Carlos Vinicius

[TheSpurEst]

The stats were more to show that he hasn't actually been given an oppertunity at all. Not highlighting his goals and assists.

You can only score against the team put infront of you.

Or were you expecting plenty of goals and assists in the whopping 24 minutes he's played over 4 games in the league?

I don't expect him to be here next year. Not because of his ability, or even his fee. But because he'd be fucking stupid to waste his career.

He has not been given opportunity because he has not been good enough.

Or do enlighten me - what specifically from yesterdays game (which, I once more repeat - was played against weakest side of Championship) would prove that he is worth getting chance in higher level? What did he do that impressed you? Or why are you hiding behind 24 minutes of EPL football, when in fact he had 60 minute against weaker side and contributed nothing.

 

[Totti]

He has not been given opportunity because he has not been good enough.

Again, based on what?

He's played against poor opposition and for the most part, delivered.

Or do enlighten me - what specifically from yesterdays game (which, I once more repeat - was played against weakest side of Championship) would prove that he is worth getting chance in higher level? What did he do that impressed you? Or why are you hiding behind 24 minutes of EPL football, when in fact he had 60 minute against weaker side and contributed nothing.

He wasn't the best yesterday.

But before yesterday, he had started 1 game in a month and a half which was against a team in the 7th tier of English football.

Again, he's suffering the exact same thing Llorente suffered from (And every single striker we sign going forward whilst Kane is here will suffer from). Lack of minutes to keep match sharpness up because managers are frightened of taking Kane off when things aren't working or going all out when needing something different and putting a striker on to play alongside him.

What HAS he done that's impressed me since he's been here? He's shown intelligence. His hold up play has been good. He works hard and for the most part when he's started, he tends to have a hand in goals.

But I am not going to isolate one game from his that was poor as an excuse as to why he "isn't good enough" because that's a stupid angle. And you know it. I could also name about 5 games of Gareth Bale this season to prove why he is a waste of the wages we are paying him - but I am not going too because he isn't match fit and won't be by getting games here and there.

Or should I not support our back up striker?

How any striker, who has 6 goals and 3 assists in 500 odd minutes can be criticised because he was subpar against a Championship side whilst surrounded by our B team is beyond me. Especially when Gareth Bales performance (against the same bang average side) is getting praised and calls of "Bale being back" - lol

 

[Sir Archibald Crooks]

Been banging this drum for years but this is more proof we dont need a back up centre forward. What we need is another Son type that can play up front or in the 3 with Kane and Son. Any back up to Kane is such a drop in quality he wont ever get a proper chance against decent opposition.

 

[Nawh]

He is just here to prevent a Kane injury ...
Very hard to blame him when he has to play with Lamela , Moura and Bale ...
He is enough skilled to score with Tanguy, Son and Bergjwin .

 

[BernardMatthews]

Most surprising thing I learnt today.

Vinny is the same age as Luke Shaw. WTF.

Who is the same age as Anthony Martial.

Who is the same age as Jack Grealish.

Who is the same age as Pierre Hjolberg.


And who could all, feasibly, currently be playing for Spurs!!!
Decent set of 25 year olds there.
Apart from Vinny!! (That’s a bit harsh. But true)

Mind blown!!

 

[StripiestPilot]

If we could buy him for £10-15m I would take him. I think he's adequate as a player whose role is to prevent or delay Kane's participation in cup matches against really inferior opponents.

I think we can probably find a better, more versatile player to be our reserve striker though. I agree with many of the earlier posts that a player more like Son would be better for the squad. If Bale can get to a better level he'd probably be a better option as a striker than Vinicius.

 

[Totti]

Been banging this drum for years but this is more proof we dont need a back up centre forward. What we need is another Son type that can play up front or in the 3 with Kane and Son. Any back up to Kane is such a drop in quality he wont ever get a proper chance against decent opposition.

Yep - a few of us have said the same for years.

We need someone who can be back up to Son ASWELL as back up to Kane if either of them need a rest of either of them get injured.

Alassane Pléa would have been good and we were linked a few years back - but that's the sort of profile we need to go for, in my opinion. Player capable of playing up top but also able to play out wide so can also play WITH Kane and Son.

