Backbone made of crisps

Spurs 1 Chelsea something something

A ghost goal and phantom tactics...

So basically, in conclusion, the ghost goal becomes less relevant after the fact with every goal that proceeds it?

Okay then.

I'm not going to bother about Cech and if he should have been sent off. Only way that would have happened is if Bale wasn't up there with Adebayor.  Also, I do love how players still call for the goal when they know it hasn't gone over the line. Nice one. John Terry appealing for it even though he has since admitted he knew it wasn't over. Same for Juan Mata.

If it takes a photo from a very specific angle to show the ball DID go over the line, does that excuse a referee giving it on a whim that it was over the line? Referee's ref on gut instinct now? How sure was he in that split second that the entire ball crossed the line? There is no such picture, but it's all a mute point now.

Aside from this pivotal game-influencing moment its nigh impossible to predict what might/might not have happened in its aftermath which is why it should always be imperative that no matter the injustice you just GET THE F*** ON WITH IT. We defaulted to the textbook once more where this is concerned.

Other scratches of head: I would have started Sandro or Livermore instead of Lennon. Friedel should have been between the sticks. We should not have changed shape to 442 and (as cited) we fell apart way too easily, apologetically surrendering space with some woeful defending (regardless of being punished by some superb strikes/finishes). That shift in formation ruined us. Don't think we got the ball out to the flanks as often as we could of either. Gallas was just...<insert what you're thinking here>. Our full backs dizzy. Got into some decent positions, final ball not always the best. Once more no cutting edge. Our fitness, questionable. In conclusion, a completely uninspiring and somewhat unforgivable (second half) performance. Leadership, anyone? Shrewd and patience tactics lacking (remember the Stamford Bridge game)?

That shape you witnessed is one of a pear. I'm not even knee-jerking here.

Thought we looked fairly ominous even though we played alright for an hour or so. It was an evenly balanced game which saw Chelsea get lucky/take their chances. We competed without being spectacular and arguably at times were quite unfortunate. But still a lack of sustained want and desire to really go out there and dominate and bully them. It then turned into 'shades of City at home'. When the third went in, we gave up accepting yet another cruel punchline from the footballing Gods joke book.

It's not in!

Or is it? Parallax error says NO

It was gift wrapped for Chelsea.

Hate the fact that the game changed at 2-0 thanks to  Martin Atkinson. Let's just get this one out the way. I know there are times when refs make genuine mistakes based on instinct, but ***king hell, how was that not cheating? That wasn't an honest mistake, that was a concious decision to make the wrong decision because it felt right for him to react in a dishonest way. Hate the fact there has to be controversy. Hate the fact we had to lose a goal in that manner to then react positively. Hate the fact that we still capitulated and when we do, five is the not-so-magic number these days. Hate the fact that as good as we can be, when we're bad we just melt away. Hate the fact and despise the fact we lost to them lot at Wembley for the first time ever. Hate that not even in my worst nightmare did I expect that scoreline.

I hate that we didn't deserve to win.

Regardless of the phantom goal and the effect it had on the game, it's tiresome that we failed again to contain and channel the anger in the right way. It's a trend against this lot also (decisions going against us) but that's no excuse to accept it and roll with the punches.

It's also a continuation of recent form. We've not had the belief for the best part of this year. Lost our way? That's an understatement. With much irony, have to admit we lack the right level of man-management and decisive responsibility. When there is a certain ilk of pressure, we can't handle it. In the midst of the blip we've been incapable of somehow galvanising (Christ I HATE that word) and recapturing that much required tenacity to fight our way through it. There was a weakness in our game that is sometimes so much stronger than our strengths. Our Adamantium backbone from the first part of the season has turned into one made from crisps. Much like Atiknson and his decision making. Brittle.

But you know what, **** it. I can't do much about it now. Semi-finals since '91 hate on us in this competition. How many is that now? If this is rock bottom its rock bottom because of the expectations we've built up this season. We're disappointed because even though most thought it would be difficult to compete for the top four at the start we've done just that and at times excelled. But we've managed to p*ss it away recently.

We're disappointed because once more we've allowed ourselves to be consumed by the occasion at Wembley. However, there are still five games left in the league, so excuse me for a moment, I'll hold off writing the post-mortem for a few more weeks where CL is concerned.

If this is rock bottom, the only way is up. As long as we have a ladder. We're screwed if anyone is still holding onto that God damn shovel. Last time we lost a semi-final and got written off, you know what happened.

We are Tottenham. I am Tottenham. I wouldn't change it for anything. There's a reason a straitjacket is white.


---

As for the Chelsea fans, are you really that shocked?

"We are extremely disappointed a very small minority of fans embarrassed the club [during min silence for Hillsborough]" - yet another official club statement from CFC.

