• 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!

Management Ange Postecoglou

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

bus-conductor said:
I know Ange is being lauded for that half time change, and Sarr absolutely played well when he came on, in his given remit in the DP. Defended well and played a fabulous ball for Son’s goal.

But the odd thing is, it (the tactical change) didn't do what he said he wanted it to do. He said he wanted to get more control of midfield. If he meant control of the ball, It failed. Our possession went down from 63% to 53%. As you can see by this data, both match momentum and XThreat momentum and a bunch of other metrics swung more toward West Ham after half time than first half. Even our XG was marginally better first half than second. Their XG marginally better first but not much and nearly all of that was their goal. They had more


View: https://x.com/DataAnalyticEPL/status/1847673626331365681?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1847673626331365681%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=

And it's not like it enabled Kulusevski to contribute more as an orthodox 10, which should be the payoff for switching to a DP behind him, he saw a third of the ball he did in the first half. Personally I’d rather have kept Maddison out there as the 10 (his XA in 45 was double Kulusevski’s in 97).

This is fine, you don't always have to dominate possession, territory or momentum to win games of course, it's just slightly at odds with things Ange has said about how he wants to do things and getting angry when we don't.

We ended up scoring 4 goals from a low ish XG (1.44) game. Two low value chances Kulu and Bissouma were both 0.09, an OG and a great goal from the Sarr pass, Son finish.

It’s good that Ange showed a bit of tactical flexibility, and I suppose the 4231 gives us options and means we have two viable 10’s who can rotate (Maddison/Kulu) but I’m really not sure the tactical change was genius or lucky.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And I thought that VAR was sucking the fun out of the game.

There’s only one stat that matters - who scored the most goals. We did. Just enjoy it.
 
Coys1955 said:
And I thought that VAR was sucking the fun out of the game.

There’s only one stat that matters - who scored the most goals. We did. Just enjoy it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The addiction of breaking down professional football into tiny pieces when you can’t affect any of it seems like a crazy way to spend your downtime. But people enjoy it so just let them get in with it.

Better than going out and buying an 8 ball and 2. bottles of Stoli every day and remixing disco tracks into industrial techno anyway.
I need a new hobby.
 
rusty said:
most of our goals this season are scored by breakaways (only Biss goal today was a possesssion based goal) its recieve & long pass forward and then we create good chances
when we have this possession based football around their box (whoever we are playing) we lack the players with the foot skills to create enough top chances to score, it also draws our CH's up to this High line as they have to be involved in the possession to move their 11 defenders around, thus giving their team the chance of a breakaway
this pass pass pass football works for City as they have 4 out of the 5 forwards playing at any time who have the skills to create space or chances. how many do we have in the squad, yet alone how many in first 11
to me our players create space then turn back to try to create more space (but then the chance has gone)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Mate...

We've scored 12 goals in our last 4 league games, and you don't think we have the "foot skills" to create enough top chances?

Honestly
 
Ionman34 said:
Mate...

We've scored 12 goals in our last 4 league games, and you don't think we have the "foot skills" to create enough top chances?

Honestly
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Scored more goals than 4 of the 6 teams ahead of us. (To clarify that’s goal per game… we’ve actually scored more than anyone else but played more games than others)

are-you-not-entertained-maximus.gif
 
Last edited:
Brian Fantana said:
Either short or to the back post. Statistically most corners are scored at the near post. We didnt hit one there bar an under hit one by son. It was shit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Amazingly, we're still the second best team at creating chances from set pieces in the league. Behind Woolwich, of course.

Though I'm starting to put that down to the fact we have scored from two this season (Romero and Solanke) and the sheer amount of corners we actually get.
 
One of the general rules of the premier league is that the table will often end up reflecting goal difference. Spurs currently third in goal difference. Second in goals for, equal third in goals conceded.

The Brighton game deservedly threw a spanner in the works, but the record shows that over the course of the season should be a genuine top 4 chance.
 
Phomesy said:
if you're so fragile that you're quaking in fear at the prospect of a Paddy Power joke at our expense, I'd politely suggest that Spurs isn't the team for you to be supporting.

Just become an Oil Slaver or Madrid fan boi - hell, why not ride the Tets train at Scum if you're so fucking worried about internet memes from 20 something virgins :roflmao:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Who said I was scared?
I was simply citing the fact the same people give us the "favourite" moniker are also the ones ready for the piss take.
 
dudu said:
Pretty sure the only teams Ange is yet to beat in the prem are City, Chelsea, Woolwich and Wolves.

Now, try again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Beat 9 man Liverpool, just. Lost the other (3/6)
1 draw from 3 with City (inc FAC) 2 losses (1/9)
1 point from 9 vs goons 2 losses (1/9)
W1 L1 Vs Villa (3/6)
3 points from 9 vs Brighton lost 2 (3/9)
0 from 6 vs Chelsea (0/6)
3 points from 9 from Newcastle (3/9)
2 wins from 2 vs Fulham I think. Excellent. (6/6)

That's the top half as at today. Numbers are points won vs points available. (using points for cup game vs City)

Bottom half
2 wins from 2 vs Bournemouth (6/6)
2 wins 1 draw from 3 with United (7/9)
2 wins from 2 vs Forest (6/6)
2 wins, 1 draw vs Brentford (7/9)
1 draw vs Leicester (1/3)
1 win, 1 draw, 1 loss vs Spam (4/9)
2 wins, 1 draw vs Everton (7/9)
Ipswich TBC (NA)
Southampton TBC (NA)
Wolves 0 for 2. (0/6)

Wolves aside. if you can't see that we get way more points from the bottom half than the top half then you're not one for seeing the facts in front of your face.

