Tottenham Hotspur vs Chelsea. 4.30 Sunday 19th September. EPL

  • 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...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Very interesting - thank you for posting. Makes me feel a bit better. It’s a shame we didn’t have a plan B after Tuchel made his changes.
I’d love to be able to read a game of football like that though.
I can see the game quite well I believe (still easier when actually playing it than watching) but I'm useless at spotting a tactical change(s) made by the oppo, it's obvious that player 'x' has been brought on but it's really hard to assess what they are doing that's changed/improved their team and even harder to work out what needs to be done to counter it.

But I was hugely impressed with the first half, I never expected we'd play with a high press under Nuno. His comments after the game have also given me some positive vibes as he's said he wants to build on that (whether he does we'll just have to see).

Somewhat difficult to have a plan b when your bench is still massively light, it somewhat reduces the options. A complete guess here but if Bergwign or Lucas were on the bench that might have still enabled us to get behind Chavs with longs balls and for us to drop into a midblock??? For me though, any plan goes out the window once the control of midfield is conceded, this is our issue.
 
I admire your optimism but we got spanked 3-0 at home in a London derby. I don't care how good Chelsea are that's simply unacceptable. We've given them more of a game in the past when the disparity between the sides has been much more pronounced.

Just comes across as spin.
Why are you aiming your comments at me? I didn't write the article, the bloke that did is one of the most respected analytics writers in the game, call him out as spin, it's his piece, not mine.
 
It took longer than a nights sleep to process the game but having got home from work I feel a whole lot better. We were the better team in the 1st half and should have been leading at the break- 2nd half the introduction of Kante and change of system saw Chelsea dominate but for the infuriating inability to defend a corner and a cruel deflection we would have been well in the game.
Other observations Chelsea are going to take some stopping
I think both Romeo and Emerson will prove to be great additions to the team
In the first half lo celso and ndombele looked like the expensive signings they are
We definitely need a striker and an AM in January - it is criminal that we did not do more business in the summer
 
Yes it was down to luck, if we spent £1bn on players hoping to reach the top then at the top collapsed into debt like Leeds you wouldn’t call it prudent.

Abramovich was originally going to buy us not Chelsea before deciding he didn’t like the area and Chelsea would have gone into receivership and we would have been minted. That’s fate, Leeds did the same as Chelsea, one collapse, one got a lucky buy out.
Again, you are completely ignoring the fact that the club knew exactly what they doing by going 100 million into debt and why they were doing it.
Again, there was no plan at Leeds other than a short-term chucking money at CL football.
Chelsea would probably have gone out of business if they had not rebuilt the ground, brought in quality players and got the crowds flocking back to the bridge.

Also, pre RA, they not only won trophies and were third when he took over, they also got to the CL QF and only going out by one goal to Barca after having a man sent off.
Also finished 4 points off top under Vialli with two draws against champs Utd. One goal in each and Chelsea would have been champs

Finally. The billion pounds is a bit disingenuous. Chelsea have made a ton of money on transfers. The net spend over the entire RA era is only 400 million. In the last 7 years the club is nowhere the net spend of City or Utd.
Net spend per trophies won, Chelsea come out on top of value for money spending.
 
Why are you aiming your comments at me? I didn't write the article, the bloke that did is one of the most respected analytics writers in the game, call him out as spin, it's his piece, not mine.
You chose to post it

TLDR
 
Again, you are completely ignoring the fact that the club knew exactly what they doing by going 100 million into debt and why they were doing it.
Again, there was no plan at Leeds other than a short-term chucking money at CL football.
Chelsea would probably have gone out of business if they had not rebuilt the ground, brought in quality players and got the crowds flocking back to the bridge.

Also, pre RA, they not only won trophies and were third when he took over, they also got to the CL QF and only going out by one goal to Barca after having a man sent off.
Also finished 4 points off top under Vialli with two draws against champs Utd. One goal in each and Chelsea would have been champs

Finally. The billion pounds is a bit disingenuous. Chelsea have made a ton of money on transfers. The net spend over the entire RA era is only 400 million. In the last 7 years the club is nowhere the net spend of City or Utd.
Net spend per trophies won, Chelsea come out on top of value for money spending.

Chelsea's debt to RA is reported as being anywhere between 1.2 and 1.7 billion.
 
Again, you are completely ignoring the fact that the club knew exactly what they doing by going 100 million into debt and why they were doing it.
Again, there was no plan at Leeds other than a short-term chucking money at CL football.
Chelsea would probably have gone out of business if they had not rebuilt the ground, brought in quality players and got the crowds flocking back to the bridge.

Also, pre RA, they not only won trophies and were third when he took over, they also got to the CL QF and only going out by one goal to Barca after having a man sent off.
Also finished 4 points off top under Vialli with two draws against champs Utd. One goal in each and Chelsea would have been champs

Finally. The billion pounds is a bit disingenuous. Chelsea have made a ton of money on transfers. The net spend over the entire RA era is only 400 million. In the last 7 years the club is nowhere the net spend of City or Utd.
Net spend per trophies won, Chelsea come out on top of value for money spending.

so you are suggesting that Chelsea and Ken Bates got Chelsea into massive debt knowing Abramovich was going to turn up and save them at the last moment?

