Match Ratings Ratings vs Chelsea

[ebzrascal]

Lloris 3
Trippier 6
Alderweireld 6
Vertonghen 6
Davies 6
Dier 6
Wanyama 0
Dembele 8
Eriksen 7
Alli 6
Kane 6

Subs

Son 5
Sissoko 4
Janssen NET

Poch 3 - Wrong decision to take off Dier, should have been Wanyama who was atrocious the whole game

Wanyama just back from injury not his fault Poch left him on for 90 mins!!

 

[N17-77]

Lloris 5
Trippier 5
Alderweireld 6
Vertonghen 6
Davies 5
Dier 6
Wanyama 4
Dembele 7
Eriksen 7
Alli 6
Kane 5

 

[carpediem991]

For me it was the first time I saw Dier playing in the position he did. Basically a Right offensive centre back lol. Would have given Winks at least 20 minutes.

In the end unbelievable unlucky not to get at least a point out of this. It is a defeat which is really hard to take. Hopefully we can bounce back with a comfortable win against Burnley.

Lloris - 3
Davies - 6.5
Trippier - 6
Alderweireld - 6.5
Vertonghen - 6
Dier - 5.5
Wanyama - 3
Dembele - 7.5
Alli - 6.5
Eriksen - 6.5
Kane - 7

 

[ClintEastwould]

Loris 5 Decent distribution throughout but clearly at fault for their goal

Trippier 6 Saw lots of the ball. His link up play was nowhere near as good as we're used to though.

Toby 7 Good
Vertonghen 8 I think it's time we realize Verts has actually turned into the better player in this pair?

Davies 5 Very average

Dier 7 Solid game
Wanyama 4 - worst game in a spurs shirt. I was begging for him to get subbed. He must've gotten dispossed at least 8/10 times let alone the misplaced passes

Demebele 9 Monster

Dele 7 He had a couple moments of nice skill but unfortunately couldn't string a good game together
Eriksen 7 Tried to make things happen,. Chelsea definitely marked him out of the game though. Shit corners but good free kicks.

Kane 8 The guy was on a one man mission up until about the 70th minute pretty much destroying their defense on his own. I believe he tired after that point and couldn't position himself right for the thousand incoming crosses we sent in towards the end of the game in desperation.

Sissoko Just why? Why is he a Tottenham player?

Jansenn NET

 

[Gaz_Gammon]

Chelsea crowded us out in the middle, so we needed to be dynamic down the flanks and we weren't, because we didn't have the players to do it.

This game only highlights what we still need (and I hope we will see) from the transfer window - Pace and width.

Kane/Dembele my MOM.

Here is a very good article setting out how Conte set his team up. Sometimes we have to give credit where it's due, and a very under strength side was managed to exploit their strengths and our weaknesses. Poch can play whatever formation he wants to but he needs more options to put on on the pitch than what we currently have. No shame in that.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40994946

 

[Bus-Conductor]

@Bus-Conductor @mpickard2087

I liked the 4321, Ismail agree that we should've had someone more metronomic instead of one of Dier or Wanyama. BC you've suggested Winks... what about Eriksen? I wouldn't have him in a midfield 2, but in a three where he would have lots of pitch to aim for with his passing and ball carrying I think he'd be superb. Then just have Son and Dele in the 2 off Kane.

I think Eriksen kind of drops into the midfield zone by default. In my "team for" I had us playing 34111 with Eriksen slightly deeper than Alli, because I knew Chelsea were going to play the way they did. But I've been saying Poch should play a 3cm system for a while now and have actually suggested the 4321 on various occasions. But there is absolutely no point in doing it, the way we play (as a pro-active possession based team) with three risk averse CM's.

I also don't see why we need to compromise our final third creativity by moving Eriksen back and giving him more middle third responsibility when we can have him more advanced and still have a player like Winks (or we could have had Onomah) and Dembele hubbing off Wanyama. Winks will bomb on and supplement attacks but will also flit around keeping the ball moving more expediently than Dier (or Dembele).

 

[Shadydan]

I think Eriksen kind of drops into the midfield zone by default. In my "team for" I had us playing 34111 with Eriksen slightly deeper than Alli, because I knew Chelsea were going to play the way they did. But I've been saying Poch should play a 3cm system for a while now and have actually suggested the 4321 on various occasions. But there is absolutely no point in doing it, the way we play (as a pro-active possession based team) with three risk averse CM's.

