Categories
Spurs match reports

Fulham 1-1 Spurs: Two Tottenham Talking Points

1. Ange’s Selection

You’ll be pretty relieved to hear that the drill today at AANP Towers is to err on the side of brevity, what with the need to spend the midweek daylight hours earning the monthly envelope rather than nattering away about our heroes. As such it’s just a couple of the standout points of discussion, but they don’t come much fruitier than what the daring amongst us might term Big Ange’s First Wrong Move.

Hindsight, of course, is always flawless, and it would be pretty easy to clear the throat and spend a goodish amount of time chirping away about how ill-considered was Our Glorious Leader’s choice of personnel in the aftermath of last night’s limp old showing. But I can at least look my fellow lilywhite in the eye and state with all sincerity that AANP has never bought into this business of mass changes in personnel. Never liked it at international level, don’t like it at club level. In fact, search long enough and you’ll find one or two souls who received a bit of a lecture from me making this point immediately before kick-off.

The principal objection is that for a fringe player to take a deep breath and deliver a performance that has the paying public rising to their feet and strewing the place with garlands, he really needs those around him to be regulars in their roles. Put another way, if we want to see what young Skipp is made of, then throw him in alongside two of Sarr, Maddison and Bissouma, rather than instead of. Or to get the real lowdown on Manor Solomon on the right of attack, make sure that the usual suspects are patrolling that flank alongside him. And so on. The principle generally applies across the team, and as mentioned, can be mimicked in national colours – if for example one wants to assess the cut of Ivan Toney’s jib in attack, or gauge the ticks and crosses of Trent in midfield, one keeps all (or most) other things equal, and lets them off the leash amongst established company.

This business of changing nine of the eleven, by contrast, generates precious few useful insights. They can be the best players around, but if they’re all new to their surroundings then they all rather stumble around the place in pretty rudderless fashion, not quite knowing who’s in charge and at what precise hour to unleash hell.

As it happens, I rather fancy that a Skipp-Hojbjerg-Lo Celso triumvirate would, after a few weeks of working together, function well enough to hold their own quite competently against someone like Fulham. But it would be a dickens of an ask to expect them to start purring from Minute 1 of their first appearance together. And the odds lengthen considerably when ahead of them they have Perisic and Solomon making their first starts, and behind them four more fresh faces out of five.

AANP would much rather have seen one of two of the usual midfield three in situ, and similarly one change in each of the defence and attack. The flow would not have been too wildly disrupted, and those brought in would have enjoyed more becoming conditions in which to peddle their wares.

The counter-argument, of course, is that Maddison and Bissouma in particular are the sort of fellows whose health and wellbeing for the bigger pond of the Premier League is just too bally important to go frittering away in the Carabao Cup. And one certainly understands the point. It is loaded with merit. Should Maddison have bounded around from the off and then twisted a limb at a right-angle half an hour in, a few pitchforks would have been grabbed amongst the faithful without too much delay.

Nevertheless, some sort of balancing act ought to have been achievable without too much strain upon the grey cells. Much like I understand is the case with the Royal Family, one wouldn’t shove the whole lot of them aboard the same aircraft – but that doesn’t mean forbidding any of them from flying at all. Which is to say, perhaps Maddison could have been rested, but Sarr and Bissouma started; Romero wrapped up with slippers and a bourbon while at least two of the other defensive three were readied for action. After all, playing twice in a week, once in a while, ought not to be too much of a stretch for these fine young specimens.

However, Our Glorious Leader presumably had his reasons. For a start he would have expected, reasonably enough, that even if they did resemble a bunch of strangers speaking in differing tongues, the eleven selected would at least each show the individual acumen to win their own individual battles and make more of a fist of things than they did in the first half in particular.

He might also have seen this as a rare chance to give as many as possible of his troops as close to 90 minutes as possible, there being limited opportunity for this sort of thing in the coming weeks without the benefit of European jollies. And with the transfer window looming rather awkwardly over proceedings, he might have considered this whole exercise a necessary precursor to a spot of September 1st culling.

Whatever the reasons, the dice has been cast, recorded and put back in its box now, so there’s no turning back. In truth it’s not really too great a blow, and frankly I struggle even to pretend to be particularly upset; but it is a dashed shame to toss away quite so casually a fairly straightforward opportunity to challenge for a trophy.