It's not a minority though is it? It's at the heart of their support. It's the core of their support. It's always been there, it never goes away. I expect nothing less from them and I hope it taints the rest of their innocent fans because they are the ones that need to take responsibility for sharing a stadium with scum.

In addition, reports of the usual anti-Semitic abuse also. Stay classy.

The name is Foy. Chris Foy. Licence to Kill.

Stoke 2 Spurs 1

A referee is not meant to influence a game with such defining persistent calamity. Perhaps one wrong decision (it happens). But Chris Foy is no ordinary referee. Not even average. Poor is the word best associated with him. One mistake swallowed and regurgitated in a constant loop over the ninety minutes played. If ineptness was an art form then his performance in the Stoke v Spurs game was a masterpiece.

The rather ironic saving grace after the whistle blew at full time and we finally lost a game of football in the league was that the players can take the bitterness and allow it to fuel their emotions for the next game (Sunderland at the Lane). Whilst the rest of us (those wanting to look beyond Foy) can feel a little aggrieved that Tottenham let us down in the first forty-five minutes. Because no matter what happened in the second forty-five, the game was lost before the ref and his assistants played their part in guaranteeing it. Still, there is no hiding from the fact that we did more than enough to save the points and our response is what this new-look Spurs is all about. In the end, we were ended by the man with the whistle and not the brutal brand of football our hosts play.

2-0 down, fully deserved. We allowed ourselves to be completely bullied from the off. The formation looked uncomfortable, the players (especially at the back) seemed confused and lost out to Stoke and their physicality (do they have anything else?). I guess this was frustrating for one reason only – what did we expect? Okay, so in the past we’ve had success there but considering our form they were hardly going to sit back and let us play tippy-tappy possession play. Their football is ugly. It can be effective.

I found myself hoping Harry would instruct someone to cello-tape a cardboard cut out of Ledley King onto the back of Scott Parker, for that much needed calming influence. Parker himself, off key, lacked that edge he’s had in his play since he joined our midfield. That leadership quality went missing. We allowed the anti-football to antagonise us.

You know what, it happens. Against Stoke, the obvious actually played out. We let them get to us. Now, for anyone playing around with the words ‘we’ve got out Tottenham back’, I know you’re only jesting. Because old Spurs, that inconsistent creature we hardly miss, would have got battered in the second half too. Not the case this time.

Character. We have it in abundance and we did more than enough in the second half to prove we have spirit and guile. Harry mixed things up with a 3-5-2 formation and it worked. Well, it sort of worked but didn’t. This is where unfortunately the Foy Factor impacted proceedings. Now granted, he gave us a dubious penalty one that you might admit to being generous (and perhaps not wanting Luka to repeat). Although I’m willing to bet most would prefer to silently applaud Modric for it with whispers that certain other clubs have been doing it for years (win at any cost). Personally? Would prefer we win playing football, purely. If our players want to take that particular route of falling down easily, I’d prefer it to remain ambiguous enough for me to ignore.

The inconsistent and dire decision making however had already settled into the game during the first half and spread like the black plague in the second. Luka pen aside (slotted away by Adebayor), the rest were not in our favour. A detail the home support seemed to turn a blind eye too (insert Specsavers joke here).

Time wasting on throw-ins (I feel stupid complaining about the sewn in towel so I won’t)
Shawcross foul on Kaboul in the penalty area, no intent to play the ball, blatant
Shawcross clearing the ball off the line with his arm (straight red?)
Lost count now, there was another handball, right? Woodgate should have walked
A legitimate goal disallowed for offside when Adebayor was onside (assistant ref, anyone?)
The curious case of the corners given as goal-kicks when they were blatantly corners
Various suspect decisions on free-kicks not given, no consistency compared to free-kicks given to opposition

Most of the controversy was post-Modric penalty. Coincidence? Work it out.

He (Foy) influenced the second half. Like the final season of Lost, he had no idea how it would end, making it up as he went along. In the end, what with Kaboul adding to his yellow card for complaining with another yellow for a foul – regardless of the fact that he should have been more wise in both incidents, it almost felt like another kick in the teeth (at a point when I could see us over-running them). Wasn't really a foul worthy of a yellow, was it? Bit soft? If he only stated to the ref 'it was handball' for the first yellow, then you could start to argue that the ref really didn't have a clue how to handle it all and killed off the game completely with over zealous reactions and non-reactions.

Just how much was necessary to make amends for Luka falling over? Or was he also making amends for the Walters header from last season?

The officiating was bad. Our first half performance was bad. So to play well and not get anything after the second half, it’s gutting. But s*** happens. Our response is what I’m taking from this game and as mentioned, let the players feel aggrieved and robbed, let them take that attitude into the next match and take it out in the form of redemption. I’d be far more worried if we capitulated. We didn’t. What it proves is that we have to be far more accomplished from the off, especially when King isn’t playing. So take note chairman and manager, I’m sure they have. Activity certain in January.

