• 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!

Ex-Spurs Player Emerson Royal

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Shotgunofmichalebrow said:
Selective memory or just dishonest? Why did I get pissy? You did not make a point about the merits of crossing had you done that I might of engaged in a conversation. You just went straight obtuse BS. No?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

My 'Laughs in Robertson and TAA' comment wasn't meant to be serious at all .. maybe it didn't come across right. I then expanded on what the overall point behind that was but you were in full on defensive mode.

Look, I don't actually mind you as a poster at all ... we disagree perhaps on what constitutes a cross and how effective they are, let's leave it there.
 
Raumdeuterz said:
My 'Laughs in Robertson and TAA' comment wasn't meant to be serious at all .. maybe it didn't come across right. I then expanded on what the overall point behind that was but you were in full on defensive mode.

Look, I don't actually mind you as a poster at all ... we disagree perhaps on what constitutes a cross and how effective they are, let's leave it there.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ah so you see it now. Like I said I'm not Igula
 
ILSpur said:
:pochshock:


Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Breakdown of all crosses

1 - Gets into a decent area. Short lob cross behind Kane who tries a half hearted overhead kick. Really not much Kane can do with that... Kane gets a slight touch so is this a successful cross? If it is, the stat is pointless.

2 - Odd chip cross that is near nobody.

3 - Decent back post ball that ends up with nobody. Our forwards poor spacing is more to blame here.

4 - Doesn't beat first man. Deflection turns it into a semi-dangerous ball, but not a great cross.

5 - One time cross in a dangerous position off a rebounded shot... big chance here but wasn't able to find a teammate.

6 - Decent curl/pace on the ball but nowhere near a runner.

7 - Worst cross/pass of the game. Passes it right to Sissoko and nowhere near a spurs player.

8 - Receives ball in Dangerous area... first time cross isn't terrible but is blocked by first defender.

9 - First time cross reaches Son at the top of the box but its behind him and not much he can do with it. Successful cross per stats but not dangerous.

10 - Decent outside of the foot ball but behind our attackers and leads to a weak header.

11 - Far post ball over the attackers.

12 - Deflected cross, cleared easily by defender.

2nd half

13 - Beats defender 1 on 1 (clumsily but still), far post cross is cleared

14 - Receives ball in dangerous area... decent low, far post cross... PEH and Lucas get in each others way.

15 - Far post cross easily cleared

16 - One time volley across the box that Sonny misses the backheel on. Not entirely sure if this was a cross or shot.

17 - Decent lob cross that Kane challenges but can't cleanly win.

18 - Back post cross in last minute that Kane wins but is straight at the keeper. Probably best chance created.

There were some decent balls but also some really poor ones. However, he was extremely poor on the first half, and all 3 of his best crosses came in the 2nd half, so that explains why everyone was already fixated on how poor his crossing was.

One thing to note is that our forwards runs into the box and heading ability is not strong. On cross #3, we had 2 players near each other in the center and no one at the back post. On cross #14, PEH and Lucas are on top of one another and get in each others way.

Kane is not the same in the air as he was. Lucas is good for his size but still very small. Sonny is not existent. An average crosser is not going to cut it because we aren't great at heading. We need dangerous balls in the box that give our attackers the advantage.

Another thing to note is out of 18 crosses, only one time did he beat a defender. The rest the team created for him.
 
Last edited:
ILSpur said:
They definitely weren't all bad, but I think it's fair to say that the majority of them were not good.

There were a few that were placed directly into the middle of the box, where there was nobody but defenders. Others were rocketed in low and couldn't pass the first man, and then many of the crosses that made it to a Spurs player were often looped in high which gave the defender time to play the ball, or it wouldn't have made for an effective shot as it didn't have much energy to it.

He played his role effectively, did what was asked of him, and put in a good effort all game long. I think the fact that he was rarely marked and thus able to put in so many crosses shows that he wasn't really considered a threat by Watford.

I'm not anti-Emerson by any means but I think it's okay to acknowledge that this isn't the strongest part of his game.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's a perfectly reasonable stance. Absollutely room for improvement and I'd whole-heartedly encourage that.

It's just feels like we're in the midst of an over-stated shit storm.
 
bonaspur23 said:
One thing to note is that our forwards runs into the box and heading ability is not strong. On cross #3, we had 2 players near each other in the center and no one at the back post. On cross #14, PEH and Lucas are on top of one another and get in each others way.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Very true. Considering a number of the crosses were delivered into the middle of the box, you'd normally expect at least some of those to be attacked by a Spurs player, but none were there. On the other hand, I don't know why you would put a ball into that space if there are no players there. Seems like a waste of possession.

