Cronky

Personally, I'd rather stay clear. I think there's too much of the Prima Donna about him.

In the end, I wasn't sure how well Sugar really understood the problem. He portrayed himself as a life-long Spurs supporter who got involved as the owner out of some community spirit, but I can recall at the time him saying that he saw Spurs as a useful addition to his business portfolio in the media / entertainment business. I'm not sure that he really identifies with the bond that supporters have with their club and which gives the game its particular character. A club is not just a business, it's also a community institution. That produces pressure on owners to take risks with their spending, but it's also the reason why there's so much pressure and desire to keep clubs going even when they go under financially. Sugar's idea that fans could do with learning a lesson by seeing a 'disaster' was a bit naive. Basically, the game can't be regulated entirely on a business / market model, where an enterprise that's financially unviable simply disappears. It needs to be regulated from outside, by the authorities that govern the game. That process has only just started, with the financial fair-play rules, but hopefully it's the start of a continuing trend.

It's not the first time there's been a suggestion of this problem. He's not so old that his mobility should have naturally declined. When I saw him playing for Bolton, I don't recall him looking overweight or lumbering in quite the way he does now. So it's a worry. His recent goalscoring record is very impressive for a midfield player, but he struggles against better opposition and we need to keep moving forward.

I'd agree that our momentum has stalled in the second half of the season. Whether it was Carroll's sale or the normal way in which promoted sides find it more difficult as time goes on, I don't know. I don't think it's Pardew's fault - I think he's done well to keep things going, seeing we're not blessed with many outstanding talents at the moment. If you don't keep moving forward, then you slip back. I think we will see some new players coming in, so I'm confident we'll push on from here.

The problem is he did swing his elbow. If it wasn't dirty, it was reckless.

I agree. I don't think he's the sort of player that you can ask to pull out of challenges. Aggression is part of his game.

We need to improve, but I'm confident that we will.

He looked sharper, physically and mentally. More positive in his decision-making.

I've wanted him for 4.

Mike Ashley doesn't decide the transfer targets though, that's Pardew. Pardew has worked with Cole before, and rates him. That's where this comes from.

I never liked Batty. He had some ability but he was far too cautious. He was the master of the aimless sideways pass and didn't take enough responsibility for taking a risk and making something positive happen. Tiote has his limitations but he's always eager to get the attack going. If anything, he perhaps takes too much responsibility. The only player I'd see as a rival to Tiote is Speed, for his heading ability at both ends of the pitch, and his greater ability at getting on the end of chances in the box. However, I think Speed went missing now and then and I'd go for Tiote's limitless appetite for involvement and hard work. Batty would never give the ball away and cost us goals like Tiote has done a couple of times. Well perhaps, but if you show no ambition with your passing, you're not going to make as many obvious mistakes. One of my memories of Batty is of him making himself available for a backwards pass from a team-mate, and then just shifting the ball on by a short pass to someone else in a weak position who didn't have much alternative but to pass the ball back to him. And so the process went on, with no defenders being eliminated and the team getting nowhere. I can actually remember a European game where Batty gave a crucial goal away - I can't remember who it was against. He telegraphed a pass back to Pistone, and just to make sure, in typical cautious fashion, the ball was slightly behind Pistone. Pistone ended up receiving the ball with an opponent on top of it, and losing it, with a goal resulting.

I never liked Batty. He had some ability but he was far too cautious. He was the master of the aimless sideways pass and didn't take enough responsibility for taking a risk and making something positive happen. Tiote has his limitations but he's always eager to get the attack going. If anything, he perhaps takes too much responsibility. The only player I'd see as a rival to Tiote is Speed, for his heading ability at both ends of the pitch, and his greater ability at getting on the end of chances in the box. However, I think Speed went missing now and then and I'd go for Tiote's limitless appetite for involvement and hard work.

I can remember a 1000 page thread on Robert that didn't reach any conclusion. My feeling is that defenders sussed him out after a time. If he had time and space to run at a defender and go down the outside, he was very effective. Close him down early or move him inside on to his right foot, and he couldn't do much. I didn't pick either, but given the choice, I'd go for Ginola. He was more versatile. Even there, I think Spurs saw the best of Ginola. He was so determined to prove Dalglish wrong, that he'd put 100 per cent into every game, chasing after the ball like he was demented.

It only works if you have a top class forward or two. Really the wide men should be chipping in with a few as well. Agree the idea is good but doesnt really work with Barton/Jonas needing to make a much bigger contribution than they probably would. Fair point, and in that respect Jonas is less suited to that formation. His shooting isn't accurate and he seems to need a lot of time to get his shots away. He's more the specialist winger and it's difficult to imagine him getting on the end of chances in the box. Ireland might be a possibility, depending on his recovering fitness. Or Gosling, even - not seen enough of him.

Like it.