This is the ilk of game we've been winning this season. We should have beaten Stoke. We didn't. Never get complacent.

To elaborate on the tactical switch, first half, too many players were isolated so the movement was ineffectual deeming Rafa and his deep deployment redundant and Adebayor without support. With Stoke being what they are we should have (easy with hindsight) started with two forwards, if anything to allow a more balanced shape to the side to deal with their style (lack of). Defoe didn’t deserve to be dropped but then I’m always keen to see Rafa start. In this case, we got it wrong. Harry who is sometimes maligned for not seeing things and changing them got it right when we returned from the dressing room. Foy got it wrong enough to make sure Stoke held on. Something they deserved based on their first half, fortunate to survive the second.

If there was one game in our fixture list that the footballing Gods marked down as the one where we would stumble, this was it.

Etherington for England
‘Unplayable’ Crouch (you just knew this would happen, right? Man of the Match, I'm laughing)
Woodgate and Palacios
The hoofing
No King equating to an Friedel uneasy
Gio's cameo

Still 3^rd. Game in hand. Sunderland will get it next weekend. Live and learn. We lost thanks to that first half display. What the ref did in the second will mask that. Onwards, upwards Spurs. Down into the Championship for Foy, with any luck.

As for Stoke. Well done. You’re not pretty. You got the result, but I’d rather be relegated playing football on the park than survive playing whatever the f*** it is you lot do. I guess you'll cite Wigan as a reason why you don't play it on the park. You've done well against the bigger teams. I guess I should be grateful for my colours. It’s not easy down there. It’s just as hard up here.

As for us lot, this defeat, I don't like the taste of it. I've spat it out.

COYS.

Final word on the Nani goal

Referees and assistant referees get things wrong. All the time it seems, and they enjoy doing so in Spurs games for and against us if you read what others wish to share as evidence.

United fans have cited the Palacios tackle which he should have been sent off for last season at OT early in the game. Webb didn't but did award a penalty that never was. It's swings and roundabouts. Or something.

Also cited, the Huddlestone goal against Fulham (wasn't Gallas not interfering any ways?) and the Stoke goal that never was.

The point being (as made by the right honourable Rio Ferdinand who knows everything about how to make the most of an ambiguous situation) that we looked the other way at both Fulham and Stoke and didn't ask questions, so what difference with Nani and his cheeky punt of ball under hapless body of Gomes goal?

Not sure how the decisions we don't get against United (when added up) can be explained in terms of annoyance and why they continue to happen - but regardless of the injustice any club of any colour experiences the end result is this:

Accept the mistake made, if its in your advantage or against you because the law of averages would deem that karma will set things right in another game. Even if you tally 'em up and find yourself counting the good on one hand and the bad requiring the hands of twenty.

It's fair they all say. And to keep crying victim is unbecoming of us (the scousers have copyright, I've checked).

However, the Hudd goal at Fulham. The Stoke goal not given. Are these really comparable to the Mendas 'goal', the Webb penalty decision and couple of other hugely contentious incidents? It's not exactly offside and let's have goal line technology please, is it? I guess yellow cards dished out for tackles for one team but ignored for tackles for the opposing side, time and time again, is also contentious. But then that's also a very regular pattern in the game, the country over.

Re: That Mendes 'goal' - I know the lino had his head down and never saw the ball cross the line, but surely when he lifted his head up and looked across to the goal - something a certain ref also supposedly did if he was concentrating and doing his job - considering Carroll got himself out of the goal from behind the line in a mental scramble wouldn't logic suggest the ball must have also been behind the line for the keeper to have been behind the line?

Oh Christ, I'm going to go off on a tangent here. Let's not. It's part of football legend now. Discussed to death. And it would seem, accepted in the realms of the upper tier.

So no more playing the victim. It hasn't helped us and it hasn't changed things. Them the breaks, and if it happens to your advantage you should lap it up. It's part and parcel. The mistakes. Delivered with ample consistent incompetence by the officials time and time again. Why even bother bothering?

I guess you might well ask how exactly can we manage to dig out for ourselves something like the Nani goal to our advantage in a game (for the last time, THE GOAL AGAINST STOKE DOES NOT COMPARE) is easily answered. It's whether the question is being asked inside our beloved club amongst management and players. It's whether we want to be asking it.

The answer would be to simply start c**ting off the opposition. Yep, lose a bit of class and become a winner. You'll still need support. Play in red, and you'll get it every time.

Or, I don't know, perhaps, ya know, if we grew some b*llocks and followed through on our motto and took control of the destiny of the game placing it beyond the man in black with the whistle in his hand and the opposition's gleeful handling of said delivered parcel of love.

Mental strength, hey? If only we could sign up some of that in the Jan transfer window. Because ref's are out of our league, for now at least.

