Fulham Vs Tottenham: Match Thread

[davidmatzdorf]

We never had both under Redknapp. We relied on individual star players in form then, only Redknapp had more of them with VdV getting goals and assists and Modric making killer passes to set up assists.

It was never a coordinated style of football, and often times it wasn't aesthetically pleasing either. When it clicked it looked great, sure, but the many times it didn't click, we were subject to a lack of ideas, cutting edge and the inevitable pot shots from 20 yards in the hope of striking lucky.

Thirty years of watching Spurs and you should know that we never had a tactically astute manager in that time.

Yes, Redknapp's side was entertaining but that was more by default than design. I take nothing away from Redknapp and the job he did but when we were, at that time, without VDV or Modric we looked bereft of ideas. Even times with them we were predictable and failed to unlock sitting defences like Wolves.

Point being Redknapp didn't tell them to play a certain way, he told them to play as they liked and that got us to a certain level. With direction, I believe a lesser team can go further.

Nah, I don't buy all this 'tactically naive, feel-good manager, just fecking run about a bit' stuff about Harry Redknapp. Never did. Tactics are not just relevant on a match-to-match basis and they don't just involve formations and substitutions.

Redknapp is able to apply simple, basic match tactics because of his profound understanding of how to assemble a balanced squad and how to get them to play as a team. All that is part of 'tactics'. He arrived at Tottenham in 2008 to find a highly-talented, but unbalanced squad that was playing as a disparate collection of individuals. He added some key players to address weaknesses in the squad and then cajoled and ego-stroked everyone into feeling good as a unit - that is why he was then able to keep the match-to-match tactical arrangements dead-simple thereafter, because he had set up the squad and the team in a way that permitted individual players to express themselves in a balanced, mentally-robust team framework.

It's not fair to downgrade AVB for not being able to do this as well as Harry. He's 30-something and Redknapp is 60-something. AVB just doesn't yet have the intuitive grasp of how a team functions that he may well have after 30 years in management. So he has to compensate with charts and formations and explicit, prescriptive instructions for individual players. He has set up the team in a formation that requires a creative advanced midfielder whom we do not have in the squad. And, in the absence of a creative player like van der Vaart, we're having to rely upon pace, counter-attacking and individual brilliance for our goals far more than we ever did under Redknapp.

 

[Kingstheman]

http://www.eplindex.com/21350/teams-advantage-counter-attack-stats-analysis.html

 

[davidmatzdorf]

http://www.eplindex.com/21350/teams-advantage-counter-attack-stats-analysis.html

That's three weeks old, but it's way more that even I expected. And I don't think it's declined over the past three weeks.

 

[Legend10]

Cos of Clive?

Mine was Ginola's or Gazza's.

Bale is getting there though.

No not just Clive, that team just played brilliant open attacking football and had hoddle, waddle, Paul Allen, claessen, mabbutt, gough, hodge etc! Was a very exciting team to watch!

 

[Kingstheman]

That's three weeks old, but it's way more that even I expected. And I don't think it's declined over the past three weeks.

Would you be upset with Tottenham becoming a counter attacking team, if we finished 3rd?

 

[thinktank]

Question is how do you drop Defoe in this form for Adebayor?

Possibly a better question is does Defoe deserve to be dropped for Ade?

Brilliant result though and we will have Parker and Ade back next PL game and the rest around new year

If you can drop balls at his feet around the goal then he can be very effective. The games where you need to hold the ball up and work things a bit more, he ain't so great.

 

[hybridsoldier]

Would you be upset with Tottenham becoming a counter attacking team, if we finished 3rd?

Honestly I would not,

 

[Locotoro]

Nah, I don't buy all this 'tactically naive, feel-good manager, just fecking run about a bit' stuff about Harry Redknapp. Never did. Tactics are not just relevant on a match-to-match basis and they don't just involve formations and substitutions.

Redknapp is able to apply simple, basic match tactics because of his profound understanding of how to assemble a balanced squad and how to get them to play as a team. All that is part of 'tactics'. He arrived at Tottenham in 2008 to find a highly-talented, but unbalanced squad that was playing as a disparate collection of individuals. He added some key players to address weaknesses in the squad and then cajoled and ego-stroked everyone into feeling good as a unit - that is why he was then able to keep the match-to-match tactical arrangements dead-simple thereafter, because he had set up the squad and the team in a way that permitted individual players to express themselves in a balanced, mentally-robust team framework.

It's not fair to downgrade AVB for not being able to do this as well as Harry. He's 30-something and Redknapp is 60-something. AVB just doesn't yet have the intuitive grasp of how a team functions that he may well have after 30 years in management. So he has to compensate with charts and formations and explicit, prescriptive instructions for individual players. He has set up the team in a formation that requires a creative advanced midfielder whom we do not have in the squad. And, in the absence of a creative player like van der Vaart, we're having to rely upon pace, counter-attacking and individual brilliance for our goals far more than we ever did under Redknapp.

