A serious look at Mauricio Pochettino

Parry Gallister said:
No, 90% of the time it was Tottenham's cbs with the ball. They'd make a pass forward, the midfielders wouldn't find any runners and give it back to the cbs. Until the last 20 mins or so, Juve would pounce soon as Tottenham got toward the final third and win the ball back. That's not dominating, that's shit possession, I'd be happy to let their cbs have the ball all day, they're not going to do anything with it.

That's fine if you're holding a lead, but they failed at that. Lost that lead through Allegri making a tactical switch around 60 mins in and Poch not reacting to it, so they don't really deserve praise, they got done and their individual quality couldn't bale them out. Shame they didn't go through based on the performance in Turin but they were shit today.
Click to expand...
This is just plain wrong. Spurs had plenty of chances, completely controlled the game and should have had the game in the bag long before the equaliser.

Once again, people are overly critical because they are agenda-driven. It's so strange to see some posters almost using attacking and entertaining football as negative terms. Have you all forgotten that we used to pride ourselves in our attacking football? It's fair to think it's better to win than to entertain but they're not mutually exclusive and some of you sound like you'd rather be boring than entertaining regardless of the result. It's so weird.

Spurs dominated Juventus over two legs. They deserved to go through and up until the two quick goals, there was nothing to suggest Juventus could get back in the tie.

Poch deserves neither special praise nor special criticism after yesterday. Spurs played their game and were very unlucky not to win. That's it.
 
ti vu said:
We had been there before. Play attractive football is secondary. Winning is the priority at top club. Sure playing pragmatic would put pressure on you, and test your mentality prowess when it doesn't come through. However, putting the style ahead of result is pure excuse. Wenger did it years ago (after actually winning things) and look at the end result.
Click to expand...
Arsenal and Chelsea have been the dominant London clubs in the Premier League since it began. Spurs today are a better side than both, despite being also rans for the entirety of the PL's existence. They haven't won anything but they never won anything. To get these performance levels out of a club with those resources is impressive to me.
TMDaines said:
What?! They won the League Cup under Ramos, they were in the Champions League quarter finals under Redknapp. They got more points under AVB and Sherwood than they have done in two of Pochettino's three seasons. You'd think he had taken over Newcastle the way people go on.

They're still the same old easy-on-the-eye bottle jobs. The day a few key men, or just Kane, departs is the day the Spurs "project" dissolves.

If they don't win the FA Cup with the semis and the final at home, perception will start to swing.
Click to expand...
They've dismantled top sides in the PL and Europe. They're clearly far better than that Redknapp team. They finished 8th or 6th when he was appointed. I don't get the hate for the man, unless it's directly to do with certain Spurs posters here, in which case I can understand it a little bit. :)
 
Jev said:
This is just plain wrong. Spurs had plenty of chances, completely controlled the game and should have had the game in the bag long before the equaliser.

Once again, people are overly critical because they are agenda-driven. It's so strange to see some posters almost using attacking and entertaining football as negative terms. Spurs dominated Juventus over two legs. They deserved to go through and up until the two quick goals, there was nothing to suggest Juventus could get back in the tie.

Poch deserves neither special praise nor special criticism after yesterday. Spurs played their game and were very unlucky not to win. That's it.
Click to expand...

Does a team 'deserve to go through' when it creates chances but fails to take them?
 
GM K said:
SAF won at Aberdeen. That's where he got announced.
Click to expand...

It's fits the question you asked. Aberdeen were small club, SAF was the manager who won nothing except second division title. He then made small club into serial title winners.
 
Jev said:
This is just plain wrong. Spurs had plenty of chances, completely controlled the game and should have had the game in the bag long before the equaliser.

Once again, people are overly critical because they are agenda-driven. It's so strange to see some posters almost using attacking and entertaining football as negative terms. Spurs dominated Juventus over two legs. They deserved to go through and up until the two quick goals, there was nothing to suggest Juventus could get back in the tie.

