►►►►►► Match Ratings vs Wolverhampton Wanderers ◄◄◄◄◄◄

MOTM


  • Total voters
    122

JimmyG2

SC Supporter
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
7,483
#61
I'm not doing the Pav argument, I don't class what he does as 'football'. Unfortunately it's far too simplistic to do the whole 'yeah but minutes per goal' argument, and it's a far cry from using reasoned logic.

Very good of you to admit Parker was an upgrade on O'Hara although I've got to say more of a relief than anything else.
Your sarcasm is wasted on me. I acknowledge it but don't react.
The Pav. argument I present is eminently based on reasoned logic, mathematical logic even, but if you can't be bothered that's fine.

It's neither good nor bad of me to admit when I am wrong.

Shall I start an 'Is Parker any better than Livermore' thread?

The two games prior to his injury were Norwich and Swansea.
He was very average against Swansea and decent against Norwich.
He may have been carrying an injury by then.
 

Spurs_Bear

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
14,175
#62
Your sarcasm is wasted on me. I acknowledge it but don't react.
The Pav. argument I present is eminently based on reasoned logic, mathematical logic even, but if you can't be bothered that's fine.

It's neither good nor bad of me to admit when I am wrong.

Shall I start an 'Is Parker any better than Livermore' thread?

The two games prior to his injury were Norwich and Swansea.
He was very average against Swansea and decent against Norwich.
He may have been carrying an injury by then.
He went off injured against Swansea, but it's funny how 'very average' and 'decent' earlier translated as 'poor for a while now'.

Football isn't a game of maths, if it was your mate Pav would be courted by every team under the sun, but he isn't, because he's abysmal.

Genuinely not being sarcastic, mightily relieved you admitted Parker was an upgrade on O'Hara.

And would genuinely 'Kevin Keegan' it if you started that thread about Livermore and Parker.

Do it.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,303
#63
He went off injured against Swansea, but it's funny how 'very average' and 'decent' earlier translated as 'poor for a while now'.

Football isn't a game of maths, if it was your mate Pav would be courted by every team under the sun, but he isn't, because he's abysmal.

Genuinely not being sarcastic, mightily relieved you admitted Parker was an upgrade on O'Hara.

And would genuinely 'Kevin Keegan' it if you started that thread about Livermore and Parker.

Do it.
And the minute he went off against Swansea, we started to go tits up.
 

OiOiDrUnkYiD2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
3,583
#66
Only just got around to posting but what a disappointing and frustrating 90 mins that was. Another game that we were robbed of three points. A game where we dominated and were the much better side but just could not get that crucial goal or that little bit of luck.

We started pretty well controlling the game, playing all the football and should of done better with our chances then Wolves get a jammy goal from a corner that was never a corner and poor defending. Once they got that early lucky goal they just sat back, put all their men behind the ball and worked very hard, time wasted and made it very hard for us to break them down.

I thought we played well and should of won the game, but yet again we did not take our chances, also why is Bale been told to pay in that free role in the centre? Yet he again he was poor and frustrating. He should be on that wing, so many times he should of been bombing down that wing looking to whip in a nice ball or take on his man but instead he was in centre.

Dawson was shocking, even the Dawson lovers around me were saying how shit he was. Everytime he got the ball he looked uncomfortable, he looked clumbsy, he gave away the ball, and was so lucky to not of cost us more goals.

Also why did he bring off Lennon? He should of took VDV off. I did not understand that.

Overall we played pretty well and should of won the game but yet again poor refeing decisions has cost us. We attacked and attacked but just could not get that goal. Very frustrating!



Fredial 6 not much to do, maybe could of doone better for the goal and left it for Modric to kick away maybe???????

Walker-6 looked a bit shaky and got beat a couple of times but did do well going forward

Dawson-4 very poor, he is clearly not good enough

Kaboul-6 done some ok things, got forward well,

ekotto-6 done ok again done ok going forward

Lennon-6.5 done ok, looked lively, maade a few god runs should of scored!

modric-7.5 very good goal, some good shots, gave it away in some silly positions today, still done well

parker-6 again done some good things, gave it away a bit sloppy at times,

bale_5 poor? few good runs. should of scored a few times, terrible shots should of been on the wing, hes been poor few games,

vdv-6 done some ok things but did not do muich

ade-6 held it up well, unlucky not to score, done some ok things
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,995
#67
I don't have much to add what's already been said in the thread.

I thought we were basically a bit unlucky and a bit out of sorts. It was a bitty game and we couldn't seem to quite find our rhythm.

I thought Dawson looked like a player from a mid-table team. I know Harry likes his leadership qualities, but I actually thought his yelling and pointing was unhelpful. This is a team which knows what it's doing, has been doing very well without yelling and pointing and I'm not convinced Dawson knows the best way to play anyway. It was certainly the shakiest I've seen the back four for a while and personally I'd prefer to see Bassong in there with Kaboul.