I agree with your analysis of AVB's current stock and how he is setting up due to the lack of a preferable playmaker. However I disagree with part of your Redknapp analysis.

Whilst he showed a good understanding of team balance and he fixed an obvious problem of the team lacking a defensive midfielder, he didn't show any variation to his set up, he didn't have a plan b and he was not a proactive manager in making changes when required.

His involvement in the training regimes of our players was limited and there were times were our players did not know what he wanted of them.

This is not only my opinion, this is also the opinion of a few members of our squad that I have on good account.

 

[Mr Pink]

First half was really sterile, but Jesus fucking christ - we've just one three league games in 6 days, and off the back of playing away in Rome, that's 4 games in 9 days - and still some arn't happy. It was never going to run perfectly in terms of the opening months of the new regime, particularly considering the losses, but I really can't believe the moaning by some.

One thing we are under AVB, is harder to beat. Yes Harry's side, the superior on the ball quality, could see us outplay and outscore the opposition when it was clicking, but fuck me when it wasn't, like away from home sometimes, we were beat pretty easily.

AVB is laying good foundations IMO, and it will take time and that pretty incision isn't there yet but we are stronger in different aspects now and if he's allowed to address some of the above we could be a seriously strong side.

 

[Yid-ol]

Thats our 2nd clean sheet of the season in the league, and the first away from home!

 

[we_all_loved_freund]

It's been the story of the season so far. While glad I'm amazed we are where we are in the league based on the performances.

Absolutely this

 

[hughy]

Thats our 2nd clean sheet of the season in the league, and the first away from home!

Stoke have 8 clean sheets but are still 4 points behind us in 9th. I'd much rather be where we are!

 

[davidmatzdorf]

...However I disagree with part of your Redknapp analysis.

Whilst he showed a good understanding of team balance and he fixed an obvious problem of the team lacking a defensive midfielder, he didn't show any variation to his set up, he didn't have a plan b and he was not a proactive manager in making changes when required.

His involvement in the training regimes of our players was limited and there were times were our players did not know what he wanted of them.

I don't think any of that is inconsistent with what I wrote, so I don't see how we disagree. His concentration is on setting up the squad and the team spirit in order to avoid elaborate match-to-match tactics. It worked well for us, until the occasions when elaborate tactics, prescriptive instructions and timely substitutions were needed. Then it sometimes fell down.

Redknapp has deep imperfections as a manager, but the simplistic characterisation of him as a tactical simpleton is way off the mark. He just takes a different approach to preparing the team than the clipboard-based, chess-style manoeuvres of later-generation managers.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

Would you be upset with Tottenham becoming a counter attacking team, if we finished 3rd?

It's an interesting question, but we've been a 'counter-attacking team' for some years now. The difference is that we've not only been a counter-attacking team.

We aren't going to finish third by adopting solely counter-attacking tactics. It's possible to neutralise such tactics with the right set-up, as Wigan found, and such tactics depend entirely on our two star wingers staying fit all season, which isn't going to happen.

I think counter-attacking football is very exciting, but it should be part of a balanced team approach. AVB's advance publicity suggested that we would play a pressing game, but we've frequently been out-pressed, most recently by Liverpool, but also by Norwich and Wigan, for most of the match by Southampton and in the second half by Man Utd. It also suggested we would control possession, but that hasn't happened in the majority of league matches to date. The counter-attacking has worked well, but that's because we have two exceptionally quick wingers who are on form and a striker who is running on a wave of confidence.

We need to be able to do more things well. For the past three seasons, we have been able to do several very different things well. Partly because of personnel changes, partly because of injuries and partly because of AVB's chosen tactics, virtually the only things we are doing well at present are counter-attacking and, usually, defending. It's winning a reasonable number of matches, but it's not very entertaining to watch and it isn't going get us into the top 3.

Doesn't anyone else remember the way we passed the ball last Autumn?

 

[SpurSince57]

Exactly.

The first half was dreadful, the second not much better. We were just very ruthless with our chances which is very very un-Spurs.

Joint 3rd and not playing very well...dunno what to make of it. Under Harry we played some great football but became very predictable in the patterns of play and found ourselves wanting when it came to creativity and cutting edge in the end.

Now under AVB we seem to have lost the excellent ball retention we had but somehow we are just taking chances and winning games. When everyone is back maybe the defence will be tighter and we have more options and competition meaning things will click and we will play better.

I dunno...its the age old debate isn't it, Man United dont have a particular style or any pizzazz about them but they get the job done and their fans are happy because they win games and win trophies...without being very easy on the eye. At Spurs there has always been the traditional of playing the Spurs way but for the last 25 years it hasn't really brought us much success.

