Ex Spur thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
O.Spurcat said:
I used to watch him on the training ground and he was about 3 levels ahead of other players of the same age. So much natural talent it seemed he was destined for a good future at a high level. He was level headed as well and there seemed no risk of him going off the rails like many do.
Looking back, I guess he was probably not mentally strong enough to have made it and I know for a fact the money he was on at Spurs was ridiculous for a lad of his age and experience.
Click to expand...

I assume "ridiculous" as in "far too much" .

If so, do you think that was a major factor in Bostock not fulfilling that
potential (tis an ongoing concern/gripe I have - specifically how/when
academy players get paid) ??
 
humanbeingincroydon said:
You know Conte's a crap manager when in less than a year being part of a swap deal involving Granit Xhaka is an option
You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...

I was on an Inter Milan fan forum, reading about what they were saying about Eriksen, and the most common thing I read is that Eriksen's struggled over there because he is the complete opposite of what Conte wants in his team. The style of play doesn't suit him. And the other players aren't on his wavelength in terms of intelligent off the ball movement or creating space (or they're being instructed to be functional units). Conte wants to play with Lukaku dropping deep, receiving ball to feet, and the central midfielders to be high-energy, aggressive and physical, with the wing-backs getting to the byline and whipping crosses in. No-one makes the passing option available to Eriksen with vertical runs in behind. He merely tries to facilitate play, rather than contributing any tangible goal threat. Conte won't adapt his system and Eriksen's struggled as a consequence. He's been used as a substitute frequently, but when he does play, he also isn't getting enough minutes to be the difference-maker. It's been a poor transfer for Eriksen and Inter so far.

Which begs the question: why did Conte sign him if he doesn't know how to utilise him?

And also, if it's a high-energy, powerful midfielder he wants to replace Eriksen, Xhaka isn't that man.
 
BrunelGunner said:
I was on an Inter Milan fan forum, reading about what they were saying about Eriksen, and the most common thing I read is that Eriksen's struggled over there because he is the complete opposite of what Conte wants in his team. The style of play doesn't suit him. And the other players aren't on his wavelength in terms of intelligent off the ball movement or creating space (or they're being instructed to be functional units). Conte wants to play with Lukaku dropping deep, receiving ball to feet, and the central midfielders to be high-energy, aggressive and physical, with the wing-backs getting to the byline and whipping crosses in. No-one makes the passing option available to Eriksen with vertical runs in behind. He merely tries to facilitate play, rather than contributing any tangible goal threat. Conte won't adapt his system and Eriksen's struggled as a consequence. He's been used as a substitute frequently, but when he does play, he also isn't getting enough minutes to be the difference-maker. It's been a poor transfer for Eriksen and Inter so far.

Which begs the question: why did Conte sign him if he doesn't know how to utilise him?

And also, if it's a high-energy, powerful midfielder he wants to replace Eriksen, Xhaka isn't that man.
Click to expand...
The best criticism of Conte's approach can be summed up in one sentence

He plays Nicolo Barella in the trequartista role

When a manager has such a dogmatic approach to their system over the players at their disposal that they play a box-to-box midfielder in the trequartista role, while somebody who does play the trequartista role is nailed to the bench, it's abundantly clear that either their system is not working, that the coach doesn't understand the players they have, or the coach is trying to get names on the teamsheet above a coherent starting xi as he doesn't want to drop one of Barella, Brozovic or Vidal

What has to be said is that this isn't the only example of this, either. For one other obvious example, Milan Skriniar has gone from being a rock at the heart of Spaletti's back four to somebody whose average pace has been exposed by Conte playing him on the right of a back three (which is why, if rumours of Sanchez being on borrowed time have anything to them, why we should consider a Sanchez/Skriniar swap)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrunelGunner
I can never understand supposedly top-class managers that are married to a single system and style of play.
Surely being considered that highly would need to involve some versatility and the ability to work with what you have?
Getting results is the only thing that really matters, I guess, but it seems more like sergeant major drilling than coaching, to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurlock and BrunelGunner
PleaseNotPoll said:
I can never understand supposedly top-class managers that are married to a single system and style of play.
Surely being considered that highly would need to involve some versatility and the ability to work with what you have?
Getting results is the only thing that really matters, I guess, but it seems more like sergeant major drilling than coaching, to me.
Click to expand...
In the case of Jacques Santini, who'd blow a whistle if any full back set so much as a toe over the halfway line in training, it's definitely not coaching
 
humanbeingincroydon said:
You know Conte's a crap manager when in less than a year being part of a swap deal involving Granit Xhaka is an option
You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...

Arteta's system is missing a genuine top class playmaker so I pray they don't pull that off. Was reported that prior to leaving us he rejected Utd as he refused to join another English side out of respect to us so hopefully that remains true now.

I'd happily take him back though and if Inter really are trying to offload him and a deal is doable I think we should be all over it. Similar to what I just said about Sabitzer on the transfer thread, with Ndombele and Lo Celso constantly struggling for fitness and Dele more or less on his way out, we need some creativity in this side. As much as I think Ndombele and Lo Celso can be great players, thus far they haven't been a patch on what Eriksen done for us and they cost us roughly just under a £100m. If Eriksen came back motivated having realised the grass may not have been greener, we'd have some serious potency with him supplying Kane, Son, Bale and co.
 
Dier Hard said:
Arteta's system is missing a genuine top class playmaker so I pray they don't pull that off. Was reported that prior to leaving us he rejected Utd as he refused to join another English side out of respect to us so hopefully that remains true now.

I'd happily take him back though and if Inter really are trying to offload him and a deal is doable I think we should be all over it. Similar to what I just said about Sabitzer on the transfer thread, with Ndombele and Lo Celso constantly struggling for fitness and Dele more or less on his way out, we need some creativity in this side. As much as I think Ndombele and Lo Celso can be great players, thus far they haven't been a patch on what Eriksen done for us and they cost us roughly just under a £100m. If Eriksen came back motivated having realised the grass may not have been greener, we'd have some serious potency with him supplying Kane, Son, Bale and co.
Click to expand...
The obvious issue that affects Lo Celso and Ndombele that didn't affect Eriksen (mostly...) is that for most of his time with us Eriksen had a strong bedrock behind him, with the Sandro/Dembele, Dier/Dembele and Wanyama/Dembele pivots sitting on games meaning that he had more opportunity to see the ball if it was being regained and recycled in midfield which also benefitted him pressing high up the pitch because if he didn't get the ball then there was a good chance the pivot would gobble it up soon after - but as soon as the Winkssoko pivot became the standard he didn't have a strong bedrock behind him, less opportunity to see the ball, and if he pressed high up the pitch there was no guarantee that the next time he saw the ball wouldn't be clearing a corner or at kickoff

And that's the thing, if you put Lo Celso in front of the peak Wanyama/Dembele pivot, or if you put Ndombele next to either Sandro or Wanyama, they would be more creative because not only would we have more of the ball we'd also have it in areas where either of them could do damage
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back