Has BMJ needlessly damaged the confidence of the defence

Discussion in 'Columns' started by ricardomcd, Feb 1, 2007.

  • by ricardomcd, Feb 1, 2007 at 7:13 PM
  • ricardomcd

    ricardomcd Member

    Ratings Received:
    +149 / 9 / -0
    Whilst watching the first seventy odd minutes of the game yesterday I had come to the conclusion that although we hadn't caused too many problems going forward we had managed to look fairly solid in defence.

    I was delighted to see Gardner and Dawson form a decent centre back pairing. In light of just how little football Gardner has played this season I thought he was having a good game. Obviously this was not a sentiment shared by BMJ as he decided to haul him off and replace him with Rocha. This in my opinion was a huge tactical mistake.

    I heard the opinion of Andy Gray, in that BMJ must have thought that Gardner was in danger of being sent off, but I can only say I saw little evidence of that happening.

    The importance of a strong centre back partnership cannot be underestimated. All season we have suffered from missing Ledley and having only Davenport available. Now we find ourselves in a situation where BMJ has managed to upset two centre backs, the repercussions of which might ruin the rest of our season.

    As Gardner left the pitch last night you could see from his face he was less than happy. He received a hand shake for his efforts and walked off with his head down. Did he deserve to leave the field? I would say no? Did he look more likely to receive a yellow card than Ghaly for example? Once again the answer has to be no. Did we benefit from this 'tactical substitution’? Definitely not.

    What BMJ managed to do through this master stroke is damage what little confidence poor Anthony has got. I think any Spurs fan with knowledge of Gardner as a player must agree that his best form in the past has followed from playing regularly and building his confidence.

    So what did BMJ indirectly say to him by removing him from the pitch yesterday? Answer: I don't have the confidence in you as a player to play out the rest of this game to the best of your ability without adversely affecting the team. There is absolutely no way that BMJ would have even considered removing Dawson or King in the same situation.

    He was replaced by Ricardo Rocha with whom I have been reasonably impressed so far and that even includes last night. He is tough in the tackle, pacey and has good heading ability.

    But football being football he will now be remembered for the mistake he made last night and must now suffer the pressure that follows from making a mistake in such a high profile game. How will he respond? We'll have to wait and see. Did BMJ really need to put Rocha into that pressure cooker environment when Gardner was already playing well? I am convinced that it was an unnecessary and potentially damaging substitution.

    I can only finish by saying that in my limited opinion the substitution was ill thought out. It has needlessly affected two vital members of the squad at an important juncture in the season. BMJ got it wrong!
  • Categories: Uncategorized


Discussion in 'Columns' started by ricardomcd, Feb 1, 2007.

  1. BringBack_leGin
    agreed. he should have started with Rocha IMHO but he didn't so fair enough, and Gardner was doing well enough, but Jol made a amd choice. Not the first time i think he has made a seriously flawed decision, but hey, who am i to criticise... if you listen to some fans on this site a loyal fan who's every emotion throughout the week is not allowed to have a negative opinion about anything Saint Martin does! And I am no doubt going to receive an onslaught of abuse A) for questioning Jol and B) for ridiculing the fans (no names mentioned) who believe that he can do no wrong and go nuts on anyone who disagrees!
  2. kyrre
    What game were you watching? Gardner got a booking for a terrible tackle, and then almost got a secong for a tackle on Denilson (I think). The second tackle was in my opinion nothing, but the ref obviously saw it differently, and made it clear that; one more and off you go......
  3. GetSpurredOn
    Gardner's confidence can be no more damaged than Mido's was in the first leg when despite constantly pushing the big man - little man combo, Jol left Mido sitting on the bench and watches Defoe and Keane struggle their way through the game, hitting hopeful long balls to a five foot seven target man. That said he came back on saturday and again last night with goals, so maybe it's a kind of reverse motivational technique.
  4. spursintheblood
    I can see your point, but have to disagree. The ref was in a real finickity mood and gave out a multitude of yellows. ardner was in danger of having to make lots of last ditch tackles that might have resulted in a second yellow. BMJ made a decision to try and freshen the legs in defence, with one of his 4 subs.....

    Rocha played fine. Not too sure if he slipped or was trying something a little clever, but he gave them a stranglehold on the game. The point most people have to remember is that the game was already lost, unless we scored again they were through on away goals anyway.

    We had to score and that was the real issue last night. We did not boss the midfield and I think that Zokora is STILL not back to his WC best, while Jenas is only just returning from injury. I think that we ourselves should have played a more experimental team. The first teamers have now played as much as they did all of last season. While not loaded with the quality youngsters that Arsenal have, we have a pretty good reserve team compared to most. Barnard, Taarabt or some other youngster might have provided a freshness that we lacked, and given zip to a team that was still feeling the pain of losing a 2 goal lead.

