• 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!

Player Dejan Kulusevski

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Starks said:
Each week, looking more and more like our most important player.

If he doesn't play, we're better off playing 352
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

He acts in 343 like the AM. He plays wide but is in effect the link between midfield and attack, when he is not playing we basically have 3 strikers so the balance isn’t there.

Just becuase someone plays wide doesn’t mean they can’t be the AM, Maddison is for Leicester, Grealish or Bernardo Silva often play wide for City but still operate as the creative spark rather than an out and out wing forward like Son. Kulusevski is our Maddison, our Bernardo Silva.

I tend to agree if Kulusevski isn’t available we should play 352 and let one of Hojbjerg or Bentencur play further forward.
 
Tomo said:
He acts in 343 like the AM. He plays wide but is in effect the link between midfield and attack, when he is not playing we basically have 3 strikers so the balance isn’t there.

Just becuase someone plays wide doesn’t mean they can’t be the AM, Maddison is for Leicester, Grealish or Bernardo Silva often play wide for City but still operate as the creative spark rather than an out and out wing forward like Son. Kulusevski is our Maddison, our Bernardo Silva.

I tend to agree if Kulusevski isn’t available we should play 352 and let one of Hojbjerg or Bentencur play further forward.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Or if Conte really wants to start all 3 of Son, Kane and Richie you could drop Kane down a bit to act as that creative nexus, we know that he has the distribution and eye for it, and play Son and Richie in front of him as the striker pair.
 
Tomo said:
He acts in 343 like the AM. He plays wide but is in effect the link between midfield and attack, when he is not playing we basically have 3 strikers so the balance isn’t there.

Just becuase someone plays wide doesn’t mean they can’t be the AM, Maddison is for Leicester, Grealish or Bernardo Silva often play wide for City but still operate as the creative spark rather than an out and out wing forward like Son. Kulusevski is our Maddison, our Bernardo Silva.

I tend to agree if Kulusevski isn’t available we should play 352 and let one of Hojbjerg or Bentencur play further forward.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think that the issue is even more serious as we otherwise lack any kind of real offensive output from right wing.

Kulusevski starting there masks some major issues Royal has. Richie is different in his playing style - he is more like Son, trying to pass the ball on quickly and often with first touch. He is not one to control the ball say within 15-20 first meters of opposition half.

Then if Royal is not carrying that load and Richie tries to be cleaver... and there is no Kulusevski, then our game is just not rounded enough. And solution has 2 parts - use capable RWB + 3 man CM with Bissouma maybe sitting deepest and let Benta play bit higher on that side. Latter part not ideal, as Benta is mainly very conservative passer, but better balance still then what we have today.
 
ShutUpPatrik said:
Or if Conte really wants to start all 3 of Son, Kane and Richie you could drop Kane down a bit to act as that creative nexus, we know that he has the distribution and eye for it, and play Son and Richie in front of him as the striker pair.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

He kinda does that anyway tbh.....

I don't mind that aspect of things. What's concerning me however, is how much he's drifting and being found in wide areas...... That really shouldn't be necessary considering, in terms of formation, we ought to have 2 players wide of him on each side. It's not like it's hi pace putting him in such posiitons.
 
Tomo said:
He acts in 343 like the AM. He plays wide but is in effect the link between midfield and attack, when he is not playing we basically have 3 strikers so the balance isn’t there.

Just becuase someone plays wide doesn’t mean they can’t be the AM, Maddison is for Leicester, Grealish or Bernardo Silva often play wide for City but still operate as the creative spark rather than an out and out wing forward like Son. Kulusevski is our Maddison, our Bernardo Silva.

I tend to agree if Kulusevski isn’t available we should play 352 and let one of Hojbjerg or Bentencur play further forward.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think it just goes to show how badly we fucked up in the summer not bringing in a rotation/replacement for him in case of injury or loss of form. It could end up really hurting us this season and will have to be rectified early in the january window.
 
