Andre Villas-Boas used to watch the game by crouching down on his haunches near the touchline. And then he stopped doing it. Isn’t that strange? People were making fun of him, but even so. If he thought it was the way to get the greatest insight, why would he change?
Unless it was an affectation. A quirk, a gimmick to make him look brighter than he is. After all, there have been some fairly successful coaches through the last century or so, and not one of them chose to observe the action from the perspective of a dachshund. So maybe they were the smart ones.
Then, when Tottenham Hotspur goalkeeper Hugo Lloris suffered a head injury against Everton, Villas-Boas knew best again. He kept him on and then called all those who took issue with that decision – including some fairly serious medical professionals – ignorant.
In the next game, against Newcastle United, Lloris was absent. Medical advice, apparently. So maybe those doctors weren’t so dumb after all; or maybe Villas-Boas isn’t quite as sharp as he thinks he is.
He certainly didn’t look it when that sixth Manchester City goal went in on Sunday. He appeared stunned, much as he did when West Ham United scored three at White Hart Lane without a striker. He said the players should be ashamed. That is the marvellous thing about being AVB — there is always someone around to carry the can.
So how are Chelsea’s old guard going to take the fall for this one? It is surely only a matter of time before John Terry and Frank Lampard are fingered for the mess at Tottenham this season.
It was, after all, the senior players who undermined Villas-Boas at Chelsea. Not his pig-headed high line defence, utterly unsuited to the personnel at his disposal. Not his determination to change fast when evolution, not revolution, was needed. As ever, events and foes conspired to obstruct his genius.
Players, other managers, pesky head trauma experts, Villas-Boas is beleaguered by so many random factors. The game against Newcastle brought a once-in-a-lifetime display from goalkeeper Tim Krul; the defeat by West Ham saw a tactical masterclass from Sam Allardyce (although one cannot help noticing that his false striker system has landed two points from 15 since the win away at Tottenham on October 6).
Villas-Boas had every right to be critical after the defeat at Manchester City. It was a limp and inadequate display. But these are his players, his solution to the loss of Gareth Bale.
Tottenham had sold Elvis Presley and bought the Beatles was the claim. Except this lot look more like the fab four pastiche group the Rutles — if Nasty, Stig, Dirk and Barry had all decided to swap instruments five minutes before the gig.
Yet if the team were poor against City, Villas-Boas made some equally flawed judgment calls from the bench. Jan Vertonghen, arguably the finest centre half at the club, struggled at left back.
Andros Townsend did not start, following a game and a 33-minute substitute appearance for England at Wembley, while Paulinho did despite flying to Miami to play 90 minutes for Brazil against Honduras before heading up to Toronto for another 84-minute stint against Chile.
Erik Lamela began in Townsend’s position — he usually plays on the right — and was utterly insipid.
Tottenham spent £107million on players this summer and have gone backwards. The players were meant to have let him down at Chelsea, too. And then the same team went on to win the Champions League and FA Cup that season, after he left.
The popular myth is that the group started performing only after his departure — as if they could have been champions of Europe at any time, but just didn’t fancy it previously. More evidence-based is the theory that Roberto Di Matteo got them playing in a way that Villas-Boas could not and this, along with some heroic defending and good fortune, saved the day.
Roman Abramovich’s notorious impatience then saved Villas-Boas because he was seen as the hapless victim of a crackpot club, sacked prematurely as a result of player power.
Yet what has changed? Villas-Boas remains impossibly stubborn — as he proved with his misguided outburst over Lloris — and his teams play his way, regardless of their needs.
Tottenham did not lose to Newcastle because Krul had the game of his life. That would only have produced a draw. Tottenham lost because Villas-Boas played a high line defence, as always, but with Brad Friedel in goal.
Under normal circumstances, Lloris plays almost as a sweeper, quickly off his line if the opposition get in behind the back four. Friedel, at 42, hasn’t the same speed.
So Tottenham should have sat a little deeper. They didn’t, Loic Remy took advantage, and Friedel couldn’t get out fast enough.
Krul then played magnificently, but goalkeepers will do that from time to time. It isn’t misfortune.