 

[TheSpurEst]

Again, based on what?

He's played against poor opposition and for the most part, delivered.


He wasn't the best yesterday.

But before yesterday, he had started 1 game in a month and a half which was against a team in the 7th tier of English football.

Again, he's suffering the exact same thing Llorente suffered from (And every single striker we sign going forward whilst Kane is here will suffer from). Lack of minutes to keep match sharpness up because managers are frightened of taking Kane off when things aren't working or going all out when needing something different and putting a striker on to play alongside him.

What HAS he done that's impressed me since he's been here? He's shown intelligence. His hold up play has been good. He works hard and for the most part when he's started, he tends to have a hand in goals.

But I am not going to isolate one game from his that was poor as an excuse as to why he "isn't good enough" because that's a stupid angle. And you know it. I could also name about 5 games of Gareth Bale this season to prove why he is a waste of the wages we are paying him - but I am not going too because he isn't match fit and won't be by getting games here and there.

Or should I not support our back up striker?

How any striker, who has 6 goals and 3 assists in 500 odd minutes can be criticised because he was subpar against a Championship side whilst surrounded by our B team is beyond me. Especially when Gareth Bales performance (against the same bang average side) is getting praised and calls of "Bale being back" - lol

Based on what?!? Based on common logic.
Players game time is reflection of how good or bad they are in eyes of the manager and staff.

I cannot understand how anyone with any glimmer of common sense does not understand that if player does not play much, it means that he is not deemed good enough.
Or are you suggesting that Mourinho just hates him for no reason? And intentionally leaves player out to get worse results?

Of course his hold up play can be good, playing against tired post workers and random clerks. And sure he can have hand in goals against such opposition. Really sad if he wouldn't.

I absolutely do not "know it" what you claim me to know. All I know is that if player wants to prove his value and worth, he has to perform well in those instances that he gets. He was not trusted against top 6 side in Championship, then was trusted against amateurs where he did well. Now he got his chance against weakest side in Champo and played badly. Blaming his awful performance on "playing with B side" is absurd, given that he was beaten man-against-man situations essentially 100% after taking down one ball within first 2 minutes.

Sure, I can agree that it is difficult with such limited playing time, and generally being back-up to Kane is tricky position. But every chance has to be earned. Among those minutes you quoted he was poor against Wycombe and also in 1st match against Antwerpen where he was withdrawn on interval. Sure, again here you can make a claim that Mourinho intentionally wanted to weaken the team and took off high performer, but thats not the line of thought I buy in.

In conclusion - he is so far deemed to be good enough only to play against weaker opposition, and even against them he has already had 2 bad performances where he has been 1st or 2nd player to be taken off. That is just poor and I can't understand why anyone would argue against it.

P.S No idea why do you bring Bale into this... I have not mentioned him nor assumed he would be back to anything. Guess you just run out of actually relevant things to say and revert the discussion to somewhere else.

 

[Totti]

Based on what?!? Based on common logic.
Players game time is reflection of how good or bad they are in eyes of the manager and staff.

I cannot understand how anyone with any glimmer of common sense does not understand that if player does not play much, it means that he is not deemed good enough.
Or are you suggesting that Mourinho just hates him for no reason? And intentionally leaves player out to get worse results?

Of course his hold up play can be good, playing against tired post workers and random clerks. And sure he can have hand in goals against such opposition. Really sad if he wouldn't.

I absolutely do not "know it" what you claim me to know. All I know is that if player wants to prove his value and worth, he has to perform well in those instances that he gets. He was not trusted against top 6 side in Championship, then was trusted against amateurs where he did well. Now he got his chance against weakest side in Champo and played badly. Blaming his awful performance on "playing with B side" is absurd, given that he was beaten man-against-man situations essentially 100% after taking down one ball within first 2 minutes.

Sure, I can agree that it is difficult with such limited playing time, and generally being back-up to Kane is tricky position. But every chance has to be earned. Among those minutes you quoted he was poor against Wycombe and also in 1st match against Antwerpen where he was withdrawn on interval. Sure, again here you can make a claim that Mourinho intentionally wanted to weaken the team and took off high performer, but thats not the line of thought I buy in.

