Pochettino Out, Mourinho In

[Havre]

Highly unlikely that Spurs will end up top 4, but not impossible any longer. But instead of making this a Spurs-thread I think it is interesting to see some of the changes Mourinho has made. Very common sense ones I would argue.

1. Not playing out from the back from goal kicks.
I never understood this from Pochettino. I prefer teams that can play out from the back, not because you more or less ever score goals from it in the PL, but because you tire out the oppositions attackers that have to chase you. It requires a goalkeeper that can pass the ball. Allison and Ederson do - Lloris can´t. Lloris is a specialist in picking out the defender that will be easiest to put under pressure by the opposition. It requires defenders that are capable of small passes under pressure. Alderweireld is an exceptional passer of the ball for a CD, but not when it comes to small passing close to his own goal. Vertonghen is decent, but same applies to him. Davies is quite useless. Sanchez is horrible etc. It also requires a DM/CM that can be an outlet. Modric was. Carrick was that etc., but among the current crop no-one is especially good in that role. Winks can be, but he still has much to learn in terms of shielding the ball. Sissoko and Dier are very poor at that aspect of the game. N´Dombele might play it longer term, but not yet. Rose is the only player in those positions that is reasonably comfortable playing that kind of football. He is the only player that could play that part of the game the way City do without looking out of place. Even Bournemouth got players a lot more suited to that style than Spurs. Still Pochettino insisted on playing it short. Shocking that after 5 years you then haven´t bought players suited for it. The biggest investment was Sanchez who´s biggest weakness is that part of the game (he is an OK passer further up the pitch).

What was the effect? Spurs were put under pressure. Attackers spent a lot of energy trying to find space, but they never received proper passes from the defenders. Now it is kicked long and even if Spurs haven´t got that much height up front it is still the preferable way of resetting the play. With aggression on the second ball you can still occasionally get into decent positions. Common sense.

2. Better balance.
Again just obvious common sense. When Spurs were good under Pochettino the team always had defensively sound CMs. Even when Mason and Bentaleb played they never allowed endless amount of space in front of the CMs. The best pairing was the good Dier (god knows where he went) and Dembele. Dembele was unbeatable defensively one on one and Dier always covered the space in front of the CDs well. Same with Wanyama. At times it was even Dier and Wanyama. A black hole offensively, but at least it made Spurs difficult to beat. With solid CMs you could allow Walker and Rose to attack. What did Pochettino do? Dier went #"%% and Wanyama got injured. The full backs are still pushed up, but the midfield is now players like Winks, Sissoko and even guys like Eriksen and Alli. How are they going to cover the CDs and roaming full backs? Sissoko has been shockingly good for quite some time, but he is not disciplined enough to be asked to cover the space in front of the CDs. Winks can if he has a solid CM next to him (someone like Dembele), but he can never be Makelele covering up for Sissoko and even worse Alli or Eriksen.

Mourinho, as most Spursfans, quickly understands how stupid this is. Davies is asked to play as a LB, but basically being the 3rd CD against WH. When Davies gets injured it isn´t Rose that comes in against Bournemouth, but Vertonghen. This again allows Aurier to move forward without having to worry too much about what is happening behind him. Suddenly Aurier looks like a decent player again. Similarly he plays Dier er a DM. Dier has been shocking, but it still means the team is slightly less open than without him. Spurs are by no means solid defensively under Mourinho (so far), but the structure looks better. And if Dier had only been 80% of the player he used to be it would have looked a lot better.

3. No more Alli in midfield
Alli scores 10 and 18 goals in the league and Pochettino decides to move him further back. Not many strikers will score 18 goals and instead of keeping him high on the pitch Pochettino forces him further and further back. He even does the same with Eriksen. The opposite of what Mourinho tries to do. And the opposite of how Pochettino did early on. He created almost a new formation allowing Dier to be a hybrid between a midfield and a defender. Forget the goals Alli has scored the last games - he looks like a player again. Easy to forget how good he used to be - and now he is 95% of his old self again. No reason why he can´t go on being even better. He scores goals, he works hard, he can create chances etc. Similar to Aurier Mourinho is tweaking his formation to get the best out of players. I don´t mind doing in the other way around, but then you got to buy the right kind of players to fit into those roles. Pochettino didn´t for the last years at Spurs.

