►►►►►► Match Ratings VS Swansea City ◄◄◄◄◄◄

MOTM?


  • Total voters
    263

stemark44

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
6,598
If we had played 4-3-3 for the past 10 games we would have already qualified for Europe in 3rd place and we still might have been in with a chance for second place.

Harry MUST play this way for the rest of the season!
 

stevenqoz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
2,622
If we go with the same starting line-up will we expect Sandro to go man for man again as he did most of the game v Swansea, matched-up with Joe Allen? Stephane Sessegnon would be the player I would expect him to shadow. If so Modric will appear quite often will often up almost alongside Ade like he did on Sunday. Not really happy with that. As I said in another thread I don't remember a Spurs midfielder doing this man for man marking at home for many years.....maybe when Gazza was playing for Newcastle.
On another point Barcelona have at times played 3 5 2, 3 6 1 and 3 4 3...(as well as those mentioned) there is no exclusivity of formation for them.....and as it should always be ...look at who you have playing and find the best fit formation for those players which in itself requires coaching and player flexibility. Spurs have had this successful season by playing a variety of formations 4 4 2 , 4 4 1 1, 4 5 1 and its sub -sets plus 3 5 2 on occasion. This variety is itself a function of our squad and it's depth
 

StartingPrice

Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
32,568
Funny that, because our record playing that formation this season reads:

P:13 W:7 D:2 L:4 F:22 A: 19

Hardly a ringing endorsement. Except that whenever we've lost playing that way loads of people have said things like "we just were not in form today!", "there will always be games like that..." etc., but whenever we've won it's been stuff like "that's our strongest formation", "we should always play this way..." etc.

Not necessarily directed at you Legend, but I think there's a definite group of people who think about team selection primarily in terms of what you do when you have the ball, and only as an after thought what happens when you don't, without seemingly connecting that one aspect directly effects the other. So time and again I hear or read people saying, "it's only [insert weaker team], we shouldn't be thinking about them, we only need two in CM, we should over-run them...". The point being that playing only two in CM against teams which pack the midfield very often gives us less control over what's going on, shackles our creatives with defensive duties, means we have less of the ball, they have more of the ball, in more dangerous areas, and thus more chance of scoring, winning and drawing (which leads to only a slight positive goal-difference, and fewer wins for us).

Hey...



...I like Subbuteo...:eek:mg:
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,993
If we go with the same starting line-up will we expect Sandro to go man for man again as he did most of the game v Swansea, matched-up with Joe Allen? Stephane Sessegnon would be the player I would expect him to shadow. If so Modric will appear quite often will often up almost alongside Ade like he did on Sunday. Not really happy with that. As I said in another thread I don't remember a Spurs midfielder doing this man for man marking at home for many years.....maybe when Gazza was playing for Newcastle.
We definitely don't need to do that against Sunderland, that was a very specific tactic to neutralise Swansea's biggest danger. It should be horses for courses, but generally designed about this balanced formation. I think from time to time we may wish to consider playing another way, for instance if opponents are 4-4-2 merchants, but weak defensively down their flanks then you'd be aiming to exploit it.

On another point Barcelona have at times played 3 5 2, 3 6 1 and 3 4 3...(as well as those mentioned) there is no exclusivity of formation for them.....and as it should always be ...look at who you have playing and find the best fit formation for those players which in itself requires coaching and player flexibility. Spurs have had this successful season by playing a variety of formations 4 4 2 , 4 4 1 1, 4 5 1 and its sub -sets plus 3 5 2 on occasion. This variety is itself a function of our squad and it's depth
Yes Barcelona have tried all kinds of formations this year, primarily because they know that in most matches they are going to have70% possession, for them it's almost exclusively about finding different angles to attack with the phenomenal all-round players they have at their disposal. Even they, however, out of 30 La Liga matches played have gone 4-3-3/4-3-2-1 twenty times. On eight occasions they've decided they can do away with a defender however and play an extra midfielder in a 3-4-3, and for their other two matches they've gone variations on that theme. They've never once played 4-4-2/4-4-1-1.

Mourino's league leaders Real Madrid on the other hand, have played 4-2-3-1 28 times, and 4-3-3 twice. That's it.

Under Klopp, Borussia Dortmund, current leaders of the Bundesliga, have only played 4-2-3-1 in their 28 games.

