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...
So what you're actually saying is you'd have played a different formation altogether? (Which isn't what u said btw)Vertoghen
Trippier
Dier
Wimmer
Basically, a defender who is familiar with playing in a defensive position, even though all of these players would have weaknesses playing out of position at LB they would have been better choices than a forward.
I disagree. I think if Rose was playing. We go 2-1 up, Chelsea have to come at us. We win 4-2.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
You're right. Poch should have done that!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 mind
It didn't.You said Son at LWB didn't cost us the game. Now you're saying it did, make up your mind
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
Well it was also the first time we've not had either Rose or Davies available.Well the first time we play Son in a back 5 we concede 4. Some people are suggesting that that might not be a coincidence. Anyway it's done now - but I don't see him playing there again.
People would have equally raised eye brows if we'd lined up with Wimmer, Dier, Trips or Vertonghen at LB.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).
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.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.
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.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.
He played LWB not LB. have you ever played football before??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.
Victor Moses does have defensive abilities though. That is a big difference.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?
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....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?
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.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: