• 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!

Tactics TFC's Tactical Autopsy Thread

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

More on this:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGQgTgLKsvM

During the majority of the video, he seems to be claiming a strong relationship between high number of crosses and low xG & xG per shot. I don't see it though, for a few reasons;

1. As he also acknowledges in passing, Brentford under Frank were always recording respectable xG per shot numbers.They led the whole league last season in xGPS in fact.

The fact that the same manager is currently overseeing us be 18th in that category warrants a more detailed explanation; one that makes special reference to how far behind we are at the moment from Frank's Brentford teams in terms of the quality of our transition play. Brentford, besides set pieces obviously, were feasting on transition opportunities that were leading to those high quality (xG) shot attempts in a way that we can't.

2. The leaguewide trends. See below.



X axis shows where each team ranks in the league in number of crosses.
Y axis shows where each team ranks in xG per shot.

So for example, the point (1,8) refers to the fact that the team that's 1st in number of crosses is also 8th in xG per shot.

Some teams do illustrate a strong negative correlation between the variables:
  • Forest for example are 2nd in number of crosses and 19th in xG per shot.
  • We are 3rd and 18th .
  • Wolves are 4th and 15th.
Such a clear inverse relationship doesn't hold in every case though:
  • As mentioned above, Newcastle are 1st in number of crosses and also 8th in xG per shot.
  • Bournemouth are 6th in both categories.
  • Chelsea are 8th and 2nd.
Overall, r= - 0.212 shows that although these two variables are not totally unrelated and the relationship is in the predicted [negative] direction, it is not strong enough statistically.

3. The leaguewide relationship between number of crosses and total xG is even weaker. See below.



X axis once again shows where each team ranks in the league in number of crosses.
Y axis this time shows where each teams ranks in total xG.

Once again, some teams illustrate a strong negative relationship between the variables:
  • Forest are 2nd and 15th respectively.
  • We're 3rd and 17th.
  • Wolves are 4th and 19th.
On the flipside:
  • Liverpool are 5th in both.
  • Bournemouth are 6th and 8th.
  • Chelsea are 8th and 1st.
Overall, r = - 0.0857 shows that the hypothesized negative correlation between number of crosses and total xG is basically indistinguishable from statistical noise.
 
Last edited:
BJK said:
More on this:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGQgTgLKsvM

During the majority of the video, he seems to be claiming a strong relationship between high number of crosses and low xG & xG per shot. I don't see it though, for a few reasons;

1. As he also acknowledges in passing, Brentford under Frank were always recording respectable xG per shot numbers.They led the whole league last season in xGPS in fact.

The fact that the same manager is currently overseeing us be 18th in that category warrants a more detailed explanation; one that makes special reference to how far behind we are at the moment from Frank's Brentford teams in terms of the quality of our transition play. Brentford, besides set pieces obviously, were feasting on transition opportunities that were leading to those high quality (xG) shot attempts in a way that we can't.

2. The leaguewide trends. See below.



X axis shows where each team ranks in the league in number of crosses.
Y axis shows where each team ranks in xG per shot.

So for example, the point (1,8) refers to the fact that the team that's 1st in number of crosses is also 8th in xG per shot.

Some teams do illustrate a strong negative correlation between the variables:
  • Forest for example are 2nd in number of crosses and 19th in xG per shot.
  • We are 3rd and 18th .
  • Wolves are 4th and 15th.
Such a clear inverse relationship doesn't hold in every case though:
  • As mentioned above, Newcastle are 1st in number of crosses and also 8th in xG per shot.
  • Bournemouth are 6th in both categories.
  • Chelsea are 8th and 2nd.
Overall, r= - 0.212 shows that although these two variables are not totally unrelated and the relationship is in the predicted [negative] direction, it is not strong enough statistically.

3. The leaguewide relationship between number of crosses and total xG is even weaker. See below.



X axis once again shows where each team ranks in the league in number of crosses.
Y axis this time shows where each teams ranks in total xG.

Once again, some teams illustrate a strong negative relationship between the variables:
  • Forest are 2nd and 15th respectively.
  • We're 3rd and 17th.
  • Wolves are 4th and 19th.
On the flipside:
  • Liverpool are 5th in both.
  • Bournemouth are 6th and 8th.
  • Chelsea are 8th and 1st.
Overall, r = - 0.0857 shows that the hypothesized negative correlation between number of crosses and total xG is basically indistinguishable from statistical noise.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

For anyone who wants a summary... his football is shite and getting worse.
 
Hit me up nerds.

