4 4 2 please come back!

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Parklane Block 34

Parklane Block 34

Hey gorgeous, what's your name?
Like the majority of spurs fans I am bored!!! I've renewed my season ticket with 7 of my other spurs supporting mates and some thing quite strange is happening. Maybe it's because we are all getting older and more misrable. After all we have been going to the Lane for nearly 30 years now and been STH for the last 20.

We don't really care about the actual football anymore. We go for a laugh and a catch up and of course a few beers. There were times in the last 2 seasons where we have actually stayed in the pub and other times left at half time out of complete boredom.

Now don't get me wrong I love spurs it's in my blood, and Christ I have seen some crap, but I can say hand in heart I have never felt so bored. Why?

Maybe it's the players who I have no infinity with anymore
Maybe it's the countless false dawns over the years that have finally taken their toll

But for me it's the style of play. I hate this one up front bollocks with no width and two defensively minded in midfield. What happened to the all round midfield player who could do everything?! Viera, Gerrard, or a Robson.

It's not just spurs though. That formation seems all the rage at the moment.

But we are THFC we need to something different especially at home against socalled weaker opposition. Let's go back to 4 4 2, sign some wingers who can actually beat their man and excite the fans. Sign a partner for Kane. Have a couple of midfielders who can get forward into the box and score goals as well as defend.

If it carries on like this there will actually be no point building the new stadium as fans won't pay top dollar for too long to watch that crap.

Change it now please.
 
Parklane Block 34 said:
Like the majority of spurs fans I am bored!!! I've renewed my season ticket with 7 of my other spurs supporting mates and some thing quite strange is happening. Maybe it's because we are all getting older and more misrable. After all we have been going to the Lane for nearly 30 years now and been STH for the last 20.

We don't really care about the actual football anymore. We go for a laugh and a catch up and of course a few beers. There were times in the last 2 seasons where we have actually stayed in the pub and other times left at half time out of complete boredom.

Now don't get me wrong I love spurs it's in my blood, and Christ I have seen some crap, but I can say hand in heart I have never felt so bored. Why?

Maybe it's the players who I have no infinity with anymore
Maybe it's the countless false dawns over the years that have finally taken their toll

But for me it's the style of play. I hate this one up front bollocks with no width and two defensively minded in midfield. What happened to the all round midfield player who could do everything?! Viera, Gerrard, or a Robson.

It's not just spurs though. That formation seems all the rage at the moment.

But we are THFC we need to something different especially at home against socalled weaker opposition. Let's go back to 4 4 2, sign some wingers who can actually beat their man and excite the fans. Sign a partner for Kane. Have a couple of midfielders who can get forward into the box and score goals as well as defend.

If it carries on like this there will actually be no point building the new stadium as fans won't pay top dollar for too long to watch that crap.

Change it now please.
Click to expand...

Excellent post
 
First of all I have to say that I don't agree with the conclusion; that we should go back to the traditional flair winger flat 442. To me, it's outdated, it doesn't suit modern football, because at any given time of a match it leaves too many players "out of the game".

The fit modern footballer can handle running for 90 minutes, so you should try to have as many of the 11 involved in the game at any given time, either by positioning themselves for winning the ball or by being passing options when the team is on the ball or about to win the ball.

Let's say you move the ball up the left flank. With the traditional 442, you will have the right winger keeping width on the right side, and the full back taking up a defensive position a little closer to the middle of the pitch. With an inverted winger, you'll have the right winger moving in towards the middle of the pitch, as a passing option, maybe moving into space, while you will have the right full back moving forwards as a wide option for a cross ball. You will have at least one more player involved in the game.


That being said - I dislike 4-2-3-1 too.

I find it truly mind boggling that nearly every team in the world seems to play this formation now. You would think that a manager for a top level football team had top level knowledge of football and tactics - kinda like top chess players have the best understanding of chess. Yet there is such a lack of tactical creativity, and so much just applying the flavor of the month tactics. Now, it has to be said that 4-2-3-1 doesn't necessarily equal 4-2-3-1. There are a lot of different ways to play it and go about it, and as most managers would probably tell you; those numbers doesn't mean a lot when it comes to how the team actually plays. A 4-2-3-1 with Sterling and Suarez on the flanks, Coutinho as the AMC and Sturridge as the striker is very different from one with Eriksen and Dembele on the flanks, Chadli as the AMC and Kane as the striker. That being said, it's still unbelievable that so many goes the 4-2-3-1 route.