Poch deserves neither special praise nor special criticism after yesterday. Spurs played their game and were very unlucky not to win. That's it.
Click to expand...

Does a team 'deserve to go through' when it creates chances but fails to take them?
 
Jev said:
This is just plain wrong. Spurs had plenty of chances, completely controlled the game and should have had the game in the bag long before the equaliser.

Once again, people are overly critical because they are agenda-driven. It's so strange to see some posters almost using attacking and entertaining football as negative terms. Have you all forgotten that we used to pride ourselves in our attacking football? It's fair to think it's better to win than to entertain but some of you sound like you'd rather be boring than entertaining regardless of the result. It's so weird.

Spurs dominated Juventus over two legs. They deserved to go through and up until the two quick goals, there was nothing to suggest Juventus could get back in the tie.

Poch deserves neither special praise nor special criticism after yesterday. Spurs played their game and were very unlucky not to win. That's it.
Click to expand...
I think the aggregate result was a fair reflection of the chances created over the two legs. Higuain missed a penalty in the first leg and Juventus could have been awarded another one last night. Saying Juventus were lucky to go through is a slight on them.

It's not an agenda to have a different opinion than yours.
 
GM K said:
Does a team 'deserve to go through' when it creates chances but fails to take them?
Click to expand...
By my logic yes. The team that plays best and succeeds with what they're trying to do deserves to win. Yesterday that team was Spurs and nine times out of ten, they would have won.
 
Akshay said:
I think the aggregate result was a fair reflection of the chances created over the two legs. Higuain missed a penalty in the first leg and Juventus could have been awarded another one last night. Saying Juventus were lucky to go through is a slight on them.

It's not an agenda to have a different opinion than yours.
Click to expand...
It is an agenda when you see people sarcastically joking about 'attacking football' as if that in itself was a bad thing.

Your verdict on the tie is fair, although I disagree. The post I responded to was not a fair verdict.
 
Akshay said:
I think the aggregate result was a fair reflection of the chances created over the two legs. Higuain missed a penalty in the first leg and Juventus could have been awarded another one last night. Saying Juventus were lucky to go through is a slight on them.

It's not an agenda to have a different opinion than yours.
Click to expand...
They came up against a better side, and I have no love for Spurs in recent years, but wouldn't you agree that Pochettino has made them better than they were? Asking for reasons of sanity as some here have me almost convinced he's a fraud.
 
roonster09 said:
It's fits the question you asked. Aberdeen were small club, SAF was the manager who won nothing except second division title. He then made small club into serial title winners.
Click to expand...

He did win the Scottish League, Scottish Cup and a European Cup at Aberdeen. He was the first to break the Rangers/Celtic duopoly in the Scottish League.

Yes, it fits into my point made through the question. Sir Alex, like other great managers, either won trophies with smaller clubs before leaving or turned 'smaller' clubs into giants.

Poch has to transit from playing nice football to winning silverware and he has to do it fast.
 
Sanche7 said:
Although Poch could have done better, if that Kane header which was cleared off the line had gone in, who knows, maybe spurs would have changed it around.
Totally agree that Poch lacks the tactical flexibility but that's the same thing Klopp and even sometimes Pep has been accused of.

But Spurs had a very good run in the CL, I mean finishing above Madrid and Dortmund, defeating a CL specialist Madrid side are impressive feats.
Not just that, Spurs play good football and their signings under Poch have been absolutely phenomenal, not to mention the number of players who have improved under him

Is he ready for a top club? No, not yet, but I expect him to learn from these mistakes and mature into a top manager very soon.
Click to expand...

And if refs called offside on that header... And if Juve got the penalty... And if Higuain scored the penalty in the first leg...

As a great manager once said, "there are many poets in football." It's braver to try to win ugly, than to lose looking good.
 
Last edited:
Jev said:
By my logic yes. The team that plays best and succeeds with what they're trying to do deserves to win. Yesterday that team was Spurs and nine times out of ten, they would have won.
Click to expand...

