• 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!

Match Spurs Vs Liverpool - Carabao Cup Semi Final 1st Leg. 8pm, Weds 8th Jan.

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

This 4-3-3 we play makes it difficult to fit Kulusevski and Maddison into the lineup. Kulusevski can still be shoehorned to the right, even though I don't consider him a winger, but I can't see an ideal place for Maddison. As injured players come back he may slowly fall out of favour.

A holding midfielder/DM+ two highly energetic, box-to-box CMs seem to get this formation going. Wingers are very high up the pitch, and Ange in particular also lets his fullbacks march forward very liberally. This kind of a setup cannot afford a 10, just too unbalanced in terms of shape and mentality.

Under ideal circumstances we would have a quintet of Sarr/Bissouma/Gray/Bergvall/Bentancur to choose from, so I don't think it's necessary to expect the aforementioned two to play a role that they're clearly not comfortable with.
 
Last edited:
This 4-3-3 we play makes it difficult to fit Kulusevski and Maddison into the lineup. Kulusevski can still be shoehorned to the right, even though I don't see consider him a winger, but I can't see an ideal place for Maddison. As injured players come back he may slowly fall out of favour.

A holding midfielder/DM+ two highly energetic, box-to-box CMs seem to get this formation going. Wingers are very high up the pitch, and Ange in particular also lets his fullbacks march forward very liberally. This kind of a setup cannot afford a 10, just too unbalanced in terms of shape and mentality.

Under ideal circumstances we would have a quintet of Sarr/Bissouma/Gray/Bergvall/Bentancur to choose from, so I don't think it's necessary to expect the aforementioned two to play a role that they're clearly not comfortable with.

I don't think you're completely wrong, but I do think judging Kulu lately would be unfair.

Its obvious he's been run into the ground. His touch is heavy. The weight is off on his passes. If we were able to give him proper rotation, he'd excel in a midfield 3. Maddison, i agree. In our current set up i'd love to see him get a look at LW against teams planning to park the bus.
 
This 4-3-3 we play makes it difficult to fit Kulusevski and Maddison into the lineup. Kulusevski can still be shoehorned to the right, even though I don't see consider him a winger, but I can't see an ideal place for Maddison. As injured players come back he may slowly fall out of favour.

A holding midfielder/DM+ two highly energetic, box-to-box CMs seem to get this formation going. Wingers are very high up the pitch, and Ange in particular also lets his fullbacks march forward very liberally. This kind of a setup cannot afford a 10, just too unbalanced in terms of shape and mentality.

Under ideal circumstances we would have a quintet of Sarr/Bissouma/Gray/Bergvall/Bentancur to choose from, so I don't think it's necessary to expect the aforementioned two to play a role that they're clearly not comfortable with.
Maddison left. It’s so obvious
 
Last night went a long way to shorting me out. That and a Chicken Tilkka massala with extra Scotch bonnet chilly helped too.
A hot tikka masala? Well I never.

Happy Chinese GIF by CW Kung Fu
 
Great work!

Ange, in using the word "cynical" is using shorthand, rather than referring to the laws of the game. What he is likely referring to as "cynical" is unsporting behaviour designed to interfere with a promising attack (and doing so), in which case a booking is issued. Bergvall's offence was not in these terms "cynical", nor did it interfere materially with a promising attack. The question is whether Bergvall's offence was bookable in terms of it being a reckless challenge, which I think there is a good argument it was (it was late).

All he did was repeat what he's been told by the PGMOL. If it's "shorthand," I'd say that's on them not him.
A relevant section from the laws :

"If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution/sending-off would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution/sending-off must be issued when the ball is next out of play. However, if the offence was denying the opposing team an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, the player is cautioned for unsporting behaviour; if the offence was interfering with or stopping a promising attack, the player is not cautioned."
Agreed. What it says to me is that the PGMOL either don't know their own rules, or they've offered excuses for why players weren't booked when those offences were against us. Either way, AP's comments still aren't debatable, but the PGMOL's are.
I don't disagree for a minute we've had our share of bad luck / decisions (including Bergvall's first yellow), but that doesn't mean the laws of the game get re-written!
Never suggested they should be. Maybe they should have the referees back in the classroom to reread the rules, then examine their answers. Mind you, if the PGMOL themselves don't know, they'll probably all score 100% because their "interpretation" is all that matters?
 
Only if Werner and Johnson are not around.

This is where reality and fantasy collide.

Johnson (i think) is our top goalscorer and last night by hugging the right touchline pulled their defender away opening up space for Solanke to run into before tracking down that Porro pass. But don't let's talk about off the ball tactical moves like that.

Werner from my perspective played well, made runs at and around the Scouse defence and made an actual impact. Son was fucked, and for me Werner should have come on earlier.

In a threadbare squad any fan that suggests that "only if Werner and Johnson are not around" isn't a fan, just a boneheaded idiot.

If only "fans" like you were not around this forum, TFC would be a lot better place.
 
All he did was repeat what he's been told by the PGMOL. If it's "shorthand," I'd say that's on them not him.

Agreed. What it says to me is that the PGMOL either don't know their own rules, or they've offered excuses for why players weren't booked when those offences were against us. Either way, AP's comments still aren't debatable, but the PGMOL's are.

Never suggested they should be. Maybe they should have the referees back in the classroom to reread the rules, then examine their answers. Mind you, if the PGMOL themselves don't know, they'll probably all score 100% because their "interpretation" is all that matters?
Tbh, it's impossible for us to know whether it's Ange accurately repeating what PGMOL have told him or not (in the heat of an emotional post-match interview etc etc) . Ange has a right to be fucked off with officiating, and tbh I think was really naive with his "we'll just cop it" stance last season.

One thing though - and apologies if this sours the euphoric mood, but it shouldn't really as it's an obvious and incontrovertible point about the laws of the game - is that there IS a legitimate question as to whether Bergvall should have been given a second yellow given the late challenge. The idea (whether it's from Ange or PGMOL fuck knows) that you can take a player out with an excessive force tackle and it won't be yellowed if there is advantage played (because it's not "cynical" - whatever that means as it's not a term used in the laws of the game) ... is obviously untrue and ridiculous with even a moment's consideration.
 
Dirty tackle of van Dijk on Solanke.


View: https://x.com/ONE_AMN/status/1877106054556725373


As the replay shows, Solanke clearly had the ball under control and Van Dijk comes in from behind with his studs high, pressing down on the Tottenham forward's calf. Per FA Law 12, S1 and S2 a player can be sent off for 'serious foul play' and 'violent conduct'.

With Van Dijk clearly not close to the ball and with his studs raking down the back of Solanke's leg, there could certainly be a case made for a red card. It will serve as a major source of frustration for Spurs fans then that VAR failed to even check the potentially dismissable offence.


Give in, how?
 
Back
Top