Tottenham Hotspur Message Board
Was that a good tournament as we got to the QFs and only lost on penalties, or do the results hide the fact that we were awful throughout and just managed to nick a couple of wins?
Personally, I think the advance to the QFs flattered us and that we played poorly (or should I say negatively) throughout and seemed to be generally content to soak up pressure and defend.
Obviously, Roy needs time and a few weeks with the squad isn't enough for any manager. But is the way we played indicative of Roy's style, or just what he used because he didn't think the players were capable of anything else?
Makes you wonder where/how Spurs players will feature in the World Cup qualifiers and the Cup itself. Maybe Kyle will come through. I don't see Parker or Daffy being there - and I feel sorry for Daws, as I think his chance may have gone too.
Lennon could get himself back in contention, given what I saw this time out - but does he push himself enough?
It would be a sad state of affairs if an England squad lacked Spurs players.
I thought, apart from the team spirit, passion and heart, that we were pretty awful throughout the whole tournament. Reaching the QF's was part luck and part playing even worse teams in the group.
When compared to the other QF teams we were rubbish.
Personally I put that down to just not having the talent available. We are at least 25% worse at trapping and keeping a ball than other international players and over 50% worse at playing off the ball. Every time a Spanish player gets the ball he has at least 2, and usually more, options as the other players RUN into spaces and ask for the ball.
Our players find it hard to control a ball and then have no one to pass it to which means we give the ball away, sometimes by trying to pass it 50 yards.
Rooney was absolutely crap but that was down to match fitness mostly. Milner was average at best and Young!!! Well he contributed nothing at all. Apart from Gerrard throwing in some excellent crosses, we "created" nothing. Carroll ran around like a bull in a china shop but at least he was trying. Apart from his goal Welbeck was ineffective.
Given that all the defence had to do was block shots, they did ok and given that our strength is a do or die attitude then we can at least give ourselves some credit in that department but we won't win games by being willing to take the ball in the bollox will we!
What was most obvious was our lack of a ball playing, defence splitter i.e. a Modric or Silva, Iniesta or Xavi for example. And unfortunately, I don't see any coming up through the ranks either.
- 2 Replies to Sfer
The Italians highlighted a weakness in our play last night.....when teams like Spain and indeed Italy had 2 or 3 players closing them down they used it as a positive that there was space elsewhere on the pitch for their teammates and were cool and calm in releasing the ball to one of their own players. We, on the other hand, when presented with opposition players closing us down, panicked and ended up either hoofing it or giving the ball away. We need to instill some kind of confidence or something in our players to stop this happening....the world football scene has changed into a game about tactics and possession rather than a game where guts win out....we are f*cked basically! lol
I think any time you play that defensive game and invite people on then it's largely down to luck if they don't eventually score. The commentators implied we were unlucky to go out on penalties, but we were lucky to have been in the QFs in the first place, and lucky to still have been in the game after 120 minutes - especially with the number of balls that went over our CB's heads and nearly found their target.
The Chavs had luck on their side in the CL, and we had luck on our side in most of the Euro games.
Overall I think the performance at the Euros was much as I had expected...I felt a little let down by individual performances, for example, how many times do we see Walcott/Young skinning defenders in a rush to get to the byline and put in a cross yet that never really happened except the one time that Walcott went for it...
It seemed to me that the players were afraid to express themselves, I don't know whether this was the system/Roy stifling them or if they just bottled it?
On the plus side there was one highlight for me in the Ukraine game...Scotty Parker had just been twisted up severely on the edge of our box until he lost his footing and fell to the ground, instead of giving up the ghost he actually tried to tackle the player from a prone position....with his head!!! That's commitment for ya! :0)
Until we get a manager I don't know what is going on at the Lane?! If we do well next season and don't lose half the squad to the circling vultures there is a fair bet that we will see Spurs players in an England kit once again...I hope!!
- 1 Reply to Jay
Strange how people see things. I read that Parker should have been picking up Pirlo last night. From what I saw, I thought Roy had to the team to drop to two banks of four as soon as Italy got the ball, with then Rooney tracking back as Pirlo came forward.
But it all just seemed negative.
I agree re Walcott and Young - you would have thought with Young and Cole on one side, and Johnson and Walcott the other, we would have had a fair chance of scaring some defences, but they never looked to press on even when Walcott came on. Milner is ok as a worker, but he hardly scares defences.
Whether it was a Roy plan, or just the team totally lacking confidence, I don't know - but the players seemed quite up for it, given some of the pre and during tournament comments I read. So they didn't appear to be lacking confidence.
I just don't see many players in our (Spurs) team being future England players. Looks like it will need a couple of the youngsters forcing their way into the squad to even think of seeing Spurs players at the World Cup (on the proviso we qualify - and if we don't buy English talent in between).