Look at cup games as well. Lost to fulham on penalties. Lost to City. Beat Coventry, Carrierbag and the other lot.
Pretty consistent against anyone who would struggle to get in the top half of the premier. Inconsistent at best against top half PL teams.
 
Matt1882 said:
Beat 9 man Liverpool, just. Lost the other (3/6)
1 draw from 3 with City (inc FAC) 2 losses (1/9)
1 point from 9 vs goons 2 losses (1/9)
W1 L1 Vs Villa (3/6)
3 points from 9 vs Brighton lost 2 (3/9)
0 from 6 vs Chelsea (0/6)
3 points from 9 from Newcastle (3/9)
2 wins from 2 vs Fulham I think. Excellent. (6/6)

That's the top half as at today. Numbers are points won vs points available. (using points for cup game vs City)

Bottom half
2 wins from 2 vs Bournemouth (6/6)
2 wins 1 draw from 3 with United (7/9)
2 wins from 2 vs Forest (6/6)
2 wins, 1 draw vs Brentford (7/9)
1 draw vs Leicester (1/3)
1 win, 1 draw, 1 loss vs Spam (4/9)
2 wins, 1 draw vs Everton (7/9)
Ipswich TBC (NA)
Southampton TBC (NA)
Wolves 0 for 2. (0/6)

Wolves aside. if you can't see that we get way more points from the bottom half than the top half then you're not one for seeing the facts in front of your face.

Look at cup games as well. Lost to fulham on penalties. Lost to City. Beat Coventry, Carrierbag and the other lot.
Pretty consistent against anyone who would struggle to get in the top half of the premier. Inconsistent at best against top half PL teams.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You're right bar fulham who we lost to 3-0 in one of the games.

Posted this numerous times - but our form against TOP HALF teams last season was good enough that had we collected the points against the BOTTOM half teams - wolves (6) West Ham (4) and Everton (2) Fulham (3) last season - we would have finished level on points with Liverpool on 82 which i don't think anyone can deny would be a good total.

Of course beating the teams in the top half more consistently will help but, I personally think beating the teams we are better than is more important.

Even the Champions last season struggled against the better prem sides last season

City drew with

Chelsea x2
Liverpool x2
Woolwich x1
Us x1

Lost to
Woolwich x1
Villa x1

That's 18 points dropped against those teams from the top half.

Against the same opposition, we dropped 22 points with 5 of those coming against City who, let's be honest were much better than us.
 
dudu said:
You're right bar fulham who we lost to 3-0 in one of the games.

Posted this numerous times - but our form against TOP HALF teams last season was good enough that had we collected the points against the BOTTOM half teams - wolves (6) West Ham (4) and Everton (2) Fulham (3) last season - we would have finished level on points with Liverpool on 82 which i don't think anyone can deny would be a good total.

Of course beating the teams in the top half more consistently will help but, I personally think beating the teams we are better than is more important.

Even the Champions last season struggled against the better prem sides last season

City drew with

Chelsea x2
Liverpool x2
Woolwich x1
Us x1

Lost to
Woolwich x1
Villa x1

That's 18 points dropped against teams from the top half.

Against the same opposition, we dropped 22 points with 5 of those coming against CIty who, let's be honest were much better than us.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The fact I was way off with Fulham makes my point even more true.
There's a long way to go this season. We have played 3 of the current top 10....and lost all 3.

Last season, our 4 points from Liverpool and Arse came in those first 10 games. Even our win against Fulham did.

After that, our results against top 10 sides

Chelsea - (0/6)
Villa (3/6)
City (1/6)
Newcasle (3/6)
Brighton (3/6)
Fulham (0/3)
Arse (0/3)
Liverpool (0/3)

39 points available. 13 games. 9 taken. 1.44ppg

I can't be arsed to do more calculations. But if we applied the same logic to all the bottom half teams, it would be way higher.
Which proves my point. Which, if you recall, was "we're good at beating bottom half and lower league teams"

If you're happy with that, then fine. But we'll likely only ever float just above those teams if we can't take points regularly from the teams in the top half.
 
dudu said:
Even the Champions last season struggled against the better prem sides last season

City drew with

Chelsea x2
Liverpool x2
Woolwich x1
Us x1

Lost to
Woolwich x1
Villa x1

That's 18 points dropped against those teams from the top half.

Against the same opposition, we dropped 22 points with 5 of those coming against City who, let's be honest were much better than us.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So basically City dropped 16 vs Woolwich, Liverpool, Villa and Chelsea, and we dropped 17 against the same four clubs...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top