Personally I don't believe that one formula fits all, but I do think that considering the strengths (and weaknesses) of our players 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 offers the most balanced team, the one likely to score the most goals whilst conceding the fewest. Within that set-up we may wish to experiment, for instance Lennon for VdV or Bale sometimes, Livermore instead of Sandro, perhaps Modric at the base of midfield, instead of more advanced etc. and I also think there are times within games where you may wish to roll the dice and go 4-4-2, bringing on Defoe for instance, but on the whole we should stick to the most positive line-up/set-up we have.
 

Legend10

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
10,847
We definitely don't need to do that against Sunderland, that was a very specific tactic to neutralise Swansea's biggest danger. It should be horses for courses, but generally designed about this balanced formation. I think from time to time we may wish to consider playing another way, for instance if opponents are 4-4-2 merchants, but weak defensively down their flanks then you'd be aiming to exploit it.



Yes Barcelona have tried all kinds of formations this year, primarily because they know that in most matches they are going to have70% possession, for them it's almost exclusively about finding different angles to attack with the phenomenal all-round players they have at their disposal. Even they, however, out of 30 La Liga matches played have gone 4-3-3/4-3-2-1 twenty times. On eight occasions they've decided they can do away with a defender however and play an extra midfielder in a 3-4-3, and for their other two matches they've gone variations on that theme. They've never once played 4-4-2/4-4-1-1.

Mourino's league leaders Real Madrid on the other hand, have played 4-2-3-1 28 times, and 4-3-3 twice. That's it.

Under Klopp, Borussia Dortmund, current leaders of the Bundesliga, have only played 4-2-3-1 in their 28 games.

Personally I don't believe that one formula fits all, but I do think that considering the strengths (and weaknesses) of our players 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 offers the most balanced team, the one likely to score the most goals whilst conceding the fewest. Within that set-up we may wish to experiment, for instance Lennon for VdV or Bale sometimes, Livermore instead of Sandro, perhaps Modric at the base of midfield, instead of more advanced etc. and I also think there are times within games where you may wish to roll the dice and go 4-4-2, bringing on Defoe for instance, but on the whole we should stick to the most positive line-up/set-up we have.
Ah the difference between paper formations and reality! i can absolutely assure you that Barca haven't played 4-3-3/4-3-2-1 20 times in la liga this season because for a start they more often than not don't even play with a right back, unless of course you're counting what it looks like on paper according to certain crap websites?
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,993
Ah the difference between paper formations and reality! i can absolutely assure you that Barca haven't played 4-3-3/4-3-2-1 20 times in la liga this season because for a start they more often than not don't even play with a right back, unless of course you're counting what it looks like on paper according to certain crap websites?
Great response mate, stabbed my argument right in the little-finger there didn't you!?! :lol:

On the narrow matter of my little finger however, I have to admit I haven't watched Barca play 30 times this season (have you?), I'm aware they have many times gone three at the back, according to this 'crappy' site they've done it in about a third of their games (http://www.whoscored.com/Teams/65), I dare say they call it wrong sometimes, just like you and I do, but they've played three at the back "more often than not", have they?
 

Spurs_Bear

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
14,146
Sloth.....that website notes notes one of our 'strengths' as SCORING FROM SET PIECE SITUATIONS.

I was enjoying reading it until that. :lol:
 

Legend10

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
10,847
Great response mate, stabbed my argument right in the little-finger there didn't you!?! :lol:

On the narrow matter of my little finger however, I have to admit I haven't watched Barca play 30 times this season (have you?), I'm aware they have many times gone three at the back, according to this 'crappy' site they've done it in about a third of their games (http://www.whoscored.com/Teams/65), I dare say they call it wrong sometimes, just like you and I do, but they've played three at the back "more often than not", have they?

This is my point, more often than not on paper you would call it a back 4, in reality Alves is anything but a defender.

Paper formations and football on the pitch are so often worlds apart!

And i don't know how many times I've watched barca this season but it's probably 30 odd, maybe more as outside of Spurs they have always been my 2nd team. Plus it's football from a different planet!
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,494
Ah the difference between paper formations and reality! i can absolutely assure you that Barca haven't played 4-3-3/4-3-2-1 20 times in la liga this season because for a start they more often than not don't even play with a right back, unless of course you're counting what it looks like on paper according to certain crap websites?
Just like in reality, in game we rarely ever will look like this:

Good to see we have our front 6 back for the run in, for me there's no doubt that we are at our best with:

Lennon...........Parker...........Luka...............Bale

..............................Rafa..............................