Our team is an example of why it's bad that managers seems to lack flexibility and creativity. Last season, when Adebayor wasn't playing, more often than not our right attacking midfielder was the worst player on the pitch. With Townsend or Lamela there, they added close to nothing of value on or off the ball - defensively terrible, very sloppy on the ball offensively. Yet the manager insisted on playing them, because we needed a right attacking midfielder for our 4-2-3-1. Would we not have been better off trying something different. It wouldn't have to be wastly different, but we should've tried to find something that would fit our personell better. It seems most managers have accepted 4-2-3-1 as the best and only way to line up, and if something doesn't work out they try to tweak it - like Poch does now with having a 'real' DM in Dier.

Is the 4-2-3-1 the best counter to 4-2-3-1, is what the managers should be asking themselves. I do think that all clubs should try to find a way to play their football, not mixing it up every game to best counter the opponent. But in todays meta, with pretty much every team playing 4-2-3-1, there should be a fuckton of points to earn by coming up with a decent counter to it.

Something like
Keeper: Lloris
Center Backs: Alderweireld - Vertonghen
Very defensive midfielder/Center Back: Dier
Offensive Wing backs/Wide midfielders: Trippier - Rose
Central midfielders: Eriksen - Mason
Attacking midfielders/strikers: Chadli - Dembele - Kane

With a setup like that we could become a 5 man back line when under heavy pressure, giving one man up against the four attacking players of the 4-2-3-1. Going forwards we would have three men up top, assisted by the wing backs, giving us one man up against the two centre backs and the two full backs in the 4-2-3-1.

It may not seem very different from what we play now. The main thing is that it would put more of an emphasis on the attacking ability of the wing backs. Right now we have Davies and Walker prefered, as they are full backs in a four man back line, but they are both too weak going forwards, which kinda ruins the balance of our team and leaves us more boring than we should be. The 2-1-2-2-3 that I propose here would also put an even more defensive emphasis on the defensive midfielder, while allowing the CMs to be picked more for their ability to add to the attack. The last point would be important for finding a more fitting place to Alli in the side, it would allow for Eriksen to play as a CM, and it would hopefully allow Mason and Bentaleb to show more of their offensive qualities.
 
tbonepremier said:
First of all I have to say that I don't agree with the conclusion; that we should go back to the traditional flair winger flat 442. To me, it's outdated, it doesn't suit modern football, because at any given time of a match it leaves too many players "out of the game".

The fit modern footballer can handle running for 90 minutes, so you should try to have as many of the 11 involved in the game at any given time, either by positioning themselves for winning the ball or by being passing options when the team is on the ball or about to win the ball.

Let's say you move the ball up the left flank. With the traditional 442, you will have the right winger keeping width on the right side, and the full back taking up a defensive position a little closer to the middle of the pitch. With an inverted winger, you'll have the right winger moving in towards the middle of the pitch, as a passing option, maybe moving into space, while you will have the right full back moving forwards as a wide option for a cross ball. You will have at least one more player involved in the game.


That being said - I dislike 4-2-3-1 too.

I find it truly mind boggling that nearly every team in the world seems to play this formation now. You would think that a manager for a top level football team had top level knowledge of football and tactics - kinda like top chess players have the best understanding of chess. Yet there is such a lack of tactical creativity, and so much just applying the flavor of the month tactics. Now, it has to be said that 4-2-3-1 doesn't necessarily equal 4-2-3-1. There are a lot of different ways to play it and go about it, and as most managers would probably tell you; those numbers doesn't mean a lot when it comes to how the team actually plays. A 4-2-3-1 with Sterling and Suarez on the flanks, Coutinho as the AMC and Sturridge as the striker is very different from one with Eriksen and Dembele on the flanks, Chadli as the AMC and Kane as the striker. That being said, it's still unbelievable that so many goes the 4-2-3-1 route.

Our team is an example of why it's bad that managers seems to lack flexibility and creativity. Last season, when Adebayor wasn't playing, more often than not our right attacking midfielder was the worst player on the pitch. With Townsend or Lamela there, they added close to nothing of value on or off the ball - defensively terrible, very sloppy on the ball offensively. Yet the manager insisted on playing them, because we needed a right attacking midfielder for our 4-2-3-1. Would we not have been better off trying something different. It wouldn't have to be wastly different, but we should've tried to find something that would fit our personell better. It seems most managers have accepted 4-2-3-1 as the best and only way to line up, and if something doesn't work out they try to tweak it - like Poch does now with having a 'real' DM in Dier.