I also don't see why we need to compromise our final third creativity by moving Eriksen back and giving him more middle third responsibility when we can have him more advanced and still have a player like Winks (or we could have had Onomah) and Dembele hubbing off Wanyama. Winks will bomb on and supplement attacks but will also flit around keeping the ball moving more expediently than Dier (or Dembele).

 

[Lighty64]

do you want great things for Spurs? I assume so. You have got to win games like this. In a cup run, in the league. You have got to pick up the Ws when they are available, and thats down to the manager.

After attacking another posters intelligence @EastLondonYid this post above to me sounds like your not too gifted in the "smart" department

The manager asks his players to go out there and do a job, and if they ain't working he tries to change it at halftime or bringing subs on.

He isn't the one that kicks the ball, he isn't the one giving silly fouls in silly areas, and he isn't the one that threw the ball out, or allowed the ball to go under his body.

He did make a mistake on his sub choice, think he should of taken Wanyama off instead of Dier, but that doesn't guarantee a different result.

The manager is to blame if he doesn't pick the strongest XI or rotates inform players when we lose. Yesterday was too big a game to risk KWP when Trippier was fit enough to play.

 

[Lighty64]

Lloris 5 - a few saves not much to do but mistake for 2nd goal.

You did watch the same game as everyone else?

He never made any saves, the only had 2 shots on target

@DenverSpur with Willian standing over the free kick also Lloris had to set up for the possibility of him taking it as he usually takes them

 

[OneBaxter]

Wanyama just back from injury not his fault Poch left him on for 90 mins!!

so he's exempt from criticism? he was easily the worst player on the pitch and to be brutally honest, I'm not having his inability to play a 5 yard pass down to being just back from injury...

 

[SoulDog]

Really don't agree with this BC. They set up in effectively a 5-3-2 (Willian and Morata were almost always a duo in their initial defensive line who just plonked themselves in front of our two centre backs to stop them advancing with the ball) and had three centre backs, plus Luiz ahead of them flanked with two destroyers. They are trying to clog up the centre of the park, I don't think 4-3-2-1, bad personnel in the cm for the job or not, was a smart choice as that just funnels everything centrally.

We had some good spells of pressure due to some real huff and puff trying to hammer down the door, but what I watched most of the build up play was laboured and a bit of a struggle. I'd have much preferred seeing 3CB's able to bypass the Morata/Willian line and carry the ball out and make the next line of defence come to meet them and hopefully open space up. It would also have pushed our wingbacks further forward (thought both of them got caught in 'nothing' positions in this game where they didn't have much influence). we needed to try and work them about the pitch a bit more and get around the blockade.

It did seem to me like they had a back 5 most of the game. I thought it looked like we defiantly switched it to three at the back for a lot of the 2nd half when we was in possession not sure why he brought on Sissoko. Wanyama and Lloris cost us the points Dier was poor aswell. Apart from that we dominated the game without never really opening them up as we lack that killer instinct. We have played much worse than that and won, chelsea were there for the taking though.

 

[scat1620]

But I've been saying Poch should play a 3cm system for a while now and have actually suggested the 4321 on various occasions.

Not just Poch: you've been gagging for a 4-3-3 formation since at least Gerry Francis' time...

 

[Bus-Conductor]

@BringBack_leGin

I know it looked like I was setting my team up as a protest of right wing politics, but what I was trying to convey was that I'd like to morph more into a 3511 without the ball with Eriksen dropping deeper and forming a CM3 as I feel this is where Conte will try to stifle us.

@mpickard2087

Did you watch MNF? They did a very good piece on out game. They actually showed some clips showing that our fb's were high and wide, but questioned why we played with 3 CM/DM's who were constantly behind the ball and none of them bomb forward and going the attack (which is what I said Winks would have done).

They were suggesting we should have just swapped Dier for Son at HT, and I can see that (I think you suggested the same) but I still think if he'd started with Winks instead of Dier we would have still had the "Son" option either switching to 4231 or just as a straight swap for Alli.

You, me and they all thought we'd start with a 3CB system (see my team for above) but I still think in that game, a game where Chelsea had very little to offer offensively, having only one shot on target in open play, the 4321 - or really 2341 - was a very good idea, that was just let down by Pochettino's obsession with Dier as a CM.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Not just Poch: you've been gagging for a 4-3-3 formation since at least Gerry Francis' time...

