PL: Spurs a Ratings & Reactions

[sellyoakvilla]

"Boring boring Villa"

Good one, from a side that hoofs it to Crouch for 90 minutes.

[Hanky]

except without Dunne & co they would have won about 6-0

no i guess for most they didn't play well because they didn't score.... I thought they didn't play badly at all.

In boxing terms they completely out pointed us.

Yes I suppose if you'd take all of our back line out leaving us with 6 players they would have beaten us.

[Demitri_C]

i went to the game yesterday and boy how shit is the crowd there? we out sang them whole game and they only had one sing

dunney was immense, and i felt a draw was a fair result. carew didnt look match fit at all today

i thought defence was superb but downing was really poor.

stan was our best midfieldder today. young and milner were average and gabby didnt ahve much to do but held the ball up well.

the main thing is we didnt lose. out of us, liverpool, spurs and citeh we have the best run in so we have a chance

[GasGasGas]

Just how on earth did Tottenham not get a single yellow card? Especially Huddlestone? Not for the first time they are an exceedingly dirty team who seemed like they were out to injure our players!

They succeeded with Heskey, tried to do the same with Milner, Gabby, Collins and got away with it all!

About their hoofs, at least Crouch was heading them directly to their players like Defoe or Modric. Far better than our hoofs, which simply bounce off Heskey or Carew in random directions.

[wedge]

I thought we were atrocious. We could hardly string 3 passes together throughout the whole game and when we have loads of time we seem to find nothing better to do with the ball than lump it forward aimlessly. I thought it was funny how the Spurs fans creamed themselves whenever we hit long balls or cleared it long but its perfectly OK when they spend 90 minuted cracking it forward for Crouch.

Overall a decent point and a great defensive performance but we are still a long, long way off the top 4.

[Maradona10]

3 points away at the moment!

[Mantis]

Overall a decent point and a great defensive performance but we are still a long, long way off the top 4.

So are all the other contenders though. Liverpool handed 4th place to us, City and Spurs by doing so badly at the beginning of the season but none of us have moved in to take it.

[Ryan.]

Defence - great

Attack - Shit, If MON is going to insist on getting it wide every single **** time we need to get men in the box! Defend as a unit, attack as a unit! Counter-attacking team my arse, we break with two players and then hold the ball up waiting for support, it's no good!

[Alec]

Overall, good point from a difficult fixture and our defence is rapidly becoming the best we've seen for a long, long time.

I cannot for the life of me understand the continuing short-sightedness of O'Neill's substitutions. I was thinking during the game that we shouldn't be too harsh on Carew thrown back in so soon after injury but that would be covering up the fact that his level of performance has been the same whenever he's played for at least 12 months now. Given the way Spurs were asserting themselves in midfield, I would have replaced Heskey with an additional midfielder and tried to wrestle back a little more possession. The like-for-like swapping of Heskey for Carew offers us nothing on a day like yesterday and it means the other ten players on the field have to work even harder to carry our monumentally lazy no. 10. If it's one of those days when he produces a killer moment that leads to a goal it offsets the balance but the fact is those days are very, very few and far between. I genuinely think that if O'Neill is so dead set on playing 4-4-2 we are much better off giving Delfouneso a chance - he has greater stamina, better movement and for all his comparative inexperience, gets into the right positions to ask opposition defences more serious questions. The esteem in which Carew is held by Villa fans baffles me - I can only think that we are collectively so desperate for a talismanic centre forward that we have tried to help manufacture one out of Carew given his presence and generally likeable personality. The fact is he's not an especially good footballer - he has bad touch, always need one more than the Premier League allows, is slow off the mark to react to situations and doesn't match the effort of his teammates. Heskey, for his faults and limitations, at least offers better link up play and we've looked better with him as a regular start over the last two months.

Bottom line - neither are good enough and we can't finish in the top four without a striker alongside Agbonlahor who is vastly superior to these two in every department. The rest of team is looking very solid - add some true class up top and could break in. But this will undoubtedly require O'Neill to make his biggest gamble in the transfer market yet - let's hope in the summer he is up to the task.

[mikeyp102]

Thought we were very poor yesterday, well apart from the defence who were all awesome.

Midfield were anoymous, didnt even realise Petrov was playing..

Carew...well he was just shocking didnt run, couldnt pass, couldnt head not interested...cant see him being here in the summer..

