What we mean is how do we go from contenders to champions.
-
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
Did u spell peices on purpose?
Deleted member 15314
Guest
As little as one aerially solid CB could do it. Failing that a massive fucking CM who can also jump.
He's concerned he might hit his head on the rainbow that perpetually hangs above his head.
Rodon is allegedly that guy. Swans fans even sang about out......
VoiceOfThePoshSeats
*pieceDeleted member 15314
Guest
One outside box suggestion. Dele doing a Kane for us in our box. We know he's good at headers, he's quite tall and he can be an attacking threat, a midfield presence (if not to the quality we'd like) while also being a presence in our box.
Start Rodon, and then sub in Dele for late game headers.
Start Rodon, and then sub in Dele for late game headers.
How many FreeKicks do we defend vs how many we let in? How many corners do we concede vs how many we concede from? If you have the answer to this then you can claim if it's a vulnerability or not.
Deleted member 15314
Guest
The relationship is not linear, conceding more set pieces doesn't linearly lead to more goals conceded.
Even crap set piece teams don't concede from the vast majority of set pieces. If you did the statistical analysis I'm confident that my intuition would bear out.
We need to both concede fewer set pieces and defend them better.
Fairu.
I'd never make that sorte of mistake.
If we conceded from 50% of the corners we concede then it's fair to say there's an issue. If we concede from 3% of the corners we concede then it fair to say there isn't an issue (in fact 3% would make us bang on the average, so that number can at least be attributed as a benchmark). The same too goes for set pieces.
Our plan is to sit deep and soak up the pressure, THIS IS OUR PLAN. On account of us playing the majority of games (or halves) without the ball and in our own defensive third this will bring more set-pieces and corners against us. We are perfectly happy (I'm not I hate this shite) for this to happen, we are perfectly happy to defend the set-pieces, we are drilled and set for this, IT'S PART OF THE PLAN.
Deleted member 15314
Guest
Don't see me disagreeing there. What I'm saying is that the probability of conceding a goal increases slower than the number of set pieces/crosses conceded.
However, it does increase. As our plan is seemingly to almost allow the opposition to cross freely, our CBs must be absolute towers in our box. Dier comes close, but Toby is woefully short of the start we need.
We need to both lower the number of crosses coming in and improve the rate at which we win aerial headers. Don't forget Aubameyang and Lacathreat both won a few headers in our box but they were too crap to convert.
I do not have the data for our set pieces (free kicks conceded that are crossed + Corners) but they are part of our plan because we've set-up to defend them.
Sure, if you concede loads of corners and free-kicks because you are defending deeper, there's an increased probability that this is where the oppo might score from. Again I'd don't have the numbers but if by sitting deep means we now concede double the amount of FK's + corners the probability of how the oppo score against us from these situations I would GUESS is higher. But statistically, the actual % the oppo score from might well be worse than the ave 3% (for corners) because we are more specifically drilled to defend them.
But the other massive consideration here is when Jose says we are "controlling a game", THIS is exactly what he means. We are playing how we want to play, we are playing the percentages, we've chosen to give the oppo the absolute lowest percentage chance to score against us.
I've been banging on about corners for donkey's years, they are so low % there are barely worth taking. The original poster sited John Terry as the scorer of 1 in 10! Let's break that down, let's say Chavs have 10 corners per game, that means Terry scored 1 goal from 100 corners, 1%!!!! That's not a successful formula to rely on winning you football matches. However, it is if you are the defending team.
Now, if you are still with me; here are some stats on OPEN-PLAY crosses: (Arteta should take note)
This is analysis from every cross delivered in the Big 5 Leagues during 2019/20 (plus an extra seasons worth of EPL data in 2018/19 for good measure)
Number of open-play crosses: 60151
Number of open-play crosses leading to goals: 1462 (2.3%)
Percentage of crosses leading to goals in next 5 actions: 2%
We want teams to cross against us, we want them to do this because it's low percentage, it's so low that the likelihood is they will not score. We let Woolwich cross because it's low %, we let City cross because it's low percentage, the City example also factors in that they have perhaps the best crosser of the ball in the Wolrd and City score more goals than anyone with him putting in perfect balls to well-orcastrated moves to the front or back posts, but they are still low percentage and if you analyse what they do, it is possible to reduce this threat as we did so effectively by plugging the channel with Sissoko and PEH. We let teams cross because we spend our time on the training ground mostly working without the ball (Jose famous Tactical Periodization), if we are allowing teams to cross (corners + free kicks + open play crosses) then we can focus more on training against them, THIS IS US CONTROLLING THE GAME, we have reduced the oppo plays down to a manageable number of variables (short corner, near-post corner, on the pen spot corner, back post corner, who are their runners/blockers etc) these variables can be studied and prepared for when they are set pieces and thus reduce the risk even further.
The ridiculous thing is Scum have conceded just one goal (own goal vs Burnley) from set pieces all season.
I don't believe they;
a) have a taller / better set of headers of the ball
b) are facing so many less than us to explain the difference
c) are at all well organised in any other aspect of play
I don't believe they;
a) have a taller / better set of headers of the ball
b) are facing so many less than us to explain the difference
c) are at all well organised in any other aspect of play
Deleted member 15314
Guest
this is the most likely explanation. They are dull as dishwater, but they do retain the ball a lot, despite their comical attempts at playing out the back.
Footstats - Complete analysis of UK Premiership, Championship and League Football Statistics for supporters, fans, punters and gamblers. Now includes statistics from the European Leagues including Scottish, Italian Serie A, Spanish La Liga and German
Footstats - The premier statistics and analysis site for understanding and review of the UK League results and history including Premiership, Championship and the other English leagues. Review the League Tables, Discuss the Form Guide, Look at The Game, Find your Team and Judge those Referees.
Not that many more according to this - marginally above average for the league
Can't find anything similar for freekicks
Conceding from set pieces from memory rather than stats seems to be all late in the game. Does not seem so much of a problem earlier. I saw a stat that we have spent very little time behind and other teams need a goal. Could a possible reason be that at the end of the game because the opposition need a goal they overload our penalty area and we cannot defend against the greater numbers.? Did Liverpool for example commit more players forward at the end of the game to get a winner than earlier? I am not going to watch it again to try and work it out. Not sure why we seem to concede so many set pieces at the end of the match but it feels that way.