From what i've seen, i doubt that Holtby is not hardworking enough, but if the story about his childish behaviour is true, then he does need to grow up i guess. I dare say that Sherwood's man management seems to be better than AVB's from what i've seen so far, so hopefully he will manage to get what's best from the players we have in the next period.
-
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...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
And while we are on the topic, here's an article i read on Eurosport about Sherwood's tactics and how they will not be able to take us too far if he doesn't start making changes. Some sound points are made, but i'd say that it's a tad bit pessimistic overall. What do you guys think?
Sherwood’s gung-ho tactics can only work for so long
As Michael Oliver’s full-time whistle brought Tottenham’s clash with Crystal Palace to an end, Tim Sherwood marched towards Tony Pulis to share a hearty post-match handshake in the knowledge that he had secured his fourth win in five Premier League outings since his appointment.
In fact, Sherwood’s haul of 13 points from a possible 15 is the best tally of any Spurs boss since the dawn of the Premier League. You simply can’t argue with that.
Well, actually you can.
Go back through the Premier League annals and you’ll struggle to find a more abject performance than what Spurs served up in the opening 45 minutes against Crystal Palace.
But for Jason Puncheon’s horrific penalty miss and Yannick Bolasie halting Marouane Chamakh’s goal-bound effort, Tottenham may have left White Hart Lane without the three points their performance barely deserved.
A display littered with mistakes, sloppy passing and – perhaps most alarmingly – a complete lack of impetus allowed Palace to fashion a number of openings that stronger outfits would have buried with aplomb.
The game-plan appeared to be: look, we’re playing Palace, this should be easy. But Tony Pulis got the better of his opposite number, with Cameron Jerome and Chamakh bullying the Tottenham defence and exploiting their high line.
Unsurprisingly, Sherwood plumped for his trusted 4-4-2 formation but that quickly evolved into a 4-4-0 as Roberto Soldado and Emmanuel Adebayor got paid to stand still, occasionally breaking rank to raise their arms in frustration at their beleaguered team-mates.
It is a partnership doomed to fail, despite its supposed success in recent weeks. In Soldado, Tottenham have a player who appears unable to break free of the rigidity imposed on him by former boss Andre Villas-Boas. And in Adebayor, an individual who rewards himself with a 15 minute stroll every time he breaks into a jog.
That’s not to say two strikers is a flawed concept but if you look at other clubs deploying the system –Liverpool’s Luis Suarez and Daniel Sturridge are a prime example – the pair hare about the pitch to make up for the gaps in midfield.
Sherwood has been handed the dream scenario all young managers dream of: a job at a Premier League club punching below its weight with a favourable fixture list and first-team players returning from injury.
After the pain of the AVB reign finally ended, most Spurs fans would have been only too happy to see the new boss instil a gung-ho philosophy. In his first league venture against Southampton, Sherwood threw in an array of attacking talent to the point where it was muddled and disjointed but, crucially, picked up the win after profiting against a Saints backline weakened through injuries.
In the 1-1 draw with West Brom that followed, he recklessly fielded two strikers and four attacking midfielders in Christian Eriksen, Gylfi Sigurdsson, Lewis Holtby and Nacer Chadli – the sort of decision you would make only on Football Manager after clicking save.
Even in the victory over Manchester United at Old Trafford, the Spurs display was fraught with mistakes in possession. Sherwood’s insistence of using two out-and-out strikers almost proved his downfall as the hosts dominated for long spells and really should have got something out of the game had it not been Ashley Young who hit the deck inside the penalty area.
Sweeping under the radar somewhat has been the elimination from both domestic cup competitions, with the recent 2-0 FA Cup defeat against Woolwich particularly harrowing. Sherwood’s insistence of playing his one formation at the greatest passing side in the country was embarrassing, and a decision that left Tottenham thoroughly outplayed and deservedly eliminated.
So yes, Sherwood has amassed an impressive haul of points since his arrival. But would AVB, or anyone else, have done any worse?
It almost seems that a combination of the pair, AVB and Sherwood, would harness the full ability of the Spurs squad. Sherwood’s appointment has been the ideal antidote to an insipid start to the season with his game plan practically a binary opposite to the one his predecessor insisted upon.
But once the honeymoon period ends – Tottenham welcome Manchester City to the Lane at the end of January – it may become apparent that Sherwood is out of his depth and perhaps been better served learning the trade in the Football League.
