How to we marry strong defence with a greater attacking threat?
Last season while everyone was clamouring for strikers to replace Roberto Soldado and Emmanuel Adebayor I received the usual abuse for suggesting it was the defence we needed to sort out first, as that puts pressure on the forwards to make up for poor defending.
Quite frankly when you write you are always going to receive abuse from some quarters, but then that tells you all you need to know about hat individual. Reasoned argument is a far more sensible and, well, grown up approach.
Every successful team has a sound defence, they don't leak goals. The 'we'll score more than you' approach rarely works over a season and doesn't work long-term. To build a successful side you have to build from the back. First it is a question of making ourselves hard to beat and as we have the longest unbeaten run in the Premier League this season. it would seem we can tick that box. It is deflating for attacking players to always have to rescue a defence or feel if they have scored it isn't going to be enough. Over time it wears you down and results would suffer.
Again the mental side dictates what happens, players must have confidence in their teammates so attackers must have faith in defenders. That helps create a bond which drives a side on to achieve more.
Once the defensive side of the team has been addressed over a period of time, every purchase if never going to be a success at any club, an attacking element has to be added. The difficulty is in the balance. The more attacking you make a side the more you weaken the defensive side, conversely the more you work on strengthening the defence the less effective you make your attack. Sides defend as a team not just a defence. How much you divide the workload of the midfield players between defence and attack determines your defnsive strength or weakness.
It is a fallacy to think that we have four attackers and six defenders, our full-backs are attackers, one defensive midfield is an attacker so when we attack we number seven. When we defend all but Kane drop behind the ball. How we handle the transition from attack to defence or defence to attack can go a long way to determining our effectiveness. We all remember quick Tottenham counter-attacks under Harry Redknapp and we all remember the ponderous Andre Villas-Boas build up.
Have we effectively managed to find the right marriage between the two? I'm not sure we have yet, we are susceptible to a quick counter-attack ourselves, but how many do you remember from us this season. We have established a sound defensive platform to build from, our defensive record tells us that. The next two transfer windows are windows where we will concentrate on improving ourselves in an attack.
Last season Eriksen on the left was a defensive weakness, Lamela and Chadli were both hit an miss defensively, sometimes they just didn't bother, many of our defensive problems stemmed from those three. At the moment you think of Lamela and he is defensively putting in his shift and when centrally he is creative and a goal threat. Eriksen is better defensively when central.
Chadli is now injured, Son works hard both in attack and defence, although we have not really seen enough of him and Njie to come to concrete conclusions. Dier is being raved about by all, Dembele showed he is a central midfielder and a good one when motivated, I continue to ask what truly motivates him though. In a recent article (Is Eriksen causing problems at Spurs? - link also at the end of the article) I wrote about how he and Eriksen can't play together, if Dembele is in the link role, as neither runs past Kane both preferring to stay behind the ball. Also that Eriksen and Lamela are having difficulty fitting together with Lamela needing to come central to be a goal threat, but Eriksen taking that space.
If Lamela is coming from the right into the centre then we are weak to a quick counter-attack on our right, if he stays out on the right he isn't a goal threat and we lose in attack. How we resolve the attacking problems will have a knock on effect on our defensive stability. It is going to be interesting t see how Pochettino is going to evolve us this and next season.
While we search for the right balance we'll have unpredictable results. What would be wrong right now is to judge us as being a finished article, we have to be assessed as a work in progress, are we on track, are we improving how we want to play. We have to be assessed against what we are trying to achieve and against how we are trying to achieve it.
Recent Articles
Feghouli likely to turn down more money for Spurs - negotiating to stay at Valencia
VIDEO Link: Full match Replay Spurs vs Liverpool - plus highlights, Match of the Day, pre and Post Match Analysis
Is Eriksen causing problems at Spurs? - and why Dembele, Eriksen and Lamla, Eriksen can't play together
Further reports of Spurs scouting - MacKenzie scouting 9 games in 4 days
Quite frankly when you write you are always going to receive abuse from some quarters, but then that tells you all you need to know about hat individual. Reasoned argument is a far more sensible and, well, grown up approach.
