 5 - no service and it looked like no desire.
Bus-Conductor
SC Supporter
- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
I think it's well worth reflecting on the tactical battle last night, which was once again evidence that Redknapp does do tactics, and unfortunately, gets it wrong more than right.
It appeared to me that Redknapp set us up in a kind of 433/451 match up last night, where I thought, when I heard the team he'd go, 4231. This is not the first time that Redknapp has attempted to mimic Chelsea when we played them (we had the diamond attempt previously). As with that diamond experiment, the concept wasn't bad, but the execution of it was flawed.
For some bizarre reason Redknapp committed his regular faux pas of putting VDV on the right. Normally daft, this is cataclysmically poorly thought out against the best attacking LB playing in Chelsea's 433 system with Mata out there as well. Bar far Chelsea's most threatening side.
This error was slightly mitigated by the fact that, first half, we pretty much could still control much of the midfield, thanks to having four effective receivers and passers of the ball against Chelsea's 3. This was because part of Redknapp's tactical change of playing Sandro, Parker and Modric worked, having VDV, Modric and Bale all drifting all over the pitch also worked when energy levels and work rate were up early on, and our half time possession stat was 60%.
Although it was a little disappointing the way our early pressing (which brought our goal) faded, it was still a very robust performance first half that had more good than bad about it, but Redknapp's decision to repeat his Arsenal/VDV mistake was baffling, and once again contributed to an equalising goal. Groundhog day.
But, if tactically the first half was a 50/50 affair for Redknapp, what he did second half was effectively cost us any chance of maintaining a hold of the midfield or of controlling the game. It wasn't his fault VDV had to be replaced.But what Redknapp did was throw out the tactical baby with the tactical bath water.
He could have used VDV departure to sure up his first half mistake and put either Krancjar on, or even more protectively put Pienaar on, which would have protected the weakest link in the team (Walker) whilst allowing cover for Walker to get forward and also serve to stifle the Cole/Mata combo.
But this is where Redknapp often falls woefully short. What he did was bring on Pav.
Let's observe a minutes silence while we contemplate this. No clapping.
Not only was bringing on Pav (as it would have been Defoe) the wrong move just because it was Pav, the subsequent change to 442 was even worse, and meant Chelsea now had complete control of the midfield, a control they didn't really relinquish until we put in a final harare in the last 10 minutes.
What I don't get is, not for the first time, Redknapp then stands there afterwards and says something like "yeah, they had the extra man in midfield second half and it showed". Well why fucking do it then ? Why ? Why ?
It's like by saying it afterwards, he's claiming some kind of retrospective credit for helping Chelsea. Like "well my tactics were excellent, just for the wrong team, but at least they were excellent for one of us, so I am a tactician".
This was a pretty typical case of Redknapp's inability to read and react tactically to the benefit of the team IMO. He got some things right, but some fundamental things wrong.
I don't want him to stop "doing tactics" I just wish he was cleverer. The freedom he gives players is a joy to watch sometimes, and VDV is probably the biggest beneficiary of that, and invariably pays it back, along with Modric and Bale. But that freedom is also our downfall as these players often shirk responsibility, and there was plenty of that going on in this game.
Modric spent virtually the whole of the second half coming inside and completely forgetting that he was supposed to be playing on the right and helping out Walker (god knows he needs it too). More freedom biting the arse that feeds it.
A 60% possession first half became 49% second. There were still some chances created by both teams and for a neutral I'm sure it was a decent watch. I'm not neutral though, and for me the game was surrendered effectively by the tactics of our manager, despite his opposite number losing two players through injury, which should have made them even weaker.
It appeared to me that Redknapp set us up in a kind of 433/451 match up last night, where I thought, when I heard the team he'd go, 4231. This is not the first time that Redknapp has attempted to mimic Chelsea when we played them (we had the diamond attempt previously). As with that diamond experiment, the concept wasn't bad, but the execution of it was flawed.
For some bizarre reason Redknapp committed his regular faux pas of putting VDV on the right. Normally daft, this is cataclysmically poorly thought out against the best attacking LB playing in Chelsea's 433 system with Mata out there as well. Bar far Chelsea's most threatening side.