Like davidmatzdorf said ...we are doing great and it was a good win today because Fulham created nothing, but its a bit worrying because it does feel like it won't take much for us to lose that clinical side and lose games like today. Obviously I am a big AVB supporter and back him and the team but I am not getting carried away like some twat on the radio saying he thinks we will be 2nd ha ha ha

To be brutally honest, the 'Spurs Way' didn't bring us nearly as much success as it should have done in the 'Glory Years'. We really should have won more than one title in the early 60s, and maybe if we'd paid as much attention to defence—and maybe player fitness—as Shankly's Liverpool we would have done.

I'm really not sure what to make of this season so far. The performances in Europe, even the win against Maribor, have been uniformly lame; given that we're supposed to be taking it seriously this year, that's a bit of a disappointment, to say the least. You can hardly complain about the league position, but it would be daft to apply a 'Never mind the quality, feel the width' attitude and ignore some serious shortcomings. Sure, we've lost Modric and Rafa and been hit by injuries to Benny and Kaboul in particular, but we're not really seeing the more consistent pressing game we were expecting, the defence is looking shaky and we're giving the ball away far more than we were under Harry—which is pretty ironic considering that we're doing more ball work in training. I thought I'd see more organisation, more discipline, more tactical nous (although I don't subscribe to the view that Harry was 'tactically naive') laid on the foundations from Harry's reign. I can't honestly say that I have. And where's the better coaching?

Still, here we are, fourth on goal difference, so onwards and upwards.

 

[SpurSince57]

It's an interesting question, but we've been a 'counter-attacking team' for some years now. The difference is that we've not only been a counter-attacking team.

We aren't going to finish third by adopting solely counter-attacking tactics. It's possible to neutralise such tactics with the right set-up, as Wigan found, and such tactics depend entirely on our two star wingers staying fit all season, which isn't going to happen.

I think counter-attacking football is very exciting, but it should be part of a balanced team approach. AVB's advance publicity suggested that we would play a pressing game, but we've frequently been out-pressed, most recently by Liverpool, but also by Norwich and Wigan, for most of the match by Southampton and in the second half by Man Utd. It also suggested we would control possession, but that hasn't happened in the majority of league matches to date. The counter-attacking has worked well, but that's because we have two exceptionally quick wingers who are on form and a striker who is running on a wave of confidence.

We need to be able to do more things well. For the past three seasons, we have been able to do several very different things well. Partly because of personnel changes, partly because of injuries and partly because of AVB's chosen tactics, virtually the only things we are doing well at present are counter-attacking and, usually, defending. It's winning a reasonable number of matches, but it's not very entertaining to watch and it isn't going get us into the top 3.

Doesn't anyone else remember the way we passed the ball last Autumn?

Are personnel changes and injuries really an excuse for poor passing/ball retention? Swansea took on Arsenal at their own game this afternoon and beat them at it; the 'we've lost our superstars' argument doesn't really work

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I was actually pretty happy with the first half. We were away to a decent team who'd got a result against Arsenal away the week before.

I have only seen patches of the second half so can't really make a full assessment, but considering the players we have available I was pretty happy with what I saw in the first half. We kept the ball, controlled the game.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

...we're not really seeing the more consistent pressing game we were expecting, the defence is looking shaky and we're giving the ball away far more than we were under Harry—which is pretty ironic considering that we're doing more ball work in training. I thought I'd see more organisation, more discipline, more tactical nous (although I don't subscribe to the view that Harry was 'tactically naive') laid on the foundations from Harry's reign. I can't honestly say that I have. And where's the better coaching?

As I said, doesn't anyone remember how we were passing the ball last Autumn? It was beautiful and it totally flummoxed and demoralised our opponents. For months, almost no one could live with us. We haven't done anything like that this season, not once.

Are personnel changes and injuries really an excuse for poor passing/ball retention? Swansea took on Arsenal at their own game this afternoon and beat them at it; the 'we've lost our superstars' argument doesn't really work

Well, yes, that was basically what I was trying to imply.

 

[Mr Pink]

bar the beating of us, against ten for most of the game, Arsenal have hardly been good at home of late - Fulham nearly won there a week or two ago....Swansea winning might of been a surprise but I had a feeling they would get something from the game.

 

[thinktank]

I was actually pretty happy with the first half. We were away to a decent team who'd got a result against Arsenal away the week before.

I have only seen patches of the second half so can't really make a full assessment, but considering the players we have available I was pretty happy with what I saw in the first half. We kept the ball, controlled the game.

Absolutely. It was a very solid, professional, first half away performance against a dangerous team, and lay the foundation for us smacking them about in the second half.

I was very pleased with what I saw today. No complaints at all. Especially with Gallas coming in to make things a bit wobbly for us - he had an ok game as it goes though.

People just don't seem to get that this team isn't cooked yet; AVB is a excellent chef, just wait until he has the right ingredients in front of him...will be very tasty.