Match Ratings v Everton

[Gaz_Gammon]

I don't think that's true. We gave up 4 points from winning positions in 2 of our last four games (1-0 west Brom and 2-0 up at Chelsea) with Dembele in our Cm. (With Dier too - the so called holy grail of cm pairing).

Dier and Dembele both started the game we chucked 2 goals away to Stoke at the start of the season too (though Dembele started as an AM that day I believe).

And (@THFCSPURS19 ) for people saying we were "unbeaten" with these two, I think I'm right in saying that no cm pairing gave up more points from winning positions either.

Now, I don't think we can blame just these two for that any more than you can claim these two should take sole credit for being unbeaten as a cm pair, but I think it proves that not everything is perfect just because these two play together.

We play better, and lose less with Dembele in the team. FACT.

Surrendering a two goal lead to Chel$ea had as much to do with the other ten outfield players as it did Dembele.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

Do you honestly think that every week we were unbeaten was solely down to having Dier and Dembele in CM2 ? Or do you accept that we improved defensively all over the pitch and that accounted for a lot of our defensive performances last year ?

Do you honestly believe we needed (or will need) two more risk averse CM's every week ? Do you not think there are times when this is very counter intuitive to a philosophy that has front foot, quick transition football as one of it's fundamental tenets ?

I accept that there will be games when having two of these (Dier/Dembele/Wanyama) will be viable from a defensive bias requirement, but I think there will be many more games where I'd like to see one of them paired with a more quick thinking, progressive "metronomic" type.

I think we played our best football with Dembele in the team, and we were unbeaten when he and Dier played CM, so I see no need to change until I see evidence that the partnership is no longer effective. As for pairing Dier with a more 'metronomic' type- isn't that basically Eriksen's role in the team? Sometimes he picks up the ball and dictates play from so deep, some people could think he's playing CM, now starting at LM.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

We play better, and lose less with Dembele in the team. FACT.

Surrendering a two goal lead to Chel$ea had as much to do with the other ten outfield players as it did Dembele.

So when we fuck up it it's all about the others, when we do well it's all about Dembele ?

At least 70% (it might even be 80% if we include the Stoke game) of the winning positions we coughed up we did with Dembele in the team. FACT.

 

[sly1]

So when we fuck up it it's all about the others, when we do well it's all about Dembele ?

At least 70% (it might even be 80% if we include the Stoke game) of the winning positions we coughed up we did with Dembele in the team. FACT.

Yet Dembélé played in 76% of the our matches. So if the 70% statistic is correct, that means that we were less likely to surrender a lead when he was playing than when he wasn't.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I think we played our best football with Dembele in the team, and we were unbeaten when he and Dier played CM, so I see no need to change until I see evidence that the partnership is no longer effective. As for pairing Dier with a more 'metronomic' type- isn't that basically Eriksen's role in the team? Sometimes he picks up the ball and dictates play from so deep, some people could think he's playing CM, now starting at LM.

Some evidence that all is not perfect is that we threw 14 points away with Dembele & Dier in CM. That's 14 points we "lost", we could have lost a couple more games but not thrown away those points and still been better off.

Couldn't we be even more proactive and progressive with Eriksen still doing what he does, or even not having to do so much from deep if a player like Winks, Onomah or Mason was paired with Dier, Wanyama or Dembele ?

You didn't like or see merit, for example, when Winks played next to Wanyama in pre-season ? You couldn't see a blend like that working when we are at home to unimaginative bus parkers ?

I'm actually warming to the idea of Wanyama because I think it means we can be less pragmatic with the other CM.

I think we'll get fucking stymied week after week if we stick with Dembele with Dier or Wanyama, people will figure out that these three can be bogged down pretty easily. It won't be a catastrophe, but I think it's a bit of a tactical cop out and I'll be a bit disappointed in Pochettino if it's the case.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Yet Dembélé played in 76% of the our matches. So if the 70% statistic is correct, that means that we were less likely to surrender a lead when he was playing than when he wasn't.

Some of those matches were as an AM. We had the best defensive front four in the league by a country mile when he was part of it, and I'd happily see him used there again.

I'm not averse to Dembele playing in CM, or Wanyama or Dier, I just do not think we need to play two of those three most weeks.

 

[sly1]

Some of those matches were as an AM. We had the best defensive front four in the league by a country mile when he was part of it, and I'd happily see him used there again.

I'm not averse to Dembele playing in CM, or Wanyama or Dier, I just do not think we need to play two of those three most weeks.

I don't necessarily think that we should player Dier and Dembélé every week (though I do think that this was our most effective combination last season). I was just commenting that the statistics you quoted don't indicate that the Dier-Dembélé combination was worse st dropping points than anyone else.

