Ratings vs Chelsea

[davidmatzdorf]

I don't think anyone really had a bad overall game. We were playing a slightly superior team and the players individually did OK, but collectively, we were progressively squeezed out of the match after the first 35 minutes.
Naughton coped unusually well at his inferior position. Vertonghen seems a different character this year - contentious, irritable, easily provoked, a bit reckless - he still plays good football, but I wonder if there has been something stressful or distracting going on in his personal life. Dembélé had a stand-out game, but still has the same bad habit of failing to see the right moment to release the ball - on several occasions, he drove eye-catchingly up the pitch to relieve pressure, but ended up losing the ball.

Lloris- 7.5​

Walker- 6​

Dawson- 6​

Vertonghen- 6​

Naughton- 6​

Dembele- 7.5​

Paulinho- 6​

Eriksen- 6​

Townsend- 6.5​

Sigurdsson- 6.5​

Soldado- 6​

Subs​

Defoe- 6.5​

Chadli- 6​

Holtby- 6​

 

[DAZZA1978]

MOM Dembele, offered something different with his dribbles and ball retention. No other player was able to hold onto the ball in the 2nd half when Chelsea were using a pack hunting pressing technique.

Once they won the ball would agree Mata made the difference for them but you sometimes can't stop quality players once they have the ball and out number you in midfield. Sandro would have helped in winning ball back but we should have been more patient and kept the ball in our back line more. It would have made them chase more up front therefore leaving more holes at there back that would make it easier for us to hold onto the ball further up the pitch. A change in style more than a change in personel would have been more productive.

 

[stevenqoz]

Lloris -7.5 -

Walker - 7
Verts - 6
Dawson - 6
Naughton - 7

Dembele - 8.5
Paulinho - 6.5

Siggy - 6
Townsend - 7
Eriksen - 6.5

Soldado - 6

Defoe - 6.5
Holtby - 6
Chadli - 6

Not surprised to see AVB stay loyal to Sigg who again rewarded that loyalty. We were on top for 35 minutes and probably could have deservedly gone two up. Mourinho rang the changes second half and they looked better balanced and more dangerous as a result. For us Soldado being in the game depends on the wide two joining in. Townsend did this outstandingly for half a game but him energy levels dropped considerably second period. Personally I would prefer Chadli as a better fit on the left but AVB can't be blamed for his selection Siggy is scoring from that area. One suggestion I would make here is that in making an alteration to the side AVB ought to have made two aat the same time. Sending Chadli on in his non-preferred side unbalanced us further. I would have change Siggy and Townsend for Lamela and Chadli. Defoe might have had more of an impact in 25 minutes rather than the 15 he got.
On the Torres / Verts thing I thought the Chelsea man was trying to suggest 'tears' for Verts by touching his cheeks....obviously wasn't recieved that way. On the second yellow Torres jumped into Verts but didn't seem to use his elbow ...it was more of a bump. In the event both of them lay down as a result....hard to say one is more guilty than the other.

 

[Bulletspur]

Its funny, a lot of people thought Sandro and Lamela should have come on and that AVB was too slow to react.

Yet didnt we used to say that Arry was too slow to react and made the wrong subs? BMJ too for that matter.

I'm not dissing anyone in particular as I too thought Sandro should have come on, but then I thought he's still recovering from a major injury, has played quite a bit in the last week or so and that maybe, just maybe AVB might know better than me...

Then why have him on the bench?

 

[eddiebailey]

The changes Mourinho made at half time changed the game, AVB was arguably slow to react and struggled to find the answers, but it is difficult to influence the game from the touchline. The reason we get so many of these games of two halves is because so much emphasis is put on manager's tactical game plans. In the first half Manager A gets it right and there is nothing much Manager B can do about it from the dugout, so he works out what changes he needs to make and explains them to the players at half time, putting manager A on the backfoot for the second half.

In the old days it was the job of the captain and the senior pros to fix things on the on the pitch - I recall Martin Jol saying that once the game had started, he was in charge, not the manager. Now I think everyone feels more constrained and less inclined to use initiative.

 

[only1waddle]

As others have pointed out, the mistake was Sandro not coming on, i think AVB tried to shore up the right side with a more defensive midfielder, what actually happened was our most threatening player got taken off, i didn't get this sub at all..
It seems strange that AVB is such an advocate of 433, yet didn't deploy it when he most needed to do it, the spaces would have been shut down with a DM and Chelsea would have looked quite ordinary in attack, whereas they looked great because of the space we afforded them. Considering AVB was an opposition scout i can't believe he didn't see the gaps that opened up.

