Match Threads Fulham vs Spurs - Match Thread - Day 26

[hughy]

I (politely) disagree, not about Lamela, the lad should be starting every game with the form he's shown over the last month or so.

Yes Lamela got us pushing back up the pitch, but he was the only one. And before he was doing it, it was NDombele & Dele doing it.

Bale was on a yellow & we're managing his minutes/fitness. So why not just replace him with Lamela, then leave Dele & NDombele on? Son had another off night & looked absolutely knackered. So why not replace him with Sissoko & just push Dele into Sons position?

That leaves a pretty strong midfield of Hojbjerg, NDombele & Sissoko, with Lamela still there to do what he does so well, while allowing Dele to build up match fitness & confidence after another good performance and completing 90 minutes, thus starting to believe his manager is beginning to trust him.

We do have the players to continue to worry the opposition for 90 minutes but, for whatever reason, our manager continues to not want to utilise our (blatant) biggest strength, our attacking players, and prefers to see us drop deeper and deeper whilst basically being under siege until the final whistle.

It's failed us multiple times already this season, and we were very lucky that it didn't fail us again last night. As others have pointed out, it's a worrying pattern & we will not keep getting away with it throughout the remainder of the season.

I really don't think it's as simple as you make it out to be.

Lucas was clearly bought on to help out Doc on the right-hand side, and to an extent did a decent job of it. Could Sissoko have done that job? Perhaps. But his more central position helped, along with Hojbjerg, stem the flow of Fulham pressure that we saw in the first 20-25 minutes of the second half.

I actually felt that we played better once the subs were made. A second goal would have been great, and lets be honest Kane tucks that final chance away 9 times out of 10, but Fulham were hardly hammering our door down for 45 minutes like you've suggested with your final "under siege" comment. Also it's been pointed out by a number of posters on here that Fulham are in a false position, mainly due to the fact that they only picked up a point in their first 7 (possibly 8?) games before they had a more settled team. I'm not convinced continuing to push men forward would have benefitted us any more than what we did in the second half, as those long balls by Andersen could have been far more damaging had we been 20-30 yards further up the pitch.

 

[spursie]

Just seen the VAR decision. That's ludicrous. Never in a million years is that - or has ever been - handball. Authorities need to get a grip.

I too have just seen the VAR decision. While I agree that there is nothing Lemina could have done to avoid the ball hitting his arm and that the decision was taken to the letter of the law, I just want to play devil's advocate a little, and rationalise in my mind. I shall give my (biased) opinion that after the ball struck Lemina's arm it bounced in the direction of fellow Fulham player Maja favourably enough to help him score. Who can determine whether Lemina's arm "helped" the ball move in that direction, whether accidentally or with any degree of intent? Similarly, who can determine whether the ball would have bounced so favourably had Lemina's arm not been in that position and the ball carried on to strike his hip/side? Far easier to call the rule and say it was handball. Thanks ref! Good decision! I'm sleeping well tonight.

 

[CoopsieDeadpool]

I think all our subs were due to fitness rather than anything else.

Lack of game time for Bale and Dele, so still building up fitness. And Ndombele has played a lot of games recently, so could be trying to keep in the starting line up until Lo Celso is an option.

That all just makes far too much sense for me to agree with. I'm not great with sensible, you may have noticed over the years

 

[buckley]

I may be wrong but I think we are indirectly at fault for this rule that " any handball that happens before a goal is scored whether meant or by accident the goal will be disallowed " it was the Lorente goal against City that I believe made this rule come into fruition .
Myself it stops any ambiguity and subjective referee decisions although sometimes unfair at least it is a clear rule with no room for ambiguity
The time to worry is if the Var decides not to give a goal in such circumstance because then they will be guilt of giving a personnel opinion.
As I say myself we know the rules and by the rules that was not a goal and I would have had the hump if they had allowed the goal thereby ignoring the rules .
.

 

[CoopsieDeadpool]

I really don't think it's as simple as you make it out to be.

Lucas was clearly bought on to help out Doc on the right-hand side, and to an extent did a decent job of it. Could Sissoko have done that job? Perhaps. But his more central position helped, along with Hojbjerg, stem the flow of Fulham pressure that we saw in the first 20-25 minutes of the second half.

I actually felt that we played better once the subs were made. A second goal would have been great, and lets be honest Kane tucks that final chance away 9 times out of 10, but Fulham were hardly hammering our door down for 45 minutes like you've suggested with your final "under siege" comment. Also it's been pointed out by a number of posters on here that Fulham are in a false position, mainly due to the fact that they only picked up a point in their first 7 (possibly 8?) games before they had a more settled team. I'm not convinced continuing to push men forward would have benefitted us any more than what we did in the second half, as those long balls by Andersen could have been far more damaging had we been 20-30 yards further up the pitch.

