Spot The Difference

[THFCSPURS19]

Why do pople write this kind of nonsense without bothering to check it? All it does is to encourage internet myth-making and factoids.

Here's what really happened, although I have restricted my analysis to last season under AVB - I can add the previous season if ayone wants me to bother.

All matches
Played: 26
Conceded 0: 14 (it broke our record for clean sheets - we had 14 in the first 21 matches of the season)
Conceded 1: 7
Conceded 2: 2
Conceded 3: 1
Conceded 4: 0
Conceded 5: 1
Conceded 6: 1

That's 0.96 goals conceded per match. Not exactly 'multiple times in pretty much all the games we played'.

League matches

Played: 16
Conceded 0: 8
Conceded 1: 5
Conceded 2: 0
Conceded 3: 1
Conceded 4: 0
Conceded 5: 1
Conceded 6: 1

That's 1.19 goals conceded per league match.

By mid-November, we had the 2nd (or perhaps 3rd) best defensive record in the league (after Southampton). Then it all went to hell and we conceded 16 goals in 7 matches (11 of them in 2 and 5 in the other 5), following which AVB was out.

Our 'defence' includes Lloris. If 'our defence is breached', that means that we have conceded a goal.

Maybe I was being too harsh but I stand by the fact that are defence wasn't good last season under AVB. Even when we conceded 0 goals in a match, there were still multiple occasions where we were very close to conceding a goal, had it not been for Lloris. The players in our defensive line (excluding Lloris- I'm saying that because you're so insistent that every line of a post must be incredibly clear) were often poor which meant that players from the opposition were through on goal.

 

[Lo Amo Speroni]

I don't think our Cb's are playing such a high line as we did under AVB. There is an emphasis to defend further up the pitch but the CB's are leaving themselves enough space to defend a ball over the top from I have seen so far. Which makes me feel a little easier.

 

[StartingPrice]

Maybe I was being too harsh but I stand by the fact that are defence wasn't good last season under AVB. Even when we conceded 0 goals in a match, there were still multiple occasions where we were very close to conceding a goal, had it not been for Lloris. The players in our defensive line (excluding Lloris- I'm saying that because you're so insistent that every line of a post must be incredibly clear) were often poor which meant that players from the opposition were through on goal.

Lloris is part of the defence, though, you can't exclude him. That is the whole point (Gawd, normally I hate saying that). Playing the high-line pretty much depends on having a sweeper-keeper, and an effective one. It is inherently susceptible to breaching - hence the need for a sweeper-keeper, It is not conceived primarily to stop the opposition from getting any chances. Theoretically, at least, it is conceived with other benefits in mind (like squeezing the oppos, aiding pressing and forcing them to make errors). If you wanted to send a team out that didn't concede any chances you would park-the-bus, which has the opposite effect of being virtually offence free, relying on the odd pumped ball and a striker who can on his own latch on to these occasionals and make something happen. Lloris saving our skin is really just him doing his job, utilising his particular skill-set, which benefits the tactics we have chosen to play, the high-line - a system that is inherently prone to conceding chances.

Why is it, seemingly uniquely among Spurs fans, that there seems to be a need to apologise about having a great keeper, and to still constantly make things sound as bad as possible?

The truth is, our defence really went to pot when we started having to rely on a half-fit and rusty Kaboul, a uniquely unsuited to the high-line Michael Dawson, an untried Vlad Chiriches and ultimately fresh from injury, and so not match-fit, central midfielder with no great pace (and who may have never played a high-line - I don't know) Etienne Capoue.

 

[chetil]

Yesterday was the first real look I have had of Spurs this season, and of course the first chance to see what the new gaffer is doing as opposed to the previous regimes.

MP has promised flair and everything else that we want to hear and see, but I didn't see much different to what I saw under AVB for instance?

I jut wondered if that was a fair reflection of last night's game and performance, or have the other games shown something different?

People talk about MP bringing high energy, pressing and a high line. But were they not attributes AVB promised?

