one thing I noticed

comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 8 minutes ago
Don’t think to OP was playing the victim at all. Just pointing it out. Fair enough - I see the point👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------

exactly mate. whether spurs or any other team I pay enough money to watch these games and to have the same tired lazy punditry thrust at me is so shiiit.

They also go on about the amount of late goals we concede. I swear they read this site.

This isn't bias. It's simply one metric used to point out when the opposition is in the ascendancy, and it's especially worth drawing attention to when the opposition is supposed to be an inferior side. Seems to me the issue is that inferior sides keep being on top vs Spurs.

Good spot, definitely an agenda

comment by Edward Elizabeth Hitler. (U14393)
posted 2 hours, 47 minutes ago
They also go on about the amount of late goals we concede. I swear they read this site.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Mourinho has been reading some site or another, if you see his interviews he trying to justify a lot of the criticisms found online. These days, we don`t need fans in the stadiums for managers to know what the fans are thinking.

Good point Steve F

Kane backing Jose's earlier comments about not being told to sit back.

https://twitter.com/leoiels/status/1350950844259250178?s=19

comment by Amanda Hugginkiss (U11574)
posted 15 hours, 1 minute ago
This isn't bias. It's simply one metric used to point out when the opposition is in the ascendancy, and it's especially worth drawing attention to when the opposition is supposed to be an inferior side. Seems to me the issue is that inferior sides keep being on top vs Spurs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree with this. As mentioned Spurs had nearly 70% at one point in the 1st half.

Surely if the narrative is that Spurs fail to control games with possession, would it not be right to highlight that actually Spurs were utterly dominating their opposition. You expect City to dominate teams and you always get their possession stats when watching them because thats the thing they love to identify.

Some obvious agenda items we see constantly:
1. Spurs play boring counter attack football. Leicester, whilst the same style are exciting.
2. We are constantly reminded Spurs drop points from winning positions. Like every time they play. We are only a few points off the top, so logically other teams have regular weaknesses, but what are they ? I ask because we are never told ( apart from Liverpool's "injuries" of course )
3. Utd are always turning a corner, passing the next test and when they string a couple of wins together they are definitely title challengers. Spurs are none of these.
4. Liverpool have had "serious" injuries. So much so, that it has interfered with the entire balance of football. Spurs never have injuries worth a mention ( or any other team for that matter)
5. Commentators think Vardy and Salah are spelt with about seven A's every time the ball goes anywhere near them.
6. Fernandes basically sits on the right hand of God.
7. Rashford basically sites on the left hand of God.
8. The media never make mention of the obvious. Utd get rediculous amounts of "help" from officials. Like virtually every game. Very strange that Sky / Bbc never even remotely discuss it. That's like saying "Watergate is not worth reporting on"
9. Arsenal are always in a constant state of "transition" or "re building" and therefore we should ignore there form. Trouble is this has been going on for several years. When does accountability come in ?
10. Chelsea, like Arsenal, is always a "job in progress" or "players that need to bed in" let's not mention the millions Frank spent eh ?
11. Frank ( everyone's mate ) we are constantly told, did wonders with "the kids" The fact that Chelsea were only in that position in the first place through financial cheating is never mentioned, so I suppose didn't happen. Jose, on the other hand, takes over a squad in a total mess, has available fund that simply do not compare with Chelsea, yet is expected to produce miracles from day one, with a squad that is "not in "transition" or a "job in progress" and must therefore be ready to challenge from day one.
12. And finally the obvious one. There is never any mention of City going from a 3rd tier club to Champions due to being bought by a country, who then ploughed billions into the team to make them into champions. All we are told is how great City are, but never why that is. Maybe, just maybe someone should discuss the question of why there are fair play rules in football for a reason ? just a thought.

10. is a very relevant point that even Spurs fans forget.

I see our current position as excellent in the circumstances. Spurs are a work in progress, developing all the time and we have seen in recent weeks that there is work to do. Yesterday we saw much greater intensity for most of the game and for 80 minutes we were utterly dominant. We lessened that for 10 minutes at the start of the 2nd half and paid for it.

People have to look at the big picture. Early on in teh season we were more free scoring but the defence struggled and it cost us. We have shored this up but are now trying to find the balance between the two.

The balance yesterday was great for most of the game but of course we can still get better.

We need to kick on from here and continue to improve and put away some of these "lesser teams", which is the bread and butter. Look at Utd, they have take 4 pts from Spurs, City, Liverpool, Chelsea Arsenal & Leicester yet are clear at the top.

If we had taken more points from WHU, NUFC, Palace, Fulham (having lead every one) then we'd be 4 pts clear.