As for debt last time I read that was closer to £1.7bn.
 
They were buying success when they took over us, difference was pre Russian they were about to go bust because of it.
If you look at the numbers the net spend of Spurs and Chelsea from the introduction of the PL to the time Abromavich turned up is not that much difference it’s within about £8 -£10 million

Bates got into trouble because the Bonds taken out were maturing and also following Matthew Harding’s death his widow was calling in the loan.

Chelsea's debt to RA is reported as being anywhere between 1.2 and 1.7 billion.

Thems the headline figures but it’s far more complex than that. In effect he owes himself between £1.2 and £1.7billion

RA has invested around that sum into Chelsea’s holding company. That sum includes the money he paid to buy out Bates and other shareholders, the sum to clear their debts and of course huge investment in their squad

RA owns 100% of Chelsea valued around £2 billion and that has cost him at most £1.7 billion. In effect it’s a soft loan and I believe remains on the books because it’s potentially tax efficient
 
If you look at the numbers the net spend of Spurs and Chelsea from the introduction of the PL to the time Abromavich turned up is not that much difference it’s within about £8 -£10 million

Bates got into trouble because the Bonds taken out were maturing and also following Matthew Harding’s death his widow was calling in the loan.

Thems the headline figures but it’s far more complex than that. In effect he owes himself between £1.2 and £1.7billion

RA has invested around that sum into Chelsea’s holding company. That sum includes the money he paid to buy out Bates and other shareholders, the sum to clear their debts and of course huge investment in their squad

RA owns 100% of Chelsea valued around £2 billion and that has cost him at most £1.7 billion. In effect it’s a soft loan and I believe remains on the books because it’s potentially tax efficient

Yes, it's a "soft" loan (that's not a proper financial term is it?) if that's how you want to phrase it..... But as far as the books go it's a loan none-the-less and thus he can still call that debt in whenever he wants.

Which would leave them royally fucked.
 
If you look at the numbers the net spend of Spurs and Chelsea from the introduction of the PL to the time Abromavich turned up is not that much difference it’s within about £8 -£10 million

Bates got into trouble because the Bonds taken out were maturing and also following Matthew Harding’s death his widow was calling in the loan.



Thems the headline figures but it’s far more complex than that. In effect he owes himself between £1.2 and £1.7billion

RA has invested around that sum into Chelsea’s holding company. That sum includes the money he paid to buy out Bates and other shareholders, the sum to clear their debts and of course huge investment in their squad

RA owns 100% of Chelsea valued around £2 billion and that has cost him at most £1.7 billion. In effect it’s a soft loan and I believe remains on the books because it’s potentially tax efficient
Even if Roman decides to sell which he won't for a long time it should not be too much of an issue for the new potential owners.
If rumours that ENIC want around 2 billion for a club like ours which is smaller and far less successful than Chelsea it will be no problem for anyone buying them.
 
Choose to look on the bright side all you want but that was the latest in a long list of fucking appalling defeats over the last 2 seasons where the players just gave up.

To take the fact we weren't beaten by half time as some huge positive positive is a fucking nonsense.
 
Had to split post into two as too many images.

Cont...................

As the physios attended to Son and Kepa after that collision, Azpilicueta came over to talk to Tuchel, perhaps discussing a change of system. And when play restarts, Mason Mount has now altered his position — having previously been part of the front three, he’s now part of a midfield trio, with Jorginho in the holding role and Kovacic becoming a No 8. Chelsea have moved from 3-4-3 to 3-5-2 in possession, or 5-2-3 to 5-3-2 out of possession.
G2-2.png

This immediately helped Chelsea cope with those two aforementioned problems. Here, Kane is again looking to drop deep, but there’s no need for Christensen or Jorginho to follow him because Mount is blocking any potential pass.
H1-2.png

Similarly, Chelsea had fewer problems against Spurs’ actual midfielders. Here, Mount indicates that he’s concentrating on tracking Dele, and although Ndombele has time on the ball here, at least the space is in front of Chelsea’s midfield, rather than in behind it.
H2-2.png

Mount had been asked to shift into a role he was less comfortable in, so Tuchel decided it was worthwhile introducing N’Golo Kante in his place.
Kante immediately got to work, winning a tackle inside the Tottenham half within 30 seconds.
J1-1.png

Now, Chelsea were competing properly in midfield and started to get the upper hand. Here’s a three against three in that zone, with Hojbjerg unable to get up the pitch quickly enough to shut down Jorginho, and Kante sneaking in behind Dele to receive the ball between the lines. This was the attack that ended with Chelsea winning a corner, from which Silva headed home the opener.
K1.png

And now it was Chelsea finding space on either side of Tottenham’s midfield. For their second goal, Kante, Jorginho and Kovacic worked the ball across the midfield neatly…
L1.png

…and the attack ended with Kante finding oceans of space. Dier, highlighted, knows someone has to shut him down — but it’s Dier who ends up deflecting the ball past his own goalkeeper, effectively ending the contest.
But Tottenham did cause Chelsea serious problems in the first half here, particularly in those zones on either side of Jorginho and Kovacic.
Tuchel fixed the problem with a change of system, but with his wealth of attacking options, he’ll be reluctant to be forced into a 5-3-2 every week. Opponents have spent much of 2021 wondering precisely where you find space against Tuchel’s 3-4-3. Tottenham might have found the answer.