In conclusion - he is so far deemed to be good enough only to play against weaker opposition, and even against them he has already had 2 bad performances where he has been 1st or 2nd player to be taken off. That is just poor and I can't understand why anyone would argue against it.

P.S No idea why do you bring Bale into this... I have not mentioned him nor assumed he would be back to anything. Guess you just run out of actually relevant things to say and revert the discussion to somewhere else.

Bollocks lol.

Vinicius could have scored back to back hatrricks in games and he still wouldn't have got a look in.

You understand who our striker is right?

I don't think Mourinho hates him. I just don't think he's got the Bollocks to rest Kane when he needs resting/sub him off when he's been absolutely garbage.

And this'll be the same story with every single striker we have until Kane retires or leaves.

Its not because Vinicius isn't good enough. That's a terribly lazy narrative. It's because Mourinho rates Kane too much and he'd be blamed if he didn't play Kane and we ended up losing.

I brought Bale into it because I'm pretty sure you started crying when people bashed his performances in his thread. Despite playing against the same average clubs and being out performed by Vinicius.

In conclusion - he only plays against the lower teams because those are the only games Mourinho is going to rest Kane for.

Only can a Spurs fan moan that a player has a hand in 9 goals in 5 starts only to then bash him not performing against the better teams he isn't playing against.

Never change.

 

[TheSpurEst]

Bollocks lol.

Vinicius could have scored back to back hatrricks in games and he still wouldn't have got a look in.

You understand who our striker is right?

I don't think Mourinho hates him. I just don't think he's got the Bollocks to rest Kane when he needs resting/sub him off when he's been absolutely garbage.

And this'll be the same story with every single striker we have until Kane retires or leaves.

Its not because Vinicius isn't good enough. That's a terribly lazy narrative. It's because Mourinho rates Kane too much and he'd be blamed if he didn't play Kane and we ended up losing.

I brought Bale into it because I'm pretty sure you started crying when people bashed his performances in his thread. Despite playing against the same average clubs and being out performed by Vinicius.

In conclusion - he only plays against the lower teams because those are the only games Mourinho is going to rest Kane for.

Only can a Spurs fan moan that a player has a hand in 9 goals in 5 starts only to then bash him not performing against the better teams he isn't playing against.

Never change.

Yes, sure. Lets agree on it that Mou is an idiot without grasp of context and he has no balls.
And you are the beacon of light, who is able to assess the class of players perfectly. Very good middle ground.

Despite the fact that after scoring hat-trick against amateurs, he got the chance but made a mistake with almost every single involvement in the game.

Regarding Bale, sure.. at some point I might have been saying that give him a opportunity. He got a start in EPL, he did not take it, and ever since I've not been complaining about anything regarding him. In fact I might have mentioned that unfortunately he is done. Now same with Vinicius - showed some promise, got his chance, was absolute crap against lot weaker side- sit back down.

"Only can a Spurs fan moan that a player has a hand in 9 goals in 5 starts only to then bash him not performing against the better teams he isn't playing against." - that is one way to put it.
Or "Player who is only able to score against very weak teams and is even 1st one to be hooked in 2 of those 5 starts not good enough of a striker. Player who fails to stay onside and even after having advantage of distance still does not arrive to ball earlier than Championship defender is not good enough of a striker".

 

[The Mercurial No.10]

Did he bang your Mrs. or something?

 

[Totti]

Yes, sure. Lets agree on it that Mou is an idiot without grasp of context and he has no balls.
And you are the beacon of light, who is able to assess the class of players perfectly. Very good middle ground.

Despite the fact that after scoring hat-trick against amateurs, he got the chance but made a mistake with almost every single involvement in the game.

Regarding Bale, sure.. at some point I might have been saying that give him a opportunity. He got a start in EPL, he did not take it, and ever since I've not been complaining about anything regarding him. In fact I might have mentioned that unfortunately he is done. Now same with Vinicius - showed some promise, got his chance, was absolute crap against lot weaker side- sit back down.

"Only can a Spurs fan moan that a player has a hand in 9 goals in 5 starts only to then bash him not performing against the better teams he isn't playing against." - that is one way to put it.
Or "Player who is only able to score against very weak teams and is even 1st one to be hooked in 2 of those 5 starts not good enough of a striker. Player who fails to stay onside and even after having advantage of distance still does not arrive to ball earlier than Championship defender is not good enough of a striker".