Juventus set out to be compact and win the game, therefore they succeeded with what they were aiming to do, therefore by your logic, deserved to win? Teams don't deserve to win simply because they played more attacking football, that's never been the case in football and it never will be.
 
Jev said:
By my logic yes. The team that plays best and succeeds with what they're trying to do deserves to win. Yesterday that team was Spurs and nine times out of ten, they would have won.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

My own logic is this: the team that takes its chances deserves to go through. The team that does not take its chances does not deserve to go through.

Many people prefer to judge based on the aesthetics of the game, which is fair enough. As much as I appreciate how well a team weaves passes and attacks, I prefer to stick to the basics: outscore your opponent and you win. Fail to outscore your opponent and you lose or at best, you draw.

So for me, the only team that deserved to qualify, was the team that outscored its opponent over two ties: Juventus.
 
Jev said:
By my logic yes. The team that plays best and succeeds with what they're trying to do deserves to win. Yesterday that team was Spurs and nine times out of ten, they would have won.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

My own logic is this: the team that takes its chances deserves to go through. The team that does not take it's chances does not deserve to go through.

Many people prefer to judge based on the aesthetics of the game, which is fair enough. As much as I appreciate how well a team weaves passes and attacks, I prefer to stick to the basics: outscore your opponent and you win. Fail to outscore your opponent and you lose or at best, you draw.

So for me, the only team that deserved to qualify, was the team that outscored its opponent over two ties: Juventus.
 
roonster09 said:
In 8 years, he won 3 league titles, 4 Scottish cups (FA cups), 1 Scottish league cup, UEFA cup winners cup, UEFA super cup.

Man is a genius. GOAT.

In Aberdeen history, they won
4 league titles - SAF won 3 of them. They went 24 years without title.
7 FA cups - SAF won 4 of them.
They won only 1 Cup winners cup and Super cup, SAF won both.
They won 6 league cups, SAF won 1.
Click to expand...

The magic of Aberdeen. Just watched a documentary about that achievement.

The man was truly one of a kind. Miss him :(
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
Arsenal and Chelsea have been the dominant London clubs in the Premier League since it began. Spurs today are a better side than both, despite being also rans for the entirety of the PL's existence. They haven't won anything but they never won anything. To get these performance levels out of a club with those resources is impressive to me.

They've dismantled top sides in the PL and Europe. They're clearly far better than that Redknapp team. They finished 8th or 6th when he was appointed. I don't get the hate for the man, unless it's directly to do with certain Spurs posters here, in which case I can understand it a little bit. :)
Click to expand...
Chelsea dominated since the beginning is strange idea. They did have few good seasons prior to Roman takeover, but it's nothing more special than Toon for example. And Chelsea won UEFA Cup, and FA Cup when they were supposed to run badly on debt (not well run or better resourced)

You must be joking, right? Chelsea won the league 2 in last 4 seasons. They can slip in one season, but they have the backbone, the ambition (perhaps from Roman's ambition cut throats approach that force the coach at helm to go for it). Football is not math where you take average to figure who is better. For all we know Chelsea best is unreachable domain Tottenham can't yet reach. Barcelona, Bayern, Madrid... have season where they couldn't challenge for the title too. Doesn't mean they are worse in long run the smaller teams finished above them in some certain seasons.

When you're talking bout the PL era, then Tottenham pretty rivaled Arsenal in spending (not net spend mind), and that's pretty much a top player in term of money spend on players. Remember sugar daddies era spike the fee a little over a decade ago. Tottenham is made out as lack of resource in recent years due to change in approach to finance the stadium project. Them as lack of resource when citing pre Roman Chelsea is straw clutching at its finest.

