• 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!

Transfers Summer 2022 Transfer Thread.

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Raumdeuterz said:
I didn't even mention RWB. You don't have to jump the gun on apologism this much, jesus.

I'm not gonna reel off a pointless list of RWB'S and CB'S who I think the club could sign. It's an entirely pointless exercise which proves nothing other than access to the internet. I find it strange we've been told there's a dearth of quality in a position and Chelsea have signed 3 players there. I'm sure they haven't signed the only 3 ones who are worth a damn.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You said," Loads of posters who pride themselves on being rational & calm were saying it was right we didn't spend big on a CB as the options were not available, same as with right back."
Who exactly told who that there is a dearth of quality CB available? Chelski needed 2 new CB as they had lost Rüdiger and Christensen, so they (over)paid £75m for Fofana and £33m Koulibaly - neither of them being LCB. And then Chelski paid £77m for Gvardiol (well, the deal is not done yet), a player Spurs for sure had been interested in but could not compete with Chelski.
So maybe there wasn't so much quality available for a "fair" price.
Even PSG had to give up on Skriniar and Man City gave up on over-priced Cucurella, so it was not only Spurs that failed to get what they wanted.
Without claiming that Lenglet will be a hit at Spurs, at least let's give him a chance.
 
Last edited:
TomHotspur said:
This is really a situation where we need to go full Man United in the way they voiced their displeasure at the Arnautavic rumours which stopped the club signing him.

As others have said, nothing personal against the bloke, but seriously, Dan James? We’re supposed to be a Champions League club ffs. And as someone pointed out, the guy doesn’t even properly fulfil the Home Grown quota so there’s not even that excuse for the apologists to trot out!

Jesus wept it’s just embarrassing on every level.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You want supporters to kick off at a rumour? Utd fans kicked off because they actually put a bid in
 
Maureen said:
Unless for some last minute panic buy
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think they'll be panicking yet, still two days left and Para will have his fingers in all sorts of pies.

None of us want Dan James or muscles and I don't rate either but I can see why they might be on the list (albeit way down) considering our soak it up and hit em quickly on the break tactics.

Would prefer Gil on loan as he won't play much this season at Spurs but we need a proper alternative to Kulu and that isn't the two speedsters above.
 
Suppose the question is what do you think we do when teams figure how to play against us ie they defend deep countering our counter. What do we do when we are sat aimlessly passing the ball around 25 yards out with no MF capable of that nudged ball in to the space? Hoj? Bents? Bissouma? We need that accurate ball player. You could argue Kulu has it in him from the wing, but I'd guess maybe other teams would seek to stop that.

Conte has already suggested it's role we need filled.
 
StevenPL said:
Suppose the question is what do you think we do when teams figure how to play against us ie they defend deep countering our counter. What do we do when we are sat aimlessly passing the ball around 25 yards out with no MF capable of that nudged ball in to the space? Hoj? Bents? Bissouma? We need that accurate ball player. You could argue Kulu has it in him from the wing, but I'd guess maybe other teams would seek to stop that.

Conte has already suggested it's role we need filled.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The outside CBs are eventually supposed to make runs into the box or shoot from distance (see the Bastoni highlight reels). Our backline moves progressively higher, constricts play, collects clearances, and recycles the ball to the attack for more chance creation. Eventually enough chances are created for a goal to be scored and play to reset.
 
r-u-s-x said:
You can't average total xG in that way and make meaningful conclusions.

Using your numbers they could have had had one shot at 0.7 and the others 0.005 would that be better than an "average xG" of 0.15...answer is you can't say as xG doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Their best chance was 0.13 xG and it wasn't the header from Nunes. Then you can divide the remaining 0.58 xG by 19 shots and it's even more dismal. I agree that averaging the xG is not really correct, but when you see 20 shots for a combined 0.71 and 11 shots for a combined 1.67, you can conclude that the team with more than double the xG 1.67 on half the shots did have the better chances. If it was the other way around (11 shots for 0.71 vs 20 shots for 1.67), that would be a different story and you would need to look at each individual chance's probability.
 
I hope we find another attacker to bring in- I feel a bit uneasy about how much Conte really trusts Gil in the present. Malinovsky on a small fee seemed a good fit but who knows whats happened with all that.
 
Notabadsquad said:
Even if we draw tomorrow I would say it shows we are absolutely on it this season.

Nothing defeatist but if we can play the two teams that somehow find an extra 105 per cent when they at us and away from our home and come away with what we arrived with, then we are absolutely set.

It's our biggest challenge because West Ham will be buoyed by their record signing and winning their first game.

To win we will have to play our best gane so far this season.

I think we start with 3 changes.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fixed.
 
StevenPL said:
Suppose the question is what do you think we do when teams figure how to play against us ie they defend deep countering our counter. What do we do when we are sat aimlessly passing the ball around 25 yards out with no MF capable of that nudged ball in to the space? Hoj? Bents? Bissouma? We need that accurate ball player. You could argue Kulu has it in him from the wing, but I'd guess maybe other teams would seek to stop that.

Conte has already suggested it's role we need filled.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No, Conte has not suggested it is a role we need filled. A whole bunch of "managers" on this forum have suggested that, but not Conte.
 
What a shame we didn't waste £33,000,000 on a 31 year old Koulibaly.

What's that now?

4 starts
1 win (vs Everton)
1 draw (vs Spurs)
2 losses (3-0 vs. Leeds, 2-1 vs. Southampton)
7 goals conceded
1 red card

Disastrous.
 
bk_spur said:
The outside CBs are eventually supposed to make runs into the box or shoot from distance (see the Bastoni highlight reels). Our backline moves progressively higher, constricts play, collects clearances, and recycles the ball to the attack for more chance creation. Eventually enough chances are created for a goal to be scored and play to reset.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Not sure our CBs can create though. Also not sure other teams won't be happy to have them being our outlet. Dier romero Davies, if I was the manager of another team I'd be happy to let that happen all game.... To be honest I doubt conte would see it any differently - allowing the CBs to have the ball is almost an Italian tactic of choice. I'm not against the idea of our tactics I'm just like the idea of having options.
 
Get in! said:
Their best chance was 0.13 xG and it wasn't the header from Nunes. Then you can divide the remaining 0.58 xG by 19 shots and it's even more dismal. I agree that averaging the xG is not really correct, but when you see 20 shots for a combined 0.71 and 11 shots for a combined 1.67, you can conclude that the team with more than double the xG 1.67 on half the shots did have the better chances. If it was the other way around (11 shots for 0.71 vs 20 shots for 1.67), that would be a different story and you would need to look at each individual chance's probability.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I didn't say I thought wolves were better than us just that the way you were using xG didn't prove that point. Again even with those numbers you can't conclude they had better chances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top