Yes, having a modric player in our CM would be great, but there aren't many of them about. Perhaps Winks is that player, and perhaps some person we've never seen in the Portuguese second division is that player, but realistically the chances are that they're not.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

Some evidence that all is not perfect is that we threw 14 points away with Dembele & Dier in CM. That's 14 points we "lost", we could have lost a couple more games but not thrown away those points and still been better off.

Couldn't we be even more proactive and progressive with Eriksen still doing what he does, or even not having to do so much from deep if a player like Winks, Onomah or Mason was paired with Dier, Wanyama or Dembele ?

You didn't like or see merit, for example, when Winks played next to Wanyama in pre-season ? You couldn't see a blend like that working when we are at home to unimaginative bus parkers ?

I'm actually warming to the idea of Wanyama because I think it means we can be less pragmatic with the other CM.

I think we'll get fucking stymied week after week if we stick with Dembele with Dier or Wanyama, people will figure out that these three can be bogged down pretty easily. It won't be a catastrophe, but I think it's a bit of a tactical cop out and I'll be a bit disappointed in Pochettino if it's the case.

I loved Winks in pre-season and would start him on Saturday. I agree that Wanyama and Dier should not play together, as they'll just get in the way of each other and not move us forward. However, I see nothing wrong with starting Dembele next to either one of them. He's ability on the ball is amongst the best in the world, and he can drive us forward and get us put of trouble, even if his passing isn't the most incisive (but we have Lamela and Eriksen- and, on occasion, Alli for that).

You say we shouldn't (most of the time) play with 2 of Wanyama, Dier and Dembele, but we're obviously going to play at least one defensive midfielder in every game, so therefore you wouldn't play Dembele most weeks, despite the clear evidence that we were a better team with him. Or, if you would play Dembele, it would probably be at the expense of Alli as an AM, who, by your own admission, has an end product that means he should be in the team.

 

[nedley]

BC loves to obliterate a thread.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I loved Winks in pre-season and would start him on Saturday. I agree that Wanyama and Dier should not play together, as they'll just get in the way of each other and not move us forward. However, I see nothing wrong with starting Dembele next to either one of them. He's ability on the ball is amongst the best in the world, and he can drive us forward and get us put of trouble, even if his passing isn't the most incisive (but we have Lamela and Eriksen- and, on occasion, Alli for that).

You say we shouldn't (most of the time) play with 2 of Wanyama, Dier and Dembele, but we're obviously going to play at least one defensive midfielder in every game, so therefore you wouldn't play Dembele most weeks, despite the clear evidence that we were a better team with him. Or, if you would play Dembele, it would probably be at the expense of Alli as an AM, who, by your own admission, has an end product that means he should be in the team.

Dembele's ability to dribble is exceedingly good, but that doesn't mean his ability "on the ball" is amongst the best in the world, it just means he's one of the hardest players to get the ball from. It's somewhat wasted if he doesn't use that ability to launch quick and incisive transitional play isn't it ? And IMO he doesn't move the ball quickly enough. I really didn't see as much of the "driving us forward" stuff as you seemed to and a ball moves quicker when it's passed then when it's dribbled. I personally would be happier seeing him dribbling at defenders than central midfielders.

I don't think we have to settle for one best 11. This is the point I was making a couple of days ago, we need to be more tactically diverse or we'll just get figured out like we did saturday. The odd game will require a real solid pair of CM's, but we have the squad to change things up and keep opponents guessing. So no, I wouldn't play Alli every week, or Dembele, or Dier or Kane or or Lamela. We can put Dembele back into the AM area again maybe, have him dribble at defenders, put Edwards in there have him cause mayhem, play Winks or Onomah next the defensively proficient and dynamic busy **** Wanyama who'll hunt the ball for them.

I think maybe Dembele next to Wanyama is a more acceptable pairing than Dier and Wanyama as it would at least allow Dembele more license to push forward. But we could go really pro-active and play Dembele with Winks/Onomah. Such a shame that Bentaleb is now on the naughty step, because I think him LCM and Wanyama RCM could have been another excellent balance of skills.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

Dembele's ability to dribble is exceedingly good, but that doesn't mean his ability "on the ball" is amongst the best in the world, it just means he's one of the hardest players to get the ball from. It's somewhat wasted if he doesn't use that ability to launch quick and incisive transitional play isn't it ? And IMO he doesn't move the ball quickly enough. I really didn't see as much of the "driving us forward" stuff as you seemed to and a ball moves quicker when it's passed then when it's dribbled. I personally would be happier seeing him dribbling at defenders than central midfielders.

I don't think we have to settle for one best 11. This is the point I was making a couple of days ago, we need to be more tactically diverse or we'll just get figured out like we did saturday. The odd game will require a real solid pair of CM's, but we have the squad to change things up and keep opponents guessing. So no, I wouldn't play Alli every week, or Dembele, or Dier or Kane or or Lamela. We can put Dembele back into the AM area again maybe, have him dribble at defenders, put Edwards in there have him cause mayhem, play Winks or Onomah next the defensively proficient and dynamic busy **** Wanyama who'll hunt the ball for them.