Is the 4-2-3-1 the best counter to 4-2-3-1, is what the managers should be asking themselves. I do think that all clubs should try to find a way to play their football, not mixing it up every game to best counter the opponent. But in todays meta, with pretty much every team playing 4-2-3-1, there should be a fuckton of points to earn by coming up with a decent counter to it.

Something like
Keeper: Lloris
Center Backs: Alderweireld - Vertonghen
Very defensive midfielder/Center Back: Dier
Offensive Wing backs/Wide midfielders: Trippier - Rose
Central midfielders: Eriksen - Mason
Attacking midfielders/strikers: Chadli - Dembele - Kane

With a setup like that we could become a 5 man back line when under heavy pressure, giving one man up against the four attacking players of the 4-2-3-1. Going forwards we would have three men up top, assisted by the wing backs, giving us one man up against the two centre backs and the two full backs in the 4-2-3-1.

It may not seem very different from what we play now. The main thing is that it would put more of an emphasis on the attacking ability of the wing backs. Right now we have Davies and Walker prefered, as they are full backs in a four man back line, but they are both too weak going forwards, which kinda ruins the balance of our team and leaves us more boring than we should be. The 2-1-2-2-3 that I propose here would also put an even more defensive emphasis on the defensive midfielder, while allowing the CMs to be picked more for their ability to add to the attack. The last point would be important for finding a more fitting place to Alli in the side, it would allow for Eriksen to play as a CM, and it would hopefully allow Mason and Bentaleb to show more of their offensive qualities.
Click to expand...

Very interesting post.
As an Italian fan I feel lucky, because (in spite of Serie A teams being less successfull than before) here in Italy coaches are still more tactically aware and as a consequence there is much more variety in terms of formations.
Contrary to EPL, the 4-2-3-1 trend has been over for some years already and currently I couldn't name one Serie A team playing it - Mancini's (whose affinity with EPL is evident) Inter is looking to bring in a couple of wingers (Lamela may be one of them) for that purpose, but chances are they will stick to the current 4-3-1-2.
You have a lot of 4-3-1-2's actually (maybe my favourite formation), many 4-3-3's, a number of 3-5-2's, 3-4-3's, my Fiorentina's 3-4-2-1 (even though it's a hybrid with 4-2-3-1). Not a single 4-4-2, which I agree is outdated nowadays.

I have already written the reasons why I dislike 4-2-3-1 (the awful evolution of wingers and fullbacks mainly).

I see your proposal as a 2-3-2-3, which nowadays would be described simply as a 4-3-3:

------------- Toby ---------- Jan
Walker ------------- Dier ------------- Rose
---------- Mason ----------- Eriksen
--- Chadli --------------------------- Dembele
------------------------ Kane

and I agree it would be the best solution (even though I still think Bentaleb should start, over Dier in this case).
 
Think we can all agree it won't matter what formation we play if our players refuse to make runs off the ball, our offense will continue to struggle.
 
Juicy Sushi said:
The major characteristics of our attacking play this year have been Kane dropping deep to pull a CB out of position, with a throughball or ball over the top then played to a runner coming through to attack that space.
Click to expand...

This is why I hate when everyone is so focused on how many goals he gets. He's not a Jermaine Defoe type striker who scores goals and does nothing else. He's a smart player, and in the games I watched even though he wasn't scoring he was still contributing to the team.
 
Yeah, I'd prefer the return of the 4-4-1-1 rather than 4-4-2.

I much preferred when we played van der Vaart behind Crouch/Adebayor as opposed to having two out and out strikers. I think Eriksen can play the role well as I feel his work rate is better than van der Vaarts and he could easily drop deep to help out making a three man midfield.

I'd rather we figured out and cracked the 4-2-3-1 though as we are building players towards that and have players better suited for it. Glad we're finally starting to get pace in with Njie and hopefully Son.
 
It's just numbers in a certain order. Football is more fluid than this.

I think it was Totti Totti who called the formation we played with VDV a 4-4-1-1, this could also be seen as a 4-2-3-1 as Bale and Lennon pushed on too, while Modric and Sandro/Parker stayed a little deeper.

A 4-3-3 can easily turn in to a 4-5-1, 4-2-3-1, 4-1-4-1, 4-4-1-1, 3-4-3, 3-5-2, 4-4-2 or whatever.