It can’t be denied that he’s unleashed Tottenham’s attacking potential and renewed confidence in the squad, but if he was outsmarted by Pulis and Crystal Palace then what hope do Spurs have when they enter games against those above them in the table?
Having said all that, if Sherwood can safely navigate the match against City without taking an AVB-esque thumping, he can look forward to another favourable run of games until a tricky March that sees home games with Woolwich and Southampton sandwiched between visits to Chelsea and Liverpool.
And it is in those games where we will see whether he has the tactical nous to mix it up and respond to the opposition he is facing, rather than picking the same team, both home and away, and hoping his gamble pays off.
Sherwood’s insistence on attacking football should be commended, but if he is to truly prove himself then he must show he can adapt his tactical approach.
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs...wood-gung-ho-tactics-only-long-213021084.html
Sherwood’s gung-ho tactics can only work for so long
As Michael Oliver’s full-time whistle brought Tottenham’s clash with Crystal Palace to an end, Tim Sherwood marched towards Tony Pulis to share a hearty post-match handshake in the knowledge that he had secured his fourth win in five Premier League outings since his appointment.
In fact, Sherwood’s haul of 13 points from a possible 15 is the best tally of any Spurs boss since the dawn of the Premier League. You simply can’t argue with that.
Well, actually you can.
Go back through the Premier League annals and you’ll struggle to find a more abject performance than what Spurs served up in the opening 45 minutes against Crystal Palace.
But for Jason Puncheon’s horrific penalty miss and Yannick Bolasie halting Marouane Chamakh’s goal-bound effort, Tottenham may have left White Hart Lane without the three points their performance barely deserved.
A display littered with mistakes, sloppy passing and – perhaps most alarmingly – a complete lack of impetus allowed Palace to fashion a number of openings that stronger outfits would have buried with aplomb.
The game-plan appeared to be: look, we’re playing Palace, this should be easy. But Tony Pulis got the better of his opposite number, with Cameron Jerome and Chamakh bullying the Tottenham defence and exploiting their high line.
Unsurprisingly, Sherwood plumped for his trusted 4-4-2 formation but that quickly evolved into a 4-4-0 as Roberto Soldado and Emmanuel Adebayor got paid to stand still, occasionally breaking rank to raise their arms in frustration at their beleaguered team-mates.
It is a partnership doomed to fail, despite its supposed success in recent weeks. In Soldado, Tottenham have a player who appears unable to break free of the rigidity imposed on him by former boss Andre Villas-Boas. And in Adebayor, an individual who rewards himself with a 15 minute stroll every time he breaks into a jog.
That’s not to say two strikers is a flawed concept but if you look at other clubs deploying the system –Liverpool’s Luis Suarez and Daniel Sturridge are a prime example – the pair hare about the pitch to make up for the gaps in midfield.
Sherwood has been handed the dream scenario all young managers dream of: a job at a Premier League club punching below its weight with a favourable fixture list and first-team players returning from injury.
After the pain of the AVB reign finally ended, most Spurs fans would have been only too happy to see the new boss instil a gung-ho philosophy. In his first league venture against Southampton, Sherwood threw in an array of attacking talent to the point where it was muddled and disjointed but, crucially, picked up the win after profiting against a Saints backline weakened through injuries.
In the 1-1 draw with West Brom that followed, he recklessly fielded two strikers and four attacking midfielders in Christian Eriksen, Gylfi Sigurdsson, Lewis Holtby and Nacer Chadli – the sort of decision you would make only on Football Manager after clicking save.
Even in the victory over Manchester United at Old Trafford, the Spurs display was fraught with mistakes in possession. Sherwood’s insistence of using two out-and-out strikers almost proved his downfall as the hosts dominated for long spells and really should have got something out of the game had it not been Ashley Young who hit the deck inside the penalty area.
Sweeping under the radar somewhat has been the elimination from both domestic cup competitions, with the recent 2-0 FA Cup defeat against Woolwich particularly harrowing. Sherwood’s insistence of playing his one formation at the greatest passing side in the country was embarrassing, and a decision that left Tottenham thoroughly outplayed and deservedly eliminated.
So yes, Sherwood has amassed an impressive haul of points since his arrival. But would AVB, or anyone else, have done any worse?
It almost seems that a combination of the pair, AVB and Sherwood, would harness the full ability of the Spurs squad. Sherwood’s appointment has been the ideal antidote to an insipid start to the season with his game plan practically a binary opposite to the one his predecessor insisted upon.
