As we streamed out into Stevenage Road after this match, the pathetic consensus amongst my close companions, shared by me, was that Fulham had deserved at least a point. Our simplistic reading of the arc of this game was that Spurs had the better first half, though they were decidedly flattered by their two goal lead at the interval. Thereafter that Fulham were by far the superior team, but were denied a farer result by virtue of the combination of: some superb saves by Brad Friedal; desperate goal line clearances by both Ledley King and Luca Modric; and the iniquitous failure of the referee to spot Karl Walker grounding his low two handed catch of the ball in the six yard box, with ten minutes left of the game – when this penalty denied might well have given Fulham goal parity and potential ascendancy.
Having now reflected on this match, and with the benefit of having studied a recording of the live TV screening, I am not now so sure that Fulham truly merited a better result. Not that I would for a moment deny that Brad Friedel was correctly awarded ‘Man of the Match’. (It was a vintage display from Spurs’ veteran keeper. In particular, his brilliant reaction-save to Steve Sidwell’s header in the second minute, and his safe-handed clutch to hold onto Chris Baird’s pile-driver hit strike in the seventieth minute were crucial events in preventing Fulham from succeeding.) Nor does the recording fail to bear-out the impression, formed by spectators at the match, of Fulham having much more of the play. (This indeed is confirmed by the match stats, see below.) However my present, more considered view is that a subtle combination of the factors outlined and discussed below, each of which arguably comprises a tactical error, may well have made the vital contribution to Fulham’s failure.
Quiet extraordinarily for the first week in November, Fulham have already this season played a total of 24 competitive games in all competitions. This is therefore an opportune time to take stock of what new manager Martin Jol has brought to the team’s performance, and what possibly may be lacking, as exemplified in this game. On the very positive side, Fulham have much greater flexibility going forward, as well as being a more attack-minded side. In this game the team’s starting set-up of 4-4-1-1, (with Zamora out front and Dembel positioned centrally as a ‘false number 9’,) morphed at times almost seamlessly in and out of a 4-3-3, (with at the front Dempsey working left, Zamora right, and Dembele centrally,) and on occasions late in the second half to a 4-2-4, (with the subbed on Bryan Ruiz working to the right up front.) As well as this new more flexible deployment, there is a marked increase in rapidity of the build up, with Fulham at last showing some capability to move with speed through midfield without any need to resort to long-ball passes. These very real improvements can, and certainly did in this game against Spurs, produce more good scoring opportunities. Rarely in the Premiership does a side lose who have had 13 shots on target, as did Fulham.
On the deficit side, it is becoming clear that Fulham are not now so markedly good at preventing penetration into the their penalty area, as they were in recent seasons under the management of Hughes and Roy Hodgson respectively. It is of particular concern that in the games since the draw at home against Manchester City back in September this year, the characteristic tightness and effective defensive shape that were the Hodgson hallmarks, have been consistently dissipated. In this game, both of Spurs’ first half goals stemmed from avoidable errors in defending technique. The first goal followed a move by the Spurs fullback Kyle Walker who, whilst on a right overlap, was allowed to accelerate into the penalty area past a late arriving and hapless J.A. Riise. For the second goal the Fulham defence was caught out by Aaron Lennon, who having switched wings with Gareth Bale, avoided Zdenek Grygera and then sped on, turning the retreating Chris Baird before slotting his shot home close to the left post.
Also directly associated with this game were the following important judgement calls upon the manager, where possibly Marin Jol may have erred. First, was it prudent to field so many ‘first team players’ in the Euro Cup game on the preceding Thursday evening? Eight of the Fulham players who started the game against Spurs played in the Euro cup game, as also had all the subs that Fulham subsequently used. (In marked contrast none of Spurs’ starting eleven played in their Euro game.)
Secondly, why has Martin Jol persisted with J.A. Riise at left back despite his poor performances in recent games? Riise seems at present a muscle-bound shadow of his Liverpool days, lacking positional sense and timing in the performance of his defensive duties, and no longer really effective when he (over)commits to his endeavours forward. Surely it is over time now to give the outstanding young player Mathew Briggs a good run as first choice left back?
Thirdly, although Martin Jol is correct in realising, (as did Hughes,) that Danny Murphy does need to be substituted before he may fade in the last quarter of the game, the choice of sub made in this game is questionable. Was it appropriate at the time when Fulham needed to force the game forward to bring on Dickson Etuhu, who operates best as a defensive/holding midfielder? Would not Kasami, an attacking midfielder with an eye for goal, have been the better option?
Fourthly, was the introduction of Bryan Ruiz, some twenty minutes before end, left too late? Bryan (I use his own preferred choice of name,) was subbed as a direct replacement for Duff, to be another naturally left sided player also working in from the right, and taking on Duff’s right-corner taking responsibility. He gave a good cameo performance, consistently giving the slip to his would be marker Modric, whose influence on the game was eclipsed following Bryan’s introduction. However as a potentially very sharp finisher, (as is indicated by all his goals last year in the Dutch league, plus ‘BBC Goal of the Month’ for October,) could he not have been more effectively used earlier and more centrally, possibly as a replacement for Zamora or Dembele?