The key is not a formation, you can play boring football with a 4-4-2 as well if you just decide to shut up shop with two banks of 4 and lump the ball up to the two strikers. The key is the philosophy, and I think what people would like to see is direct, fast football using the full width of the pitch, rather than players clogging up the middle of the pitch. I don't care whether we call a formation 3-5-2, 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 or 1-2-3-4

(Lost count of how often I've posted this and yet still the discussion keeps focusing on numbers. Think there's a lot of people out there who need to get off FIFA and FM and go play a game of football themselves)
 
Last edited:
Agree with almost all of this. Football tactics are subject to fads and fashions. 4-2-3-1 is latest. 3 years ago no one was playing this. To be fair, even 4-4-2 got jaded - the way the national team played it was awful. We had Bale for a while at left wing which made Harry's 4-4-2 superb. Remember El Tel's Christmas Tree? It all comes and goes.

4-2-3-1 only looks good when you've got a spare half bill and can buy Silva, Pedro, Hazard, de Bruyne etc etc. Use average players and it's dull as fuck - a 6-3-1. Especially with the entire league playing it.

I wish Poch could just be a bit more unpredictable. Sure, play a 4-2-3-1 press against the big boys, but why not go 4-4-2 against the shitter teams that are playing 4-2-3-1 and really stretch them.

Anyway, good post mate. Shame you're losing interest in the game. It'll change again, don't worry.
 
tbonepremier said:
First of all I have to say that I don't agree with the conclusion; that we should go back to the traditional flair winger flat 442. To me, it's outdated, it doesn't suit modern football, because at any given time of a match it leaves too many players "out of the game".

The fit modern footballer can handle running for 90 minutes, so you should try to have as many of the 11 involved in the game at any given time, either by positioning themselves for winning the ball or by being passing options when the team is on the ball or about to win the ball.

Let's say you move the ball up the left flank. With the traditional 442, you will have the right winger keeping width on the right side, and the full back taking up a defensive position a little closer to the middle of the pitch. With an inverted winger, you'll have the right winger moving in towards the middle of the pitch, as a passing option, maybe moving into space, while you will have the right full back moving forwards as a wide option for a cross ball. You will have at least one more player involved in the game.


That being said - I dislike 4-2-3-1 too.

I find it truly mind boggling that nearly every team in the world seems to play this formation now. You would think that a manager for a top level football team had top level knowledge of football and tactics - kinda like top chess players have the best understanding of chess. Yet there is such a lack of tactical creativity, and so much just applying the flavor of the month tactics. Now, it has to be said that 4-2-3-1 doesn't necessarily equal 4-2-3-1. There are a lot of different ways to play it and go about it, and as most managers would probably tell you; those numbers doesn't mean a lot when it comes to how the team actually plays. A 4-2-3-1 with Sterling and Suarez on the flanks, Coutinho as the AMC and Sturridge as the striker is very different from one with Eriksen and Dembele on the flanks, Chadli as the AMC and Kane as the striker. That being said, it's still unbelievable that so many goes the 4-2-3-1 route.

Our team is an example of why it's bad that managers seems to lack flexibility and creativity. Last season, when Adebayor wasn't playing, more often than not our right attacking midfielder was the worst player on the pitch. With Townsend or Lamela there, they added close to nothing of value on or off the ball - defensively terrible, very sloppy on the ball offensively. Yet the manager insisted on playing them, because we needed a right attacking midfielder for our 4-2-3-1. Would we not have been better off trying something different. It wouldn't have to be wastly different, but we should've tried to find something that would fit our personell better. It seems most managers have accepted 4-2-3-1 as the best and only way to line up, and if something doesn't work out they try to tweak it - like Poch does now with having a 'real' DM in Dier.

Is the 4-2-3-1 the best counter to 4-2-3-1, is what the managers should be asking themselves. I do think that all clubs should try to find a way to play their football, not mixing it up every game to best counter the opponent. But in todays meta, with pretty much every team playing 4-2-3-1, there should be a fuckton of points to earn by coming up with a decent counter to it.

Something like
Keeper: Lloris
Center Backs: Alderweireld - Vertonghen
Very defensive midfielder/Center Back: Dier
Offensive Wing backs/Wide midfielders: Trippier - Rose
Central midfielders: Eriksen - Mason
Attacking midfielders/strikers: Chadli - Dembele - Kane

With a setup like that we could become a 5 man back line when under heavy pressure, giving one man up against the four attacking players of the 4-2-3-1. Going forwards we would have three men up top, assisted by the wing backs, giving us one man up against the two centre backs and the two full backs in the 4-2-3-1.