This error was slightly mitigated by the fact that, first half, we pretty much could still control much of the midfield, thanks to having four effective receivers and passers of the ball against Chelsea's 3. This was because part of Redknapp's tactical change of playing Sandro, Parker and Modric worked, having VDV, Modric and Bale all drifting all over the pitch also worked when energy levels and work rate were up early on, and our half time possession stat was 60%.
Although it was a little disappointing the way our early pressing (which brought our goal) faded, it was still a very robust performance first half that had more good than bad about it, but Redknapp's decision to repeat his Arsenal/VDV mistake was baffling, and once again contributed to an equalising goal. Groundhog day.
But, if tactically the first half was a 50/50 affair for Redknapp, what he did second half was effectively cost us any chance of maintaining a hold of the midfield or of controlling the game. It wasn't his fault VDV had to be replaced.But what Redknapp did was throw out the tactical baby with the tactical bath water.
He could have used VDV departure to sure up his first half mistake and put either Krancjar on, or even more protectively put Pienaar on, which would have protected the weakest link in the team (Walker) whilst allowing cover for Walker to get forward and also serve to stifle the Cole/Mata combo.
But this is where Redknapp often falls woefully short. What he did was bring on Pav.
Let's observe a minutes silence while we contemplate this. No clapping.
Not only was bringing on Pav (as it would have been Defoe) the wrong move just because it was Pav, the subsequent change to 442 was even worse, and meant Chelsea now had complete control of the midfield, a control they didn't really relinquish until we put in a final harare in the last 10 minutes.
What I don't get is, not for the first time, Redknapp then stands there afterwards and says something like "yeah, they had the extra man in midfield second half and it showed". Well why fucking do it then ? Why ? Why ?
It's like by saying it afterwards, he's claiming some kind of retrospective credit for helping Chelsea. Like "well my tactics were excellent, just for the wrong team, but at least they were excellent for one of us, so I am a tactician".
This was a pretty typical case of Redknapp's inability to read and react tactically to the benefit of the team IMO. He got some things right, but some fundamental things wrong.
I don't want him to stop "doing tactics" I just wish he was cleverer. The freedom he gives players is a joy to watch sometimes, and VDV is probably the biggest beneficiary of that, and invariably pays it back, along with Modric and Bale. But that freedom is also our downfall as these players often shirk responsibility, and there was plenty of that going on in this game.
Modric spent virtually the whole of the second half coming inside and completely forgetting that he was supposed to be playing on the right and helping out Walker (god knows he needs it too). More freedom biting the arse that feeds it.
A 60% possession first half became 49% second. There were still some chances created by both teams and for a neutral I'm sure it was a decent watch. I'm not neutral though, and for me the game was surrendered effectively by the tactics of our manager, despite his opposite number losing two players through injury, which should have made them even weaker.
Spurger King
can't smile without glue
- Jul 22, 2008
- 43,881
- 95,149
Simple one this time. Sandro was easily our best player. Bale and Friedel had good games as well.
I thought Modric and Walker were very poor yesterday. Probably the worst I've seen them play. Having said that they looked like world beaters compared to the talent vacuum that is Pav.
I thought Modric and Walker were very poor yesterday. Probably the worst I've seen them play. Having said that they looked like world beaters compared to the talent vacuum that is Pav.
Bus-Conductor
SC Supporter
- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
Why did Friedel have a good game ?
Go and look at where Cech was for Adebayors goal, and then look where Friedel was for Sturridge's. Chech didn't quite get there but at least he tried.
And this was after Friedel had already spilled one straight to sturridge. If Gomes had done that he'd be getting mullered, the commentators didn't metion it once after it happened. Then there was the moment (can't remember when) when King stood there thinking Friedel would come for a ball, and Friedel was just stood routed.
Spurger King
can't smile without glue
- Jul 22, 2008
- 43,881
- 95,149
Well I haven't had time to re-watch the game under a microscope so was basing my view on the general impression I was left with.