    We are still on lone for 2 cups, only 6 points off the European spots in the League and look stronger that many many a season. Plus Lennon, Tainio, King and Berbatov to return. This season is not over yet; then there is the anticipation of the next. COYS.
  5. gusrowe
    One thought that I never see on this site is the influence of Chris Hughton.The team and BMJ get slaughtered when we have a bad result.CH has been in the background for years.Loyal servant yes but is this another change we need.
  6. Seaforthspur
    Gardner was headed for a second yellow, end of story. He would not have made through extra time. Jol had to sub him.
    We couldn't risk it.
    Rocha's a pro. He'll bounce back from this.
  7. BringBack_leGin
    funnily enough, i was contemplating saying the same thing in a different article earlier but didn't for fear of getting slaughtered, but i honestly think Chris Hughton has outstayed his welcome!
  8. TheChosenOne
    Regarding Gardner, I first thought "He is a fish out out water"
    then I thought " Nope he is a conger eel out of water", similar but not the same if you no what I mean.
  9. JoeT
    I mentioned two days ago that I thought possibly Chris Houghton was not the man to be the assistant coach to Jol. He seems to be a nice guy but maybe Jol needs yet another assistant coach. A stronger personality with whom Jol can discuss tactical changes or how to handle certain players. I've also mentioned before that "good guy/bad guy" coach combinations are often successful on many of today's professional sports teams; the 'feel good/ father figure' coach is able to motivate certain players (maybe in the case of Gardner?) The other guy would be the 'no nonsense' type of person...firm but fair. (Maybe Mido needs this?).
  10. ravo
    It's difficult to say whether it was a good choice or not. Gardner did OK, but he was very close to a red and it's obvious Wiley was just dying to send one of players for an early shower.

    Rocha just made a poor choice by trying to eat worms whilst clearing the ball.

    Let's just hope he doesn't get the same reputation as Milenko (Asillymiss) Acimovic. Remember him?
  11. ravo
    Mate, after reading the opiles of dribble that people post, don't ever worry about being slated on here. It's here for your opinions.

    That's the beauty of SC and why this is such a great place.

  12. banks_18
    An interesting read. I personally thought Gardner had one of his better games, but, i can see why he was subbed. He may have had a pretty decent game but if he would have been sent off the views on the website would be certainly different right now, including yourself ?
  13. biggsyboy
    one minute u guys are having a go at Jol not making tactical decisions then when he does...you have a go at him. Gardener was soo near to getting sent off that I think Jol did the right thing. I still think Jol has limitations but that was the right decision
  14. Fancypants
    It also looked to me like Gardner was pretty fucked when he came off not dissapointed!
  15. sebo_sek

    I guess its open season on Jol. For Christ Sake, it wasnt his fault that Rocha made a mistake - he was class before and after this incident. It wasnt his fault that the ball bounced off Chimbo and went in. Gardner was nearing a red so he had to go off. It was definately a good experience for Rocha to feel a NL derby. Yes we didnt have the necessary bite, but remember if this had been in the league we would have gone away with a point. Like many people rightly emphasise this was not a team of kids we were playing - they were young regulars in most cases (at least they finished with young regulars). The most important thing is that we are not prolific in front of goal. Keane and Steed should have scored, but didnt. Defoe should have made it 3-2 at the Lane. The fact that they dont take their opps is the soul reason for our very little plight. Jol could help things a bit, but in my opinion he got things right on Wednesday. Just tell Robbo to make a few SHORT passes for f*** sake :bang:
  16. alamo
    And how can you possibly know what Hughtons role is? Do you sit in on training sessions and see what part he plays? Can you over-hear what him and Jol say to eachother on the touchline?

    I'm sorry mate but that's a stupid thing to say. I can understand that you are disappointed with having gone out the cup and at our season not living up to expectations. However, blindly flailing about looking for a target to blame and a head to roll just because things aren't all rosy at the moment is hardly the way to go about rectifying our problems.
  17. Yidatron
    It would be fantastic if we could transform our form simply by replacing the assistant manager...unfortunately, I dont think any footballing problem is ever as simple as that. I admit I have no idea whether chrissy hughton is a positive or negative influence on us, but I cant imagine that getting rid of him is going to change anything.

    Plus, his connections with the republic of ireland setup mean that we have a constant stream of irish youngsters into our academy (Granted...it hasnt done us much good yet though!)
  18. dontcallme
    Really don't know what game you were watching. Agreed that Gardner had put in a good performance but he'd been booked and pulled up by the ref a couple of times for little tackles (some of which weren't fouls) with Gardner starting to look tired i was very worried he was going to get sent off.

    Like almost always Jol probably got it right there
  19. jurgenthegerman18
    If it was in the league they would have come at us alot more, they knew they didn't have to win the game on wed but they still dominated it. Am i the only one who thought that although we were solid at the back we didn't get a sniff in midfield and our forwards were largely ineffective or isolated. The only time we really looked like we wanted to win was when we went a goal down and the only time we looked like we could realistically win was the five mins after we equalised. As soon as it went to ET they reorganised we never looked like scoring again.

    I'm not being negative, just saying it how it is. BMJ needs to find a way to get the team motivated and up for away games as well as home and stop switching to negative tactics when we're two up. Was i the only one screaming at the TV when we started sitting back inviting them on in the first leg, a fool could see that we were letting them off the hook. If the first leg had been at their place and they'd gone two up in half an hour, that would have been tie over.

    Sorry to rant and there is much reason to be optimistic about the future at the lane, but now we have to listen to those *****s taking the piss for another season unless we pull out a result at their place ( what odds, anyone?)

Share This Page