What's new

The Benefits of a Siege Mentality

Krafty

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2004
4,768
2,099
Having watched the coverage of that 4-4 draw for the umpteenth time, you realise how much has changed over the last two weeks. After nine weeks of abysmal results and lacklustre performances, suddenly we look ready and willing to take the fight to anyone. The confidence Harry has given the team has been invaluable, but it could be the siege mentality we have developed that could have made the difference.

When Jenas scored that 3rd goal I was happy. We may have lost, but we had come out with respect. The win at Bolton had not been a flash in the pan, but the start of something. Watch fanzone, see how happy the fan is that we have scored three. 4-3 showed progress.

With Ramos in charge I was dreading a mauling as the team did not show any passion or stomach for a fight. The performances and score lines had been so bad you could have forgiven the players if they felt the same. Having got back into the game with Bent’s goal, to then go two goals behind again 60 seconds later, heads could have dropped. But they didn’t stop, if anything in added time they raised their game, put men forward and got that goal that will live in the memory forever. The relief was there for all to see, but it was not just relief. The players showed they could step up, they could fight, that they could compete and they were no longer the punch line to every office email. No wonder they were all buzzing.

Then three days later we face the unbeaten league leaders. We go one down inside two minutes. It would have been easy for the bubble to have burst, especially after the way Liverpool had held out Chelsea for most of the game at the Bridge. Liverpool had chance after chance, and we were struggling to create anything, but the players kept going. Even when we got the equaliser, they kept going. I would have been happy with the draw, but the players had something to prove, they could sense the three points, and they got them.

I cannot recall a game where we have won when the opposition has been on top for most of the game and have created a lot of chances while we have created so few. Normally we are the ones who have created chance after chance only to draw or lose due to late goals. If we faced a well organised, disciplined and hard working team, we struggled. When you add it was against a team of Liverpool’s quality, it’s a remarkable achievement.

Alex Ferguson is often noted as a manager who creates a siege mentality in his players. His numerous spats with the media, opposition managers, the FA and referees are often seen as the rants of a mad old Scotsman, but maybe it’s something deeper. They certainly create a spirit and unity in the team.

I cannot imagine Ramos pinning up jokes from the Sun on the changing room wall, or Fabregas’ comment about the Arsenal Ladies team. Harry is certainly more of a friend to the players, and bringing in players that were left out in the cold under Ramos shows that he is bringing everyone together. The individuals become a team.

The players say he has given them confidence, but subconsciously he has also given them a reason to fight.
 

sak11

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2005
926
897
its like the chelsea under mourinho... they never ever gave up... i lost count how many times they scored in the last 10 mins and ended up winning games... that is what we need and hopefully what we are striving for.. and its not just about being gung ho in the final minutes.. its about composure and confidence also. long may it continue.
 

tommo84

Proud to be loud
Aug 15, 2005
6,120
11,100
What Redknapp appreciates, and what Ramos failed to grasp, is that, in our league at least, confidence is every bit as crucial as the right tactics, and almost as critical as the right players.

Against Zagreb we were missing 4 important players, including our captain and vice-captain, yet there appeared to be no weakness within the team as a result because the players on the pitch performed with the necessary belief that they belonged in that starting XI, and were therefore good enough to beat any opposition. Redknapp has told each player what he's good at, and simply told them to go out and do that.

Ok, Dinamo Zagreb were poor, and any 1 of the 20 Prem teams would pose a stiffer test than they did, but the point is that even without 4 important players, we played as a team. Nobody looked or performed as if they didn't belong, even if not everyone excelled. Under Ramos, even though we had relatively few injuries during his reign, we rarely looked more than just 11 players.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
With Ramos in charge I was dreading a mauling as the team did not show any passion or stomach for a fight...

One thing that I have mentioned on a few occasions to friends, but that no one, including me, ever seems to have touched upon here is that, during our excruciating start to this season, we never got thrashed or mauled. Not once. The same applies, with the exception of the ludicrous home match against Newcastle, throughout the post-CC slump last season.

It's a key pillar of my contention that the main problem with Spurs, for at least 2 years, has been an endemic mental weakness in the squad. Last season, we developed an uncanny ability to squander leads. This season, the knack changed slightly: we would unerringly lose matches by one goal.

The team would do just enough to fail. This has been the problem for years and has undermined a succession of very exciting squads. This past August, there was nothing wrong with our squad except that it was short of one striker and needed a better defensive midfielder. It was potentially a top 4 squad and should easily have finished in the top 6.

But Ramos never managed to extinguish the mentality problems in the club. As Jenas has observed, after we cruised through pre-season, hammering everyone we faced, the initial loss to Boro served as an almighty shock. The players never recovered. They stumbled through a succession of narrow losses, whether playing abysmally against Villa or thrashing Hull and still contriving to lose 1-0. The quality in the squad is such that we never suffered a one-sided loss. But we kept losing anyway, because no one thought we could win.

Tactically, Harry has changed very little. He's moved Modric in behind the striker and he's restored Huddlestone to the first 11. That's about it. But somehow, he has managed to exorcise the pall of failure that was hovering over every performance.

I can well understand why Redknapp has taken this job at 61. He's spent his entire managerial career fashioning silk purses from sow's ears, figuring out how to win games with a collection of home-grown kids and cut-price imports, working miracles to avoid relegation on a budget of tuppence. No one knows if he can cut it at the top. He doesn't know. Provided we stay up this season and unless Levy sacks him next Summer, we're about to find out. The squad is good enough. They just need to understand that they can win.
 

spud

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2003
5,850
8,794
...... the main problem with Spurs, for at least 2 years, has been an endemic mental weakness in the squad.

The team would do just enough to fail. This has been the problem for years and has undermined a succession of very exciting squads. This past August, there was nothing wrong with our squad except that it was short of one striker and needed a better defensive midfielder. It was potentially a top 4 squad and should easily have finished in the top 6.

The squad is good enough. They just need to understand that they can win.

Absolutely spot on.

I recall a relayed quote from Robbie Keane shortly after his transfer to Liverpool to the effect that, with the exceptions of Gerard and Torres, the players that we have are every bit as good as theirs. The collective psychology has been the main thing that has prevented us from being top 4 and challenging for the league.
 

martinj

Member
Dec 6, 2006
84
68
Great post DM - I have been surprised at the number of times we lost 2-1 in our early season low patch, a scoreline which demonstrates our ability to score but also our tendancy to lose out at the last to an opposition who either want it more or work better together as a team ( almost never because they have a better squad ). We saw great individual play coming to nothing when players lacked any understanding of each others' intentions and a rudderless quality showing a lack of leadership on the pitch as well as from the management. Now Harry seems to have sorted this and I'm sure, given time he will make great tactical improvements to get the team working together better ( signs of this were clear on thursday but we have to be able to work as a well oiled machine in the premiership where there is less time and tougher closing down/spoiling )
Next thing to see is how Harry's shopping ability works at a club with a good budget. He has found so many bargains at West Ham and Pompey and turned non performing players into stars - will this work in spades now he has moved up in the market and could we see a refreshing reversal of the spurs buying policy of the last few years which has often bought reasonable players and then sold them on at a loss only to see them up their game elsewhere?
Finally what we must wait to see is whether Harry can move from working magic on a budget at middle-income clubs to challenging the tactical ability of Wenger, Fergie etc. Personally I am confident he will do it given time.
 

Geoff

New Member
May 11, 2005
16
0
Interesting read, all the posts, just to add to it the most gratifying thing for me was how he changed (Harry) the side at half-time by putting two up front and moving away from the lone striker with Modric behind, just for the short term, to give some added scope against Liverpool, it showed to me he has a preferred way forward but is not obsessed with it under all circumstances.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
...the spurs buying policy of the last few years which has often bought reasonable players and then sold them on at a loss only to see them up their game elsewhere...

I have to pick up that point in your otherwise good post. Since Arnesen arrived 4 years ago, Spurs have never sold an individual player at a loss - except perhaps Younes Kaboul, but some say we broke even on that deal as well. On the contrary, the club has made a very large surplus on player trading in every financial year. Even if you discount the really big windfalls on Carrick, Keane and Berbatov, we've still made a surplus on nearly every single sale.
 

mawspurs

Staff
Jun 29, 2003
35,069
17,740
This is a really good thread and I've enjoyed reading both the initial post and some excellent responses. To pick up your point DM about mentality, it is something I too have mentioned fairly frequently but I really think Harry has the knack of just saying the right things to players to give them the confidence needed to overcome the issue.

On top of this I like the way Harry keeps things simple, lets face it for most footballers that is vital. In doing so Harry removes all the complexity and allows players to express themselves naturally on the pitch. That alone boosts the players so much that any negativity that existed before gets washed away. For a footballer, to go and and be able to do what they do best, provided they stick to a simple game plan is a major plus.
It is another reason that Ramos didn't work, he preferred more complex game plans and had trouble communicating them to the players.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
It is another reason that Ramos didn't work, he preferred more complex game plans and had trouble communicating them to the players.

I find this a bit mystifying. One of the things that struck me forcefully in the weeks after Ramos arrived last season was his knack for getting substitutes to perform impressively, even out of position (Zokora, O'Hara, Tainio...), by giving them very clear instructions. What happened? What went wrong?

Ramos was a successful cup-competition manager because he made aggressive, daring substitutions and he made them work. It was one of the ways in which he immediately impressed, by comparison with Jol, whose substitutions were generally tardy and tame.

How can Ramos possibly have done that if he couldn't communicate clear instructions to his players? I have to conclude that either he stopped being clear or the players lost confidence in his instructions and didn't carry them out properly.

It was a strength and then it became a weakness. It will remain a mystery.
 

mawspurs

Staff
Jun 29, 2003
35,069
17,740
I find this a bit mystifying. One of the things that struck me forcefully in the weeks after Ramos arrived last season was his knack for getting substitutes to perform impressively, even out of position (Zokora, O'Hara, Tainio...), by giving them very clear instructions. What happened? What went wrong?

Ramos was a successful cup-competition manager because he made aggressive, daring substitutions and he made them work. It was one of the ways in which he immediately impressed, by comparison with Jol, whose substitutions were generally tardy and tame.

How can Ramos possibly have done that if he couldn't communicate clear instructions to his players? I have to conclude that either he stopped being clear or the players lost confidence in his instructions and didn't carry them out properly.

It was a strength and then it became a weakness. It will remain a mystery.

I agree, But I think that the most likely reason for it is that other managers sussed out what his substitutions were all about and made plans to deal with them prior to matches. So when Ramos made his subs as he had done previously the impact of those substitutions was not as it had been on previous occasions.

The other thing is that most of his game changing substitutions came in Cup games, and for the early part of the season we didn't have many of those.
 

Gilzeanking

Well-Known Member
May 7, 2005
6,093
5,019
Yes DM , its a mystery wrapped in an enigma .

I have posted elsewhere on the subject of our always narrow defeats under Ramos .

I would contrast this with the last 10-12 matches under Jol . There was a team in crisis , the level of effort from some players was minimal , seemingly exhausted , wide open at the end of matches , overrun regularly .

Not so this year . The players were really working hard for Ramos ( well , not Bentley) . Maybe , as you say it was some mental problem which Harry has been able to unblock.

One final thought , I do hope Harry doesn't wheel the cake trolley back in to the canteen . In stark contrast to days of old , the last 20 mins now are the time when WE score and pressure opponents . Long may this fitness continue .
 

Ulspur

New Member
Jan 13, 2005
8
0
I've never bought into the idea that Spurs were unfit under Jol, it you look at the two seasons where we came fifth, 05-06 and 06-07, Spurs tended to win games in the final quarter.

I'm guessing that since Summer 2007 (like DM says) it has been a mental thing. Leevy has said that Berba wanted to go and complained when he didn't get his way. If we are being honest Robbie (Keane) was a complainer too. Ever notice if someone mis placed a pass, Robbie made sure that everyone knew that "it wasn't Robbie's fault". Perhaps moral was bad because the two star strikers were complaining and destroying the confidence of the rest of the team (I'm only guessing here, I've no inside knowledge).

I was quite hopeful during Summer 2008 with the signing of Modric that this would improve the mentality of the side. Look how Bilic has given Modric so much responsibility (but not captaining) in the Coatian side and Modric (and Coatia) have thrived.

However, I guess it is difficult for a young player to come to a new side and say "do it my way". But look at what Harry has done, he has said pass to Modric even if he is surrounded he can deal with it and win the game. Effectively, saying Modric is a leader follow him.

I've hopes that with Modric as a leader and hopefully the team being united we can salvage something from this season, even if it is just pride in being a Spurs supporter again.
 

alamo

Don't worry be happy
Jun 10, 2004
5,047
7,226
I find this a bit mystifying. One of the things that struck me forcefully in the weeks after Ramos arrived last season was his knack for getting substitutes to perform impressively, even out of position (Zokora, O'Hara, Tainio...), by giving them very clear instructions. What happened? What went wrong?

Ramos was a successful cup-competition manager because he made aggressive, daring substitutions and he made them work. It was one of the ways in which he immediately impressed, by comparison with Jol, whose substitutions were generally tardy and tame.

How can Ramos possibly have done that if he couldn't communicate clear instructions to his players? I have to conclude that either he stopped being clear or the players lost confidence in his instructions and didn't carry them out properly.

It was a strength and then it became a weakness. It will remain a mystery.

Juande was never afraid to make a substitution. Earlier than most managers. They just happened to work out more often than not at the start of his tenure. Oh and incidently MJs choice of subs were never in question before results under him started to wane.
 
Top