Every successful team has a sound defence, they don't leak goals. The 'we'll score more than you' approach rarely works over a season and doesn't work long-term. To build a successful side you have to build from the back. First it is a question of making ourselves hard to beat and as we have the longest unbeaten run in the Premier League this season. it would seem we can tick that box. It is deflating for attacking players to always have to rescue a defence or feel if they have scored it isn't going to be enough. Over time it wears you down and results would suffer.
Again the mental side dictates what happens, players must have confidence in their teammates so attackers must have faith in defenders. That helps create a bond which drives a side on to achieve more.
Once the defensive side of the team has been addressed over a period of time, every purchase if never going to be a success at any club, an attacking element has to be added. The difficulty is in the balance. The more attacking you make a side the more you weaken the defensive side, conversely the more you work on strengthening the defence the less effective you make your attack. Sides defend as a team not just a defence. How much you divide the workload of the midfield players between defence and attack determines your defnsive strength or weakness.
It is a fallacy to think that we have four attackers and six defenders, our full-backs are attackers, one defensive midfield is an attacker so when we attack we number seven. When we defend all but Kane drop behind the ball. How we handle the transition from attack to defence or defence to attack can go a long way to determining our effectiveness. We all remember quick Tottenham counter-attacks under Harry Redknapp and we all remember the ponderous Andre Villas-Boas build up.
Have we effectively managed to find the right marriage between the two? I'm not sure we have yet, we are susceptible to a quick counter-attack ourselves, but how many do you remember from us this season. We have established a sound defensive platform to build from, our defensive record tells us that. The next two transfer windows are windows where we will concentrate on improving ourselves in an attack.
Last season Eriksen on the left was a defensive weakness, Lamela and Chadli were both hit an miss defensively, sometimes they just didn't bother, many of our defensive problems stemmed from those three. At the moment you think of Lamela and he is defensively putting in his shift and when centrally he is creative and a goal threat. Eriksen is better defensively when central.
Chadli is now injured, Son works hard both in attack and defence, although we have not really seen enough of him and Njie to come to concrete conclusions. Dier is being raved about by all, Dembele showed he is a central midfielder and a good one when motivated, I continue to ask what truly motivates him though. In a recent article (Is Eriksen causing problems at Spurs? - link also at the end of the article) I wrote about how he and Eriksen can't play together, if Dembele is in the link role, as neither runs past Kane both preferring to stay behind the ball. Also that Eriksen and Lamela are having difficulty fitting together with Lamela needing to come central to be a goal threat, but Eriksen taking that space.
If Lamela is coming from the right into the centre then we are weak to a quick counter-attack on our right, if he stays out on the right he isn't a goal threat and we lose in attack. How we resolve the attacking problems will have a knock on effect on our defensive stability. It is going to be interesting t see how Pochettino is going to evolve us this and next season.
While we search for the right balance we'll have unpredictable results. What would be wrong right now is to judge us as being a finished article, we have to be assessed as a work in progress, are we on track, are we improving how we want to play. We have to be assessed against what we are trying to achieve and against how we are trying to achieve it.
Recent Articles
Feghouli likely to turn down more money for Spurs - negotiating to stay at Valencia
VIDEO Link: Full match Replay Spurs vs Liverpool - plus highlights, Match of the Day, pre and Post Match Analysis
Is Eriksen causing problems at Spurs? - and why Dembele, Eriksen and Lamla, Eriksen can't play together
Further reports of Spurs scouting - MacKenzie scouting 9 games in 4 days
3 comments
Poch doesnt know how to pick another teams defence because he is 1 dimensional and tactically inept.
The supporting 3 when ever Lamela Townsend Chadli play are nowhere near supportive enough with movement or intelligent play.
The flaws have been not getting rid of sub standard players that don't fit the system and failure to buy an Experienced Striker.
And with the anouncement today from Uefa that we made the biggest net profit in europe last year gives Levy and his Legion of followers no excuse for not buying a player we desperately needed to avoid this.
I fear this will burn Harry out and could hinder his development hard.