Lot of doom and gloom on here, bit like the old BBC 606. Doesn't take much to bring it all out does it? Anyone could forget that we've spent a vast majority of the season being rather good and somehow accumulated this number of points to be in 3rd even after three straight defeats! Lots of evidence that Harry has made mistakes and the speculation about England has affected performances, but this is only presenting certain evidence one way. I don't agree with the way the team was set out yesterday, but we still dominated the game overall and were probably unlucky not to get a draw. We also mostly outplayed ManU a couple of games ago. Saying we've been rubbish since the Harry for England stuff is also rather forgetting how we demolished Newcastle (with a 4-4-2 as well). So we ignore the evidence that suggests Spurs are still capable of doing a job? Of course its all about putting the ball in the net but lets not forget that we actually did that against ManU in circumstances that in some games the goal would have stood. Similarly we might have had a couple of pens yesterday and if any of those things had happened the perception today would be far different and different conclusions would be drawn from the same evidence. We could also do without the Harry speculation and all this sudden concentration of Bale being a "diver". But basically Harry/players must have been doing something right for us to be in this position, and three games does not right all of that off. This can be turned round and whilst I am also not happy with what has happened I'm not all doom and gloom about it. Getting away to the Cup next week isn't a bad thing and a good win there will set us up well for the rest of the campaign. We are well capable of 3rd and I think we will do it. We should be concerned but not defeatist.
Two wins in 9 is a pretty big blip. I agree we are capable of third. I think we have one of the best starting elevens and a very good squad on paper. Third all season is all well and good but absolutely academic if we blow it now. The Newcastle game was almost a reaction to all that had happened and to be fair, Harry didn't prepare the team as far as I remember (correct me if I'm wrong.) Don't get me wrong. I love what Harry has done and hope against hope that he continues to do so, but he needs to get his finger out and so do the players. COYS.
Harry is definitely our problem right now, and he will be until either he confirms he's staying or he gets the hell out of our club. I still think we are good for 3rd, but it will be in spite of Harry, not because of him.
Vimhawk It's not true though, is it? In our last 9 games it's 4 wins, in the last 9 league games it's 3 wins. Eitherway, as I said only the other day, statistics can help support an argument but they can't become the argument as they tell a small part of the story. In that (league) period, we've played the 3 top 4 teams that aren't us, 7th away, 9th home and away and all the while our manager had a court case and didn't even get to one of the games. Whilst I'm certainly not excusing anything, we've done poorly but people trying to say we are in relegation form, dismissing 'Arry's influence in the games that go right but criticising him for the games that go wrong is stupid.
Why wouldn't 'Arry have prepared the team for the Newcastle game? It makes no sense to say that as in the games he hasn't prepared the team it's been very obvious, like the Liverpool game and the ones Bond and Jordan took when he had his heart trouble. We struggled badly without him.
Sorry my mistake about the League games. The way we surrendered at Arsenal or the inability to score against two poor Merseyside teams and Stevenage is cause for concern. Statistics have nothing do with any of those games, more a lack of the fight that we had in bucketfuls before the England situation arose. We look right now like good old fragile Spurs, always good for 3 or more points a season. I am not happy about this. Can you blame me?
The day 'Arry was found not guilty(the day after Liverpool) the England speculation started. Before then we'd struggled against Watford, lost it right at the death against City and failed to outscore Wolves at home. You're seeing what you want because you want to be angry and you want a scapegoat. If any of those City/Watford/Wolves games had fallen within the period since the England speculation started, it'd typify this lack of fight and blah, blah you think we have. If the Newcastle game was outside of that period it would typify how much better we were before. You're just looking for reasons that the England speculation and 'Arry is at fault so you'll find them whether they're there or not. I'm not happy that we've lost 3 in a row but it is well worth keeping it in perspective, we are better placed this season than we have been for a longtime so as unacceptable as the temporary for has been, we're still 3rd and that's far more pleasing. Would you honestly trade our position with Arsenal or Chelsea? You'd be mad to, and how often have you been able to say that? I used to think that the Gooner board was funny with all the infighting as their team struggled. It's embarrassing the way some of our fans are reacting despite still being ahead of them and well placed for the run in.
The affects are shown, not only by our lack of conversion of goal attempts (22 alone, in the Everton game), but more importantly in defence, where we are beginning to switch off at crucial times in games.
