Ratings vs Sheriff

[Bus-Conductor]

I'm all for giving Lamela time to settle to PL play, and probably the next outing for him will be the Hull cup game playing against Hull's PL players but not in a PL match. Hopefully thereafter he will gradually aclimatise so that by (say) Christmas AVB will think he is up to playing in the PL.

At the same time, lets also cut Lennon slack on his first game back, where he improved throughout the game - which is one of the reasons why AVB subbed Lamela rather than Lennon.

I'd agree that after the TW influx of attacking midfielders, Lennon has a way to go to compete for a first team place , but in this game neither Lamela nor Lennon put in anything other than an a pretty unispiring performance , alkthough I'd mark Lennon slightly higher than :Lamela who with Naughton probably had the poorest performance of the Spurs players, which incidentally is a similar analysis as the combined SO board ratings (ie its not a few vociferous posters who seem to unreservadly worship Lamela whatever his performances)

There was no Lamela worship here SI. I think Lennon will inevitably suffer from some attritional lack of slack. 7 or 8 years of fairly insipid flim flam can do that.

 

[Spurs1960]

I think Dawson was not better or worse defensively than Chiriches last night, but to say Dawson came on and problems stopped because of this is factually wrong.

Before Dawson

14 min (player through left, ball played past Chiriches who recovers to save) I am convinced this was offside. AVB complained as well.

31 min (Chiriches actually cuts out through ball but deflects to their guy at acute angle edge of box)


After

37 min (quick free kick played to man Dawson is marking then played through his legs ends up with chance on pen spot)

58 min (played into space corner of box results in ping pong in box)
70 min (guy gets past Dawson - results in shot Dawson gets block on)
80 min (player gets in behind Dawson, clean through down centre 1v1 best chance of the game IMO)

There were only two real 1v1 created by them. One with and one without Dawson. Chiriches made amends for one of them. No one did the second.

Seems scotoma is rife.

That's all that you saw, which emphasises my point, it's not all I saw.

 

[Spurs1960]

Certainly an excellent buy and its difficult to see better goalkeepers around, although sometimes he seems to take too many risks in coming out. But I think I prefer that to Freida not moving off the line which is the opposite extreme.

He seems to have a mistake a game in him with his feet or putting the left-back under pressure with his distribution but yeah he's miles better at coming out than Friedel. Happy with him overall.

 

[Spurs1960]

im stunned, you must live in some alternate reality.
Which game did you watch?
Dawson man of the match?

Only for the fact he tightened the defence when he came on so had an impact where nobody else did. Lloris gets the same mark, he did what he had to do. Everyone was average or below average.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

That's all that you saw, which emphasises my point, it's not all I saw.

I saw an eagle sawing in the sky, the eagle had a magnolia beak and was wearing lederhosen and written on the lederhosen in fluorescent gel pen were the words "Dawson is not the Messiah. That emphasises my point.

 

[Coyboy]

I guess because I applied perspective. Lamela is a 21yo settling in to a new team in a new country yet still managed to see as much of the game as Lennon, who on top of being insipid also wasted the games best chance with an insipid little back pass.

Maybe when Lamela has been insipid for five years and we sign 21yo who is a acclimatising I might call Lamela bad and the 21 ok when in fact their performances are pretty similar. And the evolutionary cycle of football critique wrongedness will have righted itself.

Try not to lose too much sleep over it.

But I still don't see what Lamela did. You are keeping it vague.

Lennon's chance in the first half was a bad miss. He should have scored but it wasn't a back pass. His shot in the second half was not powerful but it was accurate, well an inch off being accurate.

He also got into good positions and was not picked out. For example when Chiriches took on a stupid shot.

Lennon has not been insipid for five years. That's absurd but at least your are being honest with your bias. I am prepared to cut Lamela and Chadli a lot of slack but I won't fabricate things they do or gloss over bad performances.

Again, can you give me examples of how they were involved and better than Lennon?

 

[double0]

Lennon is underrated.

 

[Spurs1960]

I saw an eagle sawing in the sky, the eagle had a magnolia beak and was wearing lederhosen and written on the lederhosen in fluorescent gel pen were the words "Dawson is not the Messiah. That emphasises my point.

That you don't know what you're talking about yes, that was established in another thread.