Come on bus-conductor bus-conductor BJK : what structural, tactical or personnel changes can a putative Interim make right now that will make a difference? Do we even have the players to move to a more possession based gamestyle?
 
Phomesy said:
Hit me up nerds.

Come on bus-conductor bus-conductor BJK : what structural, tactical or personnel changes can a putative Interim make right now that will make a difference? Do we even have the players to move to a more possession based gamestyle?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

One of the reasons I’ve been so ambivalent about sacking both (vastly different) Ange and Frank is I genuinely believe this squad is so weak and flawed that I don’t see too many easy fixes, especially with the omnipresent injury clusterfuck.

I’d stop trying to play DP midfields and use Simons more as an 8 in a 433, which would give us some actual football ability in midfield, and he’s proven he’s a tenacious, robust little fucker. Use Paulinha or Bissouma as a pure 6 pivot with a more simplified remit and Gallagher as the other 8.

Gray offers fuck all as a RB. Poor defender, poor attacker. Might as well start Souza at LB and Spence at RB.

I’d also be tempted to swap Dragusin out for Byefield. Based on fuck all except Dragusin s a total fucking wardrobe.

It’s hard to envisage anyone coming in at this juncture and changing our overarching tactical approach. But obviously being more front foot and proactive, rather than reactive would be nice. Can’t see it happening though.
 
Last edited:
HA4Y888XMAEsk3N
 
Was going to post this in the Frank thread, but it's pointless now. It's a larger issue that is not created by Frank anyway, so might as well put it here.

Also provides a preliminary answer to Phomesy Phomesy 's question regarding realistic short term improvements that could get us out of this mess.

Emphasis should be on the notions of "realistic" and "short term" here: We're actually in a relegation battle with only 12 games to go; so whoever comes in will have to address some of the most glaring issues to get some points on the board first, before thinking about getting fancy with more complex stuff.

The issues are numerous; but the one I have in mind here is box defending. This I think is the key to the enigma of us continuing to concede 2 a game, the way relegation fodders do, despite Frank getting more and more defensive with his football during the last month or two in particular.

Even first choice defenders, including Romero&VDV, are not very good at this; and their backups are even worse.

Some non-exhaustive footage to illustrate the point:

r0qPBD.gif


De Ligt's late equalizer in the 2-2 draw with United

9dDZo4.gif


2 basically free headers by Lacroix&Mateta that barely miss the mark.

vI1tMz.gif


From as recent as yesterday

YO-hna.gif


A clear cut chance for Callum Wilson from a low-effort cross to the box. Simple as that.

tzRBN6.gif


More free-ish headers for Palace

crHXYS.gif


From yesterday also

U9qDKa.gif


Mbeumo's header in the said 2-2 draw with United

M915Gl.gif


Callum Wilson's late winner for West Ham

OUncaL.gif


Burnley's first goal in the most recent 2-2 draw

5unY3L.gif


A clear cut chance for Brentford in that 0-0 draw

bNK95Y.gif


Wolves' goal in that 1-1 draw

----------------​
Low balls, high crosses, set pieces, open play. You name it.

Now, what can an interim do about this? There's no easy fix this late into the season I'm afraid.

Nuno took over a West Ham team that was in a similar situation after matchday 5, as Potter left behind a team that conceded 7 (!!) goals from set pieces in 5 league games; and he still hasn't fully sorted out these issues. They still give up those cheap goals that ruin all the hard work he/they might be putting in in other parts of the game.

That being said, taking the game into the opposition more to avoid getting besieged inside our own third/box for prolonged periods could be a good start.

Newcastle for example had so many corners yesterday, most of which caused some serious trouble. See below.

hUt958.gif


x3koEM.gif


Basically, the idea is that we need to attack more/better to be able to defend better. Because the latter, not the former, is/was the main issue that led to Frank's downfall.

In number of goals we're;
  • Level with Villa
  • Only 4 behind Liverpool.
  • Ahead of Palace by 10; Sunderland by 9; Everton by 7
Now look at where we are compared to these teams.
 
Last edited:
Im not sure I agree BJK and I often do with you to be fair (re the no easy fix/Nuno Potter reference)

As Frank has shown in our own set pieces - despite us being useless at them for years - we had a pretty immediate and significant improvement.

Its what happens when things get coached properly.