Absolutely. Always been a fan of the 433. More recently though, I've suggested 4321 a few times as a way of keeping our two "10's" in that pocket they occupy in the 3421, but primarily keeping Eriksen as a 10 as he's not a wide forward and he's our most important and influential player by a mile. I really like having two pivoting 8's either side of holder too. Much harder for defensive bus parks to pick up midfielders that bomb into forward areas from deeper positions.

I didn't really agree with @mpickard2087 's suggestion that playing 3cb's would have helped us break the press, I don't really think think there was a high press yesterday, and in any case, the 3CM system is great from breaking the high press as it should give you more out ball options as the 3cm's spread and the central CM can always drop back. This also facilitated supply to the FB's - a la Barca.

 

[mpickard2087]

@Bus-Conductor

No I only caught the City/Everton match in the second half, so missed this analysis. I am not surprised that they found examples of our fullbacks high and wide, just my instinct was that it didn't happen consistently enough - but then I do like my fullbacks/wingbacks absolutely kamikaze high up the pitch really attacking the opposition. The main problem is though that, and Davies in particular, is that they need the ball brought to them and just cannot attack space, especially on the outside, both with and without the ball. It's almost impossible on that side to get in behind the oppositions defence. There was a passage of play yesterday second half where the ball got switched left and we had a 2 vs.1 with Dembele and Davies. As Davies took the ball down Dembele didn't move or make any run beyond the marker holding position in front of Davies, so Davies shuffles the ball inside to Dembele, and then Davies doesn't make any run either and stays still. So a really good opportunity to use acres of space was utterly wasted. I nearly launched the remote through the TV as it happened.

If we had to make one signing now before deadline day, I honestly think my choice would be another flyer of a left back

My thinking as to 3CB's was to try and shift their players around a bit. If you had the initial 3CB vs. Morata/Willian then Vertonghen and Dier could aggressively carry the ball out and then it gives others a problem. If they run the ball out at the Chelsea wingback then it can release ours on the overlap (and brought the ball to them, as I said they need), and then drags either their side midfielder or centreback out in order to assist, possibly, hopefully, opening up space for others. But you have to start constructing attacks in the initial build up and moving their defensive structure around, a bit like chess, maybe two, three, four times and a gradual knock on effect before getting into the position where you can cause damage. I don't think we did this well enough.

You know I have no problem with the 4-3-3, I just don't think it was the best fit on the day given a) Chelsea's approach and b) the personnel we selected.. The midfield selection was bordering on cowardly, if it wasn't trumped by the Chelsea team. I'd have hauled Wanyama off for Son early in the second half and had Eriksen next to Dembele in the 3-4-3. And if that wasn't working then had Dier off for Winks and gone 4-2-3-1 and pushed Eriksen forward again.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

@Bus-Conductor

No I only caught the City/Everton match in the second half, so missed this analysis. I am not surprised that they found examples of our fullbacks high and wide, just my instinct was that it didn't happen consistently enough - but then I do like my fullbacks/wingbacks absolutely kamikaze high up the pitch really attacking the opposition. The main problem is though that, and Davies in particular, is that they need the ball brought to them and just cannot attack space, especially on the outside, both with and without the ball. It's almost impossible on that side to get in behind the oppositions defence. There was a passage of play yesterday second half where the ball got switched left and we had a 2 vs.1 with Dembele and Davies. As Davies took the ball down Dembele didn't move or make any run beyond the marker holding position in front of Davies, so Davies shuffles the ball inside to Dembele, and then Davies doesn't make any run either and stays still. So a really good opportunity to use acres of space was utterly wasted. I nearly launched the remote through the TV as it happened.

If we had to make one signing now before deadline day, I honestly think my choice would be another flyer of a left back

My thinking as to 3CB's was to try and shift their players around a bit. If you had the initial 3CB vs. Morata/Willian then Vertonghen and Dier could aggressively carry the ball out and then it gives others a problem. If they run the ball out at the Chelsea wingback then it can release ours on the overlap (and brought the ball to them, as I said they need), and then drags either their side midfielder or centreback out in order to assist, possibly, hopefully, opening up space for others. But you have to start constructing attacks in the initial build up and moving their defensive structure around, a bit like chess, maybe two, three, four times and a gradual knock on effect before getting into the position where you can cause damage. I don't think we did this well enough.

You know I have no problem with the 4-3-3, I just don't think it was the best fit on the day given a) Chelsea's approach and b) the personnel we selected.. The midfield selection was bordering on cowardly, if it wasn't trumped by the Chelsea team. I'd have hauled Wanyama off for Son early in the second half and had Eriksen next to Dembele in the 3-4-3. And if that wasn't working then had Dier off for Winks and gone 4-2-3-1 and pushed Eriksen forward again.