Your Dawson one on one mistake is in fact a Chiriches mistake but that was too much for you to spot of course. A full-back has to read the game more than any other player in our system and be pro-active rather than reactive, he and other players are supposed to do things and make movements before something happens (pro-active) not after (reactive) where at all possible.

Watching live I could see he needed to drop back, he didn't, he stayed and thought about it by which time it was too late, he had allowed a one-on-one.

When you start with the wrong initial data (how each player is supposed to play the game) then naturally your conclusions will be wrong and you'll see lederhosen, florescent gel and eagles where none exist.

 

[markieboy]

Lloris 7
Naughton 4
Chiriches 5
Vertonghen 6
Fryers 6
Dawson 7
Sandro 6
Dembele 6
Lennon 6
Eriksen 6
Lamela 5
Defoe 5
Chadli 6
Holtby 6

Defence was cut to shreads simply playing the ball behind an out of position Chiriches which stopped when Dawson replaced him. Naughton didn't help Chiriches one little bit, just made matters worse, he was awful. They would have scored had it not been changed.

Lloris did everything that was asked of him, shame Fryers got injured, going forward we looked pedestrian playing as if we were convinced 1-0 was good enough.

Defoe had no service so no attacking player can get anything other than an average 6 .

Defoe had no service so no attacking player can get anything other than an average 6

Was Defoe playing in defence then because you gave him a 5.

 

[idontgetit]

 

[Bus-Conductor]

That you don't know what you're talking about yes, that was established in another thread.

Your Dawson one on one mistake is in fact a Chiriches mistake but that was too much for you to spot of course. A full-back has to read the game more than any other player in our system and be pro-active rather than reactive, he and other players are supposed to do things and make movements before something happens (pro-active) not after (reactive) where at all possible.

Watching live I could see he needed to drop back, he didn't, he stayed and thought about it by which time it was too late, he had allowed a one-on-one.

When you start with the wrong initial data (how each player is supposed to play the game) then naturally your conclusions will be wrong and you'll see lederhosen, florescent gel and eagles where none exist.

Strange that you apply almost reverse argument when I have criticised Walker - a full back. When he doesn't read danger and be pro-active you tell me it's because that's how AVB wants him to play.

I didn't blame Dawson, I didn't single Dawson out for criticism, I just pointed out the inaccuracy of your "Dawson stopped the problems" theory. He didn't.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

But I still don't see what Lamela did. You are keeping it vague.

Lennon's chance in the first half was a bad miss. He should have scored but it wasn't a back pass. His shot in the second half was not powerful but it was accurate, well an inch off being accurate.

He also got into good positions and was not picked out. For example when Chiriches took on a stupid shot.

Lennon has not been insipid for five years. That's absurd but at least your are being honest with your bias. I am prepared to cut Lamela and Chadli a lot of slack but I won't fabricate things they do or gloss over bad performances.

Again, can you give me examples of how they were involved and better than Lennon?

You make a fair case.

 

[jezz]

That you don't know what you're talking about yes, that was established in another thread.

Your Dawson one on one mistake is in fact a Chiriches mistake but that was too much for you to spot of course. A full-back has to read the game more than any other player in our system and be pro-active rather than reactive, he and other players are supposed to do things and make movements before something happens (pro-active) not after (reactive) where at all possible.

Watching live I could see he needed to drop back, he didn't, he stayed and thought about it by which time it was too late, he had allowed a one-on-one.

When you start with the wrong initial data (how each player is supposed to play the game) then naturally your conclusions will be wrong and you'll see lederhosen, florescent gel and eagles where none exist.

Lennons stats

But I still don't see what Lamela did. You are keeping it vague.

Lennon's chance in the first half was a bad miss. He should have scored but it wasn't a back pass. His shot in the second half was not powerful but it was accurate, well an inch off being accurate.

He also got into good positions and was not picked out. For example when Chiriches took on a stupid shot.

Lennon has not been insipid for five years. That's absurd but at least your are being honest with your bias. I am prepared to cut Lamela and Chadli a lot of slack but I won't fabricate things they do or gloss over bad performances.

Again, can you give me examples of how they were involved and better than Lennon?

