Not a bash

[StockSpur]

everyones probably still cringing at the goals we let in yesterday and how stupidly close the game was when it should have been out of reach after 25 minutes.

Does anyone else think that Harry tries to have too many 'flare' players on the pitch thus sacrificing stability in defending?

If we dont try and cram all the luxury players into the midfield, plus 2 (ok crouch is good for defending corners) strikers, does our 'luxury' midfield have an impact on how overworked and desperate the defending always looks? do we need vdv,hudd,modric and bale all on the pitch at the same time?

my gut feeling is no and one of those players should be on the bench in order for a sandro or palacios type whether home or away.

 

[Yid-ol]

i dont care if we let in 10, as long as we score 11

Yes we had more flare players on the pitch yesterday, but it worked, we havnt won in afew games before then so i dont see how you can question why we did it. Sandro is agreat player but at home to teams like stoke we should be going all out for the win

 

[3Dnata]

We haven't scored alot recently and our attacking form is poor. Both of those goals should have been prevented by people on the pitch and we have three games in 8 days.
I can't see your point.

 

[Damian99]

This "so long as we score one more" in theory is fantastic, but it doesn't happen EVER in football.

You don't see the top teams or teams that win trophies win games, 4-3, 5-4, 3-2 everyweek, it just doesn't happen.

I would prefer us to concede a lot less than we have this season, if you don't concede or don't concede many per game, it gives you a much better chance of picking up wins.

 

[kishman]

We haven't scored alot recently and our attacking form is poor. Both of those goals should have been prevented by people on the pitch and we have three games in 8 days.
I can't see your point.

This. Ahead of a game where we need to score at least 4 goals it was important that we scored a few goals in yesterday's game.

 

[FITZ]

On every other day, jones would have stuck his shot in the top tier.

 

[jimbo]

This "so long as we score one more" in theory is fantastic, but it doesn't happen EVER in football.

You don't see the top teams or teams that win trophies win games, 4-3, 5-4, 3-2 everyweek, it just doesn't happen.

I would prefer us to concede a lot less than we have this season, if you don't concede or don't concede many per game, it gives you a much better chance of picking up wins.

Is that you, Jose?

 

[jonathanhotspur]

Is that you, Jose?

:bowdown:

 

[Azrael]

Actually I don't think we "let any in" at all yesterday. Stoke's goals were both very, very good, particularly the one from Kenwyne Jones, which was a lucky as in was impressive. They were against the run of play and I thought we were defending quite well when both were scored.

If anything, had they got a goal towards the last quarter of the match then you could make an argument for "letting them in", but not the two that ultimately were scored.

 

[stemark44]

We always play wide open under Harry and we never seem to control the game,we will win nothing playing like that.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

We always play wide open under Harry and we never seem to control the game,we will win nothing playing like that.

You're not wrong.

 

[Krafty]

Nothing wrong with the lineup, their first goal was a combination of Huddlestone not being as quick as Etherington (no surprise) and the fact no one showed the bottle/fight/desire to win the big up and under that then dropped to Etherington. Second one Bale gets caught in possession, Jones finishes well.

We do need a bit more experience, like holding on to 3-1 until the half time whistle, instead of letting teams get right back into the match.

 

[StartingPrice]

Is that you, Jose?

He's preparing the ground for when he takes over from 'Arry:wink:

Actually I don't think we "let any in" at all yesterday. Stoke's goals were both very, very good, particularly the one from Kenwyne Jones, which was a lucky as in was impressive. They were against the run of play and I thought we were defending quite well when both were scored.

If anything, had they got a goal towards the last quarter of the match then you could make an argument for "letting them in", but not the two that ultimately were scored.

This.
If we had scored those two goals in a game we wouldn't be wringing our hands about how our offensive play was poor adn the defending was just really lax.

TBH, in reference to the OP, after 27 minutes I wasn't thinking anything about how open we were, no one saw the Etherington goal coming. All I was thinking was tht we could really pile into Stoke and reduce Citeh's goal difference advantage. That and the fiver I had on us beating them 4-0

 

[faymantaray]

He's preparing the ground for when he takes over from 'Arry:wink:



This.
If we had scored those two goals in a game we wouldn't be wringing our hands about how our offensive play was poor adn the defending was just really lax.

TBH, in reference to the OP, after 27 minutes I wasn't thinking anything about how open we were, no one saw the Etherington goal coming. All I was thinking was tht we could really pile into Stoke and reduce Citeh's goal difference advantage. That and the fiver I had on us beating them 4-0

HAHA that was so on for about 5 minutes!

 

[StartingPrice]

HAHA that was so on for about 5 minutes!

 

[guate]

With the ease we scored the first two goals I honestly thought we'd rout Stoke, 6-0 in preperation for Wednesday's game against Real Madrid.

 

[lifeof...]

Actually I don't think we "let any in" at all yesterday. Stoke's goals were both very, very good, particularly the one from Kenwyne Jones, which was a lucky as in was impressive. They were against the run of play and I thought we were defending quite well when both were scored.

If anything, had they got a goal towards the last quarter of the match then you could make an argument for "letting them in", but not the two that ultimately were scored.

As many others, i agree with this kind of point. Whilst both of their goals come from them "nicking the ball" The Jones strike was unstoppable, and one of those that become a wonder goal, 1-50, and the other times end up in row z. The 1st perhaps true, more player could have got back a little quicker, but sometimes you just have to give credit to the player.

1st half we were imo excellent, last 15 a bit nervous.

 

[StockSpur]

the jones strike was dawson backing off because he was the last line of defence half way up the pitch, bale was in the wrong position to be dealing with back passes, i dont agree that we should be aiming to score more than we let in, what kind of a mantra is that? whatabout when we dont score? (frequently these days). everyone scores wonder goals against spurs (strange) and i was also wondering if we could get 5 or 6 but wasnt surprised when 2 goals were scored agaisnt us'let in' or otherwise.

teams have a go at us because we are setup for attack and weaker at the back as a result.

 

[dav3j]

With the ease we scored the first two goals I honestly thought we'd rout Stoke, 6-0 in preperation for Wednesday's game against Real Madrid.

After the first I was (in hushed tones) saying I thought we could smash them. A little disappointed (if not entirely surprised) we didn't put more past them in the second half.

 

[StartingPrice]

the jones strike was dawson backing off because he was the last line of defence half way up the pitch, bale was in the wrong position to be dealing with back passes, i dont agree that we should be aiming to score more than we let in, what kind of a mantra is that? whatabout when we dont score? (frequently these days). everyone scores wonder goals against spurs (strange) and i was also wondering if we could get 5 or 6 but wasnt surprised when 2 goals were scored agaisnt us'let in' or otherwise.

teams have a go at us because we are setup for attack and weaker at the back as a result.

:eh: If we scored more than we let in in every game we played we would win every competition we entered...so it's a winning matra:wink:

Anyway, as I said above, we could quibble over our defenders, but if our players had scored those two goals wouldn anyone on here be arguing that the goals were devalued 'cos the defending wasn't all that it could have been?