I think the issue is more rooted not in shape so much as personnel. I can't think of another proactive ball possession top team who would play such a risk averse bunch of CM's. Both yesterday and last week I kept noticing Trippier and KWP in space high up but the ball needed to be zipped out there by the CM who wasnt always the nearest one, and none of Dier, Dembele or Wanyama will play that pass, they all choose to play it via the next CM to then play it, but by he time momentum has been slowly shifted in that direction, the oppo have shifted too and the opportunity to get the ball to our RB in a 1v1 situation goes.

I agree with you about a lwb, which is why I'd love Sessegnin to happen.

I also like the 3421, and I don't mind the 4231 some of the time. I still think 4321 was a good idea yesterday, if we'd have played a proper dynamic cm it could have worked better. Conte likes having 3cm's, he used to do it a lot at Juve. I think Poch's logic was sound and in the same way you say the cm's could split and bring the ball out, I really don't think it was the issue yesterday. I think if we'd had Winks out there he would have pulled there shape about, passed and moved, took good positions and passed it quicker into the AM's and FB's, instead we got a very predictable CM3 that was very easy for Chelsea to deal with.

 

[mpickard2087]

I think the issue is more rooted not in shape so much as personnel. I can't think of another proactive ball possession top team who would play such a risk averse bunch of CM's. Both yesterday and last week I kept noticing Trippier and KWP space high up but the ball needed to be zipped out there by the CM who wasnt always the nearest one, and none of Dier, Dembele or Wanyama will play that pass, they all choose to play it via the next CM to then play it, but by he time momentum has been slowly shifted in that direction, the oppo have shifted too and the opportunity to get the ball to our RB in a 1v1 situation goes.

I agree with you about a lab, which is why I'd love Sessegnin to happen.

I also like the 3421, and I don't mind the 4231 some of the time. I still think 4321 was a good idea yesterday, if we'd have played a proper dynamic cm it could have worked better. Conte likes having 3cm's, he used to do it a lot at Juve. I think Poch's logic was sound and in the same way you say the cm's could split and bring the ball out, I really don't think it was the issue yesterday. I think if we'd had Winks out there he would have pulled there shape about, passed and moved, took good positions and passed it quicker into the AM's and FB's, instead we got a very predictable CM3 that was very easy for Chelsea to deal with.

I think they are all valid arguments, particularly about the personnel in midfield and lacking someone who can move the ball in an up-tempo manner. We can't always ask Eriksen to be in about three places at once orchestrating the entire play...

I'm not even saying tbh I'd have stuck with 3CB all game, as I said in my previous reply I'd have had no qualms changing during the game to hopefully find solutions. Just what I would have done, and find strange we never employed yesterday considering the personnel on the pitch and that it worked fairly well last season against the same opposition (the home league win, and narrow cup defeat).

 

[BringBack_leGin]

@BringBack_leGin




@mpickard2087

Did you watch MNF? They did a very good piece on out game. They actually showed some clips showing that our fb's were high and wide, but questioned why we played with 3 CM/DM's who were constantly behind the ball and none of them bomb forward and going the attack (which is what I said Winks would have done).

They were suggesting we should have just swapped Dier for Son at HT, and I can see that (I think you suggested the same) but I still think if he'd started with Winks instead of Dier we would have still had the "Son" option either switching to 4231 or just as a straight swap for Alli.

You, me and they all thought we'd start with a 3CB system (see my team for above) but I still think in that game, a game where Chelsea had very little to offer offensively, having only one shot on target in open play, the 4321 - or really 2341 - was a very good idea, that was just let down by Pochettino's obsession with Dier as a CM.

@Bus-Conductor

No I only caught the City/Everton match in the second half, so missed this analysis. I am not surprised that they found examples of our fullbacks high and wide, just my instinct was that it didn't happen consistently enough - but then I do like my fullbacks/wingbacks absolutely kamikaze high up the pitch really attacking the opposition. The main problem is though that, and Davies in particular, is that they need the ball brought to them and just cannot attack space, especially on the outside, both with and without the ball. It's almost impossible on that side to get in behind the oppositions defence. There was a passage of play yesterday second half where the ball got switched left and we had a 2 vs.1 with Dembele and Davies. As Davies took the ball down Dembele didn't move or make any run beyond the marker holding position in front of Davies, so Davies shuffles the ball inside to Dembele, and then Davies doesn't make any run either and stays still. So a really good opportunity to use acres of space was utterly wasted. I nearly launched the remote through the TV as it happened.