"I think both managers came out of it well."

Absolute nonsense. One of those managers lost 3 - 0 at home.
 
Yes, it's a "soft" loan (that's not a proper financial term is it?) if that's how you want to phrase it..... But as far as the books go it's a loan none-the-less and thus he can still call that debt in whenever he wants.

Which would leave them royally fucked.
A soft loan is a loan with no interest or a below-market rate of interest. Also known as "soft financing" or "concessional funding," soft loans have lenient terms, such as extended grace periods in which only interest or service charges are due, and interest holidays.
 
Between 96/97 and the 2003/04 season they finished 6th, 4th, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 6th, 4th, 2nd for an average of "4.5th"
In that same period. we finished 13th, 11th, 11th, 15th, 13th, 14th, 14th, 13th for an average league position of 13th
You've listed the number of Wins, not the league positions there.
It was 10, 14, 11, 10, 12,9, 10, 14th, average of 11. (Still awful and your point stands)
 
I think people are being a bit harsh on Nuno - what he set out to do in the first half was clearly working better than what he had at Palace. For instance, Ndombele and Lo Celso combined 16 times in 60 minutes yesterday. Their counterparts against Palace, Dele and Skipp, only combined 13 times in 90 minutes.

I've been very skeptical of Nuno from the start, but he played the best players and had a plan that utilized their talents against one of the best teams in Europe. That's progress at least, and right now, with this team, progress is something.
 
How much have we won since 91?

That was 30 years ago. I reckon at least 1/4 of the fans in our stadium yesterday weren't born when we won the FA Cup.

Between us winning the 91 FA Cup and Abramavic buying them, they won it in 97 and 2000, they won the league cup in 98, Uefa Cup Winners Cup winners 98, Uefa Super Cup 98,

Tell me with a straight face they weren't already well ahead of us?

Still not convinced?

Between 96/97 and the 2003/04 season they finished 6th, 4th, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 6th, 4th, 2nd for an average of "4.5th"
In that same period. we finished 13th, 11th, 11th, 15th, 13th, 14th, 14th, 13th for an average league position of 13th

Have you also forgotten that prior to the Jol team of 2006, we hadn't beaten them in a single league game for SIXTEEN years (32 league matches)

Like it or not, they were already comfortably better than us when Abramovic bought them.
In 1993 Harding and Bates took over Chelsea and started spending money like water, developing the ground, Chelsea Village etc. They also started buy elite players and sinking millions into the team to achieve success. What they got for their outlay were the cups you listed, not the league or the European cup. When Harding died it all started to fall apart as they had been spending money they didn't have in the hope it won them the big prize.
What happened in that period is a smaller version of what happened when Abramovich arrived. Chelsea were on the verge of being wound up, because they were in so much debt and couldn't pay it off without them selling their site to developers, meaning they would have to ground share, sell off their player assets and try to rebuild - a glorious moment for all Spurs fans - and then the Russian fairy godmother rocked up (and spoiled everything!)

Basically, Chelsea have been buying success from 93 with money they didn't earn, financially or in terms of on field success.

That's not to say that their football teams haven't deserved to win their games and their trophies - it's just that had the club gone about their business in the same way as every other club has had to (excluding the other frauds in Manchester), they would be another West Ham -either that or be extinct or hacking around in the southern league
 
Last edited:
I can see the game quite well I believe (still easier when actually playing it than watching) but I'm useless at spotting a tactical change(s) made by the oppo, it's obvious that player 'x' has been brought on but it's really hard to assess what they are doing that's changed/improved their team and even harder to work out what needs to be done to counter it.

But I was hugely impressed with the first half, I never expected we'd play with a high press under Nuno. His comments after the game have also given me some positive vibes as he's said he wants to build on that (whether he does we'll just have to see).

Somewhat difficult to have a plan b when your bench is still massively light, it somewhat reduces the options. A complete guess here but if Bergwign or Lucas were on the bench that might have still enabled us to get behind Chavs with longs balls and for us to drop into a midblock??? For me though, any plan goes out the window once the control of midfield is conceded, this is our issue.
Agreed, our midfield fell apart when Kante arrived, because they didn't have the fitness to keep up with him. If N'dombele can regain full match fitness (has he ever had it?) and LoCelso can find some form and inspiration, we might have a challenging midfield.
Romero fully fit could be our new Toby
 
Back
Top Bottom