2. Richarlison

On the bright side, at least Richarlison pocketed some winnings. Considerably assisted though he might have been by the curious incident of the Fulham bobbie whose absence was temporarily enforced by a boot in a state of disrepair, one does not shrug off gift-horses when they rumble into view. One does instead precisely what Richarlison did, and loop a header back across the goalkeeper and into the net.

At kick-off, the list of wants from this fixture was pretty short and free of frills. Win the thing; have one or two of the reserves catch the eye; and by hook, crook or a penalty rustle up a goal for Richarlison. And one out of three will have to do.

It’s a good job that the wish-list did not extend to Richarlison delivering an all-round performance that blew the minds of all in attendance, because once again he stomped around the place looking like he didn’t quite belong. No shortage of effort, but whatever he tried, be it linking up the play or racing onto forward balls, it didn’t really work.

Even after his goal, which I rather bobbishly expected to stuff the lad full to bursting with confidence and brio, he continued to bump into others and generally bang the old loaf against a brick wall. For what it’s worth, I remain happy to keep giving him time, and remain confident that the goals will at least trickle, if not flow; and more to the point Big Ange seems similarly inclined, at least until such time as another striker worthy of the name is yanked into the building. Nevertheless, his overall performance was a bit of a non-event, punctuated by one isolated cause for cheer. Rather summed up the whole thing, what?

Sharing is daring:

12 replies on “Fulham 1-1 Spurs: Two Tottenham Talking Points”

Absolutely! Putting out last year’s first XI (more or less) and expecting them to play the same as last Saturday’s first XI was asking for trouble. Ange-ball reverted to Conte-ball as quick as you could say Tim Robinson.

As you say, Mr P. probably had good cause for his selection but what manager after manager seems to fail to understand is that we, the fans, would like a fair crack at winning a trophy. We only have three chances this year and before September is upon us, that number has diminished by 33%.

Finally, AANP, I must congratulate you on no mention of the D-S words. Bad enough he was playing (I use the term loosely) at all, but to give him a friggin’ penalty!!!!! Whaaaaat?!?!?

Roll on Burnley. Let’s hope our faith is restored.

I thought Sanchez actually had a fairly good game, and the fact he’s chosen, and played (yes, often as a sub) means that Ange obviously rates him to some extent. Yes, he missed a penalty, has confidence issues because of all the negativity, but he was brave enough to stick his hand up and volunteer, unlike those who were on the pitch at the time who play higher up (i.e., Scarlett, Hojbjerg)

I have an alternate view which, to summarise, is that Ange was in a ‘no win’ position. As he is a manager who insists on having the final say regarding incoming or outgoing players, I believe, in the final week of the transfer period, he had to say who he definitely did not want in the squad and who he would accept.

Given he’s only come into the job, he’d yet to see a good number of players in a competitive game. What to do? Ange opted to play them. Was that good for progression in the EFL Cup? Obviously not – though, I will point out that Spurs did not lose in the 90 minutes.

Why didn’t he play those he clearly considered second fiddles against Brentford, Man U or Bournemouth? Well, he would have jeopardized those positive results, stalled any momentum and good feeling, and also confused players by not rewarding the best performers with team spots.

Tough choice, right? Personally, I think Ange made the right choice and, with a slice of luck, Spurs may have made it through penalties to the next round with the team he selected.

Writing this a further few days down the track allows me to say that the start in the league, 10 points from 12, 11 goals scored, goal difference of 7 should help salve the wounds of an early cup exit.

In response to both Sid and Sealy – firstly, what ho, thanks tremendously for stopping by; and secondly while I admire Sanchez’s commitment to the cause, and noted a couple of his flying blocks last night, if a central defender needs to resort to last-ditch full-length interventions quite so often, it suggests to me that he’s got the mechanics wrong in some of his previous ditches. Read the game a bit better and there would be less need for those full-body extensions. Plus, his passing could use a bit of polish.
I don’t throw too much muck at him for the pen though – wasn’t exactly a corker, but a doff of the cap to him for volunteering. Our youngest bona fide striker notably shirked the job (may have been pencilled in as 5th taker I suppose)

“Plus, his passing could use a bit of polish.” Ho, ho, ho, If Spurs are now (“just copying Pep, mate”) predominantly playing out from the back, it surely rules out a CB whose stuttering attempts at ball control add an unwelcome element of Russian roulette when required to play through the press. Especially when the neighbouring full-back has already taken up the Cancelo role and headed towards the centre circle…
Bring back dull dependable Romero, for gawd’s sake.

Sanchez. You can be forgiven for swearing he’s on some hidden contract with the Woolwich folk.

