Premiership: Tottenham Hotspur 2 - 1 Chelsea
Monday, 06 November 06, 04:38 PM · Comments (13)
Match reports
The Independent, Glenn Moore: "Remember, remember, the fifth of November. Tottenham fans will never forget it as they finally lifted the hex Chelsea have held over them since the pre-Premiership era."
Daily Telegraph, Henry Winter: "The 'bangs' reverberating around the Lane after this epic match could have been Jose Mourinho breaking the sound barrier looking for Graham Poll. The Hertfordshire official should have given Hossam Ghaly a red card, rather than yellow, for a nasty elbow on Michael Essien, and John Terry was unfortunate to be singled out for a second yellow for holding when everyone seemed at it."
The Times, Matt Hughes: "Terry took the first sending-off of his Chelsea career on the chin, removing his armband before he was formally dismissed, but José Mourinho was less impressed, launching a forthright attack on Poll. “Two matches with him and we’ve lost five points,” he said, referring to Chelsea’s 1-1 draw with Aston Villa in September. “One was disallowed and only Mr Poll can say why. I’ve seen it on TV with ten different angles and I don’t know why.
“Mr Poll goes home and we cannot ask him the reason for these decisions. I didn’t ask because they always have some excuse. He will say something like ‘Didier was free to head the goal but I saw a foul 30 yards away.’ He has very good eyesight. I don’t understand why John Terry was sent off. I’ve seen it also on TV and cannot find a reason. He sent Terry off while he was holding King and kept (Hossam) Ghaly on after he elbowed Michael Essien. Referees should come to the press conference and explain decisions, but it would be a fake conference.”"
The Guardian, Kevin McCarra: "Chelsea, whose spirit must always be admired, attacked more than Martin Jol's side and Arjen Robben, with a curling effort, struck the post in the 87th minute. All the same, among neutral observers it would take a curmudgeon to begrudge Spurs success. Jol himself, who had not overcome Chelsea, Manchester United, Liverpool or Arsenal until now, can claim to be a major influence on the outcome."
The Herald, Karen Giles: "Dramatic, contentious, thrilling and outrageous from vibrant start to neurotic finish, this game was an explosion of dastardly deed, heroic effort and extraordinary passion."
Official Chelsea FC Website, Neil Barnett: "Chelsea fought to the end, including through four minutes of stoppage time, but it had felt for some time that Three Point Lane would be No Point Lane this year. Manchester United are now three points ahead of Chelsea at the top of the table. Chelsea remain second. The goals conceded will be one concern. The refereeing decisions will be a major issue."
The good
- The opening 20-25 minutes. We probably played our best football of the season so far, ripping into Spurs with such decisiveness and ease that the game really should have been put beyond them. If Graham Poll had decided to referee the game in front of him and not a preconceived one in his head, then Didier Drogba's perfectly legitimate goal would have added to Claude Makelele's wonder strike and the game would have been all but over.
- The game as a whole. It might have ended in major disappointment, but you can't doubt the fact that it was almost on a par with last Tuesday's encounter with Barcelona at Camp Nou for entertainment value. Credit must go to Spurs for the way they attacked, although they didn't have a great deal of choice after conceding an early goal.
- Our performance with 10 men. The folklore of football says 10 men play better than 11, and more often than not this is the case. It can't be said that we were any better in the last 20 minutes with 10 men than we were in the opening 20 with 11, but we were nothing short of outstanding after John Terry had been wrongly dismissed. One player was especially brilliant...
- Michael Essien. If ever a player is worth his weight in gold, it's Essien. (Yes, we probably paid the equivalent of his weight in gold for his services, but boy was it worth it.) He seems to have a limitless supply of energy, and at times during the closing minutes was playing 3 different positions, including centre-back and right-back. He's running Drogba close as my Player of the Season so far.
- Claude Makelele. If only for his remarkable goal. It had been coming.
- All the players deserve a mention because they were all magnificent, except for two...
The bad
- Our right-backs. It is often unfair to single out individual players after a defeat, but on this occasion Paulo Ferreira and Khalid Boulahrouz deserve it. Both were all at sea at times up against Spurs' wingers and their individual mistakes cost us the two goals. Substitute Boulahrouz was reported to have stormed down the tunnel uttering expletives after being substituted himself, and it remains to be seen if he will start in place of the suspended Terry in Wednesday's League Cup fourth round tie against Aston Villa.