I wouldn't say Mourinho was an idiot at all. But he's under pressure to deliver something at Spurs and probably feels like Harry Kane gives him a better chance of that.

You're the stereotypical modern day fan. You're only as good as your last game type. You've made it clear.

Alderweireld got bullied by a striker who was playing in the Scottish League last season. I'm guessing he's not good enough either ey?

We are never going to agree on the matter.

I think a back up striker having a hand in 9 goals in 5 starts is a good return. You think he's not good enough because of one game where he scored the same amount of goals as Harry Kane, who played 20 less minutes.

 

[Gear]

Most surprising thing I learnt today.

Vinny is the same age as Luke Shaw. WTF.

Who is the same age as Anthony Martial.

Who is the same age as Jack Grealish.

Who is the same age as Pierre Hjolberg.


And who could all, feasibly, currently be playing for Spurs!!!
Decent set of 25 year olds there.
Apart from Vinny!! (That’s a bit harsh. But true)

Mind blown!!

Luke Shaw is only 25?! You do mean stone, right?

 

[spursmalc]

He is really here to cover for when/if Kane gets injured. He seems to be off injured every season and if that happens again he will be needed and will have to take his chance with a few games in succession.

 

[TheSpurEst]

I wouldn't say Mourinho was an idiot at all. But he's under pressure to deliver something at Spurs and probably feels like Harry Kane gives him a better chance of that.

You're the stereotypical modern day fan. You're only as good as your last game type. You've made it clear.

Alderweireld got bullied by a striker who was playing in the Scottish League last season. I'm guessing he's not good enough either ey?

We are never going to agree on the matter.

I think a back up striker having a hand in 9 goals in 5 starts is a good return. You think he's not good enough because of one game where he scored the same amount of goals as Harry Kane, who played 20 less minutes.

Yeh, okay, lets just agree to disagree.

You are just like a broken record :
- repeating his goals without any context (very good example of pointing out that Kane also got 0 goals - if you did not see how he was able to control and pass the ball + force the save that resulted in our 2:1 goal - it literally proves that you only look at very high level stats and make your conclusion on those)
- try to divert the discussion about Vinicius with bringing in Bale, Toby and Kane instead of explaining why he was not able to prove anything against Championship bottom team.
- expect that games would just be gifted from good heart and it has nothing to do with the fact that he has started 6 games and against even half decent opponents in 3 occasions he has been taken off early - respectively in 45th minute 58th and 59 th minute - literally only occasions where he has been deemed good enough have been against 8th league side + game against team that ended in bottom of EL group + against LASK. So there is much more to it than last game.
- ignore the specific situations where he failed and jus try to wipe it under the carpet talking about one game, when his track record proves that he has not been deemed good enough to finish half of started games against lesser opponent. Sure, this was "one bad game". Then Antwerp was 2nd bad game. And there was 3rd bad game - so if against inferior side you suck balls 50% of the time - that says something about your quality.

To be clear - my expectations for back-up striker would be that we could in fact afford to give Kane full games off. Which has not been the case as I just pointed out - he has been called upon to see game out in 3 of the 6 games in EL + FA cup game against Wycombe; on top of that he has started 2 games against Championship sides in EFL cup.

 

[Totti]

Yeh, okay, lets just agree to disagree.

You are just like a broken record :
- repeating his goals without any context (very good example of pointing out that Kane also got 0 goals - if you did not see how he was able to control and pass the ball + force the save that resulted in our 2:1 goal - it literally proves that you only look at very high level stats and make your conclusion on those)

Kane has played 210 minutes against Championship teams this season and has 1 goal..

It's not the be all and end all.

Players have poor games. Especially players who don't play week in and week out.

- try to divert the discussion about Vinicius with bringing in Bale, Toby and Kane instead of explaining why he was not able to prove anything against Championship bottom team.

No idea. Because players ARE allowed to have an off game when they get a rare start?

I could tell you that if he was on the pitch when Hojbjerg, Ndombele and Son were all on - he may have actually got on the end of a decent pass and through on goal. Who knows?