I guess it really comes down to an inherent weakness in the team, that the only ways in which we were going to create chances against that set up is to just put a ball into the box and hope for a bit of luck. If we had a little more creativity in and around the box, perhaps we wouldn't have been so dependent on that tactic that obviously wasn't working for 90+ minutes.
 
Raumdeuterz said:
It's a nonsense statement when one of the best teams in the league primarily bases their attacking setup on the ability of their wing backs to get crosses in to the box. How is crossing 'shit' when you have those two getting double figures for assists every season, which is more than most creative midfielders get?

It's clearly effective when done correctly. And I don't mean lumping lofted balls to a target man, but the top teams do use width a lot, and do whip balls in to the box regularly. The two teams crossing the most this season are City and Liverpool ... Klopp and Guardiola clearly don't think it's shit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'd argue that there's a correlation between the best teams and their possession/passes/crosses totals.

Burnley is 5th most in crosses but last (20th) in passes this season.

TAA and Robertsons assists totals are skewed by the fact that they also take corners + free kicks. Many of their assists from "crosses" are more of a "short pass/cutback from the endline" variety... a direct result of their positional responsibilities in Klopp's system.
 
Château NoHo said:
I'd argue that there's a correlation between the best teams and their possession/passes/crosses totals.

Burnley is 5th most in crosses but last (20th) in passes this season.

TAA and Robertsons assists totals are skewed by the fact that they also take corners + free kicks. Many of their assists from "crosses" are more of a "short pass/cutback from the endline" variety... a direct result of their positional responsibilities in Klopp's system.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Crossing is a fundamental part of Klopp’s gameplan at Liverpool. They deliberately funnel it out wide to Robertson/Trent on a regular basis. It’s not just because they have a lot of the ball. The season they won the title they crossed the ball an outrageous amount.

Less integral to City’s overall gameplan but still important. Top teams love to play with width and when you do that you’re inevitably going to end up crossing on a regular basis, and you want to do it with quality.

Guardiola himself has spoken about this after a game before, vs sides who pack out the midfield you have to play with width, and you can’t only rely on cut-backs. Top sides have a varied gameplan and crossing is still a big part of it for a reason.

Crossing is going to be a HUGE part of our game this season, we will rely on the wing backs creating width for our creativity. Hence why Conte spoke openly about the delivery from both sides not being good enough at all.

No top side relies on aimless crosses as their primary source of goals, but very few top sides will not have it as a string to their bow. It only becomes very low % when sides spam them in to the box with low quality deliveries against physical defenders.
 
Raumdeuterz said:
Crossing is a fundamental part of Klopp’s gameplan at Liverpool. They deliberately funnel it out wide to Robertson/Trent on a regular basis. It’s not just because they have a lot of the ball. The season they won the title they crossed the ball an outrageous amount.

Less integral to City’s overall gameplan but still important. Top teams love to play with width and when you do that you’re inevitably going to end up crossing on a regular basis, and you want to do it with quality.

Guardiola himself has spoken about this after a game before, vs sides who pack out the midfield you have to play with width, and you can’t only rely on cut-backs. Top sides have a varied gameplan and crossing is still a big part of it for a reason.

Crossing is going to be a HUGE part of our game this season, we will rely on the wing backs creating width for our creativity. Hence why Conte spoke openly about the delivery from both sides not being good enough at all.

No top side relies on aimless crosses as their primary source of goals, but very few top sides will not have it as a string to their bow. It only becomes very low % when sides spam them in to the box with low quality deliveries against physical defenders.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
IMO, the fullbacks' responsibilities (in order of importance) in Klopp's system are:

1. Offensive. Direct play, providing width and additional numbers in attack. Involved in set plays on their strong foot side.

2. Transitional. High-press/intense defensive pressure in the attacking + middle third when losing possession.

3. Defensive. Recovery/dropping back into the back-4 defensive posture. Typically, 1 or 2 of the CMs (Wijnaldum, Fabinho, Henderson, Milner) will sit deep to cover for the fullbacks, and the 2 CBs will split wide. Klopp likes mobile, defensively solid CMs... the more attacking minded box-to-box types struggle in his system (Keita, Oxlade-Chamberlain).

We may be arguing about semantics here. I just don't think that what TAA + Robertson and what City's fullbacks are doing is "crossing" in the classic English sense. I mean, Pep has smashed transfer-records and gone through about 10 world-class fullbacks (of all varieties) trying to find one that works in his system. Often settling for Zinchenko (LMFAO).

As for quality "crossers" that I'd like to see at Spurs, I'm a huge fan of James Ward-Prowse (criminally under-rated) and Dwight McNeil (we should be all over him if Burnley get relegated).
 