...............................Ade.............................
The point is that players, even Alves, are given default positions and default responsibilities in tandem with freedoms and their own initiative. Which is why Alves will still perform the function of a rb when Barca aren't having one of the 70% possession moments and the ball breaks down their right flank. Alves might spend 70% of his time as an auxiliary right winger, but the paper formation becomes reality when describing his default area of responsibility. And he's actually a bloody good rb. who is quick and tenacious.

This is my point, more often than not on paper you would call it a back 4, in reality Alves is anything but a defender.

Paper formations and football on the pitch are so often worlds apart!

And i don't know how many times I've watched barca this season but it's probably 30 odd, maybe more as outside of Spurs they have always been my 2nd team. Plus it's football from a different planet!

I've watched Barca a lot too, and they whilst they do have freedom and use instinctive initiative when on the ball, they also are incredibly disciplined, and snap back into their default shapes incredibly quickly, quicker than most teams I can think of.
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,993
Sloth.....that website notes notes one of our 'strengths' as SCORING FROM SET PIECE SITUATIONS.

I was enjoying reading it until that. :lol:
They've got some sort of comparison engine on their database which produces those strengths and weaknesses, the problem is that when you're talking about low frequency events you'll get wild fluctuations week to week in the ratings. Probably they'd be better disabling stuff which happens below a certain frequency because it's meaningless and throws the rest of it into disrepute. On the other hand they probably don't give a shit because they're providing an interesting website for fans, not 100% reliable data-service for stattos.

This is my point, more often than not on paper you would call it a back 4, in reality Alves is anything but a defender.

Paper formations and football on the pitch are so often worlds apart!

And i don't know how many times I've watched barca this season but it's probably 30 odd, maybe more as outside of Spurs they have always been my 2nd team. Plus it's football from a different planet!
Ok, ok, well I just heard Rodgers refer to their (Barca's) usual 4-3-3 in a interview he did this morning (http://www.talksport.co.uk/sports-n...sive-rodgers-dismisses-tottenham-link-168766?) so he's another who thinks their favoured formation is 4-3-3, but all that aside, for arguments sake let's agree you're correct and Barcelona usually don't play 4-3-3, it remains a peripheral issue to my main point, which you have yet to address.
 

Legend10

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
10,847
Just like in reality, in game we rarely ever will look like this:



The point is that players, even Alves, are given default positions and default responsibilities in tandem with freedoms and their own initiative. Which is why Alves will still perform the function of a rb when Barca aren't having one of the 70% possession moments and the ball breaks down their right flank. Alves might spend 70% of his time as an auxiliary right winger, but the paper formation becomes reality when describing his default area of responsibility. And he's actually a bloody good rb. who is quick and tenacious.




I've watched Barca a lot too, and they whilst they do have freedom and use instinctive initiative when on the ball, they also are incredibly disciplined, and snap back into their default shapes incredibly quickly, quicker than most teams I can think of.
Er I know we rarely look like that, that's why I referred to it as our front 6!

It's not me who gets bogged down in believing tactical genius!

In reality there is very little difference between the 4-2-3-1/ 4-3-3/ 4-4-1-1 that people are talking about!

All that people are saying which they believe is some sort of innovation is to play one extra defensive player in that 6 and one less attacking one!

That's it, Sandro in instead of Lennon for example just means that your 3 central midfield players have one extra defensive one in there, because quite frankly when Rafa plays in a 4-4-1-1 he operates in the main in there anyway!

It's not tactical genius, its no more than one more defensive player in that group, the same as pressing isn't genius, it's been here since footballs been here. 20 years ago we called it squeezing, now it's pressing, nothing innovative, if anything it's old school lower level football tactics where you figure the opposition can't play their way out because they aren't good enough so you 'squeeze' them in!

