Going on the evidence of my eyes, this season has shown Spurs to be on a new level in terms of play. There are only two teams that are better than Spurs in the PL, Man.U & Chelsea. We should IMO have finished third in this league. We haven't because our results against the bottom teams were so poor. You can put this down to tactics, injuries, complacency, or diversions. You cannot put it down to poor officials or bad luck, we only have ourselves to blame. In the end of course the blame lies with the management they are only ones who can react and do something to change things. You can argue for changes or you can argue for stability, whichever way you go the experience of this season needs to be taken fully on board. It's obvious that we need new strikers and a new goalkeeper but even with those gaps you cannot argue that we have had a great season. To finish 5th or 6th having been outplayed or beaten by all the teams above us would have been a decent season. To finish in these positions having beaten and or outplayed most of the teams above us bar two, then you have to say we have under achieved. We could and should have done better!
Totally agree yet Harry is spinning it as our best ever season!! The inability to break poor teams down is the reason for our demise this year needs a serious change in tactics next year as more teams will shut up shop next season at the lane.
I think our poor results against weak teams won't be there next season. Everyone knows how much that cost us, and I hope Harry takes note. We cannot afford complacency if we want CL football again. I think city WILL spend again, regardless of what they say, so they'll be out of reach. It'll be up to us to hold off liverpool ,who will no doubt improve, and to overhaul Arsenal, who we all know won't improve over the summer, and provided Van Persie doesn't find a miracle cure to his inability to remain fit for a whole season, we've got a really good chance of who really is the best North London team!
There are 4 teams who achieved better results than Spurs. The league table records that, it does not record the performances on the pitch. Football is not an exact science that is why I am talking about the evidence of my eyes. We took 4 points from Arsenal, they took 1. On results Spurs were the better team. It works both ways.
Spurs were better against Arsenal in the two league games. Arsenal were better throughout the season in the league.
Maybe you're right. Arsenal were slightly better in the game at White Hart Lane. To finish 6 points clear beating your goal difference by 20 would suggest that Arsenal had a better league campaign than Spurs. I'm not sure what else I can say?
If you understood the point of the article rather than just trying to make points in favour of your team you might get somewhere. Our results at Wigan, Blackpool, West Ham and so on are the question. Useing your logic Spurs are lucky they were not relegated, but it does not work like that does it. Results and league position are about statistics and do not always reflect the games that are played. Luck, injuries, tactics, all play a part. To start from the simple position that 'The league never lies' is fine as long as you forget about the football.
I'm not trying to belittle Spurs' league position. The league gives the fairest reflection on who were the best and worst teams of the season. The league shows who has the most points, to get the most points you have to win or draw (but not lose) the majority of your games. To win the majority of your games, mor eoften than not, you have to be better than your opposition. There will be freak results but overall the final league standings are the fairest way to judge who had a good seaosn and who didn't.
Edin what are you not agreeing with? On Paper! that is exactly what I am not talking about. On grass is what I am on about. On paper Arsenal are 4th best, Spurs are 5th. On grass it was a little different. This is not a winnable argument because it will depend who you support. For that reason my argument was not directed at a comparison between us and the top 4 even though I suggested we could have been third. It's a Spurs discussion on whether it has been a good season or, as I believe, we have under performed. Nothing to do with Arsenal!
A good season,based on finishing 5th and last 8 of CL. Having said that, I also believe we underperformed against a lot of teams we should have beaten comfortably.
You cannot be serious! How on earth have you become better than us when you haven't finished above us in god knows how long? Yes you have a very good team but so do we, and Man city have a better group of players than both of us! Your argument is completely ridiculous.
