"Spurs can't close out games" - fact or fiction?

[BoringOldFan]

One of the several faults cited by Martin Jol’s detractors is his inability to get the team to close out a game successfully from a leading position. This came up again after the Fulham game, when from 2-0 and 3-1 up, we finished level at 3-3.

Here we go again they said, just like against Arsenal and Chelsea in the Cups last season, and Sunderland and West Ham in the league the season before that. So this got me thinking: are we really that bad and do the facts and stats bear out this accusation? Let’s take a look at the outcomes of some of the 99 games we’ve played over the last two seasons.

The 2006/07 Season

Last season we all remember those grim Cup games, where draws were snatched from the jaws of victory and we lost out after the second game.

To those games you can add the trips to Reading and Sheffield United, where we led in both games and lost. And if you take a strict view, we led Sevilla 1-0 at their place and lost 2-1.

Closed Out Games

So much for the bad news. But what of the other side? I can count 16 results where from 1-0 we went on to win the game by the odd goal or actually push on and score the second. For the stat fans amongst you, these are those games:

Slavia Prague (A UC) 1-0, Portsmouth (H PL) 2-1, Besiktas (A UC) 2-0 West Ham (H PL) 1-0, Bayer Leverkusen (A UC) 1-0, Boro (H PL) 2-1, Man City (A PL) 2-1, Southend (H CC) 1-0, Aston Villa (H PL) 2-1, Everton (A PL) 2-1, Braga (A UC) 3-2, Braga (H UC) 3-2, Reading (H PL) 1-0, Boro (A PL) 3-2, Charlton (A PL) 2-0 and Man City (H PL) 2-1.

So looking at the 10 league games alone, that represents 30 points won where had we been pegged back we would only have got 10 points.

Comeback Games

But wait – there’s more. There were 9 games where we were a goal down and came back to get something from the game. Seven of those were league games, and so we got 11 points from those matches when it looked like we’d get none.

The comeback games were Chelsea (H PL) 2-1, Fulham (A PL) 1-1, Arsenal (H PL) 2-2, Portsmouth (A PL) 1-1, Brugge (H UC) 3-1, West Ham (A PL) 4-3, Sevilla (H UC) 2-2, Wigan (A PL) 3-3 and Blackburn (H PL) 1-1.

The 2005/06 Season

Looking at the 2005/06 season, I would say we ‘threw away’ both Cup games, against Grimsby and Leicester. At 0-0 and 2-0 up, we should have closed those out to win or get a replay at least. At home to West Ham and The Goons we led 1-0, only to be pegged back late in both games. And the away games at Sunderland and The Goons again saw us let a 1-0 lead slip. So in the league, we ended up with 4 points when there could have been 12.

Closed Out Games

But there were 13 games where we won by the odd goal or got the second. These were Birmingham (H PL) 2-0, Everton (H PL) 2-0, Fulham (H PL) 1-0, Man City (A PL) 2-0, Portsmouth (A PL) 2-0, Newcastle (H PL) 2-0, Birmingham (A PL) 2-0, Everton (A PL) 1-0, Bolton (H PL) 1-0, Sunderland (H PL) 3-2, Wigan (A PL) 2-1, Blackburn (H PL) 3-2 and Man City (H PL) 2-1.

So looking at those league games, we ended up with 39 points, when lost leads could have reduced this to only 13.

Comeback games

Again, there were four games where we came back from a goal down to get something from the game, against Aston Villa (A PL) 1-1, Boro (A PL) 3-3, Charlton (A PL) 3-2 and WBA (H PL) 2-1. So a useful 8 points from that lot, when we could have had none.

Closing Out Games – Can We Do It?

So while the results confirm that we do lose leads and points, we also keep them and win them back. So why is there this perception that we can never close out a game successfully, when the stats support the view that on many occasions we do?

I have a couple of theories. Firstly, there’s human nature. We often look on the bad side of things and those memories tend to stick longer than the good ones. Maybe you can double that factor for Spurs fans.

Secondly, when you look at the games cited as examples of ‘close-out failures’ in the past couple of seasons, you see games like Chelsea and Arsenal. Especially Arsenal. So of course people will remember that we threw away points or a Cup semi final to them more than comebacks against the likes of Fulham, Wigan and Blackburn. In fact most fans may only remember the big comeback games, like Chelsea and West Ham last season.

Looking at the comeback games alone in the past two seasons, we got 19 points from losing positions, compared to the 4 from a possible 18 points in games we didn’t close out. And that’s before you add in the whopping 69 points from games we did close out.