The similarities of both managers seem quite apparent to me, but what am I missing?

They both use the same formation (both seemingly out of stubbornness too) - with both using inverted wingers and lone striker, as well as the already aforementioned aspects of the game. They have both identified similar weaknesses early on, Dawson, full back and central midfield. They both have similar demeanour in press conferences, although MP is certainly less aggressive and argumentative - but that maybe more to do with the agenda the media had with AVB, and the fact that only recently has MP started speaking in English.

Maybe its just me being my usual pessimistic self, but I feel as though I did exactly two years ago - unsure of the manger, the clubs philosophy and (most worryingly) struggling to identify with our team.

I wish MP and the team my obvious best, but what can/does he bring to the table which AVB didn't?

From what I've seen the positions/roles under Poch aren't as rigid as under AVB. We seem to have a lot more fluid play and move the ball around with a lot more confidence. The biggest difference was to watch Townsend not cut inside and let fly every single time he got the ball.

In addition, the front 4 swap positions a lot where a player automatically slots into the space left by a player on a run. If the left wing/forward makes a run into the box, the number 10 moves to fill the space the LWF left and the centre forward moves down to cover the number 10 position. I think we're going to see a lot more of this in the coming season, creating spaces for that killer through ball that was missing under AVB/Dimothy.

In short it's sort of AVB-tactics, only less strict roles/instructions, and more fluid motions from the front 4.

 

[Main Man]

For me the two main aspects of difference between MP and AVB are (and both are clearly evident even in the handful of pre-season outings we've had under Pochettino):

1) Under Pochettino we are playing more directly and at a much higher tempo: passes are going forward rather than sideways, and the team is moving the ball (and themselves) much more quickly than they did under AVB.

2) Under Pochettino we're actually pressing high up the pitch in matches on grass, rather than just paying lip-service to the concept of a pressing game in PR interviews.

These traits are (IMO) very clear and visibly noticeable when comparing the two managers, and I'm genuinely a little surprised that the OP hasn't noticed the same. Onions.

With all due respect, I did specifically state that the only game I have seen in pre-season was last night.

Certainly neither of the points you made were "very clear and visibly noticeable" in last nights game.

I think it's a bold post to write, critical thinking or devil's advocate towards Pochettino is not yet widely accepted. Which I understand, he does deserve more time. That being said, I though I spotted some improvements which I enjoyed, and some similarities which I didn't enjoy.

I am questionable of Pochettino's ability, but I am certainly not dismissive of it. He is still a relatively unproven manager, and just like you I hope he proves to be the real deal.

His work with Southampton certainly has to be respected, but let's also remember the foundations laid by the manager before him - he was doing a pretty god job himself and can't think of a more surprising and unjust sacking since. His time in Spain was hardly 'successful', and he had a Ramos-esque start to a season before being sacked - with a club of similar standing to our own.

it's sort of AVB-tactics, only less strict roles/instructions, and more fluid motions from the front 4.

Now I did see this to a certain extent, most notably Lennon. I like him centrally too. Why Jol didn't persist with that is beyond me.

I know these things take time, people say he has only had four weeks with the players etc. But after a pre-season of exclusively working with these players I expected more - but that could be an error on my part.

Either way, all I care about is beating the Spanners next week, especially after last seasons results against them. If he ensures that, MP won't get any grumbles from me.

COYS!

 

[Main Man]

So in essence you're disappointed because you aren't seeing instant results?

Marathon not a sprint / whatever platitude you're more comfortable with.

I was just expecting something very different to what we saw under AVB, something which I didn't see last night. Subtle differences have been pointed out, but certainly this whole notion of pressing all over the pitch was hardly Atletico-esque was it?

It must be also pointed out that I watched the game on TV, so perhaps didn't get a full understanding of the game.

 

[seanyboy]

The BIGGEST difference for me is the quickness of the ball movement. Back to basics with 1, 2 touch. Some struggle with it though... ahem Townsend.