I agree, re Fulham’s form/league position, and they played very well last night.

But what I don't agree with is your suggestion that we weren't 'hanging on' in the final 30 minutes or so of the game. Yes Kane could've put away that late chance (or the absolute sitter of a header he missed) but we were mostly camped inside the last third of the pitch & our own penalty area.

Ps, re your first sentence. It's me you're talking to. Do you expect anything other than simple

 

[Graham Minshall]

I too have just seen the VAR decision. While I agree that there is nothing Lemina could have done to avoid the ball hitting his arm and that the decision was taken to the letter of the law, I just want to play devil's advocate a little, and rationalise in my mind. I shall give my (biased) opinion that after the ball struck Lemina's arm it bounced in the direction of fellow Fulham player Maja favourably enough to help him score. Who can determine whether Lemina's arm "helped" the ball move in that direction, whether accidentally or with any degree of intent? Similarly, who can determine whether the ball would have bounced so favourably had Lemina's arm not been in that position and the ball carried on to strike his hip/side? Far easier to call the rule and say it was handball. Thanks ref! Good decision! I'm sleeping well tonight.

I have always thought the handball rule to be ridiculous, surely if you have a rule that means if the ball strikes the hand it’s a foul, why would you then look for reasons to then not give a foul? I know fans will say accidental this, too close to the ball that, didn’t mean it etc, accidental and unintentional things happen in the game all the time, and the rule isn’t bypassed, if you trip someone accidentally, it’s still a foul, if your score off your arse its still a goal.

I remember years ago Alan Hansen and Jimmy hill having a right bust up at half time in a cup final over whether a penalty should have been give, Hill was saying the trip was accidental so shouldn’t be given, Hansen was arguing the player was still tripped.

With the level of scrutiny there is in the game today, subjective rules without strict guide lines, simply leave to much open to debate, and leave too much argument as to wether, fairness, consistency or bias is involved.

 

[JoaoPereira]

I have always thought the handball rule to be ridiculous, surely if you have a rule that means if the ball strikes the hand it’s a foul, why would you then look for reasons to then not give a foul? I know fans will say accidental this, too close to the ball that, didn’t mean it etc, accidental and unintentional things happen in the game all the time, and the rule isn’t bypassed, if you trip someone accidentally, it’s still a foul, if your score off your arse its still a goal.

all you would see with that broad generalization was attackers aiming at defender's arms/hands. it would be a shitshow. imagine shots or crosses straight at arms from close proximity. defenders would be (even) more worried about their arm placement rather than properly defending.

 

[ostrov]

For me, fitness is a big concern. In the second half, we simply could not make it to the ball, the Fulham players were ahead of us in everything. I remember one moment when a Fulham player beat Sissoko from behind and took the ball away from him like from a child without a fight. Davis and Doherty were exposed time after time out wide. That worries me more than tactics.

 

[Who’s our next manager?]

Just seen the VAR decision. That's ludicrous. Never in a million years is that - or has ever been - handball. Authorities need to get a grip.

True, it’s happened to us as well, the Dier incident being the most stupid.

 

[carpediem991]

For me, fitness is a big concern. In the second half, we simply could not make it to the ball, the Fulham players were ahead of us in everything. I remember one moment when a Fulham player beat Sissoko from behind and took the ball away from him like from a child without a fight. Davis and Doherty were exposed time after time out wide. That worries me more than tactics.

How can fitness be an issue for Sissoko? I don't get that. He came fresh on the pitch and hasnt played a lot recently. Fitness surely plays a part still I think the mindset is key. I am sure we would have seen a completely different approach in the 2nd half if we wouldnt have had the lead.

 

[Who’s our next manager?]

This is pure bollocks. Scott Parker is trying to look after his own players by objecting to the 5 sub proposal. How are lower clubs supposed to react when City could bring on Jesus, Foden, Silva, Aguero and Laporte and their own players are left trying to battle that? The wealthy clubs would be given a massive advantage against the minnows who would be running their best players into the ground because they don't have any depth (because they can't afford it).

Perhaps Parker should object to the number of loan players a team can field.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

all you would see with that broad generalization was attackers aiming at defender's arms/hands. it would be a shitshow. imagine shots or crosses straight at arms from close proximity. defenders would be (even) more worried about their arm placement rather than properly defending.

And this is exactly why the distinction has been introduced between attacking and defensive handballs.

A goal scored after a handball, however inadvertent, gets disallowed. For defenders, there is room for interpretation.

 

[ostrov]

How can fitness be an issue for Sissoko? I don't get that. He came fresh on the pitch and hasnt played a lot recently. Fitness surely plays a part still I think the mindset is key. I am sure we would have seen a completely different approach in the 2nd half if we wouldnt have had the lead.

