I think you were very fortunate to win, but Wolves conceded a very poor goal at the end - and that's their fault. Lucas Moura's career is looking up under Mourinho.
TBH I do not get this logic. It is the lateness of our winning goal that has led to the "spurs were lucky" stuff. Wolves had 5 shots on target as did we. They attacked and we defended...and we defended well on the whole. Gazzaniga made 2 good saves, the other three were shots at him. They scored with a moment of individual brilliance but then so did we...we also hit the post. 22 corners v 2 corners means very little other than demonstrating how well we defended and good defending is an important part of the game. We were not "very fortunate" to win. We were dogged in defence, clinical in attack, continued playing til the end and kicked them as hard as they kicked us (which is something we stopped doing). All the media and wolves fans have whined about Taroare bring kicked but have said very little about Moura getting the same treatment. It is about time we stopped allowing teams to kick **** out of us. We deserved to win cos we scored more and defended better ... every club can point to similar inconsistencies in reporting of wins so this ain't about a media campaign against us...just think people are wrong. When united beat us at Wembley no one claimed United were very fortunate to win. Your keeper was praised as was the new spirit of OGS's team. Yet the same media now scream about how lucky we were...personally I couldn't give a **** but I am surprised by how many people are taken in by it. Hope this doesn't come across as a dig as it ain't meant in that way.
That's a bit of a stats based defence of your win. The stats don't reveal that Wolves dominated the ball and had the upper hand for most of the game. They failed to take advantage and then defended very poorly for your late winner. You equate fortunate with undeserved; I didn't say that. I used fortunate in the literal sense - that the outcome was good for you despite being uncertain and unexpected on the balance of play. It was a performance which wouldn't have been a win (or even a draw) if the points had been awarded on merit. Mourinho himself called it "three incredible points" - I suspect in the literal sense that it was an unlikely outcome based on the way the game was played.
Some old school LDL there. Wolves need to add on-target shot volume to the CM domination. Otherwise they will be on the end of similar results.
No...it is based on facts rather than a feeling or vague notion of fortune. Why did our performance not "merit a win or even a draw"? Wolves had 20 or so corners...and? Wolves had 58% of possession ... and? Wolves forced our keeper to make 5 saves...the exact same number we forced their keeper to make. If we got wrong decisions in our favour as we did with Watford (the penalty they didn't get) or Sheffield United (the crass offside ruling) then I would get people saying we were unfortunate. I would get it if wolves had hit the woodwork etc but the truth is our keeper had to make just two good saves...him doing that is not fortunate. As for our goal being a result of them poorly defending ... so what...virtually every goal could be put down to "poor defending"...both you gosls v us 2 weeks ago were the result of terrible defending for example...were you fortunate? Vertonghen headed in from 15 yards...so in my view it was a great header. We won by taking more of our chances than they did, defending better than they did and matching their aggression. Therefore we got what we merited...just like when we lost to you at wembley.
We might laugh at the expected goal stat but it was: Wolves 0.72 Spurs 0.99 I think that means that on the balance of play Spurs were expected to score more than Wolves. How does that translate into:'Spurs were lucky to win'? Pundits like to ignore a particular stat when it doesn't fit the narrative.
If your opponent dominates the game, you should expect to lose. If you don't, that's fortunate - whatever the reason for the result. Wolves did dominate. Beyond that I can only repeat what I said earlier - fortunate doesn't mean undeserved or that it wasn't hard earned or down to either side taking or failing to take opportunities, but that it was against expectations in the circumstances.
But in your last post you did say ... "It was a performance which wouldn't have been a win (or even a draw) if the points had been awarded on merit." ...that clearly implies that it was undeserved. Wolves had 5 shots on target...the same as us...that does not imply domination. All the rest is irrelevant...possession stats tell you nothing other than the opposition had the ball...they clearly were not allowed to or were not able to do anything more with it than we were. If they had done to us what Man City DID earlier this season then I would agree. We ain't gonna agree but to be honest you are not being that clear in the point you are making (you usually are) so maybe I am not just understanding your point.
I think perhaps you're looking to take my comments too literally. Wolves were the better side; they should have taken advantage of the possession they had in attacking areas. They then handed you the win through some cack defending at the end of the game. If I was a Spurs fan, I'd think that was "fortunate" - just because of the way events unfolded. It wasn't an assessment of the game frame by frame.
I think this stats thing doesn't mean too much. If one team has 75% of the game,well that used to impress me.But today teams are playing sideways,backwards a lot( like us recently) while the 25% might mean that team attacking all the time until losing the ball. The other stat they show is goalkeeping saves. Well,if you've got a bad defence in front of you,that goalie is going to have a lot to save. The Villa man,Grealish,is top of the "fouled" list. Well,if you dribble the ball a lot you will be chopped!
Not sure if anyone else noticed it but bloody hell Gazza tears the bollocks off them when they make a mistake at the back! Such a vocal keeper and clearly growing in confidence and presence with each game. I far prefer it to Hugo's shrug-while-making-a-constipated-face approach. It'll be interesting to see who Maureen goes with after Captain Fantastic returns from injury.
I wouldn't say that Gazza is as good as some of the other keepers in the better sides in the league. However, his current form is no worse than Hugo's over the last year or two. If his form doesn't dip, he should keep the shirt when Hugo returns and that goes throughout the team. If you're in and playing well, you should keep being first choice.
Spurs dominate both chances and possession against Watford: Spurs are lucky to get a point. Spurs have slightly less chances and possession against Wolves: Spurs should've lost. Leicester played a counter-attacking game to win the league. Virtually everyone they played had more possession, shots, corners and chances than them every week. Apparently they were lucky not to have been relegated.
Wolves controlled a lot of the possession but we had the two best chances on goal (excluding the goals scored). Should Wolves feel hard done by to an extent? Yes. Do I care? Do I ****.
Would have been game over if Dier showed a bit of composure and placed the Dele chip to the keepers left...there was acres of space They had all the momentum but we dealt with it in true Jose style
Aye, was gutted for him as that goal would’ve done him some good. Class bit of play as well. He’s getting better in the Prem thankfully, still a way to go to get back to his old form but the signs are positive.