 

[StartingPrice]

I was just expecting something very different to what we saw under AVB, something which I didn't see last night. Subtle differences have been pointed out, but certainly this whole notion of pressing all over the pitch was hardly Atletico-esque was it?

It must be also pointed out that I watched the game on TV, so perhaps didn't get a full understanding of the game.

As said, the fundamental difference last night was that Capoue, who has been the fulcrum of the other pre-season games, was missing - along with young Mason, who has also impressed. It should be added that, for the majority of preseason Pochettino has only had one (Capoue) of the midfield that was dubbed at the start of the season the best in the league. He may have been trying something new last night. The pressing certainly wasn't as intensive last night as in the other four preseason games - probably making your impression a little skewed. I've just watched the goals again, and what I can say if that both came from the type of immediate forward passing that we rarely saw under AVB.

It was preseason, and there were some little pointers - ironically more from what they didn't do yesterday that they did in the USA/Canada tour and against Celtic

 

[JerryGarcia]

Maybe I was being too harsh but I stand by the fact that are defence wasn't good last season under AVB. Even when we conceded 0 goals in a match, there were still multiple occasions where we were very close to conceding a goal, had it not been for Lloris. The players in our defensive line (excluding Lloris- I'm saying that because you're so insistent that every line of a post must be incredibly clear) were often poor which meant that players from the opposition were through on goal.

Come on dude, if you're going to count 'nearly goals' against us then you have to count them for us too. There were many AVB games where we had 20+ shots from around the box and some of those were just as close to breaking through the defense as the ones you're talking about. I've never seen a Spurs team look as solid at the back as AVB's team before we started getting whipped (no thanks to injuries etc) by northerners.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

Maybe I was being too harsh but I stand by the fact that are defence wasn't good last season under AVB. Even when we conceded 0 goals in a match, there were still multiple occasions where we were very close to conceding a goal, had it not been for Lloris. The players in our defensive line (excluding Lloris- I'm saying that because you're so insistent that every line of a post must be incredibly clear) were often poor which meant that players from the opposition were through on goal.

I think this is closely related to what I wrote earlier in this thread about playing the high defensive line. This will always happen when you adopt that approach. As I wrote above, an opponent being 'through on goal' except for the goalkeeper, when the defensive line is playing nearly on the halfway line, isn't an indictment of the defenders, it's an unavoidable result of the strategy. It can be reduced by playing a quick sweeper-goalkeeper, which we did, and by playing quick defenders, which we also did until nearly all of them got injured. But it can't be eliminated, so I don't see that it's reasonable to call it 'poor defending' when the players have been instructed to take that risk, in order to realise benefits in possession and territory.

My earlier post also explores why those advantages in possession and territory didn't produce goals - I hope a similar approach will not produce the same result in the coming season.

 

[SamR]

I do laugh a bit when I read all the different takes on a team formation and our setup. Let's be frank, football is 11vs11 with a pretty predictable amount of def,mid,att players per side. I reckon you could make all kinds of different judgments on a formation, style, tempo based on different snapshots and phases in a game. LukeBB has made some wonderful posts about our style and what philosophy Poch is trying to implement and I think its clear we are making small steps of progress and starting to form a new identify.

Sorry to sound harsh, but I find topics like this a bit detrimental to the optimism and harmony we need at our club right now. Let's review Poch and the team come January and try to keep the spirits high rather than compare ourselves to this and that! We've had a lot of change of late and I'm very hopeful we can keep making strides forward if we all actually talk about the positive steps our club is taking right now.

 

[Blake Griffin]

i hope poch brings a more direct style of play, everyone in this country is obsessed with trying to play this precise pick the lock football with the three behind the striker but i'm not terribly convinced that it's particularly effective over here.

 

[SpurSince57]

Come on dude, if you're going to count 'nearly goals' against us then you have to count them for us too. There were many AVB games where we had 20+ shots from around the box and some of those were just as close to breaking through the defense as the ones you're talking about. I've never seen a Spurs team look as solid at the back as AVB's team before we started getting whipped (no thanks to injuries etc) by northerners.