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/f...ue-biggest-spending-clubs-ever-sportgalleries
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
They came up against a better side, and I have no love for Spurs in recent years, but wouldn't you agree that Pochettino has made them better than they were? Asking for reasons of sanity as some here have me almost convinced he's a fraud.
Click to expand...
For sure, he's done a very good job with them. The forum is just prone to hyperbole. When Spurs are doing well Poch is an elite coach who Jose should be kicked out on the curb for, and when Spurs lose he's a 'fraud', whatever that means. You've got some convinced we're going to lose to Sevilla next week just so they can justify Poch being better than Jose today. I mean we might, I'd just like to think United fans would place progressing in the CL above getting the opportunity to say 'I told you so'. I think the frustration with the Spurs love-in from our own fans leads to reactions like you've mentioned.

I liked the comparison someone made much earlier with Spalletti. Was a coach I always liked and appreciated in his first stint at Roma, where he had them playing great football and won some trophies, but ultimately hasn't showed yet that he deserves to be regarded among the elite. I put Pochettino at that level right now, good football, improves players, cohesive teams - but you need a certain ruthlessness and desire to get to the very top and I'm not sure he has that. Maybe it will develop with experience over time.
 
Jev said:
By my logic yes. The team that plays best and succeeds with what they're trying to do deserves to win. Yesterday that team was Spurs and nine times out of ten, they would have won.
Click to expand...
But Juve was the one who succeeded? I meant game plan was clear: score more concede less goal.

Napoli football is more enjoyable for quite awhile than Juve's. Juventus has had plenty of hard fought fine margin victories over the years, yet same Juve kept winning, and now top the table. If your 9 of 10 logic is true, are we all dreaming the whole time?
 
Last edited:
Spurs fans backing Poch look so ridiculous yet they don’t even know.

It’s a 2way road when it comes to winning/losing, the latter being when it matters most and winning being in meaningless or build up type games. Spurs supporters make him seem like such a fraud lol. Can’t move the goal posts once one uses the same logic when things aren’t going so well.
 
The biggest issue he had was not making a change when it went 1-1. That backline being so high for the second goal was just ridiculous.
But ok fine, you can get hit with 2 quick goals. But then, he still didnt react. It took him so long to do something. Bringing on Llorente so late was mad. I think they were creating stuff by getting it out wide and putting it in. Strangely they stopped for a while once llorente came on.

Not only that, but they essentially had 2 holding players whilst chasing a goal. Spurs were inexperienced, but you gotta look to your manager for that moment. It was like he froze.
 
Akshay said:
For sure, he's done a very good job with them. The forum is just prone to hyperbole. When Spurs are doing well Poch is an elite coach who Jose should be kicked out on the curb for, and when Spurs lose he's a 'fraud', whatever that means. You've got some convinced we're going to lose to Sevilla next week just so they can justify Poch being better than Jose today. I mean we might, I'd just like to think United fans would place progressing in the CL above getting the opportunity to say 'I told you so'. I think the frustration with the Spurs love-in from our own fans leads to reactions like you've mentioned.

I liked the comparison someone made much earlier with Spalletti. Was a coach I always liked and appreciated in his first stint at Roma, where he had them playing great football and won some trophies, but ultimately hasn't showed yet that he deserves to be regarded among the elite. I put Pochettino at that level right now, good football, improves players, cohesive teams - but you need a certain ruthlessness and desire to get to the very top and I'm not sure he has that. Maybe it will develop with experience over time.
Click to expand...
Very good post!
 
Akshay said:
I liked the comparison someone made much earlier with Spalletti. Was a coach I always liked and appreciated in his first stint at Roma, where he had them playing great football and won some trophies, but ultimately hasn't showed yet that he deserves to be regarded among the elite. I put Pochettino at that level right now, good football, improves players, cohesive teams - but you need a certain ruthlessness and desire to get to the very top and I'm not sure he has that. Maybe it will develop with experience over time.
Click to expand...

It's a good comparison. At this stage of his time with spurs, I think you have to talk about the impact of the managerial mentality. It's not coincidence that this keeps happening, anymore that it is coincidence that wenger's sides are the way they are. I think his comments on how spurs are a longterm project, the stadium, etc., while rational, reflects a point of weakness for him where his more cerebral side interferes with the need to instil that extra bit of hunger and drive in his team. Same with Wenger really.