This game isn't rocket science, it's about doing the basics right and most of all it's about players and that's why even though I've questioned him on numerous occasions Redknapp is doing a great job, it's because he knows players!

he knew he needed Parker, he knew that Nelsen would be better for us at this stage than Bassong, he knew that despite 1 goal in 19 Saha would give us something important in the short term, he knows the value of experience around younger players and to me his biggest plus of all is that he knows the value of letting players go and play!

You think the sandro/Parker or the Livermore/Parker combination has been why we've done well in the last 3 games, superb by the way is a ridiculous exaggeration as we should be beating Bolton and Swansea at home! For me the biggest reason is that bale has played where he should be playing, he has been incredible in the last 3 games, really top draw!

Football isn't rocket science, in the end it's about players and that's what Redknapp does well, he doesn't need to be a tactical genius! Give us Messi and we would win the league, because it's about players!

Reknapp knows this and he knows what players he needs and that is what makes him a good manager!

For example BC judging on past posts you would have Gomes in goal, Hutton at RB, Gio out wide and the old warhorse that's Peter Crouch up front! Even with players of the quality of Rafa, Modders and Bale we couldn't quite carry them. Friedel was inspired by Redknapp, in one swoop he took all the nerves and uncertainty out of the back 4, it has to be a nightmare playing in front of Gomes!

In short this isn't a complicated game, intead of all this prolonged formation stuff it would be a lot simpler if people just said maybe we should play an extra defensive player in the middle of the park?
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,993
Er I know we rarely look like that, that's why I referred to it as our front 6!

It's not me who gets bogged down in believing tactical genius!

In reality there is very little difference between the 4-2-3-1/ 4-3-3/ 4-4-1-1 that people are talking about!

All that people are saying which they believe is some sort of innovation is to play one extra defensive player in that 6 and one less attacking one!

That's it, Sandro in instead of Lennon for example just means that your 3 central midfield players have one extra defensive one in there, because quite frankly when Rafa plays in a 4-4-1-1 he operates in the main in there anyway!

It's not tactical genius, its no more than one more defensive player in that group, the same as pressing isn't genius, it's been here since footballs been here. 20 years ago we called it squeezing, now it's pressing, nothing innovative, if anything it's old school lower level football tactics where you figure the opposition can't play their way out because they aren't good enough so you 'squeeze' them in!

This game isn't rocket science, it's about doing the basics right and most of all it's about players and that's why even though I've questioned him on numerous occasions Redknapp is doing a great job, it's because he knows players!

he knew he needed Parker, he knew that Nelsen would be better for us at this stage than Bassong, he knew that despite 1 goal in 19 Saha would give us something important in the short term, he knows the value of experience around younger players and to me his biggest plus of all is that he knows the value of letting players go and play!

You think the sandro/Parker or the Livermore/Parker combination has been why we've done well in the last 3 games, superb by the way is a ridiculous exaggeration as we should be beating Bolton and Swansea at home! For me the biggest reason is that bale has played where he should be playing, he has been incredible in the last 3 games, really top draw!

Football isn't rocket science, in the end it's about players and that's what Redknapp does well, he doesn't need to be a tactical genius! Give us Messi and we would win the league, because it's about players!

Reknapp knows this and he knows what players he needs and that is what makes him a good manager!

For example BC judging on past posts you would have Gomes in goal, Hutton at RB, Gio out wide and the old warhorse that's Peter Crouch up front! Even with players of the quality of Rafa, Modders and Bale we couldn't quite carry them. Friedel was inspired by Redknapp, in one swoop he took all the nerves and uncertainty out of the back 4, it has to be a nightmare playing in front of Gomes!

In short this isn't a complicated game, intead of all this prolonged formation stuff it would be a lot simpler if people just said maybe we should play an extra defensive player in the middle of the park?
I take your point, but I don't think anyone's saying 4-2-3-1 is massively innovative, or tactical genius, if anything people have been arguing the opposite all season to folk who seem to think the only way to play is 4-4-2.

As has been said countless times in this thread and others, saying 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 or whatever is just a short hand for conveying the kinds of players you want to play and the kinds of positions you want them in.

So, a flat 4-4-2 usually means you want two wingers, two CMs and two Strikers, the wingers generally stay wide and attack the flanks, the strikers get in the box and score goals, the CMs break up the opposition's play and try and do creative stuff when they've got the ball.