- Which leads to Jose Mourinho's tactics. For the opening 20 minutes they were perfect. But shortly after we took the lead, Martin Jol switched to 4-5-1 and put Robbie Keane and Aaron Lennon on the left and right wings respectively. From that point on, our 4-4-2 formation and narrow midfield struggled to keep Keane and Lennon in check, which opened up our full-backs to their speed and trickery. Ashley Cole coped slightly better on the left than Ferreira and Boulahrouz did on the right, but the fact that Keane and Lennon had so much joy highlights the problem of playing four central midfielders in Makelele, Essien, Frank Lampard and Michael Ballack. Maybe Mourinho could have countered Jol's change of tactics?
- Graham Poll. It is not sour grapes on our part to say that the outcome of this game was determined by one of the most dislikeable and increasingly poor referees officiating in world football today. In five years' time, when asked about the day Spurs finally lifted the Chelsea hex, are we going to remember Spurs' good defensive performance, particularly Michael Dawson, our brilliant opening 20 minutes, poor right-back play, Makelele's wonder goal? Probably. But not as vividly as we will remember Poll's performance, baffling and incorrect decisions, and overall influence on the result. And do you know what? I believe this is exactly what Poll wants.
- And that's about it. I think I've done quite well to recall all the above considering my beer intake increased exponentially with every passing minute of the second half.
- Oh, one more. The result. We lost. To Spurs! For the first time at White Hart Lane in over 19 years. It's remarkable to think I was in the final year of being a GCSE guinea pig the last time it happened. I'll admit that yesterday I was more concerned about the record than dropping points to Manchester United.
Man of the Match
Michael Essien.
Final thoughts
Complete this sentence: "Graham Poll..."
Related links
Like this blog? Help spread the word: 
To Ian Chandler
Do you think you will get any reply? I just start to believe that this Poll guy either corrupted, or it is something personal.
Ian, you are in danger of sounding a little paranoid there and, sorry for being rude, but a little bit whiney. Poll was crap and seemed to be on some kind of misguided personal mission to stamp out the curse of "grappling in the box". But think we tend to overdo this "is the world against us?" stuff sometimes.
Sure, we are the tacky, Russian arrivistes at the top table and this seems to upset some of the football establishment. And Jose Mourinho clearly isn't every one's cup of cocoa, hence the enemy of football stuff.
But we've also had ref decisions in our favour, such as JT saving a few with his arms last year, and Carvalho doing that grappling thing when we beat Barca 4-2.
It's fair enough to slag Poll off for being a crap ref, he probably is. But to suggest it is part of some hidden agenda is a step too far, I'd say.
I know this isn't really your point, but also think we get a bit carried away with our media bias obsession too. Some in the media clearly don't like us, but some do. As pointed out elsewhere have seen pretty decent coverage in NotW, the Observer and the Guardian in past week or so. Ian Wright and Lee Dixon on MoTD last night were more than fair. And even Fatty Norman in the Standard was spot on today.
We have more money than everybody else combined, the best players and the best coach. So it is a bit rich to bleat.
Think the best response in such circumstances is to show a bit of dignity, as JT did when he went off. No histrionics and looking for someone to blame. Just get on with it, and try to win every game, as usual.
If Arjen could finish and our right backs hadn't gone walkabouts, or Jose had responded better to Jol's clever tinkerings, we'd have won anyway.
Sometimes you win a football match for unfair reasons, and sometimes you lose. I've always tended towards the cockup rather than conspiracy school of thought, but if people are really out to "get us" then bollocks to them, let's win anyway.
Tottenham played very well, it was bound to happen some time. And personally, I'm loving this season because there is a bit of decent competition and some much-missed passion out there.
I'm glad when sanctimonious twats like Hugh Mcilvanney on the Sunday Times or those UEFA muppets hate us. Makes it all the sweeter when we win.
Fuck them all, as I believe the song goes.
Jimbo, I'd like to echo your general sentiments, and you're right about there being a slight overall improvement of the press coverage after the past few games ('slight' being the key word!). Games like Sunday's are great to watch and far more exciting because the opposition actually tries to attack and win the game. It proves that Chelsea are an exciting team when the opposition doesn't park the bus before the goal. If only Arjen would learn the art of dinking it over the keeper he could have had 5 goals in the last 3 games!