Still some positives to take out of the game though, Townsends new found belief in passing the ball, Dembele back to top form, Lloris decision making was exceptional, Paulinho got into good positions in the box, Sigurdsson is becoming an asset, minus a few brain farts Walker looked good.

Some Decision making needs sharpening up though, AVB needs to react quicker, Dembele's release of the ball needs improvement, Paulinho has a tendancy to drift into a great a place to set a move off but never delivers the killer ball.
Dawson scares me at the back.
We need to start finding Soldado, if this involves switching the wingers for periods of the game then so be it, i think AVB seems slightly too rigid in the belief that it is inverted forwards or nothing.
Still, 1 goal conceded from open play all season is not to be sniffed at, 1 goal conceded to a JT header makes me want to vomit..

Onwards and upwards, we move on..

 

[Mr-T]

Then why have him on the bench?

Same reason as having anyone on the bench - options and/or cover.

Maybe AVB didn't consider him the right option to use at the time even though many fans would have sent him on.

Or maybe he was cover in case Dembeles hip injury flared up?

 

[Mr Pink]

It seemed to me as though the substitutions were reactive. Townsend and Eriksen were not having the same effect as in the 1st half so they were replaced with players who could fill their specific roles in like fashion. Eventually the same could be said of Soldado/Defoe. Yet at half time, if you were to make one prediction about how Mourinho would react it would have been that he would bring Mata on and change things around a bit. What we don't know is whether AVB also anticipated this but felt that his team could cope, or whether it never occurred to him to make a tactical change. I would guess the former. If AVB had brought Sandro on at half time it might have made it grimmer and harder for Mata but at the expense of some of our own attacking potential. Who's to say that in so doing Chelsea might not have won the initiative some other way, for example by just being able to force the numbers forward with even greater decisiveness?

I disagree with your hypothetical suggestion. We weren't doing any attacking in the second half prior to the Torres sending off. Our problem was we were failing to win the ball back, and when we did we couldn't retain it for long enough. Sandro would definitely improved our chances of winning the ball back, and his strength on the ball in terms of shielding it could of improved our possession as well.

I would of played the 4-3-3 from the start, but honestly I was staggered AVB didn't react in the second half by bringing him on. It was almost like AVB didn't want to react to Mourinho's tactical change. The game was slipping away and the changes he made didn't make much sense in addressing the core problem.

Love AVB, but not his best day yesterday.

 

[khataby_spurs]

I really don't understand the siggy bashing and " he doesn't do enough "

well he scored the goal and had our best shot in the second half ,, work very very hard ( if you care to watch ) both defensively and offensively .. that's enough for me

how many games last year that Bale did fuck all but scoring and we were all creaming ourselves over him .. not saying siggy is on Bale's level but a little appreciation would be good

Chadli sub was strange to say the least may be because Twonsend wasn't helpng walker enough .. defensive move

we needed Sandro badly

Dawson not good enough sadly

 

[Tit&Ham]

Eriksen was pure class in the first half. And his turn before our goal is just out of this world. Yes he disappeared aften the break, but i don't feel he is done justice in these ratings.

Dembele outstanding all game. Lloris a close second.

 

[Bulletspur]

Same reason as having anyone on the bench - options and/or cover.

Maybe AVB didn't consider him the right option to use at the time even though many fans would have sent him on.

Or maybe he was cover in case Dembeles hip injury flared up?

Then I thought he's still recovering from a major injury, has played quite a bit in the last week or so and that maybe, just maybe AVB might know better than me...
This is what I was responding to. If he was still recovering from injury and is therefore not fit, why have him on the bench? In all honesty he therefore could not be cover for Dembele as you put it. Its either one way or the other, it cannot be both.

 

[Bulletspur]

I disagree with your hypothetical suggestion. We weren't doing any attacking in the second half prior to the Torres sending off. Our problem was we were failing to win the ball back, and when we did we couldn't retain it for long enough. Sandro would definitely improved our chances of winning the ball back, and his strength on the ball in terms of shielding it could of improved our possession as well.

I would of played the 4-3-3 from the start, but honestly I was staggered AVB didn't react in the second half by bringing him on. It was almost like AVB didn't want to react to Mourinho's tactical change. The game was slipping away and the changes he made didn't make much sense in addressing the core problem.

Love AVB, but not his best day yesterday.

Totally agree! Should have started with the 3 in mid field or if not bring Sandro on when Mata came on.

 

[lukespurs7]

I think you might want to revise your assessment above. You seem to have watched a different game from everyone else. Dont make pass performances and player preferences cloud your judgement.