If we had to make one signing now before deadline day, I honestly think my choice would be another flyer of a left back

My thinking as to 3CB's was to try and shift their players around a bit. If you had the initial 3CB vs. Morata/Willian then Vertonghen and Dier could aggressively carry the ball out and then it gives others a problem. If they run the ball out at the Chelsea wingback then it can release ours on the overlap (and brought the ball to them, as I said they need), and then drags either their side midfielder or centreback out in order to assist, possibly, hopefully, opening up space for others. But you have to start constructing attacks in the initial build up and moving their defensive structure around, a bit like chess, maybe two, three, four times and a gradual knock on effect before getting into the position where you can cause damage. I don't think we did this well enough.

You know I have no problem with the 4-3-3, I just don't think it was the best fit on the day given a) Chelsea's approach and b) the personnel we selected.. The midfield selection was bordering on cowardly, if it wasn't trumped by the Chelsea team. I'd have hauled Wanyama off for Son early in the second half and had Eriksen next to Dembele in the 3-4-3. And if that wasn't working then had Dier off for Winks and gone 4-2-3-1 and pushed Eriksen forward again.

Not overly responding to these specific posts, but more continuing the discussion with the both of you, I'm also a huge advocate of the 433.

I guess my argument for placing Eriksen in one of the midfield three is that to my mind, even if we lost his assists, it puts him in the part of the pitch where he is going to be hardest for opposition players to stifle as he'll be able to go wherever he wants as the spare man of that three, and that licence will allow him to do what he does best, create space. Essentially let him be our Modric/ Iniesta. Because of his instincts he'll end up bursting forward with the attacks anyway, but I feel he will influence play far more.

Then, further up the pitch his spot could open up to someone pacier like Son, and we'd have the best of both worlds. In effect it wouldn't be far different to the 4231, but it would allow Eriksen more of the pitch to play with than when he's shafted wide in that system. In fact, my ideal would be if ultimately in a 433 both Dele and Eriksen dropped back, I think with the mileage they cover and the combination of Dele's energy and Eriksen's intelligence, a solid Wanyama (or even Dier as just a pure Anchor) behind would not sacrifice our solidity, but allow us to play with far more adventure going forward. Admittedly this might be a by product of an unhealthy obsession with Guardiola's Barcelona, but I think a 433 negates the need for someone like Dembele at a midfield ball holder and allows more adventure.

Wanyama
Eriksen_____ Dele
Lamela ________ Son
Kane
​

Seems ludicrous to suggest that both Eriksen and Dele are dropped deeper than their current positions, but I think the overall effect would be a faster moving attack without sacrificing solidity or ball retention, and less dependence on the full backs to produce all our delivery into the box.

Onions though, preparing for you both to tear me apart/ call me naive...

 

[walton]

Dominated the match, created a far greater amount of chances, their goalie had far more to do, they score a great free kick (from a total dive by Luis) and a clusterfuck where Wanyama turned our attack into their attack for no apparent reason and Lloris forgot how to be a goalie.

Overall fine all other players bar the two mentioned above, Kane and Dembele a bit better than the rest, Chelsea got lucky

This simply isn't true. We may have dominated possession, but how many chances did we actually create?? Very few. We hit the post through some good individual work by Kane, and scored because of a great FK from Eriksen, but other than that we were relatively toothless. Chelsea didn't create much more (although Morata's miss was unforgiveable for a striker of his reputed quality). They did a job on us.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

This simply isn't true. We may have dominated possession, but how many chances did we actually create?? Very few. We hit the post through some good individual work by Kane, and scored because of a great FK from Eriksen, but other than that we were relatively toothless. Chelsea didn't create much more (although Morata's miss was unforgiveable for a striker of his reputed quality). They did a job on us.

As ever, onions, we got behind them plenty of times, and Kane hitting the post was actually having been put through by a good move, while we had plenty of balls into and around Chelsea's goal, especially first half, which they had to make a last ditch tackle, clearance, or our player was a whisker away. It's completely revisionist to say that that we just dominated possession but did nothing with it. Our 14 corners to Chelsea's 3 paints that picture better than any other stat, unless you recall us taking 14 pot shots from outside the area which just deflected of their players that is...