I said at the start of the season that we had the fourth best squad and I think we played above ourselves for matches 3 to 23. We are still better than Arsenal and not far short of Chelsea and we're still ahead of them both and have an easier run-in so third is still very much on. We've played all right in the last two matches so we mustn't get too down - we can easily survive a blip like this. I agree with some of the comments about Harry but not all the solutions. The 4411 formation works fine when it has Bale, Lennon and VdV because they soak up a lot of opposition players and Modric and Parker can cope in the centre. However if some of those are missing it works very badly, especially against better sides. 4231 is much better in those circumstances and two of Sandro, Livermore and Parker work very well in that. But playing 442 like we did yesterday really doesn't work at all: Modric is only half the player when not in the middle and Defoe offers nothing except power and pace which rarely makes a difference against good defenders. To end on a controversial note: I still think Freidel is no better than Gomes and the stats back this up. We've conceded the same number of goals now as at the same time last season despite having King playing a lot more matches, and a having better holding midfield. I see that Friedel doesn't make big blunders but his positioning is very poor and we are conceding goals we shouldn't be. Watch yesterday's goal: he was right on the near post when the ball was crossed - if he had been a yard in as he should have been he would have saved it easily.
I'm not having a major cry, I just don't like, or enjoy, Harry making mistakes that he would never have made when he first came in to manage the team. 4411 works with Lennon, Bale and VDV because we can literally attack from anywhere. Threats all over the pitch. Pace. Danger. Width. He's done a great job of creating backups for every position, all except the wings, especially the right wing, he's ignoring the fact that we play better with two wingers in a 4411 or with at least one winger in a 442. Newcastle was a good example of this with Bale on the left and Krancar on the right. When has 4231 ever really worked for us? Beyond the 4 and the 2? Without Bale on the left and / or Lennon on the right? Bale is not a right winger and he gets in the way of Walker when played there. (We saw how yesterdays game opened up to us with Bale on the left.) For me, the difference between us and the two teams above us is that they play with a shape, the players may change but the shape stays familiar. Solid. We lose games when we sacrifice our best shape to accommodate available players, as if squad depth is an issue. Moving our best players out of their best positions to cover holes. Why are there holes? Are we saying that with all the players we have, not one can cover right wing in the absence of Lennon, without sacrificing our best left winger? Considering how important wing play is to our game, it's laughable that this happens. The thing that Friedal brings to the team, that Gomes didn't, is confidence to the back line. He has a more solid mentality and that helps us. Teams used to target Gomes, successfully, to rile him. It worked. Not anymore. Friedal is super-cool in comparison and he's better at directing the defence.
How do you know that the 4-4-1-1 works badly without certain players, PS? If we lose anyone then Redknapp abandons it. Playing two holding players automatically pushes Modric out of position, either onto a wing or further up the park, so I just wouldn't do it unless he's unavailable.
I'm not bothered about Arsenal - if we finish ahead of them, great. If we finish behind them but still top 4 then that's fine too. Harry will go more from hero to zero if we finish 5th or lower and then he trots off to England. This is the big problem - Harry will be offered the England job, pretty much regardless of what he does with us now for the rest of the season. Not much incentive for him to push the team on.
I created this article in December http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/110541-Squad-limitations-or-Redknapp-Not-taking-risks and i asked the members on here if our problems would be the limitations of the squad or arry not taking risks. I knew the answer then and i think now some of you realise what the issue is.
Just a few quotes from members from that article, back in December, clearly arry doesn't understand how to deal with the loss of a key player to the 4-4-1-1 formation and then just resorts to 4-4-2, which imo if we played 4-4-2 for the entire season, we would finish top 6, rather then we fighting for champions league.
Everyone's written off Dos Santos at the moment, but I'd even rather see him played in Lennon's place than the switches that we used yesterday. Even if he didn't do much, at least it wouldn't screw up the balance of the side. I've said for ages that I think Kranjcar should be used whenever either van der Vaart or Lennon's missing. I know that he's far from perfect, but I think his weaknesses are less of an issue when Walker's at right-back and at least he adds some creativity to the side. He'd probably take a better set-piece than those who are involved with them at the moment, too. We have enough players, in my opinion. The right ones just aren't getting picked.
exactly PNP...like for like...it can be simple cant it but NO! ill switch the best winger onto his weaker foot(who i think needs to be benched for a few games so his evident greediness cn be evaluated)..ill put my most influentiel central midfielder out wide..thus nullyfying him because as good as he is..he is not very clever on the wing...not his fault mind....and ill play 2 defensive midfielders who are great at getting the ball..but cant do much with it..hence the majority posession going our way(which seems to console alot of people)..but to me it just shows that we have no clue once we have the ball. ohh and in the mean time ill leave made wingers like Rose,Santos to rot on the bench and send Townsend on loan....actually ill play Krancjear on the wing....who only plays well if we are winning 4 nil...but turns slower that an oil tanker.....Harry for England.........i hope. p.s an on form Lennon is just as important as Bale for us.
The only way we could play two defensive midfielders is if we played 5-3-2, wing backs, two holding players in front of say modric and then in front of modric we would have two attackers, but that system has its flaws but actually would have worked against Everton.
yeah but he doesnt use the right personnel for it and deems some of our most influential players useless due to where he has put them....but all in all we agree.
