The stadium is cursed. But the retractable pitch isn't causing injuries. There are other teams with retractable pitches and don't have the same injuries. The turf might not be kept properly though.
-
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...
Player Mohammed Kudus
- Thread starter The Fighting Cock
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
There's no other stadium besides the Bernabeu that has a system like the NWHL system, and they are also struggling with injuries.
That's absolutely not true. There's a handful of stadiums that have retractable pitches, several in your country in fact.
If it was the pitch, why did the injuries just start out of the blue last year? The stadium was finished in 2019 and we had nothing like the injuries we've had for the last two seasons in the 4 years previous. Correlation ≠ cause.
All the other retractable pitch stadiums move the pitch as a single unit.
Only Tottenham and the Bernebeu have a segmented pitch stored in multiple trays which are stored independently and joined for use.
Injuries did not just start out if the blue last year. Spurs have struggled for many seasons.
Nothing like the last two seasons. Those trays are 200 tonnes each. They're not going to flex or shift with a few guys on it.
They also play there usually once every other week. Have all of our injuries occurred here? Why the sudden shift in injuries?
If banana sales were higher during a year there was an especially abnormal increase in murders, does not mean they're connected.
The actual playing surface could be an issue. The surface on the new Wembley was a disaster for years to begin with.
Last edited:
He's going to be about as game changing for us coming back as our much heralded saviour, Solanke.
His numbers are hugely inflated because of Frank's master plan of give it to him any time we had the ball. His need to beat a man standing up, is probably his biggest issue as well. It's like Palinha and tackles, looks great, but it's not very effective. He slows us down, beats a man, the defence is reset so the cross is easily dealt with, or it's smashed into the first defender. Show pony.
I think he can be coached into playing better. We need more disciplined attacking generally- our idiot passers hardly ever reward anyone making a run the first time. Kudus for sure will be able to do that if behaviorally trained/rewarded in those situations.
At least hes got prem level attacking tools already. Can't say that about much of our other attacking talent. We've no other natural RWs available right now- we'll be absolutely grateful when he returns.
He's been the same player he always has been. Frank was supposed to coach that out of him, but seemed to love it. I just don't think there's any training him. He's got ability, but the brain the size of a pea. All great giving it out wide to him, for him to dribble around his man and do very little with it.
West Ham were more than willing to give him up, quickly at that, and there was nobody else bothered. I went on to the West Ham forum after the signing was done, and most of them were happy enough to get him gone, citing the same limitations. I'd love to know what our recruitment process actually looks like.
These are all fine criticisms of the player vis a vis what's necessary in a title-challenging side, but the question is what his impact will be in a relegation scrap for a toothless, passive team with nobody that can break lines or win a duel.
As I'm pointing out, he doesn't actually make that much of impact beyond getting people off their seats for a couple of seconds, before the inevitable sighs of frustration that follow shortly after. There's been a million of his kind in the league. Fun to watch, but not serious players.
We looked much more balanced and effective when Odobert moved there after Kudus initially got injured. And I don't rate Odobert, he just did the basics, and we looked better for it.
A big part of why we're bad is because he's an offensive back hole. He does work hard, I'll give him his dues, but he's a big reason why we're so bad.
Well,
1. Odobert is done for the season
2. Kudus started all 7 of our league wins this season, Odobert started 1 of them.
Our league wina for the most part we're ridiculously fortunate, that is all.
My point is that a player who almost everyone would consider a much worse player was actually fairly effective when he was missing. Kudus impact is ridiculously overrated and doesn't move the needle because of how he plays the game.
I don't rate myself as a physiotherapist or a detective, but I'd say that getting the entire defence to sprint half the pitch every time the opposition got the ball for 2 seasons had a lot more to do with the issue than the turf.
However, I am a lazy person with access to the modern technologies, so here you go
Odobert offers so little. He’s not a fraction as impactful as Kudus. You don’t want your winger to be neat and tidy.
He got the ball into the box early, which created chances. Kudus stands up a man, beats him 7 times and does something stupid with the ball 9/10. Yannick Bolaise 2.0.
Well, give me prime Yannick Bolasie on the wing over Conor Gallagher.
I don't condone playing Conor Gallagher full stop, nevermind this weird out position thing. We have players that can play other formations. I'd rather play with wing backs and have two forwards to aim at, but he'd rather play players out of position. That I can't understand.
I’m taking prime Bolasie over almost all of our team.