[Shillzz]

Think it's harsh to brand the teams performance as particularly poor. Half the team did their jobs exceptionally well. We shouldn't tar the entire team with that particular rating.

[srsmithusa]

I think it's nearly unanimous that the point is good but our play was blaringly short of standard. On a completely unrelated note. Boneheaded referee call of the night was Milner's hand ball. The key in the law is that it be deliberate. If it was deliberate, he contrived to have the ball run into his plant foot and bounce up and behind giving him the opportunity to swing his arm around behind himself and strike the ball further off the course of what looked to be a good counter attack developing. How many hours do you think he practiced that move, so he could handle the ball deliberately and stop what might have been one of the few moments we were really dangerous. ludicrous.... stupid decision by the ref.

Obvious lack of intent.

Not sure that it was 'boneheaded' or just common sense.

Sure it was accidental, but it was potentially giving us the best advantage of the game. The ref had to pull it back and was right to do so.

Whether the handling was giving us a chance at the break, or stopping a chance at the break, we apparently see differently. But more to the point, the laws don't say, handling depends on the advantage potentially gained. It says handling depends on the intent (being deliberate). If it depended on advantage only, then Dawson's contact on the ground, should have been a PK (which it should not - because it was not deliberate either.) "Sure it was accidental" actually means you agree it wasn't deliberate, which, on point of law, is not handling.

Sorry to bore everyone with this tangent, It's just been a pet peeve of mine for quite some time. IMO, it just seems foolish and reflexive to think a player would heel a ball up into his hand in order to knock it behind him, in order to squander what could have been "the best advantage of the game" (or any other advantage for that matter).

[GlastonSpur]

It's a better result for you than Spurs, yes.

seeing as we've won at OT and won at Anfield this season , old Harry bottled it and was content to see a draw today ..if he had been serious about 3 points then he would have made some attacking substituions and gone for it .... but he didn't

the aim is to win your home games , so it was a case of 2 points lost today for Spuds , and a point gained for us

end of the day we played badly and yet you still couldn't beat us .. we could probably keep playing for another week and you still wouldn't have scored

I've already said it was a better result for Villa than Spurs, so what are you arguing about?

The point I disputed was that it was a "great" result for Villa, when clearly it wasn't ... winning would have been great result for you, drawing is merely decent/OK.

The rest of your post is mostly nonsense. Harry bottled it and was content for a draw? Did we watch the same match? Spurs had probably 80% (or more) of the attacking play, with wave after wave of attacks breaking on the Villa defensive wall. It's clear beyond the slightest doubt that Villa played for a draw and that Spurs played for a win. If any manager bottled it, it was clearly MON.

As for "attacking substutions", Spurs already had pretty much their most attacking line-up on the pitch from amongst the available players.

You also say "the aim is to win your home games". Sorry, the aim is to try and win all games, which at least is what Spurs try to do.

Reaching 4th place is a tough ask for all of the contenders. But I'm pretty sure that Villa need to take risks if you are to make it, and I've not seen much sign so far this season that Villa/MON are capable of doing that.

The team that finishes 4th will IMO be a team that mostly goes for a win above all else. Of the four contenders - Liverpool, Spurs, Villa and Man. City - Villa display the least capacity/intent to play adventurous, attacking football. Some VTers will not like this view, but most neutrals will see it as the truth.

[RMB]

It's a better result for you than Spurs, yes.

seeing as we've won at OT and won at Anfield this season , old Harry bottled it and was content to see a draw today ..if he had been serious about 3 points then he would have made some attacking substituions and gone for it .... but he didn't

the aim is to win your home games , so it was a case of 2 points lost today for Spuds , and a point gained for us

end of the day we played badly and yet you still couldn't beat us .. we could probably keep playing for another week and you still wouldn't have scored

I've already said it was a better result for Villa than Spurs, so what are you arguing about?

The point I disputed was that it was a "great" result for Villa, when clearly it wasn't ... winning would have been great result for you, drawing is merely decent/OK.

The rest of your post is mostly nonsense. Harry bottled it and was content for a draw? Did we watch the same match? Spurs had probably 80% (or more) of the attacking play, with wave after wave of attacks breaking on the Villa defensive wall. It's clear beyond the slightest doubt that Villa played for a draw and that Spurs played for a win. If any manager bottled it, it was clearly MON.

