They remind me of Blackpool and Hull before them. These promoted teams always seem to start well but then trail off. QPR and Swansea imo look better equipped than Norwich to survive.
Exactly what GH10 and I have been suggesting for weeks now. Sandro had another great game: not many opposing teams will create much with him and Parker holding the midfield and the front four are very hard to stop when given freedom like this, particularly with the full-backs in support. Kaboul was great too. Didn't see many weaknesses last night.
Exactly PS. Why so many people, including Harry it seems, wanted players like VDV or Luka to replace Lennon I dont know. You dont need two wingers and I laughed when Sky put VDV on the right, as hes not a right winger or right mid. We got it right v Norwich, let Sandro and Parker cover the right side when necessary. I had given up on the Sandro Parker duo as it seemed we didnt know how to play them and they have little goal threat. Now the penny has finally dropped with Harry, hopefully we can accomodate both of them and still score enough goals
Quite right in the system we finally got right as you say v Norwich, thats as near 433 as I've seen any Spurs team play, we only need a 2nd winger in the 442 games at home.
yep NSS If Lennon is fit theres no problem with him playing, as hes so good, but the idea we have to have to have two wingers , nope.
Not all the time I agree, but as a preferred option the rest of the system you want to play requires, yes. For example the Chelsea game, Ashley Cole sits back when he's against Lennon or anyone quick, he's the same with Walcott. There's the mental thing about a FB ****ting himself about pace, that puts them off their normal game. Cole would not have got forward as much and been as influential had a pacy player been there. A FB that sits gives you more room.
Kaboul+King = first choice. I agree, it's doable but we need to step up another gear and hope the Mancs don't.
Fair comments NSS Unsurprisingly I disagree though, for the system I prefer the answer is not yes, it's no, regarding two wingers. We didn't need Lennon to beat Chelsea, we needed to play 4-2-3-1 properly, given Lennon was injured. We also needed someone other than Pav as the sub for VDV. Plus, so well did Chelsea play, that with or without Lennon/JD/whoever, we might only have drawn. The system I like precisely doesn't need two wingers, in fact it probably can't accommodate two wingers. I've no problem with Lennon and Bale playing wide in a 4, as they are so good ATM. We'll see how it goes, depending on player availability.
I'm not suggesting we play that all the time GH, what fool would suggest that??? If we can get this 433 type thing we saw working, I'm with that. But, when the opposition has two FB's that can hurt you going forward, a good tactic is too pin them back with quicker wingers/forwards. Its all I was ever saying.
High Definition http://mukki.org/tv/epl-2011-12-27-norwich-city-vs-tottenham-hotspur-720p-hdtv-x264-fairplay-178328
Yep agreed NSS, that is a good way to pin back attacking FBs. I've no doubt that had Lennon been fit, he would have played v Chelsea and Harry would have gone down the route that you advocate for that particular situation. It'll be interesting to see when Lennon returns how our shape changes.