So let's give Cluttenburg and Webb and every other ref that has dicked as or helped us by way of comedy a massive round of applause.

Start clapping in 3...2...1...

As for Spurs, heads up, we're playing some lovely stuff, we have some fantastic players. We're not far off from getting it right. Honestly, have faith. I'm not drunk.

Clattenburg 2 Tottenham 0

Let's get the Nani goal out of the way first.

I'm doing this from memory as I watched it on a stream and if there is anything that's not quite on the money with regards to the time-line of the incident and it's events, then talk up. That's the whole point of a discussion thread.

Okay, so here we go...


1) Nani in the box, Kaboul is pulling the red shirt down, and the United player decides he may as well give into gravity and tumble over. He handballs the ball after falling (diving). The ref doesn't award a penalty - which is contentious because they've been given for that sort of thing in the past - but equally so, you could argue he went to ground with relative ease. Would have been soft if it was awarded. Probably because Nani tried far too hard to con the ref when it wasn't necessary.

2) No matter if you think it was a pen, a dive or just a nothing incident - there was no indication from the ref or the lino at this juncture that the hand ball had been acknowledged by either of them. Was not a penalty for certain as far as the ref was concerned. And I don't remember that much of a protest from the United players who got on with the game.

3) Now this is where it gets a bit messy. The only certainty at this point is that Nani had blatantly and unequivocally handled the ball. So much so that the Spurs players - and especially Gomes - do not, for a single second, think that it is anything other than a stone cold free-kick. So much so, they take it for granted.

In fact, note the assistant referee at this stage of the incident. He doesn't raise his flag because he assumes Clattenburg - who witnessed the fall (dive) in the box and the handball - is taking control because of the obviousness. What I mean by control is - unquestionably making it clear it was a free kick. Except the ref doesn't make anything clear.

4) So, this far, we have a blatant handball, Clattenburg (as far as I could tell) was in clear sight. But either he didn't see it or did see, but either way - as the official - doesn't make it clear to anyone other than the voice in his head. The assistant ref (the lino), sees it but makes a mistake. He doesn't raise his flag and wave it about. Had he done so, Clattenburg would have been forced into using his arm and hands and voice to clearly state free-kick/play on/whatever - although a free kick would probably have been given due to the raising of the lino's flag. And everyone's mistake it to accept the obvious, i.e. a free-kick from a dead ball.

4) Gomes, dear innocent Gomes, places the ball down (having looked at Nani and shook his head at the player and then looked at the lino for confirmation which might have been given with a stare or again a telepathic assumption, which is hardly the basis you should accept). Again, another massive assumption in the belief that everybody on the pitch understand that Nani handled the ball.

And I'm certain everyone on the pitch did. Including Fletcher (I think it was) who shouted at Nani to drop back to defend. Everyone apart from Nani, who knew he had handled the ball and also knew the ref had not blown his whistle or made it abundantly clear what was meant to be going on. I think Clattenburg was running back to the half-way line at this point. Which begs the question, did he think Gomes was taking the free-kick or that the keeper was going to play advantage?

5) So Gomes places the ball down (twice) ten yards from the actual incident, then remonstrates with his players to get out of he box, and Nani looks around (did he ask permission from the ref or someone if it was okay to kick the ball?) and then kicks the ball under Gomes and in. Apologetic celebration, looking around at first, making sure it counted. Which it did. Which he accepted.

6) Everyone (in Lilywhite) goes a bit mental, Gomes running to the lino smacking his arm/hand, and the lino decides now is the best moment to be lifting his flag up and waves it for the attention of Mark. Clattenburg has already given a goal, but runs down to his assistant, listens to his assistant (who has already mouthed to Gomes 'I know' in response to 'handball') but alas...it's not disallowed.

Too much has happened. Clattenburg signals again, it's a goal. Two things here - the lino flagging when prompted by Gomes (why did he not do it when the hand ball happened so he can make sure the ref saw it so they could both be on the same page in terms of the flow of the game? Or do such incidents, where hand ball occur, always result with a free-kick, therefore, no need for communication? Well? Second thing worth mentioning; Pav flapping his arms like a chicken at the lino.

7) Also - you've got to laugh at our players being told to walk away from the lino whilst Rio is allowed to stand next to both Clattenburg and the lino and stick his oar in. Although if he talks like he tweets, there's a likelihood neither understood his complaining.

8) It's 2-0 and that's that.

9) If you look back (on my stream of the game) the goal was missed because they were showing a replay - so that makes it the linesman, the fans (me and everyone else watching it would seem), the players on both sides and the frigging television producers - all making the assumption it was a dead ball kick. Playing advantage only works when the keeper with the ball in his hands actually knows it's advantage - which the ref failed to do.

10) Therefore: No communication from Clattenburg. Nothing definitive. Other than the ref running up the pitch away from the box where the ball was. Would you run up the pitch if you (the ref) had decided that the ball was still in play? Why not remain close(r) to the action until you can work out what the keeper is going to do?

