Match Day Thread Chelsea v Spurs

PowerSpurs said:

How do you know? Kulusevski, Kudos, Solanke, Maddison and Udogie play every match then surely we get 3 or 4 more wins easily. A few different refereeing decisions on top of that also makes a difference.
I've demonstrated that the refs make 20 points difference between the best and worst treated teams which means that Bournemouth could be only be as good as us even with our injuries.
Also we did very well in the CL group stage which suggests we are the right level to play in it.

Click to expand...

Snuck Solanke in there, lol.

Kulu, Maddison and Kudus would’ve made a difference though. But we were/ are lacking star quality to have gotten top 4 or 6. With those guys fit we’d have probably gotten around 8th-10th.

This club once had two of the best attacking players in Europe, it largely surrounded them with ****e, now they’ve left us with a muffled squad with some decent players but also some dreadful ones.

Kudus, Maddison and Kulusevski are the only players who noticeably improve the current options. The midfield still fails to control games because it is stacked with too many average all-rounders. The defence and keepers still concede howlers on a regular basis. None of that changes with them back in the side.

Oh and the fact that Kudus and Kulusevski play in the same position means that we basically only have two spots out of eleven that would be instantly improved without injuries.

I fail to see us picking up more than 9-12 additional points across a season, which puts us bang in mid table which is exactly where we should be.

Was gonna reply in depth but CK and DH have covered most of my points.

Spurs obviously do better if all the players are fit but not to the extent some here think.

Citizen Kane. said:

Kudus, Maddison and Kulusevski are the only players who noticeably improve the current options. The midfield still fails to control games because it is stacked with too many average all-rounders. The defence and keepers still concede howlers on a regular basis. None of that changes with them back in the side.

Oh and the fact that Kudus and Kulusevski play in the same position means that we basically only have two spots out of eleven that would be instantly improved without injuries.

I fail to see us picking up more than 9-12 additional points across a season, which puts us bang in mid table which is exactly where we should be.

Click to expand...

Our first choice defence has barely had a chance to play together for nearly three seasons now. Not really surprising they make mistakes.
And we should be sixth because the squad has cost the sixth most money. We might have had bad luck in recruitment but no-one has a negative edge. If Lange genuinely had one he would be worth his weight in gold....you would just lock him in a room and do the opposite of what he recommends.

KingHotspur said:

Was gonna reply in depth but CK and DH have covered most of my points.

Spurs obviously do better if all the players are fit but not to the extent some here think.

Click to expand...

My original post on this claimed 10 points for refereeing decisions and 10 more for fewer injuries. The first of those is based on 1 big decision per PL match which could have gone the other way....I watch a lot of non-Spurs matches on TV and I don't think that's an over-estimate. The second is more of a guess.

KingHotspur said:

Having Maddison or Kulu means an extra 5/6 wins?

I don’t agree with that.

Click to expand...

So how many games do you believe at least one
of them as I stated, would have have been won
this season ??

The RDBD said:

So how many games do you believe at least one
of them as I stated, would have have been won
this season ??

Click to expand...

Maybe a couple

PowerSpurs said:

My original post on this claimed 10 points for refereeing decisions and 10 more for fewer injuries. The first of those is based on 1 big decision per PL match which could have gone the other way....I watch a lot of non-Spurs matches on TV and I don't think that's an over-estimate. The second is more of a guess.

Click to expand...

I don’t agree with the 10 points for decisions and I think it’s more 5/6 points for players.

KingHotspur said:

I don’t agree with the 10 points for decisions and I think it’s more 5/6 points for players.

Click to expand...

The 10 points for decisions is a statistical calculation. It's not a matter of opinion. If you think the calculation is wrong then explain why.
There is a post a bit further up which points out we have lost 5 points in the last four games from three individual errors. Every player responsible is only playing because of injuries. If having the worst injury record in the division only costs 5/6 points then injuries make an undetectable difference in the League outcome....do you really believe that?

The RDBD said:

So how many games do you believe at least one
of them as I stated, would have have been won
this season ??

Click to expand...

A very sensible place to start in what is highly speculative analysis is to ask:

Which games did we show a lot of promise in, but just lacked that little bit of quality or composure to get us through it?

My list would be:
1-1 v Wolves
2-2 v United
1-2 v Newcastle
1-2 v West Ham
2-2 v Brighton

Which gives a total of 8 points.

I make that more or less accurate. I don't think we deserved any better from the other matches we dropped points in.

PowerSpurs said:

The 10 points for decisions is a statistical calculation. It's not a matter of opinion. If you think the calculation is wrong then explain why.
There is a post a bit further up which points out we have lost 5 points in the last four games from three individual errors. Every player responsible is only playing because of injuries. If having the worst injury record in the division only costs 5/6 points then injuries make an undetectable difference in the League outcome....do you really believe that?

Click to expand...

It's a statistical calculation which you've literally made up out of thin air.