It may not seem very different from what we play now. The main thing is that it would put more of an emphasis on the attacking ability of the wing backs. Right now we have Davies and Walker prefered, as they are full backs in a four man back line, but they are both too weak going forwards, which kinda ruins the balance of our team and leaves us more boring than we should be. The 2-1-2-2-3 that I propose here would also put an even more defensive emphasis on the defensive midfielder, while allowing the CMs to be picked more for their ability to add to the attack. The last point would be important for finding a more fitting place to Alli in the side, it would allow for Eriksen to play as a CM, and it would hopefully allow Mason and Bentaleb to show more of their offensive qualities.
Click to expand...

Either that or Poch puts out too slow a team for any system to work?
 
Parklane Block 34 said:
Like the majority of spurs fans I am bored!!! I've renewed my season ticket with 7 of my other spurs supporting mates and some thing quite strange is happening. Maybe it's because we are all getting older and more misrable. After all we have been going to the Lane for nearly 30 years now and been STH for the last 20.

We don't really care about the actual football anymore. We go for a laugh and a catch up and of course a few beers. There were times in the last 2 seasons where we have actually stayed in the pub and other times left at half time out of complete boredom.

Now don't get me wrong I love spurs it's in my blood, and Christ I have seen some crap, but I can say hand in heart I have never felt so bored. Why?

Maybe it's the players who I have no infinity with anymore
Maybe it's the countless false dawns over the years that have finally taken their toll

But for me it's the style of play. I hate this one up front bollocks with no width and two defensively minded in midfield. What happened to the all round midfield player who could do everything?! Viera, Gerrard, or a Robson.

It's not just spurs though. That formation seems all the rage at the moment.

But we are THFC we need to something different especially at home against socalled weaker opposition. Let's go back to 4 4 2, sign some wingers who can actually beat their man and excite the fans. Sign a partner for Kane. Have a couple of midfielders who can get forward into the box and score goals as well as defend.

If it carries on like this there will actually be no point building the new stadium as fans won't pay top dollar for too long to watch that crap.

Change it now please.
Click to expand...
Good post,my views almost exactly.
I remember in the late 80s ,in the milford having "where will be in 20 years time" chat with the lot I went with.
We all agreed we would be season ticket holders still. 2 even stating " If spurs went down the pan and played their home games in a park field ,we would still go"*
Out of the 12, 1 is still a sth, one shares one ,I go when I can(more Europa , CC and "yoof" games to be honest these days) and the rest attend periodically.
A shame, but that's the way it is for a lot of people
* The two that made this comment, I haven't seen at the lane for about 4 years
 
Last edited:
We don't stick to one formation when we play, so I don't get the point of this.

On paper things get written down as 4-2-3-1, but in defence we're generally lined up 4-4-2/4-4-1-1 if the press hasn't created a quick turn over. When attacking we wind up in all sorts of shapes (not always to the good) depending on how much space we have to attack into.

Looking at the games so far, Pochettino seems (this year) to want a holding midfielder and a box-to-box player, with at least one, maybe two wingers playing as forwards cutting into the box, while Eriksen floats as a playmaker and Kane moves around to pull the marking/defensive shape apart.

That can look like a 4-2-3-1, 4-4-2, 2-1-2-1-2 or 2-3-5, so why are we getting hung up on a number when the point seems to be that it isn't one?
 
Juicy Sushi said:
We don't stick to one formation when we play, so I don't get the point of this.

On paper things get written down as 4-2-3-1, but in defence we're generally lined up 4-4-2/4-4-1-1 if the press hasn't created a quick turn over. When attacking we wind up in all sorts of shapes (not always to the good) depending on how much space we have to attack into.

Looking at the games so far, Pochettino seems (this year) to want a holding midfielder and a box-to-box player, with at least one, maybe two wingers playing as forwards cutting into the box, while Eriksen floats as a playmaker and Kane moves around to pull the marking/defensive shape apart.

That can look like a 4-2-3-1, 4-4-2, 2-1-2-1-2 or 2-3-5, so why are we getting hung up on a number when the point seems to be that it isn't one?
Click to expand...
The 4-4-1-1 (or 4-5-1 if you're Mourinho) is the "natural" outcome of the 4-2-3-1 when in defence.

"Winding up in all sorts of shapes" is not what matters when defining a formation anyways. You name the formation from the positions taken at the beginning of a play, not during it or after it, of course.
(I love those tv shots while a GK is about to take a goal-kick and the camera moves upwards and shows the whole pitch from above. In that moment the formations are usually even more evident than one would think).

