Tottenham Hotspur Message Board
you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
What was the change in tactics in a critical part of the season?
I thought the others here were arguing the opposite. I thought 'arry played with 1 striker and VdV behind. The argument has been here (I think), that that wasn't attacking enough against Villa and that Daffy (presumably, or Gio) should have come on for VdV. Presumably changing the structure to 4-4-2.
'arry did try the 4-4-2 against Norwich and true it failed then.
'arry did try the 4-4-2 against Norwich and true it failed then."
john still playing dumb again!
u leave out facts to suit your argument as always.
we had no parker or sandro in DM against norwich.
playing livermore as the only defensive midfielder was asking for trouble. another mistake by redknapp.
& what about all the game this year that 4-4-1-1 failed?!
overall we never looked like scoring many with this system.
the vdv behind ade failed a lot this year.
u are getting more silly,stupid & pathetic in each defence of harry.
& the 4-4-1-1 wasnt troubling villas goal at all. we never looked scoring bar a pen. which lets face it, seemed the only way we would score.
even after the we scored, we never looked like scoring & harry just left it as it was. oh well he did bring on a DM at the end to sure up the 1pt!
john, harry has stated he settled for 1pt against villa.
& if given the chance again would settle for 1pt & 4th spot.
surely that goes against everthing u believe in?!
especially your cringing reach for the top/stars philosophy.
how can u defend this-
harry=we can win the title
then id setlle for 1pt & 4th spot despite 3pts & 3rd being within grasp.
it goes against everything u believe john.
but once again, u make huge contradictions to defend harry.
can u really not see how pathetic & silly u look?
- 1 Reply to A Yahoo! User
I addressed the Sandro/Parker and pointed out that Livermore played - a player that had played that role earlier.
I don't care when 4-4-1-1 failed. That isn't the point surely. Look SB - just remember this. We got 4th basically playing 4-4-1-1. Not 6th, not 7th not 10th. We actually got 4th.
If 4-4-1-1 failed so much, and if we gave away 10 points and if 'arry lost the plot and if 'arry is no good at tactics - then what on earth would success have been? Weren't you one of the ones saying the squad wasn't good enough at the start of the season and that 5th was likely? I'm lost SB, as 'arry then does as good if not better than you expect with a squad that isn't good enough - and now you expect him to have got third or better?
SB, I am silly stupid and pathetic. But disagreeing with you doesn't make me that.
'arry did not settle for 4th. Where did you get that? Wasn't it you who said we gave away a 10pt lead? Where were we then - were we 3rd? Or are you saying that 'arry purposely didn't win games? He purposely engineered it - is that what you're saying?
He didn't settle for a point SB. Just because we ended with a point, it doesn't mean that is what the target was does it?
I look in the mirror each day and see someone silly and pathetic. And? Does that make you right? I'm not sure I see the correlation between my looks and your ability to grasp the seasons we've had since 'arry became manager.