Rightfully so, he doesn't trust those players.
-
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...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Rightfully so, he doesn't trust those players.
Yes and no. He does not trust them to play often but could we not have rotated against Southampton and Watford? Maybe fresh legs and a new formation would have been better than putting the same XI out there looking tired and out of ideas.
Three forwards is useless against a team that sits back if you don't have a player to make passes.
If we switched to 2 Son still would have played so I don't see your point.
If we would have rested him and lost points because of it the manager would have come into heavy criticism.
Blame the shoddy recruitment, not the manager.
I just said switch to a 2 and rotate Son and Lucas? That is my point. Conte has to work with what he has, yes you can blame recruitment but you also have to blame Conte for overworking Son this month when he is the one picking the XI.
The last few matches everyone has been saying Son needs a rest. Who cares if they complain if we dropped points and Son was rested? If we can't beat Watford or Southampton without Son, bigger issues need to be looked at.
If he doesn't trust them; he doesn't trust them.
1. Southampton didn't sit back until they had a man sent off.
2. Given the mass drama in response to us only getting a point against them; are you shitting me?
3. Son made a telling contribution against Watford...... Would you have be chill if that was a draw instead?
4. As both those games played out peeps were screaming for a CB to be taken off, not one less fwd.
5. Do you think Conte's ultimate priority is league points or a cup game against a Chelsea who'm a large amount on here think are on a completely different level to us?
I'm sorry, but for all the talk about 352/343/4231 in the last week or two; none of it was in reference to rotation..... This is just hindsight coming into play..
If Son hadn't pulled up injured (we still don't know what's wrong btw! ...It may not be fatigue related. Kicks, twists and impact injuries DO exist afterall!); this sudden "our formation killed our rotation" narrative would not be a thing.
I have been saying I wanted a formation change since before Son was injured. The midfield of Skipp and Hojbjerg is going to drop more points than earn imo. Unless we suddenly have TAA or Reece James helping create chances on the wings, we will not be scoring against most teams.
It is not hindsight or your idea of changing the formation would not help with rotation is completely false. If we have 3 healthy forwards and we only start 2 a game, that leaves 1 to be rested and play less minutes. It's common sense.
I like Conte but go look at his past. He is stubborn with creative midfielders for the first 6 months until they are exactly what he wants and then he uses them and his teams thrive. We cannot wait 6 months this time.
You've missed the point.... I didn't say a formation change couldn't have helped rotation; I said that no-one was calling for a change of formation because they wanted rotation.
Even now; you resumed discussing the merits of Skipp & PEH as a two; but that's a different discussion.
I'm sure I've already said in amongst this that I want 352, but I'm not about to re-write history and pretend that was because I wanted Son rested............. That my friend would be playing the hindsight 'card'.
Again, nothing here to substantiate the idea that you or anyone else wanted the system to change last week explicitly because of rotation concerns.
(By all means show me some quotes from the past and I'll retract this comment.)
I just told you I have been saying we need to change formations and have been saying Son needs to be benched. If you don't want to believe me, that's fine. It's your choice. But to sit here and act like Son wasn't overworked is naïve. We have played close to the same XI most of the matches Conte has been here, injuries like this were bound to happen.
I was wating for this one to come out...I mean no one is saying that, people are more than aware why he was being overworked, you just seem to think that the lack of formation switch was the cause and not a symptom. The real reason why he was overworked is becuase of the situation with other injuries/covid and the Xmas schedule, you can't legistlate for that no matter how much you try and schedule mins for players.
And who's to say that had we switched to your preferred formation that we would have accumulated the points we have now or someone else picked up an injury? Who's to say that had we rested Son a bit more over the Xmas schedule Son would have picked up an injury at a later date, we can do this all day, it's just pure hindsight.
It seems to me like you wanted this formation switch but you're using this injury as an excuse to project your real thought process.
You're still not quite there.
Did you ever say A) we should change formation because B) that will allow Son to rest?
Not done that.... So please don't strawman.
This is not what's being debated with you.
How clear do I have to make it? YES I DID SAY WE NEED TO CHANGE FORMATIONS SO THE ATTACKERS COULD BE ROTATED AND SO WE CAN USE MORE CREATIVE MIDFIELDERS. Does that clear it up? Or can I only have one reason to say why a formation needs to be change?
I'm not starting this whole conversation over again. Go read from the start a few pages back if you care but yes, changing formations was a way to rotate players due to other attackers being injured.
Yes, other injuries could have happened, they can happen at any time. But the position I am focused on is the attack when we were down to 3 players (when Gil and Berg were out) so rotating them was the priority.
You didn't actually read what I said did you.
Well, clearer than you had before now.
The wording matter; not the caps/font.
......So if I search your name in those 3 match threads and Son's name I should find evidence of this?
You are right. There was just no need for a 343 vs Chavs , should have stuck to the 352, it works better as our CMs arent brilliant. Skipp, Winks and a 3rd would have been more useful than the terrible duo of skipberg. And we can rotate son/kane/lucas a little.
You won't find me in most match threads. Once the matches start, those are toxic. Believe it or not, I talk about Spurs in real life with real people. I also talk about Spurs on other forums. Unlike some, my life does not revolve around TFC.
Before matches is traditionally where one would make such assertions.... Mid or post match in this contest is just another platform for hindsight.
You don't post line-ups and thoughts in the days that run up to a game?
Believe it or not, I talk about Spurs in real life with real people. I also talk about Spurs on other forums. Unlike some, my life does not revolve around TFC.
Fine.... But I'm sure you understand that for a poster, it's what we do or don't say on TFC that defines us within TFC.
Still reeks of hindsight though....
Not really what? It's Not bad luck. This issue long predates Conte. Or this current injury.
It's not really inept from our management
Bit silly some wagging their finger at the manager then, innit....
Last edited:
You can say it as much as you'd like, it won't make it any more factual.
Conte was hired on November 2nd, 2021.
Per Transfermarkt, only Lo Celso has been unavailable for more than he's been available under Conte.
Bergwijn has only been unavailable since December 27, 2021.
Bryan Gil has been available for Conte more than he's been unavailable for matches (which were between 02.11.21 - 12.11.21 & 07.12.21 - 23.12.21).
Edit: Sessegnon also has been available for more than he's been unavailable for matches (which were between 02.11.21 - 14.11.21 & 21.12.21 - present).