Tottenham Hotspur v Southampton

  • 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!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

We do have Vertonghen, Dawson, Kaboul and Chirches. Just as we have Capoue and Sandro as defensive elements in midfield (ala Parker). All of which are fine players and can offer us that balance.
I know that.......
but we still don't have the King and being without that kind of talent takes some getting around, as we have found out now Bale is gone.

I still am concerned about Rose as well, he was passed by all too easily at the weekend and his positional play was suspect as well.
I'd rather get Benny back personally. A good stiff slap and a tight haircut and he'll be fine. Particularly now that his homie is on the ball.
 
I know that.......
but we still don't have the King and being without that kind of talent takes some getting around, as we have found out now Bale is gone.

I still am concerned about Rose as well, he was passed by all too easily at the weekend and his positional play was suspect as well.
I'd rather get Benny back personally. A good stiff slap and a tight haircut and he'll be fine. Particularly now that his homie is on the ball.

The King is irreplaceable, but the point is we do have quality - so it neednt be all or nothing defence OR attack. Thats my issue really, balance that out successfully and we have one hell of a team IMHO.

Rose isnt a great player by any stretch, and Ive pointed to loaning / not replacing Ekotto as one of the big cock ups this season. However, I think Roses re-introduction has served to show we really have missed that natural width on the left.

My hope is January sees a decent LB come in to cover/compete
 
there is no such a thing as too attacking.
100% agree.

I know I'm in the minority but I really do follow the school of thought of the great Bill Nick and Danny Blanchflower in that professional football is a form of entertainment and the whole philosophy should be about going out to beat the other lot.

I walked out of WHL last Wednesday night seeing West Ham knock us out the cup in a positive mood simply because I enjoyed watching Tottenham again. From minute 1 we set about trying to attack the game, fast wingers down each flank, direct football, 2 up front, and it led to a cracking atmosphere. It's not just about the score in every match because results more often than that will follow the performance. You ain't going to win every game but you can certainly try your damned hardest to win every game. And under AVB there were times when this simply wasn't the case. More or less under Harry we attacked, but towards the end of his reign he took his eyes off the ball and that defensive sub after Rose got sent off at 1-1 against Villa was possibly the most costly and unforgivable substitution a Tottenham manager has ever made. Tim made a similar error against West Ham - this time around against So'ton he kept the 442 bringing Defoe on for Soldado and thus not sending out that psychological message to both teams that spurs were just going to shut up shop for the last few minutes.

The bare minimum I want to see out of Tottenham is exciting, attacking football. I can just about handle all the disappointments Spurs get season after season as long as we play our identifiable brand of attacking football that makes going to White Hart Lane fun. It's the very reason why we are Tottenham Hotspur. Perennial bottlers maybe, but I think I'd rather settle for the odd cup every few years than become those turgid machines that Liverpool (70s and 80s), Woolwich (George Graham) and Chelsea (Mourinho's first stint) have been in years gone by - winning football matches by sucking the life out of games, knocking the ball around sideways until the opposition get tired and nicking it 1-0 at home. If you want that go down the road and watch somebody else.

And I have faith that at some point, by playing this way, we will achieve that success that Bill and Danny reached in the 1960s doing it the proper way.
 
100% agree.

Perennial bottlers maybe, but I think I'd rather settle for the odd cup every few years than become those turgid machines that Liverpool (70s and 80s), Woolwich (George Graham) and Chelsea (Mourinho's first stint) have been in years gone by

As admirable as that thinking is, and in essence I agree, I've seen that for the 24 years of my life. I wouldn't mind seeing a little of the success the 3 named sides you've mentioned there. I'd sacrifice some of ''The Tottenham Way'' for just a one League title at the moment.
 
As admirable as that thinking is, and in essence I agree, I've seen that for the 24 years of my life. I wouldn't mind seeing a little of the success the 3 named sides you've mentioned there. I'd sacrifice some of ''The Tottenham Way'' for just a one League title at the moment.
I still wouldnt after also about 24 years now. Fuck realism, glory is the only thing that lasts.
 
Real under del bosque was the best team i ever saw, even after seeing barca and last years Bayern. Just because they played to score, they sacked Del Bosque and never fully recovered from it, they sold their souls to Mourinho and it got them that empty feeling inside that you feel when you sell out on your deepest of principles. I d rather be stubborn and proud.
 
Bit late and it's probably already been addressed but why did Sherwood sit up in the directors box in the first half an hour of the match?

Hoddle used to do that when he was manager. It's to get a better view of the match. Pitchside in the dugout it's a shit view frankly.

All the managers do it in Rugby.
 
Back
Top Bottom