' Were Tottenham wrong? '

Tuesday November 26th 2013.

Were Tottenham wrong to sell Steven Caulker?
By
Gareth McKnight

With the defender excelling at Cardiff and Spurs hit for six against Manchester City, should the north London club have kept the centre-half at White Hart Lane?

Tottenham’s strong early season defensive record went out the window on Sunday as Manchester City hit the north Londoners for six at the Etihad Stadium.



The truth is that Spurs have been over-reliant on Hugo Lloris and Jan Vertonghen to ensure the side stay water-tight at the back, with the pair’s sweeping ability in behind the back four saving the team on numerous occasions this term.

On Sunday, with the usually dependable pairing not at their best, the weaker members of Tottenham’s defensive unit were well and truly caught out, with Kyle Walker and Michael Dawson in particular exposed.

Walker’s forays forward are fine when Spurs are dominating the game, but his positional sense is distinctly ordinary in his own half. The England international was exposed too many times, with Samir Nasri taking advantage.

The main villain of the Spurs piece though was captain Dawson. A lack of pace has been evident all season long, with the laboring centre-half relying on others to bail him out of trouble.

However, it was his woeful positional sense, defeat in physical battles and inability to lead the side that will have been most disappointing for the travelling support.

Fast forward a couple of hours and a player deemed surplus to requirements at White Hart Lane has just put in a man-of-the-match performance against the current Premier League champions.

Steven Caulker has made the most blocks of any player in the Premier League this season, and it is his solid showings in the Welsh club’s rearguard that have been a key reason that Malky MacKay’s men have held their own this term.

Given the form that Caulker and Dawson are in respectively, did Villas-Boas make the wrong choice in allowing the former to leave?

Dawson was on the verge of leaving for QPR, while Caulker has impressed when given the chance to play consistently for both Swansea and Cardiff.

The current Spurs skipper is a visible weak point in the Spurs team, and with Manchester United to play next weekend surely has his place in the side in danger.

Caulker meanwhile is putting his hand up for inclusion in England’s World Cup squad.

Should Spurs have kept Caulker?

I'm glad they didn't the man is a rock in the Cardiff defense he has been a class act throughout the season and can only see him getting better and better

Having this conversation in college. If Spurs had kept him they'd be in the top four now. Their defence doesn't cut it.

Caulker much better than Dawson... Can't stand AVB though so glad he's having a pasting...

I still think they'd have lost heavily to Citeh though, even if they'd not sold him. The whole Spurs team were garbage on Sunday...

I'm glad they didn't the man is a rock in the Cardiff defense he has been a class act throughout the season and can only see him getting better and better

Totally agree, I think defensively this is the best we've been for years.

I'm glad they didn't the man is a rock in the Cardiff defense he has been a class act throughout the season and can only see him getting better and better

Totally agree, I think defensively this is the best we've been for years.

Our main problem last year that everyone was complaining about was defense, now i don't think i've hear one complaint about it

I'm glad they didn't the man is a rock in the Cardiff defense he has been a class act throughout the season and can only see him getting better and better

Totally agree, I think defensively this is the best we've been for years.

Our main problem last year that everyone was complaining about was defense, now i don't think i've hear one complaint about it

Our fans love a moan. The Cowie brigade have been quiet since we played united too.

To be fair to Spurs, before the Man City game, they' donkey conceded 6 goals all season, second best in the league if I recall.

Still, selling Caulker for less than £10m was insane, considering the inflated prices normally associated with young English players. Not that I'm complaining, seeing as we landed ourselves one hell of a player.

Question regarding Caulker though - has he officially become club captain now?

I say they are silly for selling him in the first place regardless of the City game.

You do not play a high line at the Etihad and expect to contain or beat Man City (especially with their home form) so I fail to see how Caulker would've made a difference.

Having this conversation in college. If Spurs had kept him they'd be in the top four now. Their defence doesn't cut it.

Their defense isn't the problem (hence why they hadn't conceded many before the City game) it is AVB playing the most negative football in the league and the stupidity of signing so many new players.

They do not get people in behind defenses or get wingers going at full backs. They just pass and pass and pass with no potency and intent to do something other than sit in narrow and play slow tempo football.

No crosses(and the time they take a chance with crosses they get a goal like against us) into the box for their striker who is one of the best box players in Europe so he just sits around the defense doing nothing

So in short; Caulker wouldn't make them a top four side(they got a good defender to replace him in Chirices (sp?)). Playing some football with intent will.

Yes they were wrong..........and wrong to waste all that money in one go when they had a decent side. I hope all the spurs fans who laughed at wenger for being cautious ..........are worried now.