Darnswim said:
Emerson is not good defensively? I've seen it all now in this forum. He's very good defensively, he just can't attack to save his life. I don't think crossing and technique can be coached, so he just won't fit our system under Conte.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Agree but why won’t he fit the system? Surely makes sense to have an attacking RWB and a defensive RWB in the squad? Horses for courses etc
 
Château NoHo said:
We may be arguing about semantics here. I just don't think that what TAA + Robertson and what City's fullbacks are doing is "crossing" in the classic English sense. I mean, Pep has smashed transfer-records and gone through about 10 world-class fullbacks (of all varieties) trying to find one that works in his system. Often settling for Zinchenko (LMFAO).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

They certainly don't play the good old fashioned 'Plan B' traditional winger whipping it in to an Andy Carroll style of play. Which funnily enough Liverpool actually did try (Stewart Downing to Carroll was their big brain plan) before obviously landing on Klopp, who has relied heavily on delivery from fullbacks, but in a more modern style.

But yeah, as Airfixx Airfixx said, I do think it's more of a semantics thing. I'm certainly not suggesting we just continuously throw it in the box as our game-plan. I just do think it's important in this setup (and most others) that the wing backs are comfortable with possession in wide areas, and feel able to play balls in to the box with some degree of quality, whether that's an old fashioned cross or making the right decision/playing the right kind of cut back.

We will face a lot more games like Watford under Conte, where the opposition pack the centre and it's impossible to play there, especially when you don't have a plethora of technically superb midfielders who can excel in tight spaces. In those games, using width well and having wing backs capable of playing that one ball across which unlocks a side could be crucial.
 
Château NoHo said:
IMO, the fullbacks' responsibilities (in order of importance) in Klopp's system are:

1. Offensive. Direct play, providing width and additional numbers in attack. Involved in set plays on their strong foot side.

2. Transitional. High-press/intense defensive pressure in the attacking + middle third when losing possession.

3. Defensive. Recovery/dropping back into the back-4 defensive posture. Typically, 1 or 2 of the CMs (Wijnaldum, Fabinho, Henderson, Milner) will sit deep to cover for the fullbacks, and the 2 CBs will split wide. Klopp likes mobile, defensively solid CMs... the more attacking minded box-to-box types struggle in his system (Keita, Oxlade-Chamberlain).

We may be arguing about semantics here. I just don't think that what TAA + Robertson and what City's fullbacks are doing is "crossing" in the classic English sense. I mean, Pep has smashed transfer-records and gone through about 10 world-class fullbacks (of all varieties) trying to find one that works in his system. Often settling for Zinchenko (LMFAO).

As for quality "crossers" that I'd like to see at Spurs, I'm a huge fan of James Ward-Prowse (criminally under-rated) and Dwight McNeil (we should be all over him if Burnley get relegated).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Zinchenko is a v good player - stick to Gridiron
 
Raumdeuterz said:
They certainly don't play the good old fashioned 'Plan B' traditional winger whipping it in to an Andy Carroll style of play. Which funnily enough Liverpool actually did try (Stewart Downing to Carroll was their big brain plan) before obviously landing on Klopp, who has relied heavily on delivery from fullbacks, but in a more modern style.

But yeah, as Airfixx Airfixx said, I do think it's more of a semantics thing. I'm certainly not suggesting we just continuously throw it in the box as our game-plan. I just do think it's important in this setup (and most others) that the wing backs are comfortable with possession in wide areas, and feel able to play balls in to the box with some degree of quality, whether that's an old fashioned cross or making the right decision/playing the right kind of cut back.

We will face a lot more games like Watford under Conte, where the opposition pack the centre and it's impossible to play there, especially when you don't have a plethora of technically superb midfielders who can excel in tight spaces. In those games, using width well and having wing backs capable of playing that one ball across which unlocks a side could be crucial.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I feel positive (in general) about Emerson. His awkward gait belies and his good size, skill, physicality and elite defending. The Brazilian NT has been giving him a good look.

But if we have nearly 75% possession and Emerson is our touch-leader with +110 touches (followed by the remaining 5 defenders + Højbjerg), I'm going to assume that we're going into stoppage-time 0-0 (or worse).
 
VonnegutBusy said:
What is the evidence Sess can do this?

I know he scored a few tap ins for Fulham in the champo years ago but haven't see much since. He's not much of a dribbler and doesn't beat people. Probably has a better final ball and attacking instincts than Emerson I will admit.

Tbh I'm not sold on any of our current crop as Conte wingbacks.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
He scored 20 in a season as a teenager. Sometimes players have a knack and I see it in him….. makes football look simple
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top