• 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 James Maddison

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Good to see him back but talk of starting him is unlikely not only due to his match fitness, but also you could see that he is not going to put himself about yet.

He needs to trust his knee again in competing and challenging for the ball and there were a couple of occasions where he was hesitant to do so. Do we need his creativity? Absolutely, but we need fight as well and especially against Chelsea.
 
Shadydan said:
It wasn't a pen, not conclusive enough.

Bit weird it didn't go to VAR though when you couldn't really see if their defender got the ball whilst their pen wasn't really that conclusive either.

Anyway good to see him back, hopefully he plays more mins going forward.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I seem to recall them going to VAR? Their player got a faint touch on the ball before touching Maddison.
 
Raiders said:
It was noticeable, to me at least, that our players were just giving him the ball hoping he would do something and he did make a difference. He looked technically great but a little slower than I remember him. Maybe not a starter against Chelsea but definitively someone we can bring on.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think it was more him being tentative than having necessarily lost pace.

After a year out he’s bound to be nervous about his knee and that one bad tackle could finish his career.

For this reason alone I wouldn’t be starting him as some are suggesting. We need 100% commitment in the tackle and understandably he can’t offer that atm.

We also have a duty of care to his health irrespective of the fact it’s dire straits.
 
Really good to see him back on the pitch but he needs to be used sparingly over the next two games.
It sucks because we really need him but that's just the way it is, we can't risk breaking him and he's far from match fit.
 
1882 said:
The clear and obvious bit is that one went against Tottenham and the otter went against Tottenham!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Bloody otters. Water voles I can handle, but...

image.png
 
Shadydan said:
I meant sending the ref to the screen, I don't see how thru view one as a clear and obvious error and not the other.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Not sure your point here.

The referee thought it wasn't a penalty. He was right.
The VAR thought it wasn't a penalty. He was also right.

Shadydan thinks despite that, lets delay game further to send referee to screen, so he can just say again that it wasn't a penalty
 
Shadydan said:
It wasn't a pen, not conclusive enough.

Bit weird it didn't go to VAR though when you couldn't really see if their defender got the ball whilst their pen wasn't really that conclusive either.

Anyway good to see him back, hopefully he plays more mins going forward.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The fact it was so inconclusive is what made it so suspicious to me that the VAR didn’t 1) spend more than 10 seconds reviewing it and 2) send Gillet to the monitor.

From one angle it looks like there may have been a touch on the ball from the defender, but from the another angle it looks as if Maddison is just cleaned out of it.

To me it was an absolutely perfect example of an incident that SHOULD require an on field review. Gillet was too far away to make a definitive call on it in real time, there’s absolutely no way he could have conclusively seen that the defender won the ball, and from the replays to me it certainly wasn’t conclusive that there was 100% a touch on the ball. If he went to the monitor and concluded there was a touch then so be it.

The reality is, if an incident like that occurred at that time in the match in a home game for Woolwich, City, Liverpool, jeez pretty much ANY other team, I just refuse to believe they would get a 10 second review and play on…
 
Trotter said:
Not sure your point here.

The referee thought it wasn't a penalty. He was right.
The VAR thought it wasn't a penalty. He was also right.

Shadydan thinks despite that, lets delay game further to send referee to screen, so he can just say again that it wasn't a penalty
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The counterpoint is nothing in the rules says you can take down a player so long as you managed to touch the ball. Getting the slightest nic on the ball doesn't necessarily excuse taking a player out that still has a play on the ball.

The lack of consistency and clarity in the rule is a problem.
 
It was a pen all day long.

I'm sorry but the ball made no discernable change in movement. I can see no footage that shows a touch.

Even if I go along with there being a touch, what you're then saying it's ok to take a player out as long as you brush the ball so lightly that you make no impact on it's trajectory.

He impeded Maddison. Penalty all day.

Having said that, we'd prob have missed the pen anyway. That's how inept we were last night.

Good to see Madders back though. 30 minutes to help us win next week and then nice stroll on the final day.
 
Shadydan said:
My point is how can VAR rule one a clear and obvious error and not the other when they were both inconclusive?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But they were both totally conclusive.

Tel kicked their player in the head.
That was conclusive, and left a massive mark on their players head. Don’t know what more conclusive evidence you need than our players kicking theirs in the head 6 foot in the air, after their player headed the ball.

The tackle by their player in the box clearly got the ball, again what more conclusive evidence than him playing the ball and it changing direction do you need
 
Last edited:
Bill-bao Bob said:
It was a pen all day long.

I'm sorry but the ball made no discernable change in movement. I can see no footage that shows a touch.

Even if I go along with there being a touch, what you're then saying it's ok to take a player out as long as you brush the ball so lightly that you make no impact on it's trajectory.

He impeded Maddison. Penalty all day.

Having said that, we'd prob have missed the pen anyway. That's how inept we were last night.

Good to see Madders back though. 30 minutes to help us win next week and then nice stroll on the final day.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Who is our penalty taker when Solanke isn't playing? Madders? Richy?
 
Trotter said:
But they were both totally conclusive.

Tel kicked their player in the head.
That was conclusive, and left a massive mark on their players head

The tackle by their player in the box clearly got the ball,
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

lmao wtf, how was either of them conclusive?

The amount of times both were replayed will tell you that, it doesn't even look like Tel even touched him in the replay, what are we going here 🤣
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top