With nine games to go, we don't need Grand philosophy. We just need points. And normally I would say that defensive, compact, well organized football is THE WAY a weak side gets some points. But we've tried that. Tried it with Jose, with Nuno, tried it with Conte, tried it with Frank. And it has always led to disappointing results. I don't know why, but it's clear: It's not who we are, mate.
And the question here is: Why do people think that 'defensive, compact, well organized' football is the way to points? Because there doesn't seem to be much evidence for that.
Specifically for a weaker team, is there truly not evidence? Anecdotal evidence is 'every' instance of a championship / League one side coming up against an EPL side, or the majority of instances where a bottom 5 side faces a top 5 side (2 examples of a clearly weaker side, there are more of course) they play with 11 men behind the ball 95% of the match. I assume there is evidence to back that strategy but maybe there isn't?
I'm not arguing that THFC are currently the clearly weaker side e.g. against Palace - that's a separate discussion.
Excellent breakdown! It seems so simple that attacking is needed to win, but so easy to disregard when struggling to stay afloat. Spurs needs someone that isn't afraid to tell the boys to keep attacking, like Ange did. Give up 3, but score 4! I echo Peter's sentiments above...
Yeah, I think the 'pragmatism' narrative in the Premier League is so strong right now that even a team like Spurs is painted naive for trying to attack and control games.
What’s described as pragmatism by pundits is only actually pragmatic when a team is defending a significant lead with a limited amount of the game left to play, in which preventing shots means the whistle goes before the opposition can score. Otherwise it’s gambling
Really interesting analysis - supported by compelling data.
I read somewhere that "the best form of defence is relentless attack".
I'm not sure I've seen that at any time this season from Spurs.
We saw it plenty of times under Ange. That 4-1 win against Villa in November 2024 was the best example. All 4 goals in 2nd half with relentless attack and effectively dominated Villa out of the match.
Indeed, I think the idea that attacking well makes you better defensively is pretty compelling, and we're in the situation we're in now because we've tried the inverse.
God i miss Ange.
You and I both.
Same.
With nine games to go, we don't need Grand philosophy. We just need points. And normally I would say that defensive, compact, well organized football is THE WAY a weak side gets some points. But we've tried that. Tried it with Jose, with Nuno, tried it with Conte, tried it with Frank. And it has always led to disappointing results. I don't know why, but it's clear: It's not who we are, mate.
And the question here is: Why do people think that 'defensive, compact, well organized' football is the way to points? Because there doesn't seem to be much evidence for that.
Specifically for a weaker team, is there truly not evidence? Anecdotal evidence is 'every' instance of a championship / League one side coming up against an EPL side, or the majority of instances where a bottom 5 side faces a top 5 side (2 examples of a clearly weaker side, there are more of course) they play with 11 men behind the ball 95% of the match. I assume there is evidence to back that strategy but maybe there isn't?
I'm not arguing that THFC are currently the clearly weaker side e.g. against Palace - that's a separate discussion.
Excellent breakdown! It seems so simple that attacking is needed to win, but so easy to disregard when struggling to stay afloat. Spurs needs someone that isn't afraid to tell the boys to keep attacking, like Ange did. Give up 3, but score 4! I echo Peter's sentiments above...
Yeah, I think the 'pragmatism' narrative in the Premier League is so strong right now that even a team like Spurs is painted naive for trying to attack and control games.
What’s described as pragmatism by pundits is only actually pragmatic when a team is defending a significant lead with a limited amount of the game left to play, in which preventing shots means the whistle goes before the opposition can score. Otherwise it’s gambling
Really interesting analysis - supported by compelling data.
I read somewhere that "the best form of defence is relentless attack".
I'm not sure I've seen that at any time this season from Spurs.
We saw it plenty of times under Ange. That 4-1 win against Villa in November 2024 was the best example. All 4 goals in 2nd half with relentless attack and effectively dominated Villa out of the match.
Indeed, I think the idea that attacking well makes you better defensively is pretty compelling, and we're in the situation we're in now because we've tried the inverse.