But once the honeymoon period ends – Tottenham welcome Manchester City to the Lane at the end of January – it may become apparent that Sherwood is out of his depth and perhaps been better served learning the trade in the Football League.
It can’t be denied that he’s unleashed Tottenham’s attacking potential and renewed confidence in the squad, but if he was outsmarted by Pulis and Crystal Palace then what hope do Spurs have when they enter games against those above them in the table?
Having said all that, if Sherwood can safely navigate the match against City without taking an AVB-esque thumping, he can look forward to another favourable run of games until a tricky March that sees home games with Woolwich and Southampton sandwiched between visits to Chelsea and Liverpool.
And it is in those games where we will see whether he has the tactical nous to mix it up and respond to the opposition he is facing, rather than picking the same team, both home and away, and hoping his gamble pays off.
Sherwood’s insistence on attacking football should be commended, but if he is to truly prove himself then he must show he can adapt his tactical approach.
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs...wood-gung-ho-tactics-only-long-213021084.html
Why are people expecting Sherwood to prove himself with half a squad?
If anything, he's proving that he can utilise this squad properly when we have a number of important players out
If anything, he's proving that he can utilise this squad properly when we have a number of important players out
It's the same for every manager.
If Rose had been fit all season Villas Boas would still be manager imo.
Well we've been over this, but if AVB hadnt loaned out BAE, we wouldnt have suffered that heavily.....his incompetence and ego came back to haunt him.
I think it goes further than that too.......he dropped Ade for personal differences and the team suffered.
The difference is that TS is using the squad to cover our injury crisis, where as AVB simply played people out of position.
Not really, there isn't any position in the 442 where Sherwood doesn't at least have one player for each position.
When Capoue was playing at centre back it wasn't out of choice.
Sherwood's just fortunate that at present the injuries are spread over the entire squad rather than one position missing everyone.
AVB dropped Eriksen, who Sherwood has utilised as a playmaker from LW who has become instrumental in the team. He's also getting the best out of Dembele, and introduced two up top and wing play.
TS has also used Chadli to good effect, and played Lennon ahead of Walker where both excel.
AVB's injuries were no more damaging. He simply isolated or dropped players that we needed, and played people where they were not suited.
I think he's being mis-quoted there... what he said was the need "to marry desire with ability..."
Ability alone would leave us like Palace or Stoke, and if he only wants players with DESIRE, then he could do worse than dragging 11 fans out of the stands and telling them to get their boots on!
How are these stats valid?, Once sherwood plays against Manchester City, Woolwich, Chelsea, liverpool and Everton we can't start making these cute goals per game ratios and points per game. Until then this small sample is skewed with us having played mostly weaker teams.
You can only beat whats put in front of you......one of those was away to Utd.
People keep saying we cant judge until we play the big teams.
Well in that case, not conceding 11 against Pool and City will be a step up, regardless of the result....he only has to secure more than 2 pts in those five games you mention to have done better than AVB.
Its not like we've proved anything against the top teams so far (other than beating Utd away) so why is that being used as the bar?
Yeh I have to admit to being a spurs fan who likes our style of play as much as wanting to win the 'spurs way' is who we are and attacking football is in our DNA. In reference to our win percentages under Avb we played average last season but bale kept on getting us out of the mess, feel Avb win percentages should be called bale win percentages, imagine us last season with no bale but Avb as manager.
Sherwood would have been in at Christmas...
But what alot of people conveniently overlook when talking about Bale last season is the fact AVB is the one who built the team around him and gave him the confidence to become the best player in the league. Bale had never looked as consistently good as he did last season under any other manager, AVB helped him realise his full potential.
Yet Bale is on record as basically saying he was sick of carrying the team..
And Bale was on the rise LONG before AVB came anywhere near this club....the "world class" debate started way back during our CL campaign
but the point remains Bale was NEVER close to being as CONSISTENTLY good under any other manager as he was under AVB and no other manager built the whole team around him
also I've never read Bale saying he was sick of carrying the team lol and I very much doubt any quotes like that exist
Can you provide the actual quote and source for this.
‘At Tottenham I was always trying to get onto the ball and make everything tick, whereas here everybody’s doing that, there are world-class players all around the pitch and you’re able to concentrate just on your game rather than bringing the whole team forward, and I’m enjoying that.’
so he enjoys playing with world class players and his butt buddy ronaldo is interpreted by you as he was sick of carrying Tottenham lol
And you interpret it as what? That he was loving having to do everything for everyone else?
Is that why he left?
See what you want mate, but the insinuation is clear as day