As for "attacking substutions", Spurs already had pretty much their most attacking line-up on the pitch from amongst the available players.

You also say "the aim is to win your home games". Sorry, the aim is to try and win all games, which at least is what Spurs try to do.

Reaching 4th place is a tough ask for all of the contenders. But I'm pretty sure that Villa need to take risks if you are to make it, and I've not seen much sign so far this season that Villa/MON are capable of doing that.

The team that finishes 4th will IMO be a team that mostly goes for a win above all else. Of the four contenders - Liverpool, Spurs, Villa and Man. City - Villa display the least capacity/intent to play adventurous, attacking football. Some VTers will not like this view, but most neutrals will see it as the truth.

I think its ludicrous for you to suggest we played for a draw.

Against no team in the league would Martin O'Neill play for a draw nevermind Tottenham.

We are a great counter-attacking team and are reknown for it, so to defend deep and try to catch teams on the counter and play to our strengths isn't exactly bottling it.

If we had brought on Davies for a striker and play 5 at the back then I would understand your point.

[OutByEaster?]

The team that finishes 4th will IMO be a team that mostly goes for a win above all else. Of the four contenders - Liverpool, Spurs, Villa and Man. City - Villa display the least capacity/intent to play adventurous, attacking football. Some VTers will not like this view, but most neutrals will see it as the truth.

I think your post makes some sense from a Spurs perspective. The two games Villa have played against Spurs this season have been easily our two most defensive performances.

We've actually really gone at teams like Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea and Man City, but against you we go into our shell.

Of the four contenders and their gung-ho-ness, I'd put Liverpool bottom; they are a defensive team that try to break through Torres and Gerrard. After them, I'd struggle to separate you, us and City on intent.

I think you're capable of better attacking football than we are, but I think we're capable of better defensive football than you are, I think City are probably capable of being better at both but aren't so good at reaching their potential.

In terms of attacking intent though, I'd say we're on a par although I can well understand your point of view given that the two Villa games you'll have paid most attention to this season have been two of our most defensive performances.

[o'lbs]

it's a good point but we didnt play well at all. thought Bentley was brilliant, how i wish we had him.

[millbrook85]

The team that finishes 4th will IMO be a team that mostly goes for a win above all else. Of the four contenders - Liverpool, Spurs, Villa and Man. City - Villa display the least capacity/intent to play adventurous, attacking football. Some VTers will not like this view, but most neutrals will see it as the truth.

I think your post makes some sense from a Spurs perspective. The two games Villa have played against Spurs this season have been easily our two most defensive performances.

We've actually really gone at teams like Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea and Man City, but against you we go into our shell.

Of the four contenders and their gung-ho-ness, I'd put Liverpool bottom; they are a defensive team that try to break through Torres and Gerrard. After them, I'd struggle to separate you, us and City on intent.

I think you're capable of better attacking football than we are, but I think we're capable of better defensive football than you are, I think City are probably capable of being better at both but aren't so good at reaching their potential.

In terms of attacking intent though, I'd say we're on a par although I can well understand your point of view given that the two Villa games you'll have paid most attention to this season have been two of our most defensive performances.

Exactly.

[Milfner]

To the person that was sitting on row 21, lower tier, around seat 175, you are possibly the most annoying person I have ever sat by. Shouting "Get **** Rid" before the ball was in the box, or even near a player was possibly the most annoying thing I have experienced at a game.

And also, people having a pop at Heskey? He was on the pitch for 20 minutes, and for 10 of those he was limping around, and barely even got the ball.

[Stevo985]

Just because we ended up defending a lot doesn't mean we were playing for a draw!

If we hadn't defended we'd have lost. Were we supposed to cmmit more people forward and end up losing just because we wanted to be seen as "going for the win"?

IMO the team that gets 4th will be the team that get some good wins, but that can defend well when needed and grind out results that perhaps they shouldn't have gotten, like yesterdays point. We can do that. Our problem is notbeing able to beat the stubborn teams who park the bus (not referring to Spurs here).

In many ways, "going for the win" is spurs' main problem. Too often they will go forward and get beaten on the break.

To be honest, of the 4 teams going for 4th, i'd say Spurs and Villa are the least likely. Doesn't mean it won't happen though if one or the other of us sorts out their downfalls.

[AVFC-Prideofbrum]

Teams that try and win games will come up trumps?

Yeah, that's why Arsenal are top of the league.