Not at all mate. I thought Dawson was very good today, apart from the one time Torres ran at him and left him on his arse he won tireless amounts of headers and tackles and put in many blocks/stops, was sloppy for the Terry goal but thats down to zonal marking rather than Dawson's indiviudal error.

As for Naughton are you kidding? I went to the match and have been a season ticket for years and everyone around also agreed how poor Naughton was, offered little going forward, was caught out of position on a number of occasions, made some silly fouls like a push in the back on Oscar/Mata when not needed which nearly lead to a goal from their resulting free-kick.

You're entitled to your opinion but if YOU and whoever else actually watched the game or knew what they were talking about you'd have rated Dawson and Naughton similarly.

 

[Ironskullll]

I disagree with your hypothetical suggestion. We weren't doing any attacking in the second half prior to the Torres sending off. Our problem was we were failing to win the ball back, and when we did we couldn't retain it for long enough. Sandro would definitely improved our chances of winning the ball back, and his strength on the ball in terms of shielding it could of improved our possession as well.

I would of played the 4-3-3 from the start, but honestly I was staggered AVB didn't react in the second half by bringing him on. It was almost like AVB didn't want to react to Mourinho's tactical change. The game was slipping away and the changes he made didn't make much sense in addressing the core problem.

Love AVB, but not his best day yesterday.

Well I pretty much agree with you actually. I felt pretty sure Mourinho was certain to bring Mata on at HT and that Sandro on at half time would be a good call. Thing is we can't necessarily second guess how that might have turned out. Might have brought Chelsea even more onto us, like similar decisions did in similar circumstances last year. Agree that the changes he made, being pretty much like for like didn't address the core problem. What worked first half clearly wasn't working second half. That followed a personnel switch by Chelsea but would you say it was tactical? Not sure, but I think it called for a tactical response, which we didn't get. Perhaps he just put too much faith in his players to turn it round.

 

[Mr Pink]

Well I pretty much agree with you actually. I felt pretty sure Mourinho was certain to bring Mata on at HT and that Sandro on at half time would be a good call. Thing is we can't necessarily second guess how that might have turned out. Might have brought Chelsea even more onto us, like similar decisions did in similar circumstances last year. Agree that the changes he made, being pretty much like for like didn't address the core problem. What worked first half clearly wasn't working second half. That followed a personnel switch by Chelsea but would you say it was tactical? Not sure, but I think it called for a tactical response, which we didn't get. Perhaps he just put too much faith in his players to turn it round.

Oh yes, I agree insofar that you can't guarantee any change will be effective tactically before making it - as obvious as that sounds. But on the face of it - it was the obvious change, and I would say there was a strong chance the change would of worked to our advantage to some extent.

In answer to your second point, Chelsea's switch was tactical and an obvious one really. Bringing Ramires back into his natural role in a more central position allowing the introduction of Mata. It enabled their attacking midfielders to rotate and hence they became more fluid and harder to pick up. They were retaining the ball better, looked more threatening in the spaces between the lines and they were working harder off the ball in the second half, Ramires being much more effective in this respect. Its why the tide turned in their favour.

Sandro would of been able to break up play better, shielding those spaces in between the lines, and would of won us more ball and probably would of helped us keep it better. There was a point when Chelsea's midfield were pressing us like crazy in the second half and we were giving the ball back too frequently as a result. Dembele was the only one who looked strong enough to cope with that, Sandro would surely of helped in this respect. We needed some strength and composure on the ball, and obviously his ability to tackle in those spaces would surely of disrupted some of their fluency.

Had we done that I think Townsend and Eriksen would of seen more ball and we would of been better in possession, negating Chelsea's threat and superiority in that stage of the game.

 

[Bulletspur]

Not at all mate. I thought Dawson was very good today, apart from the one time Torres ran at him and left him on his arse he won tireless amounts of headers and tackles and put in many blocks/stops, was sloppy for the Terry goal but thats down to zonal marking rather than Dawson's indiviudal error.

As for Naughton are you kidding? I went to the match and have been a season ticket for years and everyone around also agreed how poor Naughton was, offered little going forward, was caught out of position on a number of occasions, made some silly fouls like a push in the back on Oscar/Mata when not needed which nearly lead to a goal from their resulting free-kick.

You're entitled to your opinion but if YOU and whoever else actually watched the game or knew what they were talking about you'd have rated Dawson and Naughton similarly.