Brian Fantana said:
I think it just goes to show how badly we fucked up in the summer not bringing in a rotation/replacement for him in case of injury or loss of form. It could end up really hurting us this season and will have to be rectified early in the january window.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Lucas is his intended backup and is obviously not as creative a passer. But he is certainly able to hold the ball and move it up field by himself if need be. But then of course he is awol with a injury. We definitely need to look to bring someone in in January.
 
Brian Fantana said:
I think it just goes to show how badly we fucked up in the summer not bringing in a rotation/replacement for him in case of injury or loss of form. It could end up really hurting us this season and will have to be rectified early in the january window.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's just bad timing to have both RWs messing at the sane time.....

Having to play your #6 attacker (Gil) in a tough away CL fixture is a tough break; not poor recruitment.

Filling the squad avg journeyman players that would v.rarely play when most of Europe has no money to buy them off you isnt/wasn't a wise idea.
 
Airfixx said:
It's just bad timing to have both RWs messing at the sane time.....

Having to play your #6 attacker (Gil) in a tough away CL fixture is a tough break; not poor recruitment.

Filling the squad avg journeyman players that would v.rarely play when most of Europe has no money to buy them off you isnt/wasn't a wise idea.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I would have liked to have kept Berg but Conte fucked that by killing his interest in sticking around thx to near-zero gametime.
 
Airfixx said:
I would have liked to have kept Berg but Conte fucked that by killing his interest in sticking around thx to near-zero gametime.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's exactly this that I worry about with a lot of our players though. Conte just doesn't rotate. Personally if I was Bissouma, Doherty, Moura, Skipp I'd be pretty pissed. Because it seems no matter how poorly someone plays they don't get dropped.
 
anderton46 said:
It's exactly this that I worry about with a lot of our players though. Conte just doesn't rotate. Personally if I was Bissouma, Doherty, Moura, Skipp I'd be pretty pissed. Because it seems no matter how poorly someone plays they don't get dropped.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Moura has been injured but I agree besides that.

Not playing players doesn’t exactly increase their morale. Not playing Bissouma for 10 minutes after PEH/Bentancur barely even have legs left is just disrespectful.
 
ShutUpPatrik said:
Or if Conte really wants to start all 3 of Son, Kane and Richie you could drop Kane down a bit to act as that creative nexus, we know that he has the distribution and eye for it, and play Son and Richie in front of him as the striker pair.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Problem is Kane and Son don’t put in defensive work. So you have 1 striker that presses and then Kane as an attacking midfielder that probably doesn’t move without the ball. Puts a lot of responsibility on PEH and Bentancur as they have to cover the wings more now that Richarlison can’t track as far back.

But I do think dropping Kane deeper could work with Richarlison. But maybe not son.
 
bonaspur23 said:
Problem is Kane and Son don’t put in defensive work. So you have 1 striker that presses and then Kane as an attacking midfielder that probably doesn’t move without the ball. Puts a lot of responsibility on PEH and Bentancur as they have to cover the wings more now that Richarlison can’t track as far back.

But I do think dropping Kane deeper could work with Richarlison. But maybe not son.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
True.

You can accomodate one forward that doesn't move/press as much in a formation in my opinion. That's not uncommon at all. But having two really makes it difficult for us to try and play on the front foot in any sort of way.
 
I think right now he's the only forward we have that can control the ball under pressure and get us up the pitch and we are missing him. All round game he is the best attacker we have imo.
 
KaneDomBadBoy said:
The problem is, all these things don't matter if you don't have the pace/mobility to execute these things. The game is becoming more and more a physical game where premium is placed on pace/athleticism.

Kulu has got the whole package and more than enough pace/mobility etc to create for himself.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

He's the 2nd top scorer in the entire league & regular pulls off excellent passes for us. He executes it.

Kulu isn't even in the same ballpark. Dropped to the bench by Conte and only really shined on the opening day vs Southampton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top