I didn't blame Friedel for the goal at all, and in fact it was thanks to Friedel that Sturridge didn't score in the 2nd half. Yes he dropped a couple of balls, but generally I thought he looked solid.
bananafish
Banned
- Dec 8, 2011
- 63
- 0
I think the most worrisome part of that Pav sub is that it raises (for me at least) the prospect that Pav is staying because we can't get anyone else for some reason (no money, their clubs won't sell etc) and we have to get back on his good side. Look at the way Harry is suddenly talking about him now - "I want to keep him, he's a good lad etc etc..."
That is the only reason I can see for playing Pav these last two games. We have really struggled to bring in players in the Jan window and I worry it will be no different this time.
Frightening prospect indeed.
That is the only reason I can see for playing Pav these last two games. We have really struggled to bring in players in the Jan window and I worry it will be no different this time.
Frightening prospect indeed.
Bus-Conductor
SC Supporter
- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
I don't think that's the case. I think Redknapp has always been fundamentally a 442 type of guy, and invariably defaults to this. I think he'll happily sell Pav in the window if there's a taker.
The truth is, in terms of efficacy, there really isn't much to choose between Defoe and Pav, it's just that aesthetically Pav is more painful to watch. They both score at a similar rate I think, Pav actually sees more of the ball than Defoe usually, it's just that he's so fucking flimsy for his physique and so prone to falling over he just makes you want to punch yourself in the head.
Paxtonite
Active Member
- Nov 28, 2004
- 1,956
- 32
Friedel - 7 solid
Walker - 5 one of his poorest games for us. Wasteful in posession
Ekotto - 5 at fault for not tracking Sturridge but appeared to wake up
Gallas - 6 Did ok
King - 7 although he too hesitated for their goal expecting a handball
VDV - 5 didnt do enough when on the pitch
Sandro - 8 fought and battled throughout
Parker - 7 strangely subdued game for him
Modric - 6 we didnt get him on the ball enough
Bale - 6 great run for goal but didnt hold ball long enough to be dangerous
Ade - 6 good goal but balls passed up to him just didnt seem to stick
Pav - 5 looked like he was told to play deepish. Didnt work.
Walker - 5 one of his poorest games for us. Wasteful in posession
Ekotto - 5 at fault for not tracking Sturridge but appeared to wake up
Gallas - 6 Did ok
King - 7 although he too hesitated for their goal expecting a handball
VDV - 5 didnt do enough when on the pitch
Sandro - 8 fought and battled throughout
Parker - 7 strangely subdued game for him
Modric - 6 we didnt get him on the ball enough
Bale - 6 great run for goal but didnt hold ball long enough to be dangerous
Ade - 6 good goal but balls passed up to him just didnt seem to stick
Pav - 5 looked like he was told to play deepish. Didnt work.
jonathanhotspur
Loose Cannon
- Jun 28, 2009
- 10,292
- 8,250
I really like Adebayor but you couldn't justify paying him £170k a week when his first touch lets him down as often as it does.
stemark44
Well-Known Member
- Mar 17, 2005
- 6,598
- 1,829
He is a very inconsistent player for me and the last few games,he has been poor.
£170,000 a week for him is a joke,I certainly wouldn't pay him more than £50,000.
Demba Ba is a far better striker.
jonathanhotspur
Loose Cannon
- Jun 28, 2009
- 10,292
- 8,250
I'd pay him no more than £100k, to be honest. If you're going to pay a striker £170k a week, you're looking for an immaculate first touch, a good awareness of the offside rule and clinical finishing.
I can't comment on Ba because I've seen very little of him.
sasa_moto
Member
- Aug 9, 2008
- 265
- 17
BC got it spot on. Every time we play decent team with three midfielders, Harry decides to "give it a go" and play "with two up front" and we always lose midfield battle. We managed to win some, in the past, but generally we were lucky more then not when playing 442 against 3 man midfield, against top oposition.
Similar threads
- Showcase: Item
Match Threads
Spurs vs Liverpool - Match Day 7 - 30th Sept KO 5:30pm