At City on Sunday, Tottenham were behind after 14 seconds due to a poor clearance from Lloris, and no manager can do anything about that.
Yet, from there, it was clear that once again Villas-Boas was pleasing himself with his game plan. Michael Dawson isn’t a high line defender, either, and Younes Kaboul might have wished for a little more security after 15 months without a league game.
Villas-Boas also prefers a lone striker, despite the fact that Tottenham have scored six goals from open play in 12 league matches this season. Their numbers are horrendous for a club with elite ambitions. Tottenham’s goal difference is inferior to every team in the top 14 bar Hull City and they have scored as many goals as West Ham, who have played most of the season without a striker.
Going into Sunday’s fixture with Manchester United, Tottenham will have scored nine in 12. They now cannot reach double figures before December. At this rate, Tottenham’s goals aggregate for the season will be 28. Last May, the three teams relegated from the Premier League scored 30 goals, 43 and 60.
Tottenham are not about to get relegated, obviously. This may be a blip, quickly corrected. Defeat Manchester United in five days’ time and recent struggles will be forgotten. Yet the flip side of that argument comes with the fear that one man made up for a heap of weakness last season — and he now plays at Real Madrid.
Take Bale away from Tottenham in 2012-13 and it is unlikely the team would have made Europe. He wasn’t just influential, he was essential. His goals turned defeats into wins against Newcastle and West Ham, draws into wins against Manchester United, Southampton, Liverpool, West Bromwich Albion, Arsenal, Swansea City, Southampton again and Sunderland and defeats into draws against Norwich City and Wigan Athletic.
Clearly, had he not been selected, a team-mate would have played, and could have been important, too. Yet would his goals have compared?
Put it like this: Clint Dempsey’s goals were worth seven points to Tottenham last season, Aaron Lennon’s were worth six; Bale was good for 24. He hit Cristiano Ronaldo form, which is why Madrid wanted to make them a partnership.
So while it was a huge blow for Villas-Boas to lose the Welshman, it was a greater fillip to inherit him in his first season. It made the manager look very smart, very quick. Now he must survive on his wits alone.
His signings have been vast in number but not in impact. There was always a possibility it could go this way. Franco Baldini, the director of football, plundered the market in Europe and South America having seen what was about in England first-hand during his time with Fabio Capello, but he underestimated the unique demands of the Premier League.
The majority of imported players take time to adjust. Instant successes such as Luis Suarez and Sergio Aguero are rare. It is forgotten now, but even men like Didier Drogba and Michael Essien endured unconvincing first seasons; that is why Chelsea bought Michael Ballack and Andriy Shevchenko, who became redundant once Drogba had found his feet.
Tottenham may be flying in 12 months’ time — but this first campaign with a hastily assembled squad was going to be a challenge. Behind the scenes the shifting of blame has already begun, with Villas-Boas distancing himself from some of the signings.
The problem for the manager is that little has improved under his tenure.
Are Tottenham higher up the table? No. Is the football more exciting? No. Are they nearer rivals Arsenal? No.
The high water mark of the Premier League era remains the years when the football played by Harry Redknapp’s team was the most exciting in England and the club reached the last eight of the Champions League.
Villas-Boas said he hoped his players would bounce back via tomorrow’s Europa League tie against Tromso — but just saying the name of the tournament is in its own way an admission of failure, considering what went before. Tottenham were not meant to be back in the Europa League again.
One wonders, in his final season, what Redknapp might have achieved with even half the investment lavished on Villa-Boas, rather than a final January transfer window signing of Louis Saha as Tottenham’s title challenge faded.
What we are seeing here is another case of Ex-Chelsea Manager Syndrome. These guys are often impossible to judge because their time at Stamford Bridge is so fleeting. Nobody could work out Avram Grant until he sleepwalked over the precipice at West Ham, and the evidence of Di Matteo’s career only confuses.
Villas-Boas looked a bright young manager at Porto and left Chelsea not even halfway through a project. This season we will discover how smart he really is.
It is very generous of Tottenham owner Joe Lewis to finance such a fascinating experiment. He must be delighted. – Daily Mail