11) Can I mention the handball again? If the ref saw it, which he must of if he was playing 'advantage' - then why exactly? It's slack. Also, where was the yellow card for Nani? Or is it okay to dismiss it and just forgive and let us have advantage so no time is lost in our favour? And loop yourself back to 10 again.

12) Do you see how the ref is responsible for birthing this bastard United debauchery of balls? No matter laying blame on Gomes for not playing to the whistle, it's still comes down to a creation of a goal out of subtle yet chaotic mismanagement of an incident. I'll say it again: If you're going to not do the obvious ( award a free-kick, yellow card the player) at least signal it's advantage. If by not doing anything, its therefore advantage, then it allows for too much ambiguity.

Also - Did the ref whistle at any stage? If he did initally, then surely its a free-kick. If he didn't - then why the f*ck not?

Conclusions

Fact is Clattenburg should have either made it abundantly clear it was an advantage - regardless of 'play to the whistle'. Everyone (apart from Nani who was sulking on the ground because he didn't get a pen) run off down the pitch - it tells you they all thought it was a free-kick. Had Clattenburg awarded the free-kick. No controversy. Had Clattenburg signalled advantage, no controversy. There is remonstrating of Gomes to his players around the box that might hint at some type of confusion, I did notice that. But I think that had more to do with Gomes wanting to pass it out to one of them rather than booting it down the pitch.

I wish we lost 1-0, instead of having that second go in. Because people will talk about yet another injustice when the reality is, we didn't quite have it going on in the final third. It's almost like we can't just lose at Old Trafford, we have to lose and there has to be something ridiculous in there to mess with our minds.

Lesson for us is simply: Do not entrust in the officials, do not leave doubt and ambiguity in what plays out simply by playing to the whistle. Talk to the ref if you have to. Just don't make assumptions even though it was more than obvious it was hand ball and should have been a  free-kick.

Should, should, should.

Ref f*cked up. No question about it. It's now two for Clattenburg (you haven't forgotten about the Mendes goal have you - the one that would have blipped this woeful 68 game run of no wins away to the monopoly). Oh Howard, at least your calamities were more straightforward.

Next season, let's save ourselves a journey up there and just default the game.

Next blog article - I will not refer to any of this and just talk about the actual performance and players. Don't want all this dizziness to get in the way of what really matters. The football. And our season.


Spurs: 'top 4' side, top 4 decisions

Fulham 1 Spurs 2

I've had pockets of time since the final whistle on Saturday afternoon to attempt to write up a structured match report of our splendid away win (and second successive three point come from behind reward), but alas, no such luck. I'm still sick. Epically tired and somewhat detached from creativity, but still I'm managed to muster up some tweets today whilst laying across the sofa watching the continued demise of Liverpool FC and then Man City trying to do their best impersonation of the Jose version of Chelsea by spending the vast majority of their game against Blackpool boring the very essence of my soul from my fever stricken body. I still don't rate them. Yes, they are lucky, yes, they don't lose often, but something about them just screams out 'CHOKE'. I guess with Man Utd doing their very best to tread the line of ordinary, this season could see a further shake-up to the one we introduced last time round. So perhaps discounting the billionaires from Eastlands would be a tad dangerous.

Okay, so Fulham v Spurs, I'm going to free-style it. Then just hit the publish button.

Saturday and Fortress Fulham. In yer face Mark Hughes. And Lily Allen. In the context of the game, we deserved to win. Some of our defending at times was not best and against better players (Eto'o) we might be left scratching our heads. But that's out of context. Which is not a concern, not until Wednesday.

First half, opening exchanges, thought we played very well. Slowly and obviously, Fulham got themselves back into the possession game. Sandro put himself about. Bit too eager, I guess he still has to get to grips with the pace of the game and the fact that clumsy challenging won't warrant too much other than a yellow card.

Was very content with Harry's selection. Strongest side, be it with one or two minor tweaks, but this games was vital in terms of needing to win - whereas the CL game on Wed isn't. Because we get to play Inter again, at the Lane. Which will be important. I'll talk more about the CL game in a later blog.

Fulham took the lead, Kamara scoring. Bit of a mess from all concerned in terms of positioning for this one. It's easy to point and shout at Gallas who showed a lack of awareness of where the Fulham forward was (behind you!) but you could also lay scorn on Hutton who run into a central position, practically clashing with Kings space and the cross/ball going through the both of them into the path of Kamara who tapped it home.

Did Gallas think someone (in Spurs colours) was tracking the forward? No matter, organisation here was left wanting. All too easy. Needs to be worked on in training. School-boy mistake tbh.

