I have only seen on here that davies was carrying a knock. Must confess I haven't been actively searching out match reports (for obvious reasons) but did this come from the club? Do we know how bad it is, & whether he will be fit for wednesday?
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Manager Mauricio Pochettino
- Thread starter WHITE&BLUE
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
So what you're actually saying is you'd have played a different formation altogether? (Which isn't what u said btw)
There's no right or wrong answer as you have the advantage of pretending your decision would have won the game of course. Personally I don't think changing formation AND playing a player out of position is a better tactic than playing 1 player out if position. All your doing is turning 1 problem into 2.
Plus it's been said 100 times already.....
WE DIDNT LOSE BECAUSE SON PLAYED LWB
People seem to be forgetting that the manager and players lost a colleague and friend the day before the match. Perhaps it was a poor decision to start Son at left wing-back, but i'm not going to castigate anyone at the club for it. All things considered, they did a decent job just hours after a bereavement.
COYS!
COYS!
I disagree. I think if Rose was playing. We go 2-1 up, Chelsea have to come at us. We win 4-2.
You said Son at LWB didn't cost us the game. Now you're saying it did, make up your mindYou're right. Poch should have done that!
It didn't.
If you're suggesting that if you swap in Rose for Son everything pans out exactaly how it did up until and with the exception of Rose presumably not conceding a penalty maybe u should watch the butterfly effect.
Based on the game as it actually panned out we didn't lose because son was LWB. We lost because we conceded 4 goals. It's bizarre how people are putting all the emphasis on 1 goal as if that was the only one that mattered.
And you're seriously clutching at straws if ur trying to turn it into a debate about whether Rose would have made the difference.
Last edited:
Its simple, we made a few wrong calls in defence and do not have the same wealth as they do, bringing on Hazard vs bringing on N'koudou (not singling him out btw) is a huge difference
One is almost a guarantee of quality, the other one is hoping it works out for the best.
That's not a dig at Poch or our players, it's just the wealth of the Chavs compared to us doing things within our means. But even with that aspect in mind, we are still battling for second and arrived in the SF of the FA cup where we dominated for a very long time. Bad result but i'm still confident we can achieve second place, the title seems a long shot but one never knows.
One is almost a guarantee of quality, the other one is hoping it works out for the best.
That's not a dig at Poch or our players, it's just the wealth of the Chavs compared to us doing things within our means. But even with that aspect in mind, we are still battling for second and arrived in the SF of the FA cup where we dominated for a very long time. Bad result but i'm still confident we can achieve second place, the title seems a long shot but one never knows.
No. What I am saying is what I said: I would have played one of those players instead of Son. We don't play either 3 or 4 at the back, I am not sure why people still don't understand that, we switch our formation easily mid-game between these two formations as required.
I am not pretending it would or wouldn't have changed the outcome, what I am saying is that it would have been a less risky decision and therefore a better one. Many people, most probably, raised eyebrows at the selection before the game kicked off, it is not about hindsight.
We lost because of three defensive mistakes, one of which was Son's (at LB where he should never have been played).
Well it was also the first time we've not had either Rose or Davies available.
Maybe that's the coincidence.
People can say they thought he got it wrong but they can't pretend they suggested alternatives would have faired any better because it's a total unknown.
My main issue isn't people saying he got it wrong. It's the vitriol with which it's being said by some that gets my back up.
People would have equally raised eye brows if we'd lined up with Wimmer, Dier, Trips or Vertonghen at LB.
Poch went for the more attacking option and I'd back him in doing that every time. 4 goals was extremely flattering and in no way tells the story of how we played overall or how that team selection was working.
Saying Son was at fault for 1 of 4 goals and blaming his selection solely for the loss is just an example of people being incapable of of excepting a loss without pinpointing a decision or individual as the scape goat.
Some times the better team loses. As was the case.
playing a forward at LB for the first time in his career in an FA Cup semi final is a very strange decision. its entirely reasonable that its a discussion point imo. Playing actual defenders (Verts or Trippier) there wouldn't have remotely raised an eyebrow in the context, ie we had no LBs so they are clearly the next best thing.
I haven't seen any vitriol towards Poch (although maybe I've missed it). What I have seen, & what I still believe is people are right to question the decision. Son is defensively non existent & that's not his fault.
Poch is magic, superb & any other glowing superlatives you want to apply to him. But he's human & capable of getting it wrong. Some of us just think he got it wrong on Saturday.
Would you play Son there on Wednesday, assuming Rose isn't ready & Davies is still unfit? If Davies wasn't fit, would you have had him on the bench, available for selection, or freed up a spot for someone else?
This isn't knee jerking at Poch. They are genuine questions & I'd like someone in the "Poch got it spot on" camp to answer them.
:dierpochhug:
Poch got the Son selection wrong however you slice it. He gifted Chelsea a penalty and goal via a slide tackle in the box that wasn't even needed. Anywhere on the pitch, that slide tackle is just fine except in the box where any experienced defender is trained and conditioned not to execute unless for last ditch effort. In the end, you can see the lack of Son's experience at this position w/ that slide tackle effort which wasn't even needed costing Spurs dearly. Poch is the man, but experimenting in that type of game with everything on the line was unwise.
He played LWB not LB. have you ever played football before??
Poch had the option of either playing a defensive wide player there or an attacking wide player.
He went attacking instead of defensive. I like that he went positive.
It really wasn't that shocking or radical a decision. Remind me where Victor Moses has played most of his career again?
Victor Moses does have defensive abilities though. That is a big difference.
jesus, there's some real stroppy c**** on this board. don't get churlish with me just because i dare to disagree. Now put your dummy back in for a second and consider what you said....
you said playing tripps/Vert etc there would have been as eyebrow raising... this is, of course, nonsense, and people are right to point this out. you like that he went positive, the majority find it bad timing and risky to play Son in that position for the fist time in his career.
Yes I would play him there if Davies and Rose are out. He's not going to give a penalty away every game and other than that name one defensive error he made.
Other than the hazard goal all of their goals were lucky for the want of a better term. It was their day. A direct free kick that should have been saved. The penalty. And a workday from a guy that never scores.
Can't comment on Davies level of fitness but it's not like we have much else in reserve to sit in the bench. I suspect he was there as an absolute emergency.
He may have even opted for Son with a view to pinning Moses back rather than having him running at Davies. If that's the case you could argue it backfired with the penalty but I still maintain that wasn't why we lost.
At 2-2 we were in full control and looked the only team going to win. Nothing Son did from that point contributed to us losing the game.