I'm sorry to be blunt but the fact that there are enough fans out there who genuinely believe that with a bit of better luck on injuries and refereeing, we'd be competing for the CL, is precisely the reason why ENIC never bother improving the squad.

Citizen Kane. said:

I'm sorry to be blunt but the fact that there are enough fans out there who genuinely believe that with a bit of better luck on injuries and refereeing, we'd be competing for the CL, is precisely the reason why ENIC never bother improving the squad.

Click to expand...

Do you think there are fans of other clubs who think their team would be higher except for the same reasons?

It’s a no brainer that if Spurs had had fewer injuries the team would have performed significantly better.

Ditto had a manager/coach found a settled team and formation and employed suitable tactics, fostered a good team spirit, injected confidence etc. That’s with this group of players.

And more favourable refereeing decisions help too.

No s*** Shergar.

But that is the challenge for all teams.
Most teams in the PL now have a decent squad of players. For the middle dozen or so teams, the difference is not the personnel, but all those variables mentioned above and how they cope with them.

So it’s not unreasonable to claim that the 17th placed team could be top 6 or 8 next season, even with the same squad, with an upturn in each of those variables.

Again I can’t add much as CK has pretty much said what I’d say.

Diego said:

Do you think there are fans of other clubs who think their team would be higher except for the same reasons?

Click to expand...

Personally, I don't hear fans of other clubs leaning on the injury and referee lines nearly as much as Spurs fans do.

I think that is largely down to self-perception and maybe a tinge of fear i.e. Spurs fans perceive Spurs as much bigger than 17th (which we are) and therefore very quickly look for any possible excuse to explain why we aren't 14 positions higher. And on the other hand there is a genuine fear that what we've seen these past few seasons is now the 'norm', and that fear is assuaged by using injuries and referees to paint it as a temporary blip.

Dier Hard said:

My plan would be to genuinely sell them all bar Bergvall.

Gray's not terrible but he's not a £40m calibre wonderkid either and in two years hasn't progressed in ability nor in terms of pecking order and the reality is we'll likely be looking to add a CM in the summer.

Tel and Odobert are just abysmal footballers with extremely rare flashes of skill. Get whatever we can for them. Replace them in the squad with Moore whilst we add a quality LW and pray Kulu and Kudus return for next season.

Kinsky is worse than Vicario and we already need to replace and upgrade the

Click to expand...

Just for a bit of perspective, the average age of the 'youngsters' below is 21 all signed during Ange & Franks tenure I think.

For some of them that was 3 managers ago. Add in all the major injuries we've had in that time and some band aid signings like RKM & Gallagher ( Palinha gets a pass, I think he's excellent on his day ) and we have had a really unsettled team for the last 2-3 years, a tough place to develop for any young footballer with all these distractions.

The younger players like Lucas, Gray, Tel, Odebert have been playing all over the pitch with a very poor strike force up front..

The only thing consistent with Spurs over the last few years is the amount of injuries the club has suffered and the managerial merry go round this season.

I do think we have some decent young players in this group below and a couple of real prospects out on loan but to see there true potential we need consistency at the club and a huge investment in goal scoring footballers.

I'm praying that RDZ is the man to keep us from relegation next Sunday but to also settle the club and help bring back our identity. He needs to sort out what players are worth keeping on the books and move on the deadwood for a start and then invest in proven goal scorers no matter what the cost!

Lucas Bergvall - 20
Archie Gray 20
Matty Tel 21
Antonín Kinský 23
Wilson Odobert 21
Souza 19
Pape Matar Sarr 23
Destiny Udogie 23
Xavi Simons 23

Citizen Kane. said:

It's a statistical calculation which you've literally made up out of thin air.

Click to expand...

I've made exactly two assumptions. One is the number of big decisions per match that are subjective so might have gone the other way. The other is the average number of points won or lost by such decisions. I've estimated both as one. I don't think that is too far out.

Citizen Kane. said:

Personally, I don't hear fans of other clubs leaning on the injury and referee lines nearly as much as Spurs fans do.

I think that is largely down to self-perception and maybe a tinge of fear i.e. Spurs fans perceive Spurs as much bigger than 17th (which we are) and therefore very quickly look for any possible excuse to explain why we aren't 14 positions higher. And on the other hand there is a genuine fear that what we've seen these past few seasons is now the 'norm', and that fear is assuaged by using injuries and referees to paint it as a temporary blip.

Click to expand...

My fear is that we will take decisions going forward that are based on belief, not data, and make things worse.

Citizen Kane. said:

I'm sorry to be blunt but the fact that there are enough fans out there who genuinely believe that with a bit of better luck on injuries and refereeing, we'd be competing for the CL, is precisely the reason why ENIC never bother improving the squad.

Click to expand...

ENIC literally spend every penny they can on improving the squad and there are very few fans who agree with my take on this so that argument is clearly wrong.
ENIC, rightly, have never cared what the fans think until this season where Levy was sacked. As I've said many times you should only sack people if you can replace them with someone better. We didn't follow that rule with Levy and fans are calling for other changes that have the same risks.