I dont expect an A-Z change in everything, a comprehensive implementation of a new system or anything like that

But I do believe a proper coach gets a lot out of this group and quickly

I do agree with you an immediate change in attitude will yield results straight away

Poch is the immediate candidate, lets have a look at him managing the team we have now

Id think something like

--------------------Vicario
Spence----Dragusin----VDV----Souza
-----------------Sarr*-----Palinha
-----Muani-------Gallagher-----Simons
-------------------Solanke
*Could be Gray, Id be happy with that

Now Im not saying this is a prime Poch side, not for a second. Nor am I saying itll sweep all before it - but what would we have?
- Higher tempo (which suits our players)
- Aggressive (especially higher up the pitch)
- Width from fullbacks, natural width
- Sarr(Gray), Palinha, Gallagher offering a solid base
- Palinha can drop between CBs
- Gallagher in his best position forcing turnovers high up (Solanke too)
- Muani and Simons playing in the channels closer to Solanke

It wont be perfect. Souza will make mistakes, for sure. Players will in general, especially with a change in system (always do) , it wont be the prettiest, might struggle to advance the ball at times and it will this season only be a step in a direction, not the whole journey.

But even then, IMO, that team wins some games and plays a fuck sight better than anything Frank has produced
 
More lacklustre defending of the box for those interested:









That's crosses resulting in 4 chances ranging from decent to clear cut, in a game where we kept a clean sheet actually.



Another clear cut chance for one of the worst teams in EPL history in 25/26 Wolves.



Another clear header allowed from a routine cross to the box. Awful.





More chances for West Ham



Newcastle creating more havoc inside the box

And, like I've said, these struggles are not brought about by Frank. Such goals were quite common under Ange too.










----------​
Even if we brought in the kind of gung-ho manager that would make Ange look conservative in comparison, he would have to start by addressing this.

As Ange himself learned the hard way through his time here and at Forest, you're not building something sustainable as long as you keep conceding such cheap goals at the other end.
 
BJK said:
More lacklustre defending of the box for those interested:

n0UxVN.gif


FYqXL_.gif


mFrHmT.gif


hcnqkw.gif


That's crosses resulting in 4 chances ranging from decent to clear cut, in a game where we kept a clean sheet actually.

npxrvm.gif


Another clear cut chance for one of the worst teams in EPL history in 25/26 Wolves.

HVvs9N.gif


Another clear header allowed from a routine cross to the box. Awful.

uOxMMm.gif


JOn4Xp.gif


More chances for West Ham

-yc13A.gif


Newcastle creating more havoc inside the box

And, like I've said, these struggles are not brought about by Frank. Such goals were quite common under Ange too.

lIDaua.gif


ZjLuaW.gif


2GxSRb.gif


YrZSzI.gif



----------​
Even if we brought in the kind of gung-ho manager that would make Ange look conservative in comparison, he would have to start by addressing this.

As Ange himself learned the hard way through his time here and at Forest, you're not building something sustainable as long as you keep conceding such cheap goals at the other end.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You know I love you BJK - but these posts are bordering on torture porn :franksnarl:
 
postbox said:
But even then, IMO, that team wins some games and plays a fuck sight better than anything Frank has produced
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I don't know about that.

We can barely field a starting XI.

Our players look on the verge of a mental collapse, as West Ham and others keep increasing the pressure. As much as I like focusing on Xs and Os of the game, I would gladly acknowledge how much it's also played between the ears.

The same West Ham that were conceding 3 in a single half from Wolves a month ago are now going toe to toe with Chelsea and United.

An arm-around-the-shoulder type interim should help with that; but it might not be enough to offset all the damage that has been caused by continuous losing going on for months at this stage.

Anybody including Wolves can score 2+ against us on a given day. Again, although a new manager bounce might help with that, things won't change drastically overnight: See West Ham still conceding 35 in 20 league games under Nuno and 22/23 Leicester continuing to leak goals with Dean Smith.

It's true that the sacking of Frank increased our chances of survival in the sense that relegation is no longer the virtual certainty that I thought it was had Frank finished the season. But we're still in trouble; and the stuff we'll watch for the remaining 12 games won't be much better than this regardless of who takes charge.

Whether or not it will be enough for survival remains to be seen, and might depend more on how others do than how we do.
 
Last edited:
Well, we'll see

Much will depend on who comes in

Though I do really belive the right man makes significant impact and quickly

And I'm sure in the end you'll hope I'm right here more than you are
 
I’d consider (in Udogie’s absence) playing VdV at LB, and partnering Danso and Romero in a back 4 with Spence at RB. I’d also like to see Richy (L), Solanke (C) and Muani (R) as a front 3, with Richy and Muani playing close to Solanke. I’d then play a double pivot in CM (and 2 of our CMs) with Simons or Gallagher a CAM (depending on opponent). I’d even consider playing Porro in a more advanced role .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top