Definitely Modric was by far the more advanced of the 3 and was often found closing down their centre backs while Adebayor went walkies. Sandro and Parker did good jobs alternating who was going to sit back a bit but usually it was Parker and Sandro would be the one making the runs forward, which worked well. Having Sandro and Parker was definitely a smart move for yesterday and they were both excellent.
Talking of Sandro, wasn't it good to see how excited he got by one of Ade's goals. Many would just mope around on the bench after coming off, but he is def committed to the cause. Better than Carroll's reaction
It was good to see Lennon back, but we won this game by starting without him, and I'd bench him again for Sunderland. The only change I'd make is Livermore for Sandro. I like the solidity of two holding DMs, but feel Jake offers more than Sandro ATM in terms of creativity and athleticism. Once again no goals conceded from a set piece, and a goal scored from one, this is a key improvement.
Well not quite, the score was 1-1 with your preferred line-up. Lennon for Sandro, 2 goals in 20 minutes, 3-1 win, thats how the game was won Gh.
Sorry, but for me, Sandro was far from excellent yesterday. I thought he was fortunate to be starting after his indifferent performance at Chelsea, and I am not sure he did well enough yesterday to justify his selection ahead of Livermore. We all see things differently when watching the game, but I remain unconvinced about his display.
I don't know about you Spurcat, but I'm going to stick my neck out and say I'd prefer Jake atm, there isn't much between them imo, apart from their disciplinary. Sandro has twice as many as cards as Jake (for a young DM, JL's record is astonishing getting a yellow every 8 games!, no red yet!) and I think people don't see the silly free kicks in dangerous areas Sandro gives away, i know they all do, but its one too many every game with him.
I'll go along with you on this NSS. I still retain reserrvations about Jake at this level, but at the moment, I think he edges it over Sandro as he looks out of sorts for me. I thought he was disappointing at Chelsea and whilst he didn't particuarly let us down yesterday, I was left with the impression he is still coming back to full fitness and until he does, he remains a bit lacking for me.
There was a lot to like about Sandro's play yesterday, I felt. I thought he used his strength on the ball well, got forward when he had the opportunity and never stopped closing down the Swansea midfield. Him playing allowed Parker to do his sweeping up role in midfield and Modric to stay further forward. When Parker and Modric play as the two across the middle. It's not that the Modric/Parker combination doesn't work without him but I feel they both get caught up at the wrong end of the pitch regularly. I'm probably eulogising a bit because he's one of my favourite players at Spurs I like Livermore too, he looks very assured now after a difficult first couple of appearances but I don't think he tackles as well as Parker and Sandro or adds much to our general play.
Not at all NSS - we won by starting with my preferred line up - that's how the game was won Except I would have preferred to start with Livermore. Furthermore our ppg ratio is even better now without Lennon starting, as compared to when he does. I hope we keep Lennon benched for Sunderland, and start with Jake
Yep OS, to me Jake should have started yesterday. Not for the first time a home grown talent at Spurs is sacrificed for a 'bigger name'. I don't like it at all. I think Jake adds plenty to our general play, more than Sandro. He's a better passer, more athletic, and more disciplined.
YV, agree with all you say on Sandro, I've just noticed this thing about his clumsy challenges around the D. I also think JL has better close skill and can go past a player easier. It is only small differences between them though.
We started with 'myline up' and won the game. That does me I never said we shouldn't use subs Although I must stress 'my line up' included Jake not Sandro. My line up against Sunderland would be the same, no Lennon or Sandro, assuming all are fit from Sunday. I'm quite happy to see Lennon used as an impact sub, but ATM prefer the solidity of 2 DMs. While it's working I say stick with it.
we should be able to play a number of different way's depending on who we are playing,so yes,if we need 2dm's then play them,but also you will need two pacy winger's for some teams,so using lennon as an impact sub only is wrong.
I agree that only using Lennon as an impact sub is wrong. He'll get his chance to start a game, probably against Norwich, but against Sunderland I think he should be on the bench. There are indeed some games where two pacy wingers may be the best tactic. What I dispute is they are the default best option for most/all games as many Spurs fans maintain/imply. I'm simply not convinced on that score.
Horses for courses. We've got a number of different systems and strategies that have worked this season, so it's a matter of using the right tool for the job. Insert another cliche here if I haven't used enough.
Question is, is Sunderland away a reason to use the extra width and pace of Lennon, or to shore up the middle and use Sandro/Livermore to make us more compact. I haven't an answer, cause I don't really know how Sunderland set up. I assume they are long ball merchants where the extra man in midfield is pointless?
442 would mean Ade and Saha for me. Without substitutions Dona, I can only think you mean VdV would have to be one of the front 2, and for him to drop into MF to make up 5? We've tried that with little success, with our other personnel it just wouldn't work.