Doesn't have to be like that though. Guys like Benitez and Guardiola are also managers whose intellectual approach is so strong it is to the detriment of their man management, but they have winning mentality and have been able to instill that same drive.
 
Womp said:
Juventus set out to be compact and win the game, therefore they succeeded with what they were aiming to do, therefore by your logic, deserved to win? Teams don't deserve to win simply because they played more attacking football, that's never been the case in football and it never will be.
Click to expand...
Juventus set out to prevent Tottenham from creating chances and hit them on the counter, which they failed to do. The reason why Spurs didn't score more goals is not that Juventus defended well but that Spurs finished poorly. And save for two freak minutes, Juve didn't threaten Spurs at all. So if you look at the dynamic of the game, Tottenham pulled off their tactics much better than Juve.
 
GM K said:
Fair enough.

My own logic is this: the team that takes its chances deserves to go through. The team that does not take it's chances does not deserve to go through.

Many people prefer to judge based on the aesthetics of the game, which is fair enough. As much as I appreciate how well a team weaves passes and attacks, I prefer to stick to the basics: outscore your opponent and you win. Fail to outscore your opponent and you lose or at best, you draw.

So for me, the only team that deserved to qualify, was the team that outscored its opponent over two ties: Juventus.
Click to expand...
That's fair, as long as you acknowledge that following that logic, a win can never be lucky or undeserved.
 
ti vu said:
But Juve was the one who succeeded? I meant game plan was clear: score more concede less goal.

Napoli football is more enjoyable for quite awhile than Juve's. Juventus has had plenty of hard fought fine margin victories over the years, yet same Juve kept winning, and now top the table. If your 9 of 10 logic is true, are we all dreaming the whole time?
Click to expand...
You can deserve to win by playing defensively if you actually defend well and pounce on the counter. Juve didn't defend well yesterday. Tottenham created plenty of chances and should have scored at least three goals before Juve got one. Juve didn't threaten on the counter at all before the goal, save for one stone-wall penalty they should have had.

One moment, Juve's first goal, switched the momentum of the game. After that Juventus showed their mental strength and experience. But from a pure footballing perspective, Tottenham's tactics succeeded way better than Juve's. Over two legs, they were by far the better team for about 165 out of 180 minutes.
 
Jev said:
Juventus set out to prevent Tottenham from creating chances and hit them on the counter, which they failed to do. The reason why Spurs didn't score more goals is not that Juventus defended well but that Spurs finished poorly. And save for two freak minutes, Juve didn't threaten Spurs at all. So if you look at the dynamic of the game, Tottenham pulled off their tactics much better than Juve.
Click to expand...

This analysis actually ignores the dynamic of the game.

When juve needed to score two goals, they were able to. When spurs needed to score one goal, they couldn't.

When spurs needed to.... not concede twice, they couldn't do it. When juve needed to keep spurs out from there, they did.

If you don't look at the dynamics of the game, tottenham pulled off their tactics much better than juve. In the context of the dynamics of the game, it was the complete opposite.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
Arsenal and Chelsea have been the dominant London clubs in the Premier League since it began. Spurs today are a better side than both, despite being also rans for the entirety of the PL's existence. They haven't won anything but they never won anything. To get these performance levels out of a club with those resources is impressive to me.
Click to expand...
Frankly ludicrous to state that Spurs are a better side than Chelsea as a matter of fact. Chelsea won two of the last three league titles. They’re only five points behind Spurs and have matched them in the FA Cup and CL, and outperformed them in League Cup.

Mciahel Goodman said:
They've dismantled top sides in the PL and Europe. They're clearly far better than that Redknapp team. They finished 8th or 6th when he was appointed. I don't get the hate for the man, unless it's directly to do with certain Spurs posters here, in which case I can understand it a little bit. :)
Click to expand...
It’s not as if they beat the reigning European champions under Redknapp, then actually managed to knock out their even more illustrous inter-city rivals in the last 16. Oh wait.

