Rachel Cohen

17^th November 2024

A game that we lost 3-0 to Arsenal is not one that any Spurs supporter will want to re-live in detail. So instead here are a few post-game thoughts about where it leaves the team.

1.    Déjà vu

Five of the nine previous North London Derbies played in the WSL have ended with at least a three-goal difference in favour of Arsenal. Last year was the exception: Two games, each ending with a single goal difference, one of which Spurs won. The year before the goal difference was 9-1 across home and away fixtures. In that context a 3-0 loss is bad but not a surprise.

Moreover, if we look at xG (expected goals) the difference is marginal between this game (0.11 to 1.88 in Arsenal’s favour) and last year when Spurs won 1-0 (but xG was 0.4 to 2.5, also in Arsenal’s favour). The difference is that last season we took our chance and this season they took theirs’. That does not ease the pain. It was beautiful to feel like Tottenham had closed the gap and to see it open wide again hurts. But perhaps it is also not as big a regression as it might feel.

2.    Summer signings yet to make a difference

At the start of the game only two summer signings were on the pitch: winger Hayley Raso, playing in the position that Celin Bizet had vacated, and centre-back Clare Hunt. By the end of the game both had been substituted.

Two other signings were unused substitutes: Ella Morris, who was signed as a future prospect and Ann Csiki, who has thus far showed little to justify her four-year contract. Meanwhile loanee keeper Katelin Talbert was not even on the bench.

Maite Oroz, Spurs’ ‘biggest’ summer signing, started the season strongly before being injured. She may or may not return before Christmas. But in her absence and with Hunt stuttering a little over the last few games, it is hard to dispute that (with Grace Clinton’s departure and Kit Graham’s absence through injury) the depth and quality of the squad, especially in the centre of the pitch has gone backward year-on-year. Conversely, of course there are areas where Spurs have strengthened. For instance, with Morris’s addition (and Amanda Nildén and Charli Grant’s last January) Spurs have plentiful good full-back options. In addition the squad is fitter than last season – better able to maintain levels across the game. Unfortunately, neither wholly compensate for the weaknesses.

3.    Back 5 or back 4?

The game started with a back five – Clare Hunt, Molly Bartrip and Luana Bühler at centre-back with Nildén (returned from injury) at left back and Ashleigh Neville swapped back to the right. Many people had expected Spurs to line up in this shape against City but in that game Bartrip was used ahead of the defence as a defensive midfielder. So this was a first competitive outing for a back five. On balance the formation was neither wholly a success nor total disaster. The centre-backs at times covered for one another, but there seemed a lack of familiarity and hesitancy over who was responsible for picking up players and early in the game Arsenal were easily able to find spaces.

The major benefit of playing a back five was that the full-backs could play higher. In Neville’s case this meant that she made challenges across a wider area – and for the period Spurs remained in a back five Neville was particularly effective at winning the ball back (making five successful tackles and winning eight duels in the first half). Less successfully this formation hollowed out Spurs’ central midfield and even though they had decent games, when they got the ball both Eveliina Summanen and Drew Spence had few options and the attackers were often isolated.

With Clare Hunt’s departure and her replacement by midfielder, Olga Ahtinen on 68 minutes, Spurs went into a back four, with Ahtinen alongside Summanen and Spence (and later Martha Thomas in front of them). Immediately Spurs had an operational midfield and were better able to play through the thirds. Bartrip and Bühler also seemed clearer about their responsibilities – probably because this has been the formation they have most experience playing in. The downside was that the full-backs were less involved, although this may also be due to them tiring a little.

It is hard to disentangle game-state from the effectiveness of the two formations. For instance, it is quite possible that a back four would have been equally as ineffective as a back five had it been the way that Spurs initially set up. That said there probably was not enough here to justify using a back five in future games – at least with the current personnel.

4.    Starting slow

Against Arsenal Spurs conceded the first goal after a minute. Last week, against City it took just 23 seconds. Across the season Spurs have conceded five goals inside the first fifteen minutes. Yet the first goal they have scored is on nineteen minutes. In other words starting poorly is becoming a pattern. Whether this is about early intensity, alertness or simply dealing with oppositions at the point at which they have most energy and are pressing hardest, there is clearly an issue.

Conversely, Spurs are typically good in the period immediately after the break. Across the season so far the team has scored three and conceded only one in the first ten minutes after the restart. In the North London Derby Spurs did not score but the start of the second half was probably their most competitive. Moreover, possession improved from 32 percent (first half) to 47 percent in the second (Fotmob). This suggests that the manager is working effectively with the players to make in-game adjustments. The question is of course, how to do that earlier and also, how to more regularly translate those improvements into goals.

5.    Maybe it only matters if we let it

As a Spurs fan I hate losing to Arsenal more than anything. But at the same time, I know the season doesn’t depend on this game. And it has not told us much new. After defeats to City, United and Chelsea we already knew that Spurs are not at the levels of the top teams. We also knew that there are positions that will need urgent strengthening in the January window (keeper and central midfield most obviously). And ultimately our season is going to depend much more on how we play in the WSL games that follow this one – against Everton, Brighton and (in January) Leicester. In between those games we have League Cup games against Aston Villa and Crystal Palace. None of these are easy. But after having a run of six games, five of which were against the teams that finished in the top five WSL positions last season, we will finally have the chance to see how Spurs do against (somewhat) less strong teams, and whether Spurs can get into a rhythm, gain confidence and (re)develop playing patterns.

And that is why the one thing we want to avoid taking away from this game is despondency. Because anyone who recalls the nine-game losing streak in 2022-23 under Rehanne Skinner will remember how hard a habit losing is to break. We’re not there yet. With the exception of the loss to Liverpool (which was a whole other thing), we have lost games we were expected to lose. And that is not disastrous. But the hard bit comes next: winning the games we are expected to (or hope to) win.