Van Der Vaart key To Tottenham’s success....and problems

[Krafty]

Rafael van der Vaart is an exquisite player. He brings a touch of class to the Spurs team. His guile, vision, technique, goal scoring and creation are of the highest quality, and he has a penchant for scoring in the North London Derby.

While players like Luka Modric and Gareth Bale aspire to move into the world class bracket, van der Vaart has been there and done that. He has won titles with Ajax, played for Real Madrid, and played in the 2010 World Cup final with Holland. When Daniel Levy picked up the phone to find out the playmaker was available for £8million, he must have thought it was a crank call. However, as Tottenham’s recent struggles to break down the opposition at White Hart Lane have shown, if van der Vaart isn’t scoring and creating he can personify Spurs’ problems.

The Dutchman has scored one goal since the end of October, a barren spell by his standards. To take the recent 1-1 draw with Wolves as a prime example, Rafa has become attracted to the ball too much, coming into Tottenham’s own half to get involved. He is not a deep lying playmaker – his qualities are producing short, incisive balls in and around the penalty area. Coming so deep merely isolates the team’s lone striker, and slows down our play.

The former Hamburg man lacks the pace to rejoin the play in advanced position quickly, and because opponents are content to put men behind the ball, there is not the space for van der Vaart to attack. Is it a coincidence that his only goal since October came in the game at Swansea, where the home team looked to take the game to us and we took advantage of their open play?

Van der Vaart is at his most dangerous in the final third. He can slide in through balls, he can score, he can cause havoc. There is no primer example than his delightful through ball for Pavlyuchenko’s goal in the 1-0 win against Sunderland.
However, when the opposition gets so many men behind the ball as Wolves did, and as West Brom did, VDV finds it hard to get on the ball. When the opposition press us back our number 11 retreats as well to help the side retain the ball, and there is nothing an opponent wants to see more than Rafael van der Vaart playing in his own half.

That’s not to say that the Dutchman is entirely to blame for finding himself so far away from his danger area. The freer role that Gareth Bale now plays in has crowded the space VDV would normally play in, and if the Welshman found himself on the left wing more his colleague may find more room to operate.

The other option is to play two frontline strikers, with van der Vaart behind them or coming off the right wing. While this isn’t not ideal against strong sides, it is a different story when the opposition offers little to no offensive threat. Alternatively, Harry Redknapp could consider a bit of rotation every now and then.

To say Rafael van der Vaart is the cause of our problems to break teams down is obviously nonsense. However, his qualities are wasted when they are used in our defensive and middle thirds rather than our attacking third. He is one of the few players in the league, never mind the club, who can split open the defence with one pass, or one run, but if the opposition only want to get men back behind the ball the Dutchman can be nullified, and Spurs can struggle.

If Redknapp and Spurs are not making the most of van der Vaart’s abilities then maybe the game plan and tactics need to be changed. It may be a case of Rafa being too good for the teams who come to White Hart Lane hoping only for a point. Perhaps Tottenham’s biggest name should be used in only the biggest games. Luckily, there is a pretty big one coming right round the corner...

 

[JimmyG2]

I wish we had more problems like Van Der Vaart.
We were fortunate to get him at all and at that price too.

Sorry to quote old adages back at you again but as Blanchflower said of Hoddle when his selection for England was described as a luxury:
Hoddle a luxury: no it's the bad players that are a luxury'.

if ever players merited Harry's apochryphal instructions
'just go on and run around a bit' it's the likes of Van. and Modric.

In other words don't try to fit your best players into a system, build it round your best players. Play to their strengths.
That doesn't mean I would play him every game or for a full game every time.
But I would need good reasons not to play him.

 

[Krafty]

I wish we had more problems like Van Der Vaart.
We were fortunate to get him at all and at that price too.

Sorry to quote old adages back at you again but as Blanchflower said of Hoddle when his selection for England was described as a luxury:
Hoddle a luxury: no it's the bad players that are a luxury'.

if ever players merited Harry's apochryphal instructions
'just go on and run around a bit' it's the likes of Van. and Modric.

In other words don't try to fit your best players into a system, build it round your best players. Play to their strengths.
That doesn't mean I would play him every game or for a full game every time.
But I would need good reasons not to play him.

Its not so much not playing him, but getting him to play in different ways depending on how much of the ball we will have.

Against stronger teams, when we need more help to retain possession and will have more opportunities on the break, he can play deeper.

Against weaker teams when we should have a lot of the ball and should have lots of the ball in the final third, he needs to be more advanced, less midfielder and more attacker

 

[gloryglory]

I agree with the thrust of this article. I said the other day that I thought he had been the least effective member of our first 11 this season, and I stick by it.

Quite simply, sometimes you want an extra midfielder, and sometimes you want that man to be someone whose strengths are keeping possession and using it wisely, which Van der Vaart can do (although possibly not as well as Huddlestone if he were fit). But sometimes when you want an extra midfielder, it's primarily to work hard and close down, so Sandro or even Livermore should be on in his stead - and sometimes you don't want an extra man in midfield, you want a striker.

As the article says, he can play as a striker, and when on form he is arguably a better striker than Defoe, with similar finishing skills plus added creativity and set piece skills. But at present, Defoe's form is better, so Defoe should start. It really is that simple.