I was sad to see Lennon go, and I liked him as a player, but it wasn't any great loss for the team at that moment in time.
-
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
I was sad to see Lennon go, and I liked him as a player, but it wasn't any great loss for the team at that moment in time.
I think Aurier is OK. I think Doherty is OK, they are top half WB/FBs. If both were competing for this spot this season I have no issue with this scenario.
There are however better FB's than both of them. Seeing as we have now spent our money on Doherty and if we are selling Aurier then we need to go after one of those better WB/FB than both of them.
He played for probably a better team last year Certainly, one with a better midfield and looked more stable and organised that had a set and defined identity unlike ours that's for sure. I mention this because I think you could say that about every single Wolves player and can apply your Aurier description to a big handful of Spurs players.
Even if you beleive the ridiculous notion that Aurier is better than Doherty defensively the problem with Aurier defensively is a much his attitude as his ability. Aurier would constantly shut off defensively, not willing to track back or trying to take short cuts that left acres of space open. People blamed it on the role that Jose wanted him to play, which may have been part of it, but a large part was Aurier was unwilling to track back a lot of the time and often when he did he would put in a lazy effort.
Doherty has zero questions about his motor or give a fuck meter. He will come back and put in an effort defensively. He won't look to take short cuts that often lead to good chances for the opposition and won't put in lazy challenges that often results in fouls, penalties or guys easily walking around him.
Doherty has zero questions about his motor or give a fuck meter. He will come back and put in an effort defensively. He won't look to take short cuts that often lead to good chances for the opposition and won't put in lazy challenges that often results in fouls, penalties or guys easily walking around him.
Then why don't you just do that.
Seriously mate, just rewatch a couple of Wolves games. Doherty had very little responsibility on him to track back, he hardly ever did this.
That's a curious argument AGAINST bringing a Wolves player to Spurs.
Anyway, the thing we need most of all from that position is to be threatening to defenses in possession, which Doherty excels at and which Aurier was totally useless at.
Defenses were never more comfortable against us last year than when Aurier was carrying the ball forward down the flank.
I'm not arguing against his signing. I think it's a good and sound signing.
Hardly ever did it because it wasn't his responsibility or because he was too lazy?
I have watched Wolves, with us being so close to them in the table they were often a team I would pay attention to following what was happening in their games.
I never once noticed the same kind of laziness and brain dead plays that we constantly see with Aurier. I have concerns about him transitioning to a more traditional RB role, even if that is fully what we use, but effort and dumb plays are not a concern I have for him.
Doherty was played as an out and out WB, when he was in the attack and the play broke down he would for the majority of the time remain high up the pitch, I can only presume this was instruction. Wolves were very organised and would have his position covered to a degree.
As for Aurier a lot more was asked of him because he also had to defend. I'm a FB I'd much rather play the role that Doherty did for Wolves than the role asked of Aurier, just as I'd rather play the role asked of Davies, a piece of piss in comparison.
OMG! Brilliant! Whoever came up with that idea on our marketing/communications/press/media team!
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/21814266/Serge_Aurier_vs_Matt_Doherty.png)
Enjoy.
Not having a dig, but if you need to resort to stats of xA or successful pressures to prove a point, perhaps you need to spend more time watching games and less time reading The Athletic.
It's these sorts of contrarian hipster douchebag stats which saw the Footballer Writers Association give their player of the season award to Jordan Fucking Henderson.
Jose himself said he is scared of Serge giving away a pen. I don't think he is all that bad tbh but Doc is a clear upgrade. COYS!
Yep, totally agree. The difference is we'll be watching this guy with a sense of anticipation and excitement instead of concern and worry that another fuck up is imminent. Doherty will instill confidence, Aurier doesn't.
I agree that Aurier had more defensive responsibilities that Doherty but that doesn't excuse a lot of the mistakes that i saw from Aurier that were largely mental.
Some examples- often jumping too early while balls went over his head rather than tracking back, likewise diving trying to stop balls rather than tracking back, drifting inside taking men that were already covered leaving his area wide open or his man wide open, watching the ball inside while his man ran into the area behind him. These kind of mental mistakes were not due to him having a different role than Doherty they are due to him often lacking focus and too often "turning off" for lack of better term. I think that same mentality often had him making dumb mistakes like giving away needless corners, clearing balls right to the opposition and passes to nobody.
I never question Aurier physical abilities those are undeniable but too often he loses focus which leads to quality chances for the opposition, I have not seen those same mistakes from Doherty. That mentality also often leads to him making rash challenges instead of reacting rationally when beat.
Very telling stats are always dug out to defend average players. You never see them used concerning the likes of Luka Modric.
Fuck me, Guido's still at it. Wouldn't know a good player if one slapped him in the mouth.
Alternatively one could watch a new player very closely in the next few months and form an opinion. Some people will tell us 100 times in the next 2 weeks what his strengths and weaknesses are and will only see what they want to see once he is actually playing football matches for us.
I thought Mcartney left first anyway........
When statistical analytics took over baseball, the thing they had going for them, and what grounded the whole enterprise, was a very thorough understanding of what they were looking for. Baseball is a game of discrete outcomes repeated a bunch of times, and is at a basic level just a contest of producing the most runs you can given a limited number of outs.
With the exception of Expected Goals, which at the team level is answering a very obvious and critical question (how many and how good of opportunities is this team getting/giving up? How much is poor finishing or just poor luck playing a role in results?), I don't have a sense of the same sort of groundedness in football statistics.
These ubiquitous circle wedge charts give us a great deal of interesting information, but I don't know how far it goes toward telling us how much a player helps a team win.
How’s his pointing ability near or in the box? Asking for a French friend.