- expect that games would just be gifted from good heart and it has nothing to do with the fact that he has started 6 games and against even half decent opponents in 3 occasions he has been taken off early - respectively in 45th minute 58th and 59 th minute - literally only occasions where he has been deemed good enough have been against 8th league side + game against team that ended in bottom of EL group + against LASK. So there is much more to it than last game.

I'm not expecting fuck all.

It's become clear since Kane became the main man that whoever our back up striker is will never get a true chance. And all of us have come to terms with that and it's probably one of many reasons why no one of true true class in that position will sign for us.

- ignore the specific situations where he failed and jus try to wipe it under the carpet talking about one game, when his track record proves that he has not been deemed good enough to finish half of started games against lesser opponent. Sure, this was "one bad game". Then Antwerp was 2nd bad game. And there was 3rd bad game - so if against inferior side you suck balls 50% of the time - that says something about your quality.

He got 45 minutes against Antwerp and scored 0 goals. And like many times in the past, our managers get scared and bring on Kane.

Who got the second 45 minutes and how did they do?

What was this 3rd bad game?

- He got 2 assists on his first start.
- Subbed off on his second start
- Scored 2 and got an assist in his third start.
- Scored in his fourth start.
- Got a hattrick on his fifth start.
- Subbed off in his sixth start.

I'm not the one seeing an issue.

You are.

To be clear - my expectations for back-up striker would be that we could in fact afford to give Kane full games off. Which has not been the case as I just pointed out - he has been called upon to see game out in 3 of the 6 games in EL + FA cup game against Wycombe; on top of that he has started 2 games against Championship sides in EFL cup.

We've given Kane FOUR full games off.

That isn't a back up striker issue. Vinicius has a hand in 8 goals within 3 of those games (In the 4th, Vinicius was out injured)

That's a Mourinho issue. He wants to give Kane minutes and if things aren't going well with the team performance, he will bring Kane on for a sub striker instead of just playing them together (or actually trusting his back up striker) - imagine if we lost a game with Kane on the bench and didn't bring him on!? He'd be crucified.

There was ZERO need for Vinicius to come off at 2-0 up against Antwerp, there was ZERO need for Vinicius to come off on the 86th minute against LASK or even in the 45th minute in the first game against Antwerp.

And there's absolutely no reason as to why Vinicius hasn't made 9 man benches or been brought on when the team need a goal.

He hasn't started 2 games against Championship teams by the way.

He started against Wycombe, that's it. He didn't play against Stoke and played 1 minute against Brentford.

 

[Thin Lilywhite Duke]

He is just here to prevent a Kane injury ...
Very hard to blame him when he has to play with Lamela , Moura and Bale ...
He is enough skilled to score with Tanguy, Son and Bergjwin .

We've also (touch wood) been fortunate with regards to Kane's fitness this season compared to previous (hey - maybe because he hasn't had to play much European football thus far).

It's by no means implausible that Kane picks up one of his annual injuries and Vinicius gets to properly show what he's made of. Then cue a hard reversal of opinion from those saying we don't need a backup striker.

 

[El Magnifico]

Think he is decent enough just dont think he is the kind of player we should keep for that role

 

[1966]

I see both sides of the argument but what I wouldn't do at this time is use G/A stats from low-level games as a key point of contention. Those stats can't be directly compared to any of the first XI players due to the wildly differing level of opposition. And his most statistically impressive performance to date included two almost unmissable tap-ins from about one yard.

The eye test is the way to go here. I think he looks like a decent enough player. Decent enough to do the job he's probably meant to do, which is to score in these cup matches against lesser opposition. He looks like he could possibly do a job in the PL but at what level is basically guesswork from the number of minutes he's had so far. I don't think he was bought with the intention of finding his true level out.

 

[BAE32]

Think he is decent enough just dont think he is the kind of player we should keep for that role

I'm not so sure - I think his skillset matches exactly what we need for that role. Big, strong, quick, can play with back to goal and link play. That's what we need in a Kane backup.

Just a shame that he isn't a proper youngster and comes with a fat pricetag... maybe will be held against him when it comes to deciding if he stays permanently. If he was more of an unknown/punt type player it would be a no-brainer, but his success in other leagues has meant that it's not so easy.