Last thing, I understood why Harry went 4-4-2 but yesterday it didn't work, we were all straight lines again and easy to defend against. I think the swapping of wings is a useful thing, but we're still playing in straight lines. I prefer the 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 thing because the free role our forwards have and the extra space and rotation they can get going poses more problems to the opposition.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
#68
I don't have much to add what's already been said in the thread.

I thought we were basically a bit unlucky and a bit out of sorts. It was a bitty game and we couldn't seem to quite find our rhythm.

I thought Dawson looked like a player from a mid-table team. I know Harry likes his leadership qualities, but I actually thought his yelling and pointing was unhelpful. This is a team which knows what it's doing, has been doing very well without yelling and pointing and I'm not convinced Dawson knows the best way to play anyway. It was certainly the shakiest I've seen the back four for a while and personally I'd prefer to see Bassong in there with Kaboul.

Last thing, I understood why Harry went 4-4-2 but yesterday it didn't work, we were all straight lines again and easy to defend against. I think the swapping of wings is a useful thing, but we're still playing in straight lines. I prefer the 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 thing because the free role our forwards have and the extra space and rotation they can get going poses more problems to the opposition.
Not to mention the full backs being able to come from deep to better effect.
 

steve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
3,492
#69
I don't have much to add what's already been said in the thread.

I thought we were basically a bit unlucky and a bit out of sorts. It was a bitty game and we couldn't seem to quite find our rhythm.

I thought Dawson looked like a player from a mid-table team. I know Harry likes his leadership qualities, but I actually thought his yelling and pointing was unhelpful. This is a team which knows what it's doing, has been doing very well without yelling and pointing and I'm not convinced Dawson knows the best way to play anyway. It was certainly the shakiest I've seen the back four for a while and personally I'd prefer to see Bassong in there with Kaboul.

Last thing, I understood why Harry went 4-4-2 but yesterday it didn't work, we were all straight lines again and easy to defend against. I think the swapping of wings is a useful thing, but we're still playing in straight lines. I prefer the 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 thing because the free role our forwards have and the extra space and rotation they can get going poses more problems to the opposition.
Agree with this. Wolves made it difficult and we lacked energy after Wednesday which is what I feared although the effort was most definitely there and the players were desperately trying to win.

I thought maybe H could've gone shit or bust and played 3 at the back with Lennon right (wasted on the left) and Bale left, Mod and Parker in the middle with VDV behind Defoe and Adebayor. Maybe for at least 15/20 minutes at the end - certainly don't blame him for not though.

Dawson was poor as were the fullbacks I thought but I can cut him some slack after a long lay off and 3 games in a week - would prefer Ledley marking Aguero next week though as he's the sort of player Dawson struggles with.

Not the end of the world but we've had a points haul since Chelsea that most've us would've taken before hand.
 

jamesc0le

SISS:LOKO:plays/thinks/eats chicken like sissoko!
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
4,816
#70
also why is Bale been told to pay in that free role in the centre? Yet he again he was poor and frustrating. He should be on that wing, so many times he should of been bombing down that wing looking to whip in a nice ball or take on his man but instead he was in centre.
not sure he's been all that poor. and maybe he's being used more in this role because ade hasn't been all that great with the crosses this season.

i think after the subs we needed to adopt the freerole/floating/deep striker/attacking midfielder roles for bale and defoe. defoe can do it he just needs to be tactically instructed to do so. strictly.

as bc said it would enable the fullbacks to attack properly.

this is how we should have looked at the end of the game. believing in any given system we are using and not giving up or ''running out of ideas''. we are much better than that, and not showing it.

------------ade----------
------bale-------defoe----
----modric-parker-rafa---

it's not rocket science. in this system the front 3 should be completely fluid. ade needs to be told to come deep whenever appropriate. bale and defoe should be instructed to fill the cf position when it becomes empty, whoever/whenever appropriate. defoe/bale should also be instructed to keep an eye on the midfield 3, dropping back whenever one of those surges forward. completely fluid. strictly instructed. easy to do. not rocket science. we have the players to do it.

what we did at the end of the game , not really sure what that was, a bit messy, would be the kind thing to say. over the whole game though i thought we played well. not sumptuous like so many times this season, but it's not always going to be is it. i think also that bringing off ekotto and not getting him to bomb foward in a reshaped system at the end was a missed opportunity.


7/10

redknapp 5/10
 

HotspurFC1950

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
4,223
#71
As i have said on another thread, my preferred way of following games here in New Zealand is not to get up in the middle of the night but to follow updates on a small hand held PDA in between slumber then read Spurs Community then some hours later watch the game that i have already recorded.

Just about every game especially when we have not won i do not see the things so heavily criticised on here.

Of course, much of what is written on here is straight after the game when emotions are still running high.

However one example.


When i read Spurs Community i expected toe Daws hoofing as he has done often in the past and which i hate.

But in fact the game i saw he played one brilliant cross field pass to Benny and one other that did not reach the same player but largely he passed short and to feet.

I also expected to see Daws "rusty", Parker off the boil.

For me, that was not the case.

Modders played great but he did pass more waywardly than Parker & Daws put together.

As i say, i usually watch the game hours after and after reading comments on here whereas those comments on here are usually soon after the game by followers who have watched the game live and are disappointed with the result.

Given what has happened to all the teams around us it was a good point gained and we played well without gaining the deserved 3 points.
 

DiamondLites

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
1,543
#72
still baffled by the rose substitution. you need a goal so you bring off your excellent left back for an average one and leave kranjcar, pienaar and pav on the bench all of whom offer more of a goal/assist threat than bloody danny rose
 

Kendall

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
38,502
#73
Not to mention the full backs being able to come from deep to better effect.
Walker and BAE are so wasteful, especially the former. Whenever Walker skins a left back I'm never confident the cross will get near anyone, he may as well not have bothered.

He needs to work on that final ball. It's worse than Lennon's ever was.
 

Kendall

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
38,502
#74
still baffled by the rose substitution. you need a goal so you bring off your excellent left back for an average one and leave kranjcar, pienaar and pav on the bench all of whom offer more of a goal/assist threat than bloody danny rose
Rose is more attack minded than BAE and Redders clearly didn't want to take Bale off, or move him to left back. So it made sense in a way.

Plus BAE did take a nasty knock and has also played a hell of a lot of football.
 

HotspurFC1950

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
4,223
#75
still baffled by the rose substitution. you need a goal so you bring off your excellent left back for an average one and leave kranjcar, pienaar and pav on the bench all of whom offer more of a goal/assist threat than bloody danny rose
It was probably the nasty knock he toook and at half time he may have been asked to stay on and reluctantly agreed.

Rose coming on was therefore a respectful measure frm Arry to Benny.
 

JimmyG2

SC Supporter
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
7,483
#76
It was probably the nasty knock he toook and at half time he may have been asked to stay on and reluctantly agreed.

Rose coming on was therefore a respectful measure frm Arry to Benny.
BAE reportedly tweeted that his ankle was very painful after the game.
I assume Harry kept him on as long as possible without taking too much risk.

I used to have a rule that said never post or blog for 24 hrs if you are elated or pissed off, but you know you get drawn in and sometimes overstate your case.
Guilty as charged M'lud.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
#77
Walker and BAE are so wasteful, especially the former. Whenever Walker skins a left back I'm never confident the cross will get near anyone, he may as well not have bothered.

He needs to work on that final ball. It's worse than Lennon's ever was.
See my original ratings post. I couldn't agree more. I just don't rate Walker much at all. Defensively he worries me too. He has pace, but just has no idea how to actually defend, if it's not a race he doesn't know what he's doing and players are getting past him because despite his pace he doesn't have the ability to read situations. He says "on your marks, get set" and they're gone before he gets to "go". Sometimes he catches them up, sometimes he doesn't.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,303
#78
Walker and BAE are so wasteful, especially the former. Whenever Walker skins a left back I'm never confident the cross will get near anyone, he may as well not have bothered.

He needs to work on that final ball. It's worse than Lennon's ever was.
I have to agree with this. I find Walker's use of the ball somewhat baffling, even in deeper positions.
 

mpickard2087

Fantastic Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
19,493
#79
Walker and BAE are so wasteful, especially the former. Whenever Walker skins a left back I'm never confident the cross will get near anyone, he may as well not have bothered.

He needs to work on that final ball. It's worse than Lennon's ever was.
Yep they both could improve.

Walker if there isnt open space seems a bit lost with what to do, and often makes a silly decision.

BAE is as bad though at times, often he gets himself into some really fantastic positions, has beaten his marker all ends up, but then hits a poor cross or picks out the wrong pass.
 

StartingPrice

Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
32,568
#80
See my original ratings post. I couldn't agree more. I just don't rate Walker much at all. Defensively he worries me too. He has pace, but just has no idea how to actually defend, if it's not a race he doesn't know what he's doing and players are getting past him because despite his pace he doesn't have the ability to read situations. He says "on your marks, get set" and they're gone before he gets to "go". Sometimes he catches them up, sometimes he doesn't.
Translates for non-BC speakers: I decided immediately that I didn't like Walker, so now, whenever I see him, I remember only what he does wrong as it confirms my estimation of him :wink:
 
Top