I don't think it's an ideal combination in a 4-4-2, where you really want one of the CMs to get forward into the penalty area. Barton is more of a playmaker. I don't think Barton lacks flair, it's just that he tends to set up chances rather than get on the end of them. We had this situation with Parker and Emre, where they ended up playing side by side a lot of the time. One of Barton's best games this season imo was away to Everton alongside Tiote. Frequently drifted into an attacking midfield position and looked a real threat because he was able to "play football" with Ben Arfa. At the same time, the goal against Villa early on in the season is an example of what Barton can do in terms of his ranged shooting, something we do lack. Personally think a Tiote Barton partnership could be an excellent one, and it would differ completely to the Emre-Parker experiment primarily because we'd not have the problem with roles that those two had. Emre-Parker was a confused partnership because Roeder tried to turn Parker into a box-to-box midfielder whilst having Emre holding, which was a waste of their respective talents. With this it's very simple - Tiote is the defensive midfielder, Barton is the attacking one. The main problem with Barton though is that he's such a hit-and-miss player. If he's finding the opposition with every other pass (as sometimes happens) and generally being slow/sloppy/unfocused, then we'll have no creativity down the middle. However, two good strikers, Ben Arfa down the left, and a good right winger, and I think we'd see far more from Barton than we have so far. This season he's played a good number of quality through balls and long ranged passes, most of which have been wasted by the likes of Shola and Lovenkrands, so if we could bring in strikers like Gervinho/Gameiro/etc, decent footballers with a bit of pace, it could make a big difference to how effective Barton is as a CM. The unreliability might be the dealbreaker though. Hence why I would definitely be glad to see us bring in another CM with some creativity. Ideally two, with Smith being moved on and a backup DM for Tiote coming. I'd like to see Barton moved more into the centre, because like you say on form he has a good range of passes and thinks creatively. The more involved he is, the better, and at the moment he often ends up drifting inside from the wing in order to get involved, which can create problems. The problem with him playing centrally in a 4-4-2 is he's not quick or athletic enough to be the ideal attacking midfield player in that formation. If we were in a 4-3-3 / 4-5-1, it would be a lot better.

I don't think it's an ideal combination in a 4-4-2, where you really want one of the CMs to get forward into the penalty area. Barton is more of a playmaker. I don't think Barton lacks flair, it's just that he tends to set up chances rather than get on the end of them. We had this situation with Parker and Emre, where they ended up playing side by side a lot of the time.

If it was most improved over the last two years, Colo and Jose would be out on their own. I'm struggling a bit for this season. Barton is only back to the level that we'd expect. Simpson has improved but I'm still not convinced by him. I was hoping one of the younger players would come in and show some progress. Ranger has marked time, and the only one who I can really see has developed is Shane Ferguson.

I seem to remember Gazza scoring a hat-trick of free kicks, all in the same game for Spurs. I don't think the keeper got anywhere near the kicks, and each went to different parts of the goal. It was quite an incredible feat, and as far as I know, a unique one. I hope my memory's not playing tricks. Does anyone else remember this?

Tough times indeed.

Yeah, and he might not be easy to replace. But although he's played a big part in getting us to where we are, if we're going to push on we need someone with more pace in that position. I haven't seen enough of Gosling to know if he can step up.

Pardew has said he wants to add a bit of pace and movement to the midfield and I think that's right. We look a bit one-paced at the moment.

Good shout. This is a thread for the crinklies. The depths of shitness that the club sunk into in the late 70's - early 80's surpasses all that's come since.

It won't last. They're running on adrenaline atm, the 'magic' will quickly dry up. You don't need magic when you've got a good spine, ambitious owners and a manager who knows the game inside out. Ambition? Good business yes, but until they start spending their own cash there's no sign of ambition. Not being afraid to spend what they generate in sales is a start. The whole Torres / Carroll situation was more complex than that. Chelsea were desperate to sign Torres and Liverpool were happy to get rid, providing they could bring in a decent replacement at the same time. Carroll was therefore key to the deal, and by digging his heels in until the last minute, Ashley was able to drive the price up, with Abramovich effectively financing the deal. If we'd sold Carroll earlier we'd have had a chance to spend some of the money, but we wouldn't have got £35m. Time will tell who has got the best out of the situation. Assuming we stay up and then use the money wisely, it could be us. except that john henry has said that the torres fee was key to the deal and they'd be prepared to offer us whatever it was less 15 million. so going by what he said (and i've no reason to doubt him) if we'd sold him earlier we would have still have got 35 million. the only effect ashley 'digging his heels in' had was making sure we didnt have to spend any of it replacing carroll The first part is true, but the second part doesn't follow. If Chelsea had bid £40 million and we'd been offered £25million, there's nothing to say that we'd have accepted that. All the evidence is that we drove the price up by declining earlier bids.

Of the current team, Simpson looks the weakest in terms of technique on the ball. Lovenkrands second.