Must disagree with you on nearly every point made, my dear fellow, while noting the (as always) elegance of your expressing of them. For starters, the Carabao Cup (always thought it was called the “Milk Cup” or perhaps the “League Cup”. But there you are; perhaps it should called the “Snack Cup” or perhaps even the “Fruit Cup”) has always been a bit of a joke cup, coming at an awkward time in the schedule and on one the worst possible nights of the week, ie Tuesday. All managers rest their regular line-ups unless they have the following weekend off. All of them, and that includes Fulham, who were playing with a similar squad. There was absolutely no reason for Ange to believe that the same second-string players who led Barcelona 2-0 (and I repeat, Barcelona!) at the half might not do an equally good job against Fulham. And as we subsequently saw, it was his intent to only grant them a single half of play if the result was wretched. It was not wretched but rather ill-fated; all of the goals produced in regular time were by Spurs players, and so the match produced a draw, rather than a loss. If it had been a regular season game the result would have been disappointing, as at Brentford, but hardly tragic. As matters stand, one suspects that hiring a penalty kick consultant–and perhaps another to work with Messer Van de Ven on this own-goal lark–might well be in order after the dismal overtime display. But Ange has been at the deep end since his feet hit the ground at White Hart Lane; no honeymoon period, an accursed pre-season tour of the mysterious Orient, and players rushed into the starting line-up after passing their medical. He needed a breather to rest his regulars, especially the lads with sore shins and ankles (Bissouma, Udogie, Romero, Madisson) who have to play again in a few days, and a last chance before the trade deadline to see if a few of the others are the stuff of which starters are made. They are not. We knew this in Porto back in Nuno’s few glory days, but someone neglected to brief Ange. This is a valuable if painful lesson learned and possibly well worth the usual early exit from a competition no one really cares about winning. I imagine that even Manchester United often draw a blank when they’re accused of being the current champions.

But these are minor quibbles. It is on the subject of Richarlison that you and I must come to metaphoric fisticuffs. A propped-up store-window mannequin might have equally serviceably popped that cross from Perisic into the net. A brace or a hat-trick might then have restored our faith in the chap, but as you pointed out, no further effort or evidence of skill was forthcoming. There is absolutely no reason in future, employing your own logic, for playing Richarlison as anything but another Skippy. A substitute. That Ange may have come to that same conclusion is evidenced by the newly frenzied negotiations surrounding Ansu Fati and Brennan Johnson. On the subject of Fati; Barca may now loan him to Spurs rather than Liverpool in exchange for the reverse loan of Lo Celso. Ange, who was adamant opposed to this last a week ago, may have changed his mind after the Argentine maestro’s doleful performance last night. You see? It’s an ill wind indeed…

I think you miss a deeper point.

The great teams are GOOD AT WINNING. And good at WANTING TO WIN.

Thus after the Bournemouth match we have a frisson of unease amongst other teams. Maybe Totts are turning pretty damn fast into something to be reckoned with?

So what does Ange do? He drops all the main faster more skilful players who’ve starred so far in favour of Conte-era honest toilers. Result? Drop-off in pace, and honest toil. No-one’s afraid of that.

No! Play the Bournemouth team or something v close to it again, and then again v Burnley.

The Carabao Cup ought to be an excellent way to have a deep cup run and get these new players really clicking together in the heat of cup battle. Instead all that possibility for building a merciless mentality and momentum is simply thrown away.

Utter disgrace. Yet so so Spursy ???

I have an alternate view which, to summarise, is that Ange was in a ‘no win’ position. As he is a manager who insists on having the final say regarding incoming or outgoing players, I believe, in the final week of the transfer period, he had to say who he definitely did not want in the squad and who he would accept.

Given he’s only come into the job, he’d yet to see a good number of players in a competitive game. What to do? Ange opted to play them. Was that good for progression in the EFL Cup? Obviously not – though, I will point out that Spurs did not lose in the 90 minutes.

Why didn’t he play those he clearly considered second fiddles against Brentford, Man U or Bournemouth? Well, he would have jeopardized those positive results, stalled any momentum and good feeling, and also confused players by not rewarding the best performers with team spots.

Tough choice, right? Personally, I think Ange made the right choice and, with a slice of luck, Spurs may have made it through penalties to the next round with the team he selected.

Writing this a further few days down the track allows me to say that the start in the league, 10 points from 12, 11 goals scored, goal difference of 7 should help salve the wounds of an early cup exit.

Comments are closed.