I think that solidity was a wee bit deceptive. Those first half-dozen games the opposition seemed content to sit back and showed very little attacking ambition (even Arsenal ceded the lion's share of possession, whilst Mourinho was still shaking Chelsea down). It was the West Ham game that demonstrated the inherent weaknesses of the system—and despite us having 60-40 possession, they had effectively the same number of shots. There followed another string of games against bus-parkers, including the Tim Krul show, and we got lulled into a false sense of security again before getting thrashed by City.

It's sobering that 30 of the goals we conceded came in just seven games (City and Liverpool twice, West Ham, Chelsea,and WBA); as we might have lost four or five of those anyway, it was the scale and manner of the defeats that were shocking. For 31 games we were pretty sound, though.

David's right about the system holding risks, and West Ham showed that. You really can't blame Dawson if the manager insists on playing him in a system to which he's very poorly suited, but if quick attackers like Morrison and Remy penetrate the high line you're going to need a King or a Gardner to run them down, and we don't have a King or Gardner any more.

 

[Gbspurs]

Thing is AVB nearly got it right so it's not that bad that we are seeing a similar thing with a bit more work rate and faster passing. If we had beaten West Ham early last season we would have gone top.

If poch can get the team grinding out similar results without the occasional spanking and with some more goals then he will probably get a record points total.

Our team is decent, our seasons have been ok and a bit of tweaking might be all it takes. No need for a revolution from my point of view.

 

[JerryGarcia]

I think that solidity was a wee bit deceptive. Those first half-dozen games the opposition seemed content to sit back and showed very little attacking ambition (even Arsenal ceded the lion's share of possession, whilst Mourinho was still shaking Chelsea down). It was the West Ham game that demonstrated the inherent weaknesses of the system—and despite us having 60-40 possession, they had effectively the same number of shots. There followed another string of games against bus-parkers, including the Tim Krul show, and we got lulled into a false sense of security again before getting thrashed by City.

It's sobering that 30 of the goals we conceded came in just seven games (City and Liverpool twice, West Ham, Chelsea,and WBA); as we might have lost four or five of those anyway, it was the scale and manner of the defeats that were shocking. For 31 games we were pretty sound, though.

David's right about the system holding risks, and West Ham showed that. You really can't blame Dawson if the manager insists on playing him in a system to which he's very poorly suited, but if quick attackers like Morrison and Remy penetrate the high line you're going to need a King or a Gardner to run them down, and we don't have a King or Gardner any more.

It wasn't just last season but his first as well, I'd never felt more confident in a Spurs defense but then I'm only 31 and can't speak for what came before. I don't know the stats, I just know that compared to the rest of the Enic era and the 90's we looked solid. Once we'd started to take the heavy beatings last season the bottom fell out and it would be tough for any manager to recover from that, I still think AVB could have a decent career but he'll need to learn to be more flexible in his approach if he ever wants to come back the the Premiership.

 

[Japhet]

Poch favours getting the ball forward much quicker than AVB. Remember the 'bore-fest' of square passes across the back 4 or midfield from last season? There was also much more one touch passing and immediate movement thereafter v Schalke. I also think we missed Capoue yesterday and the commentary suggested he has a minor injury. I'll be very surprised if he isn't right at the front of Poch's thinking. As for running out of steam, Bentaleb had a very good first half but then disappeared completely. Holtby, in contrast, buzzed around the whole time he was on the pitch.

 

[Yid-ol]

It was a pre season game... should we really judge on that?

Whats next, saying we havnt improved in the pre match warm up?!

 

[scat1620]

With all due respect, I did specifically state that the only game I have seen in pre-season was last night.

Certainly neither of the points you made were "very clear and visibly noticeable" in last nights game.

I think you've mistaken the tone of my post, wasn't trying to dig you out, just commenting on how I saw it. The differences between our style of football under Pochettino vs our style under AVB were very clear and visibly noticeable to me, even in just the game against Schalke. But I'm not trying to browbeat you into agreeing with me: as I said in my original post, other onions (sic) are available.