There’s a lot of revisionism around the pre-Pochettino Spurs. They’re arguably more consistent in the league right now, but they’ve won nothing, still managed to finish third behind Arsenal in a two horse race when Leicester won the league, and got a nosebleed when they got remotely close to Chelsea last year. Their run at the end of the last season was impressive in isolation, but there was essentially nothing to play for, and as soon as there was, they wilted. Held at arm’s length in the league, they were handily beaten in the FA Cup semi too.

Nothing is more Spurs than winning 1-6 vs Leicester and 1-7 vs Hull in the final games of last season, and winning 6-0 vs Millwall before getting Chelseaed in the FA Cup semi. We’ve not managed to score six post-Fergie, but we’ve still won three major trophies, finishing the European collection, with a couple of minor Community Shields to boot too.

It’s the same with Liverpool. As a United fan, I do not relish facing them currently and consider us to be underdogs most times we play, but I don’t envy them or fear their dominance in any way. When they’re good, they’re very good, but they are found wanting too often.
 
People going ga ga over someone whose CV in the achievements section would say-
Premier League Manager of the Month: October 2013
Premier league manager of the month September 2015,
Premier league manager of the month February 2016,
Premier league manager of the month April 2017

Come back when you win something.
 
B20 said:
This analysis actually ignores the dynamic of the game.

When juve needed to score two goals, they were able to. When spurs needed to score one goal, they couldn't.

When spurs needed to.... not concede twice, they couldn't do it. When juve needed to keep spurs out from there, they did.

If you don't look at the dynamics of the game, tottenham pulled off their tactics much better than juve. In the context of the dynamics of the game, it was the complete opposite.
Click to expand...
I will still maintain that this is a reductive analysis that only takes the result into account and not the flow of the game. Granted, as a United fan it might be a pragmatic approach at the moment, seeing as it means you don't actually have to watch our boring games.
 
Last edited:
Maradona10 said:
People going ga ga over someone whose CV in the achievements section would say-
Premier League Manager of the Month: October 2013
Premier league manager of the month September 2015,
Premier league manager of the month February 2016,
Premier league manager of the month April 2017

Come back when you win something.
Click to expand...
It's the younger, hipster, football manager obsessed football fan.

Pochettino is young, good looking and his sides entertain. He's the cool bloke on the block at the moment. People don't think about his lack of silverware because he's flavour of the moment.

It will be someone else next season, meanwhile the likes of Mourinho and Guardiola will probably just keep winning trophies.

Poch will become a very good manager no doubt about it. But he's got to start winning trophies before we can mention him as same breath as Jose, Pep or even Klopp.
 
This thread just typifies a very modern mindset that draws conclusions early (I include myself as I thought Spurs were gonna go through ). Pochettino is good but United is still too big for him.
 
Peanut Butter said:
It's the younger, hipster, football manager obsessed football fan.

Pochettino is young, good looking and his sides entertain. He's the cool bloke on the block at the moment. People don't think about his lack of silverware because he's flavour of the moment.

It will be someone else next season, meanwhile the likes of Mourinho and Guardiola will probably just keep winning trophies.

Poch will become a very good manager no doubt about it. But he's got to start winning trophies before we can mention him as same breath as Jose, Pep or even Klopp.
Click to expand...
Or alternatively:

Maybe people watch football to be entertained and appreciate Pochettino's effort do to so.

Maybe they understand that it's more difficult to win trophies when managing Tottenham than when managing Real Madrid og Manchester City.

Maybe they respect the fact that he's playing attractive football and delivering objectively good results on a much slimmer budget than his rivals while promoting young players.

Just maybe.
 
I'll be taking a serious look at him alright. Seriously how he managed to get to within 25 minutes away from a Champions League QF with Juve needing two goals to proceed and still feck it up. He couldn't handle Allegri's tactical change and was left bamboozled. He's still tactically naive and his inexperience showed last night.
 