4-2-3-1 on the other hand, tries to convey the fact that you've two deeper-lying (usually) ball-winners, ahead of which you have another CM with less defensive duties than the other two, but with more attacking responsibility, and the wider AMs may or may not play down the flanks or down the centre (with more freedom than the wingers in the 4-4-2 in other words; more expectation of goals, slightly less for crosses), and ahead of them you want a mobile, preferably powerful, goal-scoring centre forward.

Then of course there are variations depending on the kinds of players you have, the opponents you're playing etc.

Now, people could of course write all that out each time, or they can just use the short-hand 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1 etc.

Unfortunately on this site I seem to end up typing it all out more often than not.

So yes, I want an extra, deeper-lying, ball-winning CM, I want one of the other CM to be pushed further forward and to have fewer defensive duties, I want my other two AMs to have more freedom to attack different areas of the pitch, I want them to score more as well as provide.

There is a big difference between that and 4-4-2, even if in essence, just as you suggest, we're talking about swapping only one player.
 

AngerManagement

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2004
Messages
12,518
I went for Adebayor, I think he worked his socks off

His two goals won us the game and were great headers, plus I think his movement was key to all our attacks and he linked play well too.

I think Bale caught the eye more and Lennon was great as soon as he came on but I think Adebayor was the man that won us the match
 

Paolo10

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
4,115
Some people just like to read their own opinions and admire them, they'll write pages on the differences between one team of 11 men and another team and label it as tactical insight. They usually know better than anyone who disagrees with them and the manager, usually their mates will support them and there'll be virtual reacharounds all over the place.

Football is a simple game, you can break it down as much as you like, but tactics and their variations are massively overrated in the game today, especially by a lot of internet blowhards IMO.

4-4-2 BAD - TACTICALLY NAIVE
4-5-1 GOOD - TACTICS SPOT ON
4-3-3 NEW - OOOH THAT WAS SURPRISING
4-2-1-3 I ALWAYS SAID WE SHOULD PLAY THIS FORMATION!!!!

People will see what they want to see, does it make me think they know what they're talking about? No.
 

Mr Pink

SC Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
44,524
Some people just like to read their own opinions and admire them, they'll write pages on the differences between one team of 11 men and another team and label it as tactical insight. They usually know better than anyone who disagrees with them and the manager, usually their mates will support them and there'll be virtual reacharounds all over the place.

Football is a simple game, you can break it down as much as you like, but tactics and their variations are massively overrated in the game today, especially by a lot of internet blowhards IMO.

4-4-2 BAD - TACTICALLY NAIVE
4-5-1 GOOD - TACTICS SPOT ON
4-3-3 NEW - OOOH THAT WAS SURPRISING
4-2-1-3 I ALWAYS SAID WE SHOULD PLAY THIS FORMATION!!!!

People will see what they want to see, does it make me think they know what they're talking about? No.
Like they'll give a feck :razz:

As for your last one, I think you mean 4-2-3-1 :grin:

How are you anyway?
 

StartingPrice

Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
32,568
Some people just like to read their own opinions and admire them, they'll write pages on the differences between one team of 11 men and another team and label it as tactical insight. They usually know better than anyone who disagrees with them and the manager, usually their mates will support them and there'll be virtual reacharounds all over the place.

Football is a simple game, you can break it down as much as you like, but tactics and their variations are massively overrated in the game today, especially by a lot of internet blowhards IMO.

4-4-2 BAD - TACTICALLY NAIVE
4-5-1 GOOD - TACTICS SPOT ON
4-3-3 NEW - OOOH THAT WAS SURPRISING
4-2-1-3 I ALWAYS SAID WE SHOULD PLAY THIS FORMATION!!!!

People will see what they want to see, does it make me think they know what they're talking about? No.
I like to read my own opinions, but, at least, they have the virtue of being somewhat...unique :eek:mg::eek:mg::eek:mg:
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,993
Some people just like to read their own opinions and admire them, they'll write pages on the differences between one team of 11 men and another team and label it as tactical insight. They usually know better than anyone who disagrees with them and the manager, usually their mates will support them and there'll be virtual reacharounds all over the place.

Football is a simple game, you can break it down as much as you like, but tactics and their variations are massively overrated in the game today, especially by a lot of internet blowhards IMO.

