Check out this video from YouTube on 'Harry Hotspur' - the best 7 mins you'll spent. Let the hairs rise on all over your body !!

http://harryhotspur.blogspot.com/2006/12/martin-jol-does-winston-churchill.html

Defoe and Berbatov

Defoe and Berbatov will deliver siverware, they are on form and a great partnership

The words shiver and spine come to mind. I fucking love tottenham hotspur, my god

its good to see JD hittin the net he has taken his chance while keano has been sidelined and has bonded well with dimi.
long may the goals continue!
COYS!!!

This is the best footy video ive ever seen!! I can't stop whistling the tunes. The editing and everything is sublime!!!!
Well done

Hollywood are looking for talented directors to screen stephen king stories.

Happy 20th Hudd.

Love ya.

Defoe, Rotation, Dawson...

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by davidmatzdorf
I'm quite a supporter of the striker rotation system (which isn't actually a rotation system at all), but if Jol drops a fit Defoe for even 1 match when Keane is fit again, then it's a sign that he understands Defoe's mentality a great deal less than he thinks he does.

The young man is roaring with confidence at the moment and needs to be played whenever he is fit until his present run of form dies away. Which I hope it never does...
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><<<...I always enjoy reading your posts David and agree with most of your summations and opinions but this one is a tad contradictory.

If you support a rotation system that isn't one (yeah, right) then you wouldn't mind if BMJ leaves Defoe out against Liverpool if Mido was fit. However you would be annoyed because you think he should always be played whilst in form.......So which is it??

I think most people would agree with the latter. Players in form should always be played ahead of those who are not. There is no doubt the rotation policy has cost us points this season, most notably early on when we couldn't buy a goal because the strikers were not given a run of games to get confidence in themselves and each other.

Admittedly there are times during the campaign when players need to be rested. However, these opportunities become fewer as the season progresses and each game takes on more significance....>>>

Is it a coincidence that Defoe got into this vein of form after playing several consecutive matches which helped build up his confidence? Would he have been able to get this run of games if Keane was fit? Why is it so difficult to admit that the rotation did not work for spurs?
I have always advocated the need to have a settled partnership up front, and to play forwards who show signs of good form, to help them develop it. I agree with many that Keane's injury has been a blessing in disguise.
But I feel that Jol is still not entirely convinced by Defoe, and he has been almost pressed into some sort of praise for Defoe by the facts and reporters. I may be wrong, but let's see when Keane is fit and Defoe has just one game where he missed a few chances. It seems Jol always is keen to point out Defoe's failings (even in the case of last match v Villa, after admitting Defoe was the difference, he added that Defoe should have scored the third goal?), but is not as hard on Keane and Berbatov...

I've already explained this and there is no inconsistency. Of course Defoe shouldn't be rested against Liverpool, that would be bonkers.

It isn't a "rotation" system, because Jol said several weeks ago that he doesn't rotate them, he chooses whichever one looks sharper and hungrier in training. Rotating them would mean alternating them, regardless of form.

I half-believe him, because it's also pretty clear that, when we have 2 matches a week, he tends to favour the less knackered striker - this might, of course, be because the one who has played recently doesn't look as sharp in training, but I doubt that is all there is to it.

I think keeping all of your strikers involved in matches, whether this is a "rotation" system or not, is essential when there is fixture congestion of the kind that we have experienced for the past 2-3 months. Aside from any other factors, it helps prevent the injuries that accumulate when players play when they are physically tired.

But we're about to enter a period without 2 matches a week. And we have one striker in raging form and another not far behind. So there is no reason for Jol to change his striking partnership and there are obvious reasons not to: you don't want your hot striking partnership to go 2 weeks without a match together.

When the fixtures start to pile up again, he'll have a set of decisions to make. When that time comes, assuming that Defoe and Berbatov are still working well together and generating goals, Jol should use his striking options, but ensure that they get at least 1 match per week together.

In the meantime, Jol should shelve the so-called "rotation" system and play the strikers in form every match. That means playing Defoe and Berbatov against Liverpool and then again at Portsmouth.

So where's the contradiction? There isn't one. It's what I said before: it's a good policy, but it has to be flexible and that means abandoning it when it isn't necessary.

"Together" and with the right service is key!