CanadaSaint

That's my worry. I actually rather wanted him to get booked yesterday because I'd rather be without him for Villa than Man City, and - with his style - he's always a booking waiting to happen. But then Morgan went off and raised the possibility of us being without both of them for Man City. Cringe.

It was a strange few minutes. As he was preparing to leave the field he didn't seem to have any trouble using both hands to open a water bottle. That would suggest a finger injury rather than a hand injury, and possibly not a very bad one at that. Speaking from personal experience, it's reasonably easy (though painful) to play with a recovering dislocation but not a break. Dare I say "fingers crossed"?

I can't help but think that scoring so early may have hurt us rather than helped us. It seemed as though the early lead caused us to - deliberately or unintentionally - abandon the pressing game we normally throw at the stronger teams. Generally speaking, they actually out-pressed us, put our back four under pressure, and made it difficult for Shaw and (especially) Clyne to be as quick to go forward as we need them to be. One of the keys for me was the disappointing performance of Schneiderlin, whose "heat map", I'd venture to suggest, was concentrated some 20 yards behind where it normally is. I can't make up my mind whether we just came up short against a very good team, or whether Mourinho out-managed Pochettino on the day. Osvaldo needs to do less fan dancing and more rolling his sleeves up when the going gets tough, but I'm not convinced that's in his nature. And I wouldn't blame Gazza for either of the goals he conceded. It's pitiful that some people will post utter tripe in a vain attempt to prove they were right with some over the top opinion they posted months ago.

Pretty much how we're going about it but it takes years to build the model on which it's based and the core components (academy, staff, players, coordinated coaching styles, chairmanship). Clubs like Spurs live in a "we want it now" world. I don't think Spurs are much like us at all TBF, and I've heard us called a lot of things but seldom "predictable" (other than as a compliment) and certainly never "pedestrian". They certainly weren't very well drilled yesterday, and we were all over them at WHL last year until Bale's late piece of genius.

Why on earth would Spurs appoint a manager whose fundamental tactical style is totally unsuited to most of the players on whom they've just spent gazillions of pounds? Can you imagine many of that lot being "up" for the pressing game, or - better yet - the two-a-day training sessions that have made it possible? MP has been extremely effective here because he has a combination of young, hungry players and established pros with excellent, team-first attitudes. Take this act to most other Top 8 clubs and it would likely be a gong show, and I think - and hope - that MP knows it.

It's incredible really when you think that three of the goals we've given away have been major "brain farts" rather than teams breaking us down, and another two have been penalties.

That's probably Palace, Sunderland and hopefully West Ham.

So why did he put him on the bench then? It's all about opinions but I'd much rather we'd put Maya on the left side of our D-line and kept JWP in midfield than do what we did - especially taking JWP out of midfield and then pulling Lallana out as well. That effectively took out 50% of the engine for much of what we've achieved this year. We're a very different team to what we were when Jos and Maya played together last year, with much better defensive support coming from midfield.

Agreed. I'm as high on the guy as everyone else but I don't think MP had a very good day today. Losing Lovren from the starting line up, and Shaw at half time, didn't help us one bit. But MP's decisions to dismantle the midfield and significantly change the back row when Maya was on the bench arguably hurt us more. Those changes certainly did not allow us to "keep on ... playing the style we want to".

I don't think it helped him at all that Pochettino had effectively dismantled our midfield by the time he came on, leaving three up front competing for not very much space and less built-up delivery. Osvaldo fits within our style much better than Ramirez, and I'm optimistic that he'll ultimately make a significant contribution - if he wants to. I underline the last part because some of his body language concerns me.

It seems that MP really doesn't rate Yoshida if he would opt for the drastic change of moving Clyne to the other side and pulling JWP out of an effective midfield until rather than putting Maya on. That, as much as the strange withdrawal of Lallana when Rickie was playing so poorly, changed things very much for the worse. When it comes to Boruc, there's a fine line between confidence and arrogance. MP needs to have a strong word in his ear because Boruc's mindset is such that he's likely to try exactly the same thing again next week. But, at the end of the day we played the top team away from home, made several major individual errors (including managerial ones), lost a vital player to illness before the game and another to injury during it, and we were still very much in the game before a contentious penalty decision. Forgetting the result and the manner of the defeat, I'd say that's quite encouraging.

