We beat City.... We have better players too?
(......And so the wheel keeps turning.)
...How about Pacos?
How about etc........
-
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...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
We beat City.... We have better players too?
(......And so the wheel keeps turning.)
...How about Pacos?
How about etc........
I’ve got nothing against Conte
I’ve said we need to change out 6 players at least starting in January
Others seem to think he can make some of these players into something. He can’t, because they aren’t good enough and never will be.
That’s why he will buy new ones because he too knows this
They had an intense game Thursday night. These bozos can’t play 2 games a week. They were probably knackered.
As long as you agree to pay the kid who offers to look after your car, you will be fine.I didnt go as recently bought a car. Too big a risk going today.
Considering how shit the team is, it is a good point. As long as we keep picking up some points until the transfer window and then have big changes in january , they are all good points. If anyone between levy and conte thinks the same cunts will become a top 4 team, then we are fucked.
I'm getting fed up with the shots "on target" stat.
Who had the better chances?
If we use that stat, Everton were as they had 2 shots on target to our none.
If you look AT the shots however it tells a different story. Ben Godfrey from fully 25 along the carpet at such a slow pace Lloris could smoked a fag and poured a glass of wine before picking up. The other was a scuffed volley from outside the box that might not even have made it as far as the goal. Yay shots on target, bet their fans were ecstatic with that.
Meanwhile, Royal header inside the 6 yard box at point blank range over, Reguilon volley inside the 6 yard box just wide, Davies with a curler leaving the keeper no chance just wide, GLG off the post with the keeper beat.
How exactly have we got to s stage where utterly fucking pitiful shots are somehow a measure of how a teams attacking prowess. How can anyone be looking at the two teams yesterday and say Everton had better chances than us when they didn't ever look like scoring. They had no chances that made me puff my cheeks out. They didn't look like they'd have even scored the penalty tbh.
I'm not one to lean on it, but xG says something different 0.52 Vs 0.78
Neither brilliant but it shows we had chances in better positions and just missed. More of that please, rather than pointless long rangers to keep the keepers hands warm.
Who had the better chances?
If we use that stat, Everton were as they had 2 shots on target to our none.
If you look AT the shots however it tells a different story. Ben Godfrey from fully 25 along the carpet at such a slow pace Lloris could smoked a fag and poured a glass of wine before picking up. The other was a scuffed volley from outside the box that might not even have made it as far as the goal. Yay shots on target, bet their fans were ecstatic with that.
Meanwhile, Royal header inside the 6 yard box at point blank range over, Reguilon volley inside the 6 yard box just wide, Davies with a curler leaving the keeper no chance just wide, GLG off the post with the keeper beat.
How exactly have we got to s stage where utterly fucking pitiful shots are somehow a measure of how a teams attacking prowess. How can anyone be looking at the two teams yesterday and say Everton had better chances than us when they didn't ever look like scoring. They had no chances that made me puff my cheeks out. They didn't look like they'd have even scored the penalty tbh.
I'm not one to lean on it, but xG says something different 0.52 Vs 0.78
Neither brilliant but it shows we had chances in better positions and just missed. More of that please, rather than pointless long rangers to keep the keepers hands warm.
Having slept on it, I feel that as a team we started to show a bit more of the evelebty I know we possess. Two exceptions to that were Kane & Reguilon. I expect disagrees but, for differing reasons, I wasn't impressed with either of them. For the short time he was on (can hardly believe I'm going to type this) I was more comfortable with Doherty than Reguilon.
Overall, I thought the team pressed really well, displayed a great deal of quick, one-touch stuff, and passed the ball so much better than on Thursday. If we'd have had our old scoring boots on, we could have stuffed them - but we don't get goals these days, do we?
Overall, I thought the team pressed really well, displayed a great deal of quick, one-touch stuff, and passed the ball so much better than on Thursday. If we'd have had our old scoring boots on, we could have stuffed them - but we don't get goals these days, do we?
There were some passing passages in the middle in the 2nd half that had me open my eyes a little bit. Mainly because I don't think I've seen us do it for years. The problem is, we opened up space and the screwed up the last pass and no one player was consistent in doing it. Saw Kane, Son, PEH and others all fail to see the best pass or make a total mess of it. I thought Royal and Reguilon were pushing up, hugging the line and not getting the ball too often.
On a side, note, I wish it was Richarlson who was in trouble rather than Siggy, he's such a total c**t. That coming together with Romero was so staged, he put his head in first them threw himself on the floor.
It's the new " trophies" schtick...
For sure. You could hit the woodwork a dozen times but that would still be trumped by a feeble effort straight at the keeper
Totally agree...
I'm still not sure I believe how a shot onto the post isn't 'on target' ....'cos if it goes IN off the post (as opposed to bounce out) are you telling me that the all important stats would read;
1 Goal scored/0 Shots on target?? It's ridiculous!
If it beats the 'keeper and goes wide, I get it, the 'keeper is protecting his goal, and probably has his angles right... but if beats the 'keeper, but hits the post, whether it goes in or out, it's a posts' width of the FRAME of the goal... which is, by all accounts is THE target!
Maybe your answer's there in your post? If the ball goes in or has to be cleared/saved, it's on target, but if it bounces out, it's not on target?
Ireland a third world country?! are you one of those lads with a Union Jack in your twitter handle? Ireland is Richer per-capita than England.
educate yourself before throwing out meek racial slurs.
But it still hits the frame of the goal.... which IS the target, whether it has more spin/and or a deflection to help it go in is missing the point. If the keeper misses it, and it hits the post, how is he to know it WON'T bounce in... He doesn't know the trajectory or spin on the ball, only the direction... If it beats the keeper and goes IN Off the post OR bounces away, it has already beaten the keeper to hit the target... The rest is up to physics!
A shot that HITS the frame of the goal IS a shot on target, surely? That's whY the keeper is there, to protect his goal: net AND frame!
...and if so, then the 0 shots on target stat was wrong yesterday!
As someone already said, a daisy cutter at a snails' pace that Hugo picks up blindfolded and doesn't particularly bother anyone DOES count a s a shot on target (and adds to the all important Monday morning Opta/xG co-efficient FIFA Pro stats) ...yet a shot that strikes the post of the FRAME of the TARGET, giving us ALL that brief moment of "it's in", doesn't count as a shot on target just 'cos it bounces out?
I feel like Annie Wilkes in Misery.... Am I the only cock a doody person that can SEE THIS?
s'a bit weird, thass all!
Last edited:
There's also the question of blocked shots. If an attempt on goal is cleared off the line it clearly counts as "on target" but where is the boundary? Edge of the six-yard box? The much-maligned Regui had a great shot that was flying in the top corner but was well blocked by a defender standing near the penalty spot, that doesn't count apparently.
No - the frame of the goal isn't the target. It's the area inside the frame of the goal that's the target, so my last post was correct - and Gio's shot, excellent as it nearly was, wasn't on target.
:contesmile:
I disagree because we had really good chances yesterday.
The xG of 0.52 for Everton could well have been more like 0.0 if not for 2 pathetic shots on target.
We got into fantastic positions to score yesterday, especially those 2 fullback chances in the 6 yard box. That means more than simply registering a shot on target to me.
I am glad I wasn’t the only one that’s heard him say it a couple of times, I thought I was going mad!
What does it mean!?!?