The mindset is always to win the next game - says Mourinho. But he forgets to give the right tools to the team where fitness is fundamental. It happens almost in every game - two different halves. You can't call Mourinho's Spurs athletic, no way.

 

[faymantaray]

Sorry, but I disagree.

First, except for Man City, no teams are putting out a consistent performance week in and out - teams are beating one another. The poor performances not being sustainable as you had mentioned applies to 19 teams basically.

Second, you mentioned we dropped points from winning positions, and that was because we were playing better than the opponents to be in winning positions in the first place. The capitulation, after so many games, yes like the patterns you mentioned, is evidently, coming from the poor, jittery defenders we have, making individual mistakes nobody coached them to make. Maybe this will bring in the argument that the gaffer shouldn't have chosen these players to start with or to sub with, but I think this had been argued to death where we are only limited with these mediocre players playing the most number of games in the whole of Europe.

And finally, the win had finally broken away from the pattern which many deemed we could have suffered the same. Why was that not a positivity I really have no idea, but instead, we got away? Really?

If Kane put away the 2 goals on his plate, this would be no different from the game against Arsenal where they constantly bombarded us with crosses and possession. And yet we were a masterclass then.

I don't like Fulham, but surely they deserved alot of credits due yesterday instead of deeming us as still incompetent and just only shrugged off what could have been a routine outcome.

I am comparing it with the one-off match scenario of the League Cup final precisely because this was probably the first game for so long we held on to a 1-0 victory with the opponent pushing us all the way. And the League Cup final will be no different from the 38 league games - only results matter.

Yes ok only results matter and so far we are 8th best in a line of inconsistent teams. If we can get top 4 with a series of precarious one nils I would be ecstatic.

 

[UbeAstard]

It amazes me people (including professional commentators and pundits) still don't know the difference. Whilst the merits of the rule are very debatable, there is a very clear difference between attacking & defending.

Yesterday's was harsh on Fulham in many people's opinion but factually it's very cut & dried. Any by the way nothing will beat Moura's vs Sheff United for harshness!

You probably didnt know the difference either till referees and VAR started affecting the game with it. Professional commentators, pundits, managers, players and fans are all in the same boat as we wont notice these changes pre decisions because we're unlikely to read and contemplate all the briefs sent to refs every season. By now though the rules are more familiar but it will still produce debate as there still doesnt seem to be consistency, so we still wait with bated breath every time something goes to VAR to see how they will interpret it, and it still produces surprises. I'm sure I've seen games where Peter Walton has been asked for his opinion and he has been surprised too by some VAR decisions.

 

[danielneeds]

We could defo do a lot worse than Joachim Andersen. He gave me some Toby at Southampton vibes last night.

 

[spursfan77]

How can fitness be an issue for Sissoko? I don't get that. He came fresh on the pitch and hasnt played a lot recently. Fitness surely plays a part still I think the mindset is key. I am sure we would have seen a completely different approach in the 2nd half if we wouldnt have had the lead.

Fitness isn’t an issue for sissoko, ability is.

 

[TheTanguy]

We could defo do a lot worse than Joachim Andersen. He gave me some Toby at Southampton vibes last night.

Like Toby he is pretty good with the ball at his feet, but Toby was a much better defender when we signed him from Atletico back in 2015.

 

[nico97531]

I too have just seen the VAR decision. While I agree that there is nothing Lemina could have done to avoid the ball hitting his arm and that the decision was taken to the letter of the law, I just want to play devil's advocate a little, and rationalise in my mind. I shall give my (biased) opinion that after the ball struck Lemina's arm it bounced in the direction of fellow Fulham player Maja favourably enough to help him score. Who can determine whether Lemina's arm "helped" the ball move in that direction, whether accidentally or with any degree of intent? Similarly, who can determine whether the ball would have bounced so favourably had Lemina's arm not been in that position and the ball carried on to strike his hip/side? Far easier to call the rule and say it was handball. Thanks ref! Good decision! I'm sleeping well tonight.

I don’t know why everyone is complaining, the same situation happened to us too, against Sheffield United last year, the ball was judged to have touched lucas’s arm while he was on the ground and the goal was ruled out for handball, I don’t remember so much fuss was make out from it at the time so what’s the difference now.

 

[chrissivad]

This is pure bollocks. Scott Parker is trying to look after his own players by objecting to the 5 sub proposal. How are lower clubs supposed to react when City could bring on Jesus, Foden, Silva, Aguero and Laporte and their own players are left trying to battle that? The wealthy clubs would be given a massive advantage against the minnows who would be running their best players into the ground because they don't have any depth (because they can't afford it).

They also don't have the extra games in Europe so fitness is less of an issue when you play (mostly) just weekends.

I have no issue with them voting to stick with 3 subs.

If Klop is worried about one of his players being played to much, it's up to him to rest him.