Your perfect description of how Poch wants their players to move (hence where they start from) says it is a 4-2-3-1.
Getting hung up on a number is not important, it's just a useful label that says synthetically what type of positions the players are (mostly) expected to take.

However, despite the great variety of number combinations, in my opinion there are only a few questions that can be used to describe a tactical approach, the two most important of which being:
i) are there 2 or 3 players in the centre of the midfield?
ii) is there 1 or 2 players in each flank?
 
Matias said:
The 4-4-1-1 (or 4-5-1 if you're Mourinho) is the "natural" outcome of the 4-2-3-1 when in defence.

"Winding up in all sorts of shapes" is not what matters when defining a formation anyways. You name the formation from the positions taken at the beginning of a play, not during it or after it, of course.
(I love those tv shots while a GK is about to take a goal-kick and the camera moves upwards and shows the whole pitch from above. In that moment the formations are usually even more evident than one would think).

Your perfect description of how Poch wants their players to move (hence where they start from) says it is a 4-2-3-1.
Getting hung up on a number is not important, it's just a useful label that says synthetically what type of positions the players are (mostly) expected to take.

However, despite the great variety of number combinations, in my opinion there are only a few questions that can be used to describe a tactical approach, the two most important of which being:
i) are there 2 or 3 players in the centre of the midfield?
ii) is there 1 or 2 players in each flank?
Click to expand...
You're missing my point. We're frequently in many different shapes at the start of a play. The label is what people here are taking so seriously, and it's a label that doesn't really matter when looking at how we seem to be trying to play.

The major characteristics of our attacking play this year have been Kane dropping deep to pull a CB out of position, with a throughball or ball over the top then played to a runner coming through to attack that space.

We've struggled to make that work as well as we'd like because if we're using Chadli to do it, he's lacking sufficient pace to get there in time consistently. Pochettino and Levy seem to agree that's a problem, since they've bought N'Jie, and are trying to buy Son and Berahino. All of them are forwards who can either play centrally or wide, and who can use their pace to attacking the openings Kane's movement creates.

You can call that a 4-2-3-1, or a 4-4-2 or whatever you'd like at the start of the play, but the point is that our system presses to turnover the ball and then attacks with that idea in mind. Do we have the players to properly execute that strategy? I think Pochettino feels he didn't last year, and seems to be trying to change that. Will it work? That's what the rest of this year will tell us.
 
I think you are right. I think we have the players to play 4-4-1-1 but without being pussies like under previous managers where we turn into soft spurs.

Trippier has pace and had more prem assists than our wingers last season from right back in a shit team. The season before that he got TWELVE!! assists as a right back in the championship.

I think he would make a great winger. He's also got some of the best crossing stats in the prem last season.

Danny Rose IMO is still a liability at left back. He used to be a winger. Lets put him on the left wing because his tackling is great. He's just not there often enough when he goes wandering. His tackle count is high but he's usually steaming in after being stretched.

Example:

---------------------Kane--------------------
------------------Chadli---------------------
Rose---Mason---Dembele--Trippier
Davies-----Jan----Toby-------Walker

As long as you don't put Eriksen, Prichard, Carroll or Lamela etc in middle or on the wings...they have to be behind the striker or they will get steamrollered)

Dembele was part of the midfield that got our record prem points total Even more than Bale and Modric days. And he's looking fitter than he was back then. Chadli has a goal and an assist but I would have no qualms putting Alli or Njie there (or even Dembele as a forward).

I think Poch missed a trick putting Rose and Trippier as wingers. They will solve our soft Spurs issue plus they have so much potential attacking. Trippier is very accurate at crossing, and two monsters like Kane and Chadli to aim for is something we miss. Rose's crossing is terrible, but his engine and athletasism is so good, he gets into forward positions so often one of his crosses or (usually pretty bad) attempts of goal should cause issues just from a number perspective. His goals and creativity got better last season.

Mason, Dembele, Bentaleb, Dier, Alli is good depth for the central midfield spots.

We would need to sign backup wingers. Lennon and Townsend is the old soft Spurs and it's not fair to the defenders behind them, or the growth of Kane to include their "creativity" in open play.

But I think all along we had the pace and wingers we needed. But Poch has been playing the "how slow can I make our team" game. I said it before the season we needed to do this, and warned about the slow team he was putting out in preseason = AVB era Spurs.

You will be hard pressed to find a stronger spine than that. And for a change our wings will be a fucking nightmare to tangle with instead of managers laughing and licking their lips at the prospect of Eriksen and Rose on one side and Townsend and Walker on the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom