Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 7:58 pm

I got slated for saying we needed a new right back last summer. Got told it was no where near a priority position. It’s not nice to be right.

claretspice wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 9:15 pm

A disappointing and frustrating afternoon, but that performance needs keeping in perspective. That was an odd match and we've played worse than we did in the first half in particular and win, even kepta clean sheet.

Pope - 6 - faultless for all the goals, otherwise barely employed although he swept up well a few times.

Lowton - 4 - I'm a fan but whilst he used the balla bit better than Bardsley generally, the exceptions to that rule played us into trouble, and he never ever got to grips with Son.

Pieters - 4 - relatively little came form hos dude but his use of the ball was clumsy and his defending not a lot better.

Tarkowski - 5 - exposed one v one for at least the second, fourth and fifth goals.

Mee - 5 - too slow to close down for the opening goal and otherwise pretty unconvincing on a difficult day, although he was the pick of the back four.

Cork - 7 - for me, our most creditable player on the day. Carried the ball well, got about the midfield with a bit of hussle and made decent use of the relatively decent share of possession we saw.

Hendrick - 6 - slow to get going and guilty of not protecting the back four in the disastrous first 15 minutes, but after that he grew into the gang and did ok.

Brady - 5 - desperately unlucky not to give us a lifeline at 2-0 when his header hit the bar, and used the ball with purpose at times whilst we carried a threat in the first half, but guilty of giving too little defensive protection and faded after the break.

McNeil - 7 - real credit to him got recovering from a harrowing first 30 minutes on the right where he coughed up possession virtually every time it came his way, including critically for the opening goal when his touch eluded him and allowed Spurs to break straight into our back four. Once on the left delivered a number of telling deliveries. We do need more from him defensively though.

Rodriguez - 6 - moved well, showed purpose, but had two cracking opportunities to score with headers before the break, and fluffed them both. At this level those chances have you've buried.

Wood - 4 - never in the game and didn't give us any sort of outlet.

Vydra - 4 - offered no more than Wood, and even less presence.

Lennon - 5 - no real opportunity to get into the game.


It's no fun going to games like this and finding that a fast start from a vastly opposition kills the game within minutes; but it will happen sometimes. It was hard to tell the extent to which Spurs' attacking play was superb or our defending flimsy in the first half; the answer probably lay somewhere in between.

Spurs have a clear idea of how they intend to attack under Mourinho and they executed it with pace, directness and ruthlessness that an exposed back 4 simply couldn't cope with. Our strength under Dyche for the most part has been how well we protect the back four and our resilience, but apart from Cork, there was none of that on show during the first 30 and with the back four responding to the challenge as badly as it's possible to imagine, Spurs looked like cutting through every time they attacked.

But oddly, for all that, apart from their three first half goals, the only other clear sight of goal Spurs produced resulted in Sissoko hitting the post. By half time, Spurs had had 4 good chances and Burnley 3, with Brady hitting the bar and Jay passing up two very good chances to reduce the arrears.

But the brilliant but avoidable third goal killed the game and whilst the second half followed the same routine of some decent Burnley football and Spurs ruthlessly taking the only two real chances they had, it was all a bit of a training session by then.

And for all it's easy to take some positives and take solace in the fact we found Spurs in particularly clinical form, there's a trend here which is impossible to ignore. The bigger clubs are increasingly picking us off when we have the ball and they are tending to thrash us. All of spurs' goals today came from direct fast transitions after we gave the balls away without being back in our defensive shape. These games don't define our season but they do help set the tone, and for all expectations need to be realistic, and anaggregate of 16-3 in four games against last seasons top 4 is a little worrying.

taio wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 9:40 pm

You honestly think our two central midfielders were good and average, really?

claretspice wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:08 pm

Yes I did. Perhaps they were a bit advanced at times, and there was too much space bettered them and back 4, but by and large I thought they did absolutely fine, particularly Cork.

In truth we held our own centrally for long periods, which is why we started to get a foothold to allow McNeil to get ball in decent areas. It was our ability to defend in transition that was the problem today, and McNeil and Brady were more culpable there than the central two. They provided scant protection to help with Son in particular.

taio wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:15 pm

Fair enough if you really think that. I think we got destroyed in the middle of the park and Hendrick was woeful. To be fair to Cork he was pretty much playing on his own because Hendrick was invisible.

claretspice wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:32 pm

Each to their own. But Hendrick made 50 passes today - more than anyone else other than the defenders - with a pass accuracy of 86%. Just to put that in context, it's vastly superior to Sissoko today and very comparable to Dier, so to say he was anonymous seems contrary to the stats, which also say we had both more possession than Spurs and a higher pass accuracy. Stats aren't everything, but that does provide an indication that we competed ok in midfield.

claretspice wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:32 pm

Each to their own. But Hendrick made 50 passes today - more than anyone else other than the defenders - with a pass accuracy of 86%. Just to put that in context, it's vastly superior to Sissoko today and very comparable to Dier, so to say he was anonymous seems contrary to the stats, which also say we had both more possession than Spurs and a higher pass accuracy. Stats aren't everything, but that does provide an indication that we competed ok in midfield.

Jakubs Tash wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:44 pm

How many of those passes were probing or incisive passes? How many of those passes were part of fast, thrusting attacks? Or how many of those passes were safe, backwards/sideways passes where we were just struggling to even keep the ball? Like you say, stats aren't everything.

claretspice wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:50 pm

Midfielders getting stick for the shortcomings of the rest of the team is unfortunately not a new thing.

taio wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:48 pm

Pieters has decent passing stats but you gave him 4. Rightly so. I think you're the only person so far who has given Hendrick 6. Jeff has had some decent games lately but he was rubbish today. Not on his own but slightly worse than the next worse player.

claretspice wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:58 pm

In terms of Pieters, the difference is I marked him primarily on his defending, and the fact that I recall him playing us into trouble with poor passes at least twice. Happy to be corrected but I don't recall Hendrick playing us into trouble once. And like I say, the fact that (as was my impression and also supported by the stats) we held our own man for man in midfield, and I'm pretty sure no one would suggest that was true of either of our full backs against their opposite number.

Now if you disagree, no problem. Each to their own. I've got my view from watching the game and I'm comfortable the stats bear out what I think I saw.

claretspice wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 9:15 pm

A disappointing and frustrating afternoon, but that performance needs keeping in perspective. That was an odd match and we've played worse than we did in the first half in particular and win, even kepta clean sheet.

Pope - 6 - faultless for all the goals, otherwise barely employed although he swept up well a few times.

Lowton - 4 - I'm a fan but whilst he used the balla bit better than Bardsley generally, the exceptions to that rule played us into trouble, and he never ever got to grips with Son.
Spice, you blame Tarky for the last goal when it was Ben Mee, way out of position and looking silly from a basic one two.
Pieters - 4 - relatively little came form hos dude but his use of the ball was clumsy and his defending not a lot better.

Tarkowski - 5 - exposed one v one for at least the second, fourth and fifth goals.

Mee - 5 - too slow to close down for the opening goal and otherwise pretty unconvincing on a difficult day, although he was the pick of the back four.

Cork - 7 - for me, our most creditable player on the day. Carried the ball well, got about the midfield with a bit of hussle and made decent use of the relatively decent share of possession we saw.

Hendrick - 6 - slow to get going and guilty of not protecting the back four in the disastrous first 15 minutes, but after that he grew into the gang and did ok.

Brady - 5 - desperately unlucky not to give us a lifeline at 2-0 when his header hit the bar, and used the ball with purpose at times whilst we carried a threat in the first half, but guilty of giving too little defensive protection and faded after the break.

McNeil - 7 - real credit to him got recovering from a harrowing first 30 minutes on the right where he coughed up possession virtually every time it came his way, including critically for the opening goal when his touch eluded him and allowed Spurs to break straight into our back four. Once on the left delivered a number of telling deliveries. We do need more from him defensively though.

Rodriguez - 6 - moved well, showed purpose, but had two cracking opportunities to score with headers before the break, and fluffed them both. At this level those chances have you've buried.

Wood - 4 - never in the game and didn't give us any sort of outlet.

Vydra - 4 - offered no more than Wood, and even less presence.

Lennon - 5 - no real opportunity to get into the game.


It's no fun going to games like this and finding that a fast start from a vastly opposition kills the game within minutes; but it will happen sometimes. It was hard to tell the extent to which Spurs' attacking play was superb or our defending flimsy in the first half; the answer probably lay somewhere in between.

Spurs have a clear idea of how they intend to attack under Mourinho and they executed it with pace, directness and ruthlessness that an exposed back 4 simply couldn't cope with. Our strength under Dyche for the most part has been how well we protect the back four and our resilience, but apart from Cork, there was none of that on show during the first 30 and with the back four responding to the challenge as badly as it's possible to imagine, Spurs looked like cutting through every time they attacked.

But oddly, for all that, apart from their three first half goals, the only other clear sight of goal Spurs produced resulted in Sissoko hitting the post. By half time, Spurs had had 4 good chances and Burnley 3, with Brady hitting the bar and Jay passing up two very good chances to reduce the arrears.

But the brilliant but avoidable third goal killed the game and whilst the second half followed the same routine of some decent Burnley football and Spurs ruthlessly taking the only two real chances they had, it was all a bit of a training session by then.

And for all it's easy to take some positives and take solace in the fact we found Spurs in particularly clinical form, there's a trend here which is impossible to ignore. The bigger clubs are increasingly picking us off when we have the ball and they are tending to thrash us. All of spurs' goals today came from direct fast transitions after we gave the balls away without being back in our defensive shape. These games don't define our season but they do help set the tone, and for all expectations need to be realistic, and anaggregate of 16-3 in four games against last seasons top 4 is a little worrying.

taio wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 07, 2019 11:08 pm

Hendrick played is into trouble early in the first half.

Why is everyone else scoring Hendrick below average or in more cases poor?

Cork had a a pass completion rate of 93%...world class stats but completely misleading today.

The stats bear out nothing on this occasion...we had the majority of possession.