Erik Lamela wins the 2021 Puskas Award

[JeremyPaxton]

This is pretty much why I support spurs. The craziness (Levy on deadline day), the DNA of football brilliance (2x puskas in a row, peak Eriksen, Ginola, Gazza, Hoddle), the utter bullshit (UEFA reversing Spurs' "home" draw in the CL final because of the "nature of their fans") .. sadly the dodgy defending and dodgy hotel catering come as part of the package I guess. COYS.

 

[Delboy75]

Genuinely miss him. As an overall player for us his time was flawed by injury. But purely as a squad player we took him for granted.

 

[Ruffinthepuffin]

Genuinely miss him. As an overall player for us his time was flawed by injury. But purely as a squad player we took him for granted.

Agree 100%. ??

 

[Ruffinthepuffin]

If we had 11 players who gave a shit like he did we'd certainly win the title for shithousery. Man was a legend.

Absolutely. ??

 

[LeSoupeKitchen]

Honestly? The tone of his voice or reaction to the goal just didn't occur to me. I was more responding to this persistent and wholly inaccurate suggestion that whenever a commentator does or says something someone doesn't like, that it's bias, agenda or whatever else. The pitch of his voice or him failing to cum in his pants over it just didn't occur and I still don't care about that but I take the point.

Looking at it again, I think perhaps there's an element of surprise with a twist of disbelief that he meant it, perhaps. Could he have gotten more excited? Yeah, he could have I suppose but if we're at the stage where people are going to complain about even that and throw 'anti-Tottenham', bias or agenda into the mix then it's getting beyond ridiculous. Poor commentator? Yeah, you can throw that at him, he's been going at it for about fifty years (you'll see his name in the credits for MOTD or the Big Match in the late 60's early 70's) and maybe it's time for someone else to upset the sensitive ones on here

It's Smith I'm talking about - didn't think he started until the 90s at the earliest. He's not in disbelief - he says before the replay it's one of those flicks that invariably don't come off but this time it trundles into the corner.

I agree that 99.9% of the time we are generally too sensitive to commentary. But there is no doubt that goal deserved better.

 

[CantSmileWithoutYou]

Honestly? The tone of his voice or reaction to the goal just didn't occur to me. I was more responding to this persistent and wholly inaccurate suggestion that whenever a commentator does or says something someone doesn't like, that it's bias, agenda or whatever else. The pitch of his voice or him failing to cum in his pants over it just didn't occur and I still don't care about that but I take the point.

Looking at it again, I think perhaps there's an element of surprise with a twist of disbelief that he meant it, perhaps. Could he have gotten more excited? Yeah, he could have I suppose but if we're at the stage where people are going to complain about even that and throw 'anti-Tottenham', bias or agenda into the mix then it's getting beyond ridiculous. Poor commentator? Yeah, you can throw that at him, he's been going at it for about fifty years (you'll see his name in the credits for MOTD or the Big Match in the late 60's early 70's) and maybe it's time for someone else to upset the sensitive ones on here

You are so wrong on this A&C.

Tyler fucking hates us, his commentary and reactions to Tottenham during matches is quite frankly abysmal.

Listen to the twat a bit more when he's commentating on non-spurs games and then when we're playing.

Truly, shockingly biased, 'commentator'.

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

You are so wrong on this A&C.

Tyler fucking hates us, his commentary and reactions to Tottenham during matches is quite frankly abysmal.

Listen to the twat a bit more when he's commentating on non-spurs games and then when we're playing.

Truly, shockingly biased, 'commentator'.

No, I don't think so. People attach way too much importance on what they say anyway.

It's funny how, across SC, you could pick out someone who thinks one commentator is biased against us, another who thinks some other commentator is biased against us and so on. It must be the biggest sporting conspiracy of all time. So if you're right and the next person is right about the next commentator and so on, are really to believe that football commentary is riddled with anti-Spurs agenda? Really? I mean, come onnnnnnnn

Tyler might not have a style you like, he might be a poor commentator and he might not day things you agree with but he's not got a specific agenda against Spurs

I happen to think commentary on football has got much worse over the years coupled with supporters expecting the commentator to reflect their passion, their knowledge and enthusiasm for a club and when they don't it must be bias. Surely it's bias right? Watch one of those MOTD or Big Match Revisited shows where they show 70's and 80's stuff. Uncluttered by stats or the need to constantly just say something to fill the gaps, the difference is huge. Today's commentator or the style of it is poor in comparison.

Agenda? Bias? No.

Anyway, Lamela's goal was fantastic and that's what we're in this thread to talk about so apologies for taking it away from that people. I'll stop now, pinky swear.