Granted the games chosen for each category are open to challenge, but I doubt anyone could rearrange them to support the view that failure to close out games is a prominent or persistent habit. Sure it would be great if it never happened, but we don’t play at that level yet.

So there's certainly something to work on for the future, but let's not get carried away about the number of times we've lost a lead - and balance the times we have with those where we have held on or come back to win the day.

 

[sussexyid]

Nice post mate

I agree with you, I think we are still doing alright... Arsenal result should be irrelavent in the Jol debate, keep him, he's the best we've had since Bill Nic.

 

[Parmenio]

if fact last season I think we were the biggest come back merchents in the league, for a long stretch of the season. Of course then people were moaning about how we always were going behind in games and making it tough for ourselves.

 

[tony0379]

we were only making it tought for ourselves becaise it took us 60 mins to get going

 

[DogsOfWar]

Agree with your post but I'd just like to add one point.

Most of our fans are only interested in results relative to this season so they have seen us drop 3 points in the last minutes of two games and gain nothing from coming back ourselves.

 

[PT]

I wonder if they are the "new" fans - the ones that have a bit of previous tend to be a bit more philosophical and patient perhaps.

 

[liewser]

When looking at last season i don't think uefa cup games really qualify because lets be honest the opposition was poor. In addition, I would say that winning at home against teams outside the top 6 is expected. I would also say that some of the 'closed out games' you have mentioned will be misleading because we scored the winner in the closing minutes and so 'closing out' wasn't really required.

'Come back games' are also a completely different issue. I dont theres any real perception that we cant come back from a losing position.

For me the key is can we hold out 1) away from home, and 2) against the top 6. When i'm watching one of these games, if we are sitting on anything less than a 3 goal lead, i'm always very uneasy until we reach about 80/85mins. For whatever reason I always feel that if the pressure starts building, we will cave.

Watching arsenal/chelsea/liverpool, they (more often than not) look more than comfortable protecting a two goal cushion.

 

[YiddoJames]

Add Blackburn away to the list of comeback games in 2006-7 -Losing 1-0 to Tugay shot and drew 1-1 thanks to a penalty.

 

[parj]

aall these stats are all great and put a positive spin on things..... but it does not mask the frailties that spurs have. we never play for 90mins and i dont think parking abus in front of the goal will even help us defend!!!

 

[rooster1]

It's good to have optimism in the long run.
In the here and now though, it's our conceeding
of goals that is our main worry.

A lot has been said of our frail defence, but in
reality it's our midfield that needs to defend.
I haven't checked all the stats, but we seem to
conceed to midfielders so far this year from what i remember.

The midfield have got to learn how to shut up shop
and pick out their markers otherwise all the
hard work would be undone .

I still feel that injury free, we can or have the ability to beat
any team in the prem. As long as we don't throw it away
so easily.

 

[SpursManChris]

Sometimes Jol can be faulted, sometimes he can't... simple as that. Fulham last week, he could not be faulted. He made the defensive sub so that there was THREE CENTER BACKS, 5 all up!!!! And we conceded that 3rd goal!! Honestly, you could have 8 defenders in our defence and they would still concede. There really is something not right with the defence and it's gotta be something to do with their structure because individually, lets face it, they are decent. We cannot be letting in goals from teams like Fulham, these are the games we need to win! ESPECIALLY if we are to aim for top four. I mean could you imagine man u, chelsea, arse, liverpool leaving cravern cottage with a mere draw after being 3-1 up?

 

[BoringOldFan]

When looking at last season i don't think uefa cup games really qualify because lets be honest the opposition was poor. In addition, I would say that winning at home against teams outside the top 6 is expected. I would also say that some of the 'closed out games' you have mentioned will be misleading because we scored the winner in the closing minutes and so 'closing out' wasn't really required.

'Come back games' are also a completely different issue. I dont theres any real perception that we cant come back from a losing position.

For me the key is can we hold out 1) away from home, and 2) against the top 6. When i'm watching one of these games, if we are sitting on anything less than a 3 goal lead, i'm always very uneasy until we reach about 80/85mins. For whatever reason I always feel that if the pressure starts building, we will cave.

Watching arsenal/chelsea/liverpool, they (more often than not) look more than comfortable protecting a two goal cushion.

