I actually think you need 3 or 4 new players a year. Players have a top level career of about 12 years so in a squad of 24 you need to replace 2 a year routinely and probably one or two more to upgrade or undo mistakes. Hopefully one of those comes from the academy. So need to sign two or three. But that would also include loan players coming back.
I've never said that we should sell Kane, however the last 2 seasons he has been brought back too early from injury when the team was getting results in his absence. On both occasions our form and results slumped. I said before the Burnley game that he should be re-introduced from the bench; last 15 minutes for a couple of games then the last half an hour for a couple more. Son was on fire, ffs. And all this talk of not being able to draw conclusions from blah,blah..... is all bollox. We were grinding out results; we were in contention and now we'll be lucky if we make top 4.
The whole 'drop Kane' conversation is a pretty moot point as it sidesteps the key issue which is the almost telepathic link he enjoys with Dele. It is no coincidence that Kane's form skyrocketed after we signed him. The link up play between them was a joy to behold in the 1st half against Soton. Harry simply doesn't click as well with Son or Eriksen as he does with Dele. The latter on the pitch also means we have someone making runs beyond Kane into the six yard box, something else we have missed as Kane does have a tendency to try to do everything, which often means dropping level with Eriksen and Son to start a move, with no-one up top to finish it. Trying to assess the overall level of the team with Kane but sans Dele is like reviewing a song with only one earphone in. You cannot possibly see the whole picture.
But why are you ignoring the previous 26 matches where we've got a record points haul? Football is more probabilistic than you think. In a match us and the opposition each have possession round about 150 times. We score about 2 goals from those and concede about 1 goal. Work out the probabilities and you will find that we expect to score none in a few matches. There really is nothing that can be done to change that, whatever the pundits say. If we get slightly better so we score 2.1 goals a match on average or concede only 0.9 then we will win more often, but sequences like the last few matches will still happen. Of course there might be slight tweaks that the coach can make based on what happens. But it's more important to have a long term plan to increase goals scored and reduce goals conceded than react to events.
For me it's not about dropping Kane, it's about bringing him back to soon when we're already on a winning run. Now he's back in the team you have to carry on with him.
That is just hilarious. And there was me thinking this was a football forum, not a third-rate Laws of Probability lecture.
Football is no different to any other part of life in being affected by probability. It simply has to be true that the exact points at which goals are scored is down to chance. Say we play Chelsea in the cup one week and in the league the following week. We beat them 3-1 in the cup and draw 2-2 in the league. It is obviously better to win 2-1 and 3-2. But can you do anything in advance or during the matches to make that more likely? I don't think so.
Precisely! He's the only one that's scored. Goals were coming from all round the team before, making us less predictable. Bottom line is that we haven't won in the league since his return and only beat Dortmund away because they're also on a poor run.
The diversity argument does not hold. Just comparing the 4 consecutive PL games where Kane was not injured against the 4 where he was is, is a simple refute.
I know. Sometimes . P.s. you are already wrong @PowerSpurs as I'm pretty sure you have way more than 150 possessions compared to the opposition (I'm assuming your possession stats are far higher) if we are going down the maths route
How does one include long grass and strong wind in these probability calculations or are Liverpool as exempt from probability laws as they are from the off-side laws?
We won all 4 of the games without Kane but lets not the facts get in the way of whatever you're trying to say. At the end of the day I support Tottenham Hotspur, not Harry Kane Hotspur. And if something isn't broken there's no need to fix it, i.e. there was no need to rush Kane back unless, of course, the team's major objective is for Kane to pick up another golden boot.
We didn't play very well in those games though, even the first half v Dortmund was not very good. So something needed fixing.
Yes luckily it must be said on occasion. We scored a lot of goals late on and won matches we didn't perform well in. People like to think there's some mystical plan for that happening because humans like to find patterns. However often it's just luck and we had our fair share before Kane came back and little afterwards. Then people just analyse scorlines and try and fit evidence into that. Again that doesn't work, just because we won doesn't mean we deserved it, and just because we lost also doesn't mean that. It's not like we got stuffed by Soton was it? We could easily have won that match if a few of those first half chances had gone in, and nobody could have complained if we were 0-3 up at half time. But to read this thread you would think we've fallen off a cliff, which is clearly not the case and we are still in a good position to get in the top four. From some of the comments recently you would think we're more likely to be relegated.
We ground out wins in those games (what champions often do, according to may), barring a brilliant 2nd half against Dortmund. That's what was important. Far preferable to what's happened since
Not winning a league match in the last 4 outings is falling off a cliff, given our previous form and anyone saying different is happy to settle for mediocrity. Supporters of teams that win things don't peddle all these garbage excuses.
When it all comes down to it,we're all barmy for supporting Spurs. Let's all do some more supporting of our local pub!