But this is brand new Spurs, feasting on Dutch cake, of the Amsterdam variety. Relaxed and giddy, as you were. We go down the other end and equalise. From the kick-off. Brilliant skill from vdV to turn and chip onto the bar, ball falling down to Pav who had a simple tap in, but made sure he pointed out his name on the back of his shirt just in case anyone was in doubt of the clinical polished ball-pushing over the line touch off his boot.

Have to say, I'm still lol'ing at the Fulham fans (bless 'em) who didn't even had enough time to finish their rendition of 'you're not singing any more'. So the Spurs away support did the polite thing and finished the song off for them.

Other mentions. Gomes pulled off a save or two. King went off injured, Bassong replaced him. I know that with Ledders, I sort of half expected him not to play and be rested for Inter, in what many expected him to play a damage limitation role. I'm glad Harry started him, it's a shame he limped off and won't be available for the Everton game next weekend (as well as no Italian away day). But it's a statement made. We didn't take the game for granted or displayed signs of looking ahead to mid-week.

It's part and parcel of the risk we take with King. Get well soon. Once more, we re-visit the age old conundrum of the centre-back pairing and what we need to be doing in terms of looking ahead for the future. Once Dawson is back, we might place said conundrum back onto the back-burner again. Which isn't ideal, what with us still not knowing for sure if Woody is going to be 100% again.

Second half, Sandro off. Subbed, not sent off, which he might have been not out of malicious play but from untidy tackling. Azza replacing him before the kick-off. Lennon was good. Again. Off the bench appears to have given him a gentle kick up the bum in terms of desire to impress. Cracking
movement with BAE finding Pav who played the ball inside to Lennon - weak shot, but good to see all round. He seems to have direction rather than losing himself cutting into central midfield positions or running out of steam down the flanks.

More assured second half from start to finish I thought from us. Not perfect, Kamara spoiling chances which I was happy to see spurned. Wasn't so much about individuals today, but more about the unit. vdV, Bale, Modric...all relatively quiet. vdV had his moment with the first goal. Moddle is still slightly off the pace, his touch not Lukaesque just yet, but he's made it clear he knows he's struggling a little. He'll get there. Bale was definitely quiet compared to the beastly performances he usually produces. Did pulsate forward creating a vdV chance. But as a unit, the lads did enough, which was worthy of three points. So no shrugs of despondency from me.

Other bits and pieces off the top of my head. Hutton and Gomes getting in each others way, a Hutton effort on goal, Crouch on for Pav. Oh yeah, almost forgot. The goal for 2-1.

First time in history I've ever agreed with Alan Shearer (with his MotD assessment). Hansen obviously disagreeing with him and baiting Lineker. So very very bitter. Always let you down the Spurs don't you know.

If you want to start playing the game by the letter of the law - at the time of the Hudd shot, their keeper was in sight of the ball leaving the boot. Gallas, offside position, not interfering with play. Ball takes a deflection, still not interfering. Gallas tries his best to put any doubt in the refs mind about disallowing a potential goal by attempting to kick the ball, still not interfering because he didn't touch the ball.

Ball crosses the line. 1-2 Tottenham.

Lino however decides to flag, so good on Hudd for making sure the ref took note of the journey taken by the ball into the Fulham goal. Mike Dean, giving us the decision. I'm sure I would have complained about it if it was the other way round, but deep down, even though you could argue it is interfering because the player was trying to become active - he wasn't active because he didn't change anything (i.e. the ball was still on course with going in after the deflection, so Gallas could have stripped naked and slapped a haddock on his backside, it would not have made a blind bit of difference - although no doubt it might have made it onto Soccer AM's third eye).

Active, not active...ambiguous, no? The authorities would not have it any other way.

Good performance. We're 5th. 14 points. A few off the top, and obviously regretful of the points dropped against a couple of sides this season which might have had has even higher. But this season will be more open and closer than the last, so it's a case of staying in amongst it again - and aiming for bigger scalps in the way of our 'Top 4' opposition and doing something about the lack of wins away to them in 60+ games. Also feel we need to start to destroy sides at the Lane again.

Mentality should be about maximising our potential against the supposed weaker sides at home and continuing to dig deep away. Stick the pressure on the other contenders by pulling away. At the minute, everyone appears to be very evenly matched (there's four or so tiers in the Prem itself).

Momentum = confidence = belief = success.

Simply put, get through to the Jan window in a top 5 position. Then consolidate the f**k out of it.

Back to bed I go.


4 points, 2 games

Stoke 1 Spurs 2

Was it over the line? I guess it doesn't matter. Them the breaks Top 4 sides get, innit?

Nah, let's not sell-out just yet with that one.

I guess lady luck continues to hump our leg, be it frantically (is there a better way?) and I for one will just shrug and patronisingly point out how unfortunate Stoke were not to share the points today. But that's just me being diplomatic.

I'm all for clubs like Stoke, fighting tooth and nail, bullying and hassling opposition - especially opposition that in the past had a habit of crumbling and falling apart. Why should they pay respect to visitors? But we are made of sterner stuff these days, as witnessed by our sitting-back-and-taking-it-like-a-man performance in the second half. Much like last seasons visit, we did enough. And at this point in the season, before true form is found, I'll happily take three points at places like the Britannia. Shaky moments and everything.

I'm going to hazard a guess and say the 3-2 loss v Young Boy and the manner in which we went 3-0 down has hurt our mental strength some what. Panic, not quite of the catastrophic ilk, has crept back into our play. The sooner we get this play-off out of the way (and win it) the quicker Harry can settle with some consistency with his selection, and focus from the players on our immediate target: EPL points. So, I'm made up we left Stoke with all three points. King rested, Crouch the only available 'fit' forward, Kaboul in for Bassong, no Modric and the return of Jenas. 4-5-1. Crouch the lone man (Keane injured or dropped?). Depth. Even if we might be critical of the likes of JJ and Kaboul, I applaud their shift today. Can't really fault the team performance or Harry's selection.

The first half was decent enough. Azza slowly beginning to reclaim some of that lost end product. The opener, a clearance off the line, hitting Bale in the chest, and ending up in the net. 1-1, Gomes all dizzy in the box. But not too worry, 2-1, Bale again, and this time with a goal that you could watch endlessly. Giggesque, volley from the heavens. Lennon provider. Let's not be forgetting this won us the three points. Well, that and the officials reluctance to signal a Stoke equaliser in the second half.

First half though had us easily winning the possession percentages, passing the ball around with much confidence. And JJ could have made it three, unlucky not to.

So Bale sublime, all good, no complaints no massive concerns. Even though I couldn't help but think our defence was still susceptible to collapsing if pressure was applied. So I guess I did have concerns. I was wrong. But only just.

Second half, Stoke had a right go at us. I don't really want to bang on about the fact that we let them have a right go at us, because for me, defensive frailties and all, we still survived. We battled. Even Jenas got stuck in and worked hard off the ball. Tuncay asked a few questions. Gomes answered them by placing his hands over his ears and shouting 'lalalalalalalala'. Have to say though, that on closer inspection, our mad Brazilian was at times tripped and impeded (first goal anyone?). It wasn't an easy afternoon for him. But he seemed to experience a re-lapse with dealing with crosses. And if I take my blinkers off, I have to admit that Gomes was nowhere near being dominant in his area, and thus, sort of brought it on himself, falling over people and flapping.

Back to what I mentioned early, re: credit to clubs who might lack depth in quality by making it difficult for the likes of us to settle down and play. And although I have no intention of going all Wenger with the complaints, I did find Stoke tiresome, especially Shawcross, the dirty cheating bastard, kicking out petulantly at times. Gomes made a fine fine save from Tuncay, tipping over the bar. Stoke continued with their physicality, we continued to weather the storm. Harry makes a tactical switch (Walker on, Lennon off) and then its OMG time when a header is saved onto the underside of the crossbar, is then headed back in and appears to go over the line, hitting Crouch (chest? arm?) before being cleared off the line.

BLATTER?? WHERE IS THE GOAL LINE TECHNOLOGY?

It's not required. Well, not required until the same thing happens to us. Karma, that's what I'm going to go with here, what with Stoke's WWE tactics. We might have made hard work of it, but we stuck in there. We dug deep. I got it wrong pre-match, but I don't care. Swashbuckling can be left for Wednesday.

Loved Phil Thompson's remark about how the foul on Gomes in the build up to the 'goal' was not relevant because the referee did not give it, and yet talked up about how Stoke should have been awarded the goal and taken a point from the game. But the ref didn't give that either. So using Phil-logic™, is it not equally irrelevant also for the same reason?

It all sort of fixed itself up, one mistake following another, cancelling each other out. Discussions that will no doubt continue into the new week. Let's hope that's that, and we don't have any controversy in the play-off.

Being tested like this is fairly invaluable at this early stage. A reminder that new-look Spurs of 2010 is sticking around for 2011. I'm hoping now, with three points up on the board, the players can relax and look forward to the game that will truly define the next few weeks and months.

Tottenham, not quite brilliant, definitely resilient.

Gallas, again

I'll get straight to the point (rather than cryptically dance around it to incite discussion).

Spurs fans are split down the middle on this one. You've got half of us saying he's a bad apple and the rest believing that he's exactly what we need (as far as his player qualities are concerned). But then there's debate about just how good he actually is and how far experience can carry him. Also spoken to some gooners today (who hasn't), who are in complete disagreement with the 'he's poison' line and others who suggest he will be rosey for the honeymoon period, then turn into an utter **** and end up isolating himself from the rest of the squad because of his demands and his conquering personality and lust for authority and control.

Wenger talking him up I see today also, not that I believe what he has to say without some scepticism, but he reckons Gallas alleged negative attitude is exaggerated.

Then I remember how he said he'd score an own goal for Chelsea to get away from the club and shrug despondently.

If we get Gallas the leader, barking orders and displaying composure at the back and intent going forward - then we'll be applauding the master-stroke of a free transfer. He will bring vast experience, a winning mentality, a **** mentality which we lack in abundance and the type of assurance at the back we need to allow us to sleep better at night (Dawson by the way, isn't suddenly shit because of one lacklustre England performance and his slow-mo no-go movements away to Young Boys - but there is that scratching of the head and chin when debating whether Daws only works best with a King by his side. I'm just not happy at this juncture to write off his form from last year as some type of fluke).

If we get some of the more repugnant traces of his (Gallas) personality, I hope poison is easier to rid from our system than a dodgy lasagne was.

Gallas is paradoxical. You can see that with the way we all appear to be in disagreement with each other.

So - there's only one thing to do. Back him in Lilywhite.

Until of course, it (if it) goes to shit. Then some of the vocal ones amongst you can say 'I told you so'.

Just Given my thoughts...

We could discuss all day the ethics of signing a keeper on an emergency loan when you already have nine goalkeepers on your books and four available even when the rules apparently cite that when you're down to just two, you can draft in a replacement. Which isn't relevant here because City have four and still signed ex-Spurs player Marton Fulop.

Yes yes, the FA Premier League are looking after their chosen son to replace Liverpool in the Top 4, permitting and aiding them to recover some form of stability with Given's absence due to injury blah blah blah. And this is surely the crux of it, the crux having gone missing in all the musings and disapprovals.

The crux being, City no longer have Given between the sticks. Anything less than Given is already a bonus to any side facing them. Even more important is the fact that we still haven't played Bolton at home and acquired the three points that would take the potential for St Totteringham's Day forward to the penultimate game of the season...at Eastlands and hopefully avoided altogether going into the final away day of the 2010 season at Burnley.

So how about we all stop bitching about the injustice, smash Bolton to bits and then concern ourselves about City's outfield players and what potential damage they might do to us whilst posing them several questions with Modric (crafting), Bale (beasting) and Lennon (dinking) asking away and hopefully leaving Mancini's men with no time to answer.

COYFS.

Okay, yeah?

Penalty? Who cares?

Morning. Just some random thoughts on the weekend:

Everton's defending. Akin to blindfolding schoolboys and feeding them ketamine.

-

How about that Crystal Palace goal ruled out because the officials failed to see the ball fly into the back of the net? Here's a clue it was legit. The scorer wheeled off to celebrate followed by his team mates and the opposition looked down at the ground in despondency of conceding the goal. What exactly did the ref think was going on? Some kind of elaborate illusion? Let's pretend we scored and we might fool everyone we did. No surprise the officials have been suspended pending a little review.

-

According to Mark Hughes, re: their chase for Lescott and Moyes criticism of City:

"I'm not surprised David feels a bit aggrieved with the situation, you always are when a big club is trying to sign one of your best players."

I didn't know Spurs were interested in signing Lescott? Well in.

-

So was it a penalty or not? Rafa is balling his eyes out about it. BAE barging Voronin off the ball. On the basis of the game as a whole - we deserved to win. Statistically, they didn't get anywhere near us. And the fact that the first penalty (the one given) was an absolute gift should be a clear indication that the Spanish waiter should spend a little more time concentrating on his side fragmented play which lacked any sort of rhythm and decisiveness. The only other effort of note on goal was yet another penalty claim, again BAE involved, the ball hitting his chest (at least that's what it looked like to me) and even if it did hit his arm it would have been harsh to point to the spot. Ekotto enjoying his day.

As for us, feet firmly back on the ground. Right? The euphoria of claiming thee points in our opening game of the season is over. I was already high on the fact that we were given a home fixture to kick-off the season for the first time in 5 or so years. Perhaps the FA's IT guys have finally found and eliminated the Trojan virus left in the fixture list computer software that David Dein carefully planted many years ago. Regardless, having partied into the night with generous quantities of coke and hookers, I'm now having to be a little more philosophical about Sunday. Yes, we won. Several of our players battled well. Liverpool were fairly crap with little clout around the midfield area making it comfortable for Wilson and Tommy.

We are not exactly push-overs at home either (1 loss in 23), so perhaps the win wasn't as unexpected as it appeared to be to some. Not taking anything away from the result or the performance. Well I am I guess. Just placing it into perspective. It's Hull away where we find out if we have the right stuff for competing in the top-half of the table, the bit where 6th and 5th place sit. We've managed to compete against the Top 4 more and more over the past season or so. It's the pesky 'small teams' that need to be brushed aside.

Still, three points - one game. Opening day nose-bleeds are lush. I'll leave you with another gem from Studs-Up. Enjoy.