 

[punkisback]

i hope poch brings a more direct style of play, everyone in this country is obsessed with trying to play this precise pick the lock football with the three behind the striker but i'm not terribly convinced that it's particularly effective over here.

Tell that to Arsenal and City. Right now our best players are the ones who fit into this formation and philosophy, so we have to play this way. Avbs biggest mistake was shoehorning Gylfi, Paulinho and Dembele into roles that were more suited for Eriksen and Lamela.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

There wasn't much wrong with AVB's theory that a bit more pressing and a lot more change-of-pace wouldn't have solved. To my eyes, what went wrong with the first half of last season was that the players had been drilled into a hesitant, safety-first style of attack, which slowed down the closer we came to the penalty box. What it needed was for there to be an instant change-of-pace the moment a gap appeared, but the players had clearly been coached to preserve possession as the top priority.

The direct result of that was that we created a lot of half-chances and no penetration. The direct result of that was a ridiculous number of 25m pot-shots, each following 90 seconds or more of patient possession outside the penalty box, followed by a loss of patience. The direct result of that was a team that became progressively more frustrated and nervous as each goalless first half proceeded and never, ever scored an early goal.

I would submit that the indirect result of all that was that the defence, after conceding the first goal when we should really already have been in the lead, would get unnerved and, when playing against high quality opposition, would promptly concede two or three more soft goals.

This explains the consistent theme of last season, which was reliable gathering of points, usually by small margins of victory, against all but the best opposition, contrasted with hammerings at the hands of every team with the flair to exploit our hesitancy and defensive nerves.

If Pochettino's use of the same formation includes pressing and, perhaps even more important, acceleration of movement and passing as we get closer to the goal, then we should see a different, more ruthless and effective attack.

But it is still an approach that will concede goals, as is suggested by the absence of clean sheets during pre-season. If you play a high defensive line, you will concede goals and blaming individual defenders will not help to explain or cure this (I expect that I will come back to this point multiple times as the season progresses). It was conspicuous that Southampton had the best defensive record in the league over the first couple of months of last season - and we had the second best. Gradually, other teams found out how to play against their system (and ours) and they conceded more goals, especially late in games.

I'm hoping that the difference for us this season is that we will have those of our players who can combine to score 2-3 goals a game being turned loose to make real chances, right from the start of matches, such that we will not always be guarding a 0-0 or 1-0 scoreline with increasing nervousness in the second half.

This is just the same old misconception, just articulated better.

The problem wasn't some mythical brain washing. AVB didn't brain wash anyone not to take any risks, or how do you explain the quantum difference in Bale's game before and after AVB. The problem was we sold every single player of reasonable footballing IQ during AVB's tenure. King retired, Modric left, VDV left and then even Bale was sold. The one player who might have helped was Adebayor, and his prozac wasnt working. He was left with a choice of playing a completely different, more hap hazard way or keep applying what he believed with players he found himself with.

It wasn't that this collective thinking got slower in the final third, it was that AVB's method was to push the opposition into that third, this meant stupid players squashed into heavy traffic. A possible mistake in itself, but not the one you alleged.

His smaller mistake was within that framework, he didn't always make the best personnel decisions to suit that perseverance of system and was also very unlucky with injuries to key players. Kaboul's long term problems meant Dawson being used in a high defence, left back problems meant Vertonghen being used as a LB, Sandro out long term, Dembele continually injured, Eriksen got injured just as he was beginning to click, and AVB didn't handle Lamela well or some of the younger players who could have helped.

He made mistakes, as do all managers, but for all that his PPG was still healthy, as healthy just about as Sherwood's with Adebayor, so for all his mistakes, it's hard to make a clear case for him changing a methodology he believed would compensate for deficiencies in other (IQ e.g.) departments. Because it probably did. It just didn't appeal to those that would prefer to watch the Keystone cops over an episode of Morse.