Lamela also was in plenty of good positions and team mates chose different options.
Lamela tried a nice one two with Defore, defoe chose to play the ball out left.
Lennons record for us in goals in rubbish. 1 in 10 consistently in his time at spurs.
Not good enough not matter how you cut it.
If lamela scores 4 or 5 a season he will be gone, the same should apply for all our AM.
We are moving forward, the old guard will be fazed out and new generation moving in.
Get use to it.

 

[Coyboy]

You make a fair case.

Thank you.

 

[Coyboy]

Lennons stats

Lamela also was in plenty of good positions and team mates chose different options.
Lamela tried a nice one two with Defore, defoe chose to play the ball out left.
Lennons record for us in goals in rubbish. 1 in 10 consistently in his time at spurs.
Not good enough not matter how you cut it.
If lamela scores 4 or 5 a season he will be gone, the same should apply for all our AM.
We are moving forward, the old guard will be fazed out and new generation moving in.
Get use to it.

I'll take your word for it re Lennon's average, I think it may be better but hey ho. I have always said he should score more as he is a decent finisher.

The point was that he played no worse than Lamela, in my opinion slightly better.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Thank you.

It's not watertight though.

Lennon should be doing much more than a 21yo having his 3rd or 4th start for us. This is where we have a slack ratio discrepancy IMO. Scientifically, especially having checked the stats, Lennon and Lamela saw almost identical ball per minute, but shouldn't Lennon, 5 years his senior, with 328 appearance to Lamela's 8 be doing a bit more ? This and the fact that in 7/8 years Lennon productivity and performances have too often been like this explain the very slightly contempt bread of familiarity comments.

Chadli, for the record, saw much more ball per minute. So his/lennon "OK/bad" is justified I reckon, taking into account the same factors as with Lamela.

And it's not like I said Lennon was Bad but Lamella was great is it. Bad and barely OK are but a scale apart on the footballing richter scale.

 

[Shea]

Lloris 7 - played well but his kicking and distribution was poor
Naughton 5 - left us exposed all game
Chiriches 8 - was outstanding, saved an equaliser and was skilful and calm
Vertonghen 7 - scored and was generally good at everything he did
Fryers 6 - as with all the 6's in the team played ok nothing more
Dembele 7 - was vital in retaining possession and keeping the heat of us
Sandro 7 - the most committed player on the park
Lamela 5 - did literally nothing
Eriksen 6 - other than his assist he was AWOL
Lennon 5 - did nothing of any note in attack and failed to support Naughton
Defoe 6 - scored via a lucky deflection to avoid me rating him a 5

Dawson 6
Holtby 6
Chadli 6

 

[Spurs1960]

Defoe had no service so no attacking player can get anything other than an average 6

Was Defoe playing in defence then because you gave him a 5.

No but he didn't deserve a 6 with what little he had so I made an exception in his case. He 2 main shots were back to his old self, straight at the keeper, one took a massive deflection to go in.

 

[CowInAComa]

It's not watertight though.

Lennon should be doing much more than a 21yo having his 3rd or 4th start for us. This is where we have a slack ratio discrepancy IMO. Scientifically, especially having checked the stats, Lennon and Lamela saw almost identical ball per minute, but shouldn't Lennon, 5 years his senior, with 328 appearance to Lamela's 8 be doing a bit more ? This and the fact that in 7/8 years Lennon productivity and performances have too often been like this explain the very slightly contempt bread of familiarity comments.

Chadli, for the record, saw much more ball per second. So his/lennon "OK/bad" is justified I reckon, taking into account the same factors as with Lamela.

And it's not like I said Lennon was Bad but Lamella was great is it. Bad and barely OK are but a scale apart on the footballing richter scale.

Lennon did do a wee 'bit' more in fairness though, i know his finishing is almost comically weak but he did get into a couple of goal scoring chances. And also in his defence it was his first start for a fair while, i thought he was 'merely adequate' compared to Lamelas 'slightly disappointing' .

That said I agree he may be the most frustrating player we have in terms of wasted productivity.

 

[Spurs1960]

Strange that you apply almost reverse argument when I have criticised Walker - a full back. When he doesn't read danger and be pro-active you tell me it's because that's how AVB wants him to play.

I didn't blame Dawson, I didn't single Dawson out for criticism, I just pointed out the inaccuracy of your "Dawson stopped the problems" theory. He didn't.

Not strange at all, I merely gave you an example to show how you incorrectly read games.