For me it wasn't just the Lallana substitution, when Rickie had been totally anonymous, but moving JWP into the back row, which destroyed our midfield balance and effectiveness. In the end I think MP overreacted and surrendered midfield in favour of a front three that was A) off its game, and B) starved of decent service. Not one of MP's best games.

Absolutely. MP overreacted to the Shaw injury and destroyed our midfield balance and effectiveness in the process.

I don't think I've ever seen Rickie less effective, which makes the Lallana withdrawal all the more bemusing. And the wholesale adjustments when Shaw went off destroyed all our balance. MP has not had a good game.

I don't understand this at all - it's almost as though MP has accepted that he can't win the midfield battle, and replaced our press with a three-up-front approach.

Worst referee in the league by a country mile. I remember him shafting us at QPR.

True, but I'd be inclined to make the change for positive rather than negative reasons. I think Osvaldo's mobility, touch and speed are just what we need to throw at Arsenal's back four. With them almost certainly bringing Theo's pace on at some point, I think we'll need to score two to draw.

We've got enough to get back into this, but the inevitable introduction of Theo will test us - especially if Shaw's hammy is dodgy. Boruc was lucky to get away with that crap against Michu a few weeks back - I hope we never see it again.

Okay, so losing Lovren is a big shock we didn't need, but it also messes with Arsenal's game plan. So, it's not all bad.

It's certainly quite a step down from Boruc to Davis but it becomes less of an issue if we're tight and well-organized at the back, with help from Schneiderlin and Wanyama. If we lose Lovren or Shaw it doesn't just impair our defensive ability but also compromises our ability to play higher up. That's why I wouldn't put Boruc in my top three, even though Davis is a major downgrade. I certainly haven't given up hope of a result but - like most - I'm less optimistic than I was.

Sh*t. Given the alternatives, Lovren is #1 (tied with Shaw and Schneiderlin) on the list of players we can't afford to lose.

There's a ton of value in having both a left footer and a right footer in the equation to keep the defence guessing. The keeper doesn't have the option to "cheat" to one side. The other thing we could try is to drill the ball along the ground, because the wall players start to jump in anticipation pretty much every time these days.

The tactical difference was noticeable, with both Lallana and Rodriguez backing well-off when Chile looked to play out from the back. It left Rooney on his own to try to pressure Chile's back line, and - not surprisingly - it turned out to be an exercise in futility. If we'd thrown our (Saints) press at Chile, they wouldn't have looked anywhere near as good as England allowed them to look. It was almost as though Hodgson was "sort of trying" the Saints tactic but without really understanding what it is or really committing to it. No wonder Rodriguez looked - and was - very peripheral. So, I'd be inclined to say that I think Saints would have played much better against Chile than England did, and may well have got a very different result.

Right, and therein rests the key chess match. If we're brave enough to apply the full press early, wide opposing players who don't track back become our friends rather than our enemies; we could sneak a goal or maybe two. However, that leaves them free and lethal if Arsenal penetrate our press, in which case the goals could go the other way. Having said that, there are few FBs better equipped to get back fast than Shaw and (especially) Clyne. This is going to be a fascinating game if either or both of Walcott and Podolski are fit, and I think fortune will favour the brave. I hope that's us, but it needs large gonads to try to play Arsenal largely in their own defensive third when they have two pacy wide-men out there. I'm optimistic. I'd be more so if only one of the two is fit, and even more so if neither are.

There's a mention on the Arsenal fan site that both Walcott and Podolski will be fit to return by the time we play them. If so, that's not good news IMO because that wide duo is the only threat I really fear from Arsenal. It's not so much that they'll give Shaw and Clyne the runaround, but that their presence would limit the ability of our FBs to push forward as they must if our system is to work. I still think we can get a result up there but this certainly wouldn't help our chances. My hope and my hunch is that, while Walcott may return, they'll be much more cautious with Podolski; hamstring injuries are pigs for going again just when you think you're over them.