Fair comment - can I take out the Leicester and Grimsby Cup games as well as they were also against 'poor opposition'? :wink:

 

[davidmatzdorf]

You've done a lot of work, but I think you've missed the point a bit. Comparing games where we've lost a lead to games where we have retained a lead doesn't really demonstrate anything. Nearly all teams in nearly all sports win most of their games after they have established a lead (excepting high-scoring games like basketball).

The meaningful statistic would be to compare the number of times (and the percentage of times) Spurs have lost a lead, resulting in a draw or a loss, compared to the number of times (and the percentage of times) that other Premiership teams have done the same over the same time period.

I think you'd find that we do not show well in that particular table, measured over the past 2-3 years.

It would be difficult to quantify, but another significant factor is the number of times that we fail to add to a 1 goal lead during lengthy periods of domination, leading to psychological/mentality problems in the last 20 minutes of matches, when we drop deeper and panic, defending a lead that should have been bigger. Again, I think you'd find that Spurs would be well down that impossible-to-produce table.

As liewser says, comeback games are a completely unrelated matter. In fact, I'd suggest that our healthy habit of mounting a comeback actually reinforces the contention that we find it difficult to protect a lead. Basically, our players perform better when they have to chase something. When they have to protect something, they fall into weak-mentality problems. Pretty much every time, too. Sometimes we do manage to close out a narrow win, but quite a bit of the time it's as much luck as it is judgment.

 

[Parmenio]

I'd suggest that our healthy habit of mounting a comeback actually reinforces the contention that we find it difficult to protect a lead. Basically, our players perform better when they have to chase something.

insightful.

I can recall quite a few of those moments when you think, "why the hell did we wait to conceed before starting to play like this!"

still I think some people are looking at this with poo tinted glasses. This isn't a spurs only trait ... I bet in those stats you mention spurs wouldn't be as bad, relative to the rest of the league, as you would think. I bet we would look bad against the top 4 though.

Those kind of stats would actually be pretty interesting to see.

 

[Banjo]

:hello:

Interesting first post. I think that the basic point:- that we are not as bad at defending leads as we might think - is sound. But as others have said the real issue is how we compare with other top and aspiring teams in this regard.

I don't know :shrug:, but suspect we might not do so well in such a comparision?

 

[liewser]

Fair comment - can I take out the Leicester and Grimsby Cup games as well as they were also against 'poor opposition'? :wink:

Beating poor opposition - no issue

Losing to poor opposition - MAJOR issue!

 

[C0YS]

Sometimes Jol can be faulted, sometimes he can't... simple as that. Fulham last week, he could not be faulted. He made the defensive sub so that there was THREE CENTER BACKS, 5 all up!!!! And we conceded that 3rd goal!! Honestly, you could have 8 defenders in our defence and they would still concede. There really is something not right with the defence and it's gotta be something to do with their structure because individually, lets face it, they are decent. We cannot be letting in goals from teams like Fulham, these are the games we need to win! ESPECIALLY if we are to aim for top four. I mean could you imagine man u, chelsea, arse, liverpool leaving cravern cottage with a mere draw after being 3-1 up?

I don't belive BMJ was responsible for the draw against Fulham but instead the problem comes from the PLAYERS not finishing off games.

I never understood how come no one EVER blames the players :evil:

 

[striebs]

Whatever the facts , it's typical that Martin Jol is getting the blame .

Getting squeaky bum syndrome when Spurs have a lead has been a feature of our club for about the last 17 years .

Jokes like Glenn Hoddle buying a 3 up 5 down house in Manchester don't need to be explained and then to follow it up what about the 4 goal reversal by City not so long ago .

 

[davidmatzdorf]

Jokes like Glenn Hoddle buying a 3 up 5 down house in Manchester don't need to be explained and then to follow it up what about the 4 goal reversal by City not so long ago .

I'd never group those two games together. Spurs didn't bottle the 5-3 match, we just got swept away by a brilliant team who were caught cold by us in the first half. They outplayed us, simple as that.

The Man City 4-3, now that was a bottle job.

 

[SpurSince57]

Whatever the facts , it's typical that Martin Jol is getting the blame .

Getting squeaky bum syndrome when Spurs have a lead has been a feature of our club for about the last 17 years .

Jokes like Glenn Hoddle buying a 3 up 5 down house in Manchester don't need to be explained and then to follow it up what about the 4 goal reversal by City not so long ago .

Mate, it's been a feature for 50 years. We were quite as capable of doing it under Bill as we are now.

But we had Laurie Brown to blame then.