B20 said:
It's a good comparison. At this stage of his time with spurs, I think you have to talk about the impact of the managerial mentality. It's not coincidence that this keeps happening, anymore that it is coincidence that wenger's sides are the way they are. I think his comments on how spurs are a longterm project, the stadium, etc., while rational, reflects a point of weakness for him where his more cerebral side interferes with the need to instil that extra bit of hunger and drive in his team. Same with Wenger really.

Doesn't have to be like that though. Guys like Benitez and Guardiola are also managers whose intellectual approach is so strong it is to the detriment of their man management, but they have winning mentality and have been able to instill that same drive.
Click to expand...
I'm hesitant to say Pochettino has the same problem as Wenger just yet, given he hasn't had the same budget or time as Wenger has. I agree that Pep has an extra intensity and also will to win that makes a difference. Rafa for me was very tactically astute and an excellent cup manager. Very good at motivating and preparing his side for the big games.

I also do wonder if the history of the club plays a role. The expectations for Spurs are very different to any of the other PL top 6. On the plus side they play with less pressure but conversely there can't be as much determination to avoid failure either.
 
Jev said:
You can deserve to win by playing defensively if you actually defend well and pounce on the counter. Juve didn't defend well yesterday. Tottenham created plenty of chances and should have scored at least three goals before Juve got one. Juve didn't threaten on the counter at all before the goal, save for one stone-wall penalty they should have had.

One moment, Juve's first goal, switched the momentum of the game. After that Juventus showed their mental strength and experience. But from a pure footballing perspective, Tottenham's tactics succeeded way better than Juve's. Over two legs, they were by far the better team for about 165 out of 180 minutes.
Click to expand...

Juve weren't very good over the two legs, not at all. They played well below their best during large parts of both games. Spurs played some really nice football in periods.

But Juve missed a penalty in the first leg and should have had a another penalty in the second leg. You can't selectively ignore that Spurs were extremely lucky to not concede two more penalty goals (both after counters) and that Juve punished them on the counter attack, over and over again. Spurs clearly didn't learn how to handle those counter attacks, not even after suffering them during the first leg. Higuain and Douglas Costa thrived over these two legs and statistically outperformed Kane, Dele Alli and Eriksen.
 
Jev said:
I will still maintain that this is a reductive analysis that only takes the result into account and not the flow of the game. Granted, as a United fan it might be a pragmatic approach at the moment, seeing as it means you don't actually have to watch our boring games.
Click to expand...

How can you say it ignores the flow of the game when yours does the exact opposite? You are obviously saying: "ignoring the context of how the scoreline influenced the game, spurs executed their approach better and longer than juve did." In the context of the dynamics of the game, juve executed when they needed to.

Also, I am a liverpool fan. go wash your mouth with soap.
 
Yagami said:
He deserves criticism for the lack of trophies because he doesn't even try with the league cup and fa cup, but he deserves credit for the way he's brought them up to the standards they are. Huge credit to do as well as they did in their CL run.
Click to expand...

Subjectively.

Objectively speaking he's finishing on last 16, and depends on the last 10 games he could ended up finishing 4th which by no means big progress compared to last year. Same with jose, progress or regress will hinge on the last 10 games.

Pep is the obvious winner in the progress department seeing as they're about to set record pts with city.

If klopp can finished 2nd and past beyond last 16 I'd say progress as well.

Mourinho/poch is still battling and the jury is still out on who has progression over last season (not comparing between clubs but more on where their club finishes last season).

Conte and Wenger is the biggest loser here.
 
Nonsense to suggest Juventus were not deserving winners. Spurs were ripped apart in the 1st half at Turin. Had it not been for Higuain choking like usual the tie would have probably been finished in Turin. Spurs were also completely outplayed in the 2nd half at Wembley, they put in a million crosses which Juventus eat up for breakfast, and the shot that hit the bar by Kane was miles offside.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.