Don't know why we beat about the bush, we are absolute shyte and have been for at least 5 years. Rooney once again proved that he's not a world stage player, a yard off the pace for whatever reason. Him, Young and Milner should have been gone at half time.
If your gunna get beaten, for fuskcs sake go down giving it a real go and then us folk will respect them for that.
- 1 Reply to Alan H
My sentiments. I'd rather not get out of the group, but give it a go.
I think the overall frustration for me though isn't Roy or the team, but the total lack of foresight. I've lost count of the number of years the FA have spoken about changing it all, schools of excellence and changes at grass roots. But still the same. I bet kids still come through the same way. Playing on boggy pitches in freezing rain where size and brawn are more valuable than skill. Until the work horse ethos is taken out of the kids game, it will filter through as it's hard to reverse engineer something that's been engrained for years.
You might be right John. I don't think Roy is a moron - you don't get to manage the teams he has if you are a moron - but at the same time I am not sure he is the right man to lead us to being able to compete with the likes of Spain or Italy. He is old school and the decision to take Terry and not Rio was wrong.
Not necessarily from a football point of view - we all have different views on players - but that decision was not about football and we all know it. If it had been Rio would have replaced Cahill when he got injured. Terry did well considering but he is not the future is he.
He may have chosen to use the tactics he did or he might just have mucked up - who knows.
All know is I keep expecting to see him standing on the touchline looking up at the sky with his dribbling mouth open and with a big wet patch in his trousers where he has wet himself.
...the GOOD NEWS- the F.A have finally realised where we are lacking in the technical department so have made some big changes in kids coaching.
obvious stuff that u would think would already be in place!....'
The main problem there is that these initiatives have been spoken about before.
Maybe I'm cynical but having followed my kid around from 6-16, the biggest change IMO should be WHEN they play. Amateur pitches aren't drained, don't have sub soil heating, aren't like bowling greens - they tend to be like churned up fields. For me, I'd like to see the 'young' kids playing in summer when they don't have to contend with 3in of mud. But then we'd have a problem as the grounds we often used down here where multi-discipline and shared with cricket.
I lost count of the number of times that the centre of the pitch was so churned up, that the only outlet was the wings - and even then the coaches were actively encouraging the kids to keep the ball off the deck as you couldn't trust any more than a 2 yd pass.
Having accepted the Managers position, if Roy then allowed others to tell him he had to take Terry and ignore Rio, what does that say about him and the muppets running the FA?
We all know that PL footballers, and other rich celebrities, get special treatment from the Courst so no suirprise really is there.
There were only two real choices weren't there? Roy was the safest of them from the FA's point of view. Who else was there that would not have been seen as either "another foreigner" (after two failed attempts) or "too young/inexperienced" both of which would have invited the wrath of the British press?
Given the apparent size of the task in order to make England a side to be taken seriously, Roy is definately not the Messiah IMO. Safe yes but the longer we stick with safe the longer the road becomes behind the others.
john, 100% agree!
my little brother plays mainly in the winter & when the weather is bad. the pitches are awful, the kids are freezing & not exactly enjoying it.
then when we start to get some good weather in easter time, the season ends!
i always say why do kids have to mirror & play at the same time as the professionals?!
id like much more summer 5 & 6 a side kids competitions.
they get more touches on the ball, learn to pass & keep the ball on the floor.
The Terry/Rio thing - I also thought that was 'ethically' wrong, but I'm also not sure if that was entirely Roy's decision. (I also still find it odd that the 'law' seems to have arranged a court case around when it was suitable for the Chavs). Footballing wise? I think that both of them are past their best.
IMHO Roy was the wrong choice - mainly as for me he just doesn't inspire confidence. But, as I say, what I feel is irrelevant if he can turn England around - and given the mess we appear to be in, that's no short term project.
I stand corrected, calling Roy a moron was a
I don't accept though as an excuse, he has
only had the job a short time.
He knows the players and the systems they play. Therefore why did he ask them to do something completely different.
His coaching made the players look worse than they are, I would sooner have lost 2 -0 to
Italy playing proper football.
Still look on the bright side if we played Germany we would probably have been humiliated.
But who else would you have put in charge?
Personally I don't think 'arry. I think 'arry is at his best when he tinkers with teams and brings in people to blend. That works best when there's a big pool to select from. Ok, 'arry is allegedly a man manager as well, but he'd have been pressed with the limited selection pool.
I'm not even sure I agree with an enforced English manager - if ALL international managers had to be of the nationality of the team, then fine. But, even though I'd prefer an English person to get the job (simply because of the implication of that), the FA should just choose on merit.
- View More Messages