Well Lukespurs7, it all comes down to opinions. I may longer be a season ticket holder due to now living abroad, but I have supported the mighty Spurs for 30+ years and have seen every spurs game home and away in the past 3 years "live" on the box. So surely like yours, my opinion does count.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Not at all mate. I thought Dawson was very good today, apart from the one time Torres ran at him and left him on his arse he won tireless amounts of headers and tackles and put in many blocks/stops, was sloppy for the Terry goal but thats down to zonal marking rather than Dawson's indiviudal error.

As for Naughton are you kidding? I went to the match and have been a season ticket for years and everyone around also agreed how poor Naughton was, offered little going forward, was caught out of position on a number of occasions, made some silly fouls like a push in the back on Oscar/Mata when not needed which nearly lead to a goal from their resulting free-kick.

You're entitled to your opinion but if YOU and whoever else actually watched the game or knew what they were talking about you'd have rated Dawson and Naughton similarly.

Not according to this long term fan, season ticket holder and regular watcher he didn't. And ESPN Stat zone (Opta) seem to back that up:

He made 1 tackle (out of 2), 0 Blocked shots, 1 blocked cross and of the headers he contended with opponents he only won 1 out 3.

You have no idea whatsoever if we were using zonal marking, but I think it's unlikely we were employing - entirely at least - zonal marking from a free kick of that kind, but either way, he certainly started off marking Terry for the free kick.

I think Bulletspur is right and you were perhaps mistakingly watching a different game, maybe a video of the 1966 world cup final or something ? Was it black and white ? Did Dawson look a bit like Bobby Moore ?

 

[Damian99]

You have no idea whatsoever if we were using zonal marking, but I think it's unlikely we were employing - entirely at least - zonal marking from a free kick of that kind, but either way, he certainly started off marking Terry for the free kick.

I think Bulletspur is right and you were perhaps mistakingly watching a different game, maybe a video of the 1966 world cup final or something ? Was it black and white ? Did Dawson look a bit like Bobby Moore ?

Firstly neither do you. It's time for Dawson to put his feet up but ffs paint a bigger picture of the whole scenario.

Verts reckless challenge gave them the set piece and then Dembele is playing half of them onside when it's taken.

In very simple terms Dembele is the one at fault because if he holds a good line Terry is offside, watch the free kick Dembele is playing 3 Chelsea players onside. Dawson allows Terry to get a run on him maybe he's trying to hold the line letting Terry run into an offside position?(not a viable option for you of course but plausible not the less), which is what they all should be doing. But he's unaware of Dembele's position or maybe he just doesn't track the run Terry. But surely you hold the 18 yard line for as long as possible before the kick or otherwise if you go with every run into the box as it's made, everyone will be on top of Lloris and cause no end of problems.

Much easier to blame just one man for it all though, i suppose.


ps At 64.21 Just at what point is Dawson marking JT??? Roll it on a little further he still is NOT marking JT but Kyle Walker imo. He isn't and never was Dawson's man from that free kick but Kyle Walkers. I would suggest he's(Dawson) looking at Lampard only my opinion mind you.

I will also add it has nothing to do with my opinion of Dawson in general as i would like him on the bench for the league campaign.

 

[JimmyG2]

As for Naughton are you kidding? I went to the match and have been a season ticket for years and everyone around also agreed how poor Naughton was, offered little going forward, was caught out of position on a number of occasions, made some silly fouls like a push in the back on Oscar/Mata when not needed which nearly lead to a goal from their resulting free-kick.

All defenders are accused of giving away silly fouls
which always lead to free kicks in dangerous places.
Benny, Rose, Parker, Sandro, Dawson, Walker, and certainly Vertonghen
have all had this charge leveled at them.
Naughton who has been asked by the manager to play on his wrong side
is no worse than any of these.
All defenders are caught out of position:
Walker frequently, Dawson, Benny, Rose and Vertonghen certainly.
Again I'm not sure that Naughton is worse than any of these.
There is a scapegoat clue in your answer which I have highlighted.
It is more difficult to form your own opinion unless you are very strong minded when in a crowd.
Us watchers from afar don't have this problem.
We don't have to suffer the loudmouth on the block
who is the cheerleader for the 'Jenas you're shit mate' choir.
If enough people say it loud enough and long enough it becomes true.
But I can't hear them.
Naughton is doing a reasonable job but if Benny or Rose were available
he wouldn't be playing because over the whole range of skills
he is not as good as they are.

 

[HotspurFC1950]

Then why have him on the bench?

This about Sandro not being subbed on and a theory that he is recovering from major injury.

I agree with Bulletspur Sandro would not be on the bench if not fit enough to go on.

The decision to not put him on was purely an AVB right/wrong tactical decision to play other players.