4-4-2 BAD - TACTICALLY NAIVE
4-5-1 GOOD - TACTICS SPOT ON
4-3-3 NEW - OOOH THAT WAS SURPRISING
4-2-1-3 I ALWAYS SAID WE SHOULD PLAY THIS FORMATION!!!!

People will see what they want to see, does it make me think they know what they're talking about? No.
There she blows!!!

Been missing you Paolo, glad you're back :grin:
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,494
Er I know we rarely look like that, that's why I referred to it as our front 6!

It's not me who gets bogged down in believing tactical genius!
It was you who drew the diagram of our front 6 in the 411 formation. I merely pointed out that we all use these formations - including managers - to make simplistic points about how teams are shaped by default areas of responsibility.

And I was arguing, regardless of formation, about what our ideal "front 6" is, using the last three games as an example of how it definitely isn't what you think it is.

All that people are saying which they believe is some sort of innovation is to play one extra defensive player in that 6 and one less attacking one!

That's it, Sandro in instead of Lennon for example just means that your 3 central midfield players have one extra defensive one in there, because quite frankly when Rafa plays in a 4-4-1-1 he operates in the main in there anyway!

It's not tactical genius, its no more than one more defensive player in that group, the same as pressing isn't genius, it's been here since footballs been here. 20 years ago we called it squeezing, now it's pressing, nothing innovative, if anything it's old school lower level football tactics where you figure the opposition can't play their way out because they aren't good enough so you 'squeeze' them in!

This game isn't rocket science, it's about doing the basics right and most of all it's about players and that's why even though I've questioned him on numerous occasions Redknapp is doing a great job, it's because he knows players!
If this game is so easy then why aren't City champions already, why did we blow 13 points to Arsenal in a month ? Surely if it's so simple and Redknapp knows all the answers then we'd be home and hosed by now, no ?

This game is not rocket science but it is certainly complex and involves multiple permutations of application, coaching, tactics, physical and mental conditioning, playing in different venues on different surfaces and pure instinctive footballing ability to name but a handful of the many things that all need to be permed into the formula for getting a result.

Tactical decisions made in games recently have effected the result. Sometimes startlingly like Arsenal away, where Redknapp made simple decisions look like Rocket science, Chelsea away and Swansea home and sometimes more subtly like Stoke at home, where one small tactical/personnel change at half time made us worse not better.

We clearly changed our shape, our balance between ball winning and non ball winning and our pressing policy in the the last three games, particularly against Chelsea and Swansea.

And in my, and most people's opinion we were better for it. Doesn't mean that it becomes the default in terms of shape, but I for one hope that level of work rate becomes the default no matter who plays and in what shape.

You think the sandro/Parker or the Livermore/Parker combination has been why we've done well in the last 3 games, superb by the way is a ridiculous exaggeration as we should be beating Bolton and Swansea at home! For me the biggest reason is that bale has played where he should be playing, he has been incredible in the last 3 games, really top draw!
We should be beating Bolton and Swansea but we didn't just beat them, it was the manner in which we beat them, fact that we changed our system, shape, personnel and methodology and produced outstandingly good performances IMO, in all three games, consecutively.

We've looked good with the ball all season but have looked less than good without the ball on numerous occasions, even at home. The last three games we looked like a decent team without the ball.

Football isn't rocket science, in the end it's about players and that's what Redknapp does well, he doesn't need to be a tactical genius! Give us Messi and we would win the league, because it's about players!


In short this isn't a complicated game, intead of all this prolonged formation stuff it would be a lot simpler if people just said maybe we should play an extra defensive player in the middle of the park?
I guess this is the crux of it. You think football is a simple game and I don't.

I think it is a complicated game that can be effected by coaching and tactics and the ability to make a group better than the sum of it's parts as well as individual ability.

It is why Atletico Bilbao can play ManU off the park twice in two weeks, why Swansea (and Norwich) are mid table not bottom, why we are above Chelsea, Why ManU are now 5 points clear of ManC and 18 points clear of us.

This week we had the same players more or less available as when played Chelsea home. Yet at our home they had more ball, dictated much of the game and more territory and chances. Because of a change of shape and balance we went to their ground (despite them being in better form than earlier) and had 56% of the ball better territory and better chances. That was simply about coaching and tactics, not individual components IMO. Same Swansea. Similar teams yet two completely different games because we changed our approach and tactics.
 
Top