Martin Jol is a progressive manager whom I trust will consider these matters. His endeavours to add to Fulham’s attractive passing game a more effective attacking emphasis should be applauded. It remains encouraging that there were times during the second half when Fulham were more fluid in their built –up and quicker in their passing movement then in any previous game this season. The really important thing must be that Fulham learn from this disappointing home defeat.
Match Stats
Goals
Fulham: Kaboul own goal 55;
Spurs: Bale 10, Lennon 45, Defoe 90
Attempts on goal
Fulham 23 (13 on target); Spurs 6 (6 on target)
Corners: Fulham 11; Spurs1
Possession: Fulham 53%, Spurs 47%
Yellow Cards: Fulham: none. Spurs: Kaboul.
Fulham: Schwartzer;Grygera (Kelly 45 mins); Baird; Hangeland; J.Riise; Dempsey; Murphy (Ethu 76 min); Sidwell; Duff (Bryan Ruiz 71 mins); Zamora; Dembele
Spurs: Friedel; Assou-Ekotto; King; Kaboul; Walker; Bale; Modric; Parker; Lennon; Van Der Vaart (Defoe 66); Adebayor
Referee: P.Walton
Attendance: 25,698
Good to see some constructive criticism on the net rather than ‘We was great’ or ‘We was rubbish’ but, as a Spurs fan, I think you’ve been a bit harsh there. Most of us in the away end felt a draw would have been lucky, let alone a 3-1 win. The difference between the sides was Brad Friedel and more incisiveness from Spurs on the few occasions we had the ball in your half. Think the Europa League thing is a bit of a red herring. If anything, Spurs looked the more tired team. Anyway, if you can find someone to put the ball in the net on a regular basis, you’ll soon be climbing the table as you’ve got a decent side there. Good luck for the rest of the season.
a good summary of the game but you neglected to add that Spurs should have had a penalty for sidwell’s second assault on Scott Parker
26 attempts plus 11 corners with only 1 goal to show. Hangeland said “we were the better team in the second half,” someone should explain its a game of 90 mins not 45. all those attempts and corners might suggest that Fulham are incompetant in front of goal or spurs defended well or both. What might be meant here is that Fulham showed tremendous resolve without an end result.
Regards Baggyshorts
As a spurs fan I would say that you will happy days with Martin Jol as manager. It would have been worse if the stats had been reversed. Disappointed that all the talk has been around Walkers hand ball but no one has taken Sidwell to task for his accidental?? elbow on Parker and most deliberate foul on Parker in the penalty area in the second half! Nevertheless Fulham fans can be proud of their display.
I still think we need someone in mid to take charge. Murphy plays so far back he is almost a centerback. Sidwell gets back and defends quite a bit also. We need a better holding and creative mid. Someone who can hold and get others into the build up. A player who can run past the opposition. When is the last time you seen Murphy make a move and get forward? He is content with playing a long ball in from the back. The amount of time he plays in EPL and Europa shows the lack of depth. This squad is one of the smallest in the Premier League. If we want to stay relevant in the EPL we need to make moves in the transfer window. I would love to see more Dembele, Ruiz and Kasami. These young players need more playing time to get in form.
Many thanks for your stimulating comment.
Danny Murphy does cover considerable ground. If you haven’t already discovered this facility I do recommend the Guardian Chalkboards analysis on-line from which a detailed break-down of any given player’s key activities and movements can be obtained for each premier league game. These show that in almost every game in which Danny Murphy has been involved this season he has made more passes, and completed more successful passing movements than any other player on the field. (In last Sunday’s game against Spurs he made 66 passes of which 54 were successfully completed. The only player with a comparable total was Modric who made 57 passes of which 48 were successful. Taking into account that Danny was subbed off for the final 20 minutes this is a formidable productive work-rate.) The tracking of Danny’s movements, with the directions and varied lengths of his passes, (also available on the Guardian Chalkboards,) show that although his great talent and aptitude is as, what the Italians term, a “registra” (i.e. a deep lying playmaker who seeks to control the direction and pace of play,) his movements cover the whole of the midfield with forays into the penalty box.
I’m sure Danny Murphy continues to have a vital role at Fulham, notwithstanding that he nowadays often needs to be subbed in the last quarter before he fades. (If you haven’t already spotted it, I recommend the succinct explanation of the importance of his role in Dan’s article “Danny Murphy makes us tick”, posted on Hammy End 30.10.2011.) I do agree that Danny Murphy’s particular and very special ability would function best if he can be paired in midfield with a dynamic box-to-box midfielder. (The best combination of such types of respective talents I ever saw was that of Johnny Giles with Billy Bremner, back in the 1970’s. I also recall the time a couple of years ago when Danny operated with Jimmy Bullard – a pairing which brought out something of the best of each of these players. I hasten to add that although I rate Danny very highly and comparable with Giles, I wouldn’t put Bullard in the same class as Bremner.) I have been impressed by Kasami’s potential and hope that he will soon be given more opportunities to play with Danny Murphy. The prospect of their developing a partnership in midfield is very exciting.
Josephus
I most appreciate your kind comments.
It isn’t much consolation to us but Fulham did lose to a Spurs side who now can and do play really creative and exciting football. Spurs present combination of some specially talented players capable of high skill and real pace can be very attractive.
Josephus