I think maybe Dembele next to Wanyama is a more acceptable pairing than Dier and Wanyama as it would at least allow Dembele more license to push forward. But we could go really pro-active and play Dembele with Winks/Onomah. Such a shame that Bentaleb is now on the naughty step, because I think him LCM and Wanyama RCM could have been another excellent balance of skills.

Whilst I agree that we need to be more flexible tactically, constantly changing a side every week also has major downsides. Our settled first XI is probably our main advantage over other big PL sides.

 

[neilmcnab]

Whilst I agree that we need to be more flexible tactically, constantly changing a side every week also has major downsides. Our settled first XI is probably our main advantage over other big PL sides.

agree, i think it was a good tactic to use in what was always going to be a tricky game.however i don't think the players managed to achieve the objectives. on another day tat starting lineup would carryout their jobs in a much better way.
far more concerning is that so many individual players had poor performances during the game.
imo we are possibly lacking a player who can come in for dele/eriksen and a fast/powerful striker/wide attacker.
the youngsters are very impressive, especially impressive to me anton walked and kwp along with winks and onomah.
however we don't need to put undue pressure on these up and coming youngsters.

 

[werty]

We were pretty poor at defending leads under Poch in his first season when neither Dier or Dembele were playing often in central midfield. It has much more to do with the system and the front four becoming separated from the rest of the team as the back four start to drop deeper than it does any pairing. We didn't do too badly offensively last year with Dier and Dembele and played far worse football under Poch without both.

And Dembele should never play as an attacking midfielder. His deficiencies as a passer would be exposed even greater there and he's afraid to go within 25 yards of the goal without the ball at his feet.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Whilst I agree that we need to be more flexible tactically, constantly changing a side every week also has major downsides. Our settled first XI is probably our main advantage over other big PL sides.

Settled group, settled coached ethos and a pretty settled side. I'm not talking about making 4 or 5 changes every week or any some weeks, but we must be more tactically diverse this year.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

Settled group, settled coached ethos and a pretty settled side. I'm not talking about making 4 or 5 changes every week or any some weeks.

If I'm reading your posts correctly, if you had it your way, any 2 (or 3) of Winks, Onomah, Mason, Bentaleb, Dier, Dembele, Wanyama could start depending on the circumstances. Having a settled midfield partnership is probably far more advantageous.

 

[Gaz_Gammon]

So when we fuck up it it's all about the others, when we do well it's all about Dembele ?

At least 70% (it might even be 80% if we include the Stoke game) of the winning positions we coughed up we did with Dembele in the team. FACT.

The team has better shape, moves forward with more purpose and creates more attacking chances when Dembele plays, whether that be in a winning, drawing or defeated game. That is so bleeding obvious to anyone who watched Spurs play last season, and i saw every bloody second of every game.

You can write another sixteen paragraph reply, but fact is anyone who see us play (including the Saturday just gone) can bear witness that we struggle continuously for anyone to hold the ball up in midfield and create openings when Dembele is not in the side.

 

[Flashspur]

Agree, the uber CM is a rare species, but if we are going to play the brand of football we are trying to play - i.e. front foot football, press, steal, transition etc - we have to get the blend right and it can't be two from Dier, Dembele, Wanyama most weeks, it's just too conservative and risk averse.

I hold my hands up and say Dier made a much better job of playing CM than I thought he would, but I am still ultimately less convinced than many by him in a CM2 - or more importantly, our version of football CM2 - and as I've said all along, I still see his future ultimately as a CB, and a damn fine one.

I think this season will really be interesting in terms of Dier's CM future. For me the honeymoon's over, I think he's probably inherited the Dawson "wholesome loveable English all-round good egg" mantle, and as such got more leeway and will still get more leeway than some on bad days, and also because people were still viewing him as this rooky CB playing CM and making a damn good fist of it. But CM's at spurs rarely get more than a season's grace, and if Dier doesn't improve various facets of his game I think his CM place is going to be under pressure, especially now we've got shot of Bentaleb (who I think was the best left side "metronome" balance to Dier's right side solidity and also added a dedicated pure, dynamic busy **** in Wanyama, who probably balances off having a "metronome" in there better than Dier or Dembele do in a CM2.

Can't agree with the Dier comments. I think he will cement his DM position in the CM2 this season. I see Dembele filling in the other with Wanyama alternating for the two. As some have said on here, I like the look of Winks - defensive minded but moves the ball around quickly. I'd love to see Poch test him out.

Benteleb has obviously burnt his bridges. We are unlikely to see him again unless there is a turnaround in character and ego which I suspect are the main issues.