However, whichever way you look at the refereeing decisions in Sunday's match it is difficult to simply label them as 'crap' and without agenda. I think Ashley Cole's comments have shown that - Graham Poll was persistantly using terms such as 'you need discipline' and 'you need to be taught a lesson' when dishing out SIX yellow cards to Chelsea (in what was a free-flowing football match). In booking Cole and Maka it sounds like he was saying basically along the lines of 'even though you are obeying the rules of the game by being back 10 yards, I want you to go back even further simply because I have the power to make you do it'.
I'm not saying there is a conspiracy here - there are definitely plenty of dodgy decisions which go our way at home also - but it seems Poll had decided to make a point, having perceived us as a team which argue and put pressure on the refs. And he should be punished for his performance, just as Chelsea no doubt will be for picking up 6 yellows again.
One further point - correct me if I'm wrong Rico but I think JT only misses one match as it was not a straight red card.
And to finish your sentence Nick, Graham Poll is an egocentric c**k-sucking mother-f**king fagg*t-brained c**ting w**ker with a slightly inflated opinion of himself
No offence
Lordmorf spot on - the Cole and Maka bookings were a blatant piece of mark-setting by a puffed up little knob end. I've seen that he's going to report us to the FA for harrassing him - if there's anybody doing the harrassing, it's Graham Poll to us.
As for losing to Spurs, it's bizarrely unannoying. It's almost worth it to bookend the 1990 defeat so we can look back over that huge span of years, remember all those great results (personal fave, the 3-1 Gordon Durie match) and say 'I was there.'
I just hope we skin them alive at the Bridge.
Peter,
My personal fave was the one where we were battered by Spurs all game, but they couldn't score. Then Georgy Weir came on to score the winner - I love those sorts of daylight robbery wins because the Spurs fans were doubly gutted!
I was at the game in 1990 when Lineker scored the winner and will always remember being so angry because Kerry Dixon had a perfectly good goal ruled out for a 'shove' that day, so it would have been 2-2 and the record would have stretched back even further lol!
13 Comments · Add yours
Is a C*NT.
U forgot to mention in bad, JT is out 4 3 matches. and that makes our defense look unpleaseantly weak considering the performances of cannibal and ferreria. play Geremi maybe? With RC and cannibal in the middle, not sure. I like our 4-3-3 better than our 4-4-2 has to be said. i hate losing, but u have to take it on the chin.
Dear Mr Barwick
I am writing to complain about the standard of officiating during the recent (5th Nov) match between Tottenham FC and Chelsea FC at White Hart Lane. I don’t suppose there are many of us who cannot help but find fault with officials when their team loses. Managers are certainly not immune. Hence, I recognise the danger that the views I express could be easily dismissed as being the result only of bitter disappointment. I am mindful of that as I write. As you read I hope you are capable of looking beyond the blanket defence of referees, which is natural, as any employer would want to protect its staff.
I have several questions. Obviously not all of these are founded on Sunday’s game, or indeed Graham Poll, though that is where I begin.
1. Can you explain why Graham Poll is still refereeing top-level football matches despite many high profile errors?
2. Can you clarify why certain goal celebrations, dissent and shirt pulling (as examples) are comparable in Graham Poll’s opinion to an elbow to an opponent’s face? I mean, he did see it didn’t he?
3. Can you explain the pattern of behaviour towards Chelsea FC and John Terry in particular and reassure me there is not an agenda here?
4. Why aren’t clubs able to comment, reasonably and in a public domain (e.g. TV), about the standard of refereeing, without the risk of censure?
5. Why do you not compel referees to explain their decisions- immediately - and not leave it open to interpretation, rumour and speculation, led inevitably by the Internet and television?
6. What performance targets do officials have and how are they are assessed?
7. At what stage, can we expect the top tier of our national sport to be officiated in a professional, consistent, honest and fair manner?
8. Do you agree it would be helpful to have another debate about standards of refereeing?
I am unconvinced about the ability of Graham Poll to referee at the top-level. This opinion is not unique, as I’m sure you’re aware. He is not the only official known for making questionable decisions. He is though supposed to be the benchmark for standards in refereeing in England.
I would be grateful to hear your view on the inconsistent standard of refereeing displayed by Graham Poll and other officials at the top level in this country and particularly welcome your responses to the above questions.