4. No more endless changing in formation (well - time will show)
So Pochettino uses the summer to come up with a "new" formation - the midfield diamond. It fails miserably. I still have no clue as to which players he wanted to play in which roles. Alli, Eriksen and Lo Celso are all best suited to that no. 10 position. Son works as a second striker, but it is not his best position - neither is it for Lucas. And if Kane doesn´t play who is playing up front? N´Dombele should fit the no. 8 role perfectly, but who else? Again Pochettino tries to shoe horn Alli and Eriksen into such a role. Of course it fails. Eriksen is no Modric even if they have some of the same strengths on the ball. He will never tackle! That is OK for a no. 10, but not a no. 8. Lo Celso could play that role, but one of the reasons he got back on track again was being allowed to be more of a no. 10 in Spain. In France the times I watched him he looked rather average playing deeper (I realise he often played deeper than a no. 8 would).

Then Spurs played 4-4-2 with no wingers. Spurs have played 5-3-2. 3-5-2 and of course 4-2-3-1. The only formation Pochettino has hardly used since 2017 is 3-4-3 which was the formation he became successful with. Alli - Kane - Eriksen with two fairly pacy wide players in Walker and Rose.

Mourinho sees one fantastic wide forward in Son. So he plays him as a wide forward/winger. He sees that Lucas´ best position is similar (Lucas is hardly fantastic, but he is OK in that role - and he always plays with intensity which is useful in the position Spurs ended up in). Alli is more of a no. 10 so he plays there. Even if it means it is difficult to make room for two of Spurs´best players in Eriksen and Lo Celso. He settles the central of midfield with the two most disciplined CMs in Dier and Winks (even if they are both playing poorly at the moment). When Sissoko replaces Lucas he slightly tweaks the formation allowing Sissoko to be slightly more centrally. A bit funny how easily Mourinho exposes how strangely Pochettino ended up shaping this squad. It got a lot of individual quality, but it is clearly unbalanced. My only fear is that Mourinho´s love for Dier as a man will mean he is too patient with him (I hope Dier proves me wrong of course and turns it around).

Do I believe this was because Pochettino is that bad? No. But I do believe he is a very stubborn man that lost his way. Both tactically and maybe even worse starting to be a moaner clearly indirectly blaming others for his failures. How can you believe that stating publicly that you need another 5 year plan to build a new team will be helpful when most of your core is in the prime and in some cases at the very end of it? How motivating is it for Lloris, Alderweireld, Vertonghen, Kane, Son etc to hear that they will have to wait years to be competitive again? Completely clueless. Do I believe Pochettino is that stupid? No, but I believe he became that stupid - if only temporary.

I am actually looking forward to see how Pochettino will manage his next team. I honestly have no clue as to how good he is as a manager. Based on the last two years in my judgement he is very average. And I believe there is a good possibility he will fail in his next job at a big club. At the same time if he can readjust himself that 16/17-team played some fantastic football. If he can make a team with better individual quality play like that it will be sensational. We will see.

 

[Stray Wasp]

Two for two.

I find it a bit funny when people forget that Pochettino's second best season he ended up behind the washed up Mourinho.

Pochettino deserves a lot of credit for his first three years at Spurs. I doubt if Mourinho would have had the patience to build what Pochettino did build. I doubt he has that type of quality to build what Pochettino built at Spurs during those years. It was a team full of young and fairly cheap players (relatively speaking) that played fearless football that at times were very entertaining as well. Add to that his likeable personality and there is no wonder why pundits, fans etc. rate(d) and like Pochettino.

If he had continued a long that path I would have agreed that Pochettino could have been rated higher than Mourinho. If Spurs had developed from 2017 they would have been up there with Liverpool and Pochettino with Klopp. It never happened. And looking what Pochettino did since then I think it is just as likely that he had a Ranieri-run as him being that good of a manager. Some of his decision making was borderline absurd. Time will tell.

Mourinho is at times extremely unlikable. It hurts him on boards like this. Nothing other than the romantic dream of Pochettino suggests he is better than Mourinho at this point though.

By 'Pochettino's second best season' (a vague definition), I'm assuming you mean 2017-18. During the summer of 2017, Mourinho was given £75 million to spend on one striker - Lukaku (whose production regressed compared to his previous two seasons with Everton). That's almost as much as Pochettino was permitted to spend on all his acquisitions that transfer window.

Shouldn't we take into account the spending of the respective managers when judging their performances? Surely the longer a coach is asked to squeeze more out of less, the likelier a glass ceiling will be hit.

You say that Pochettino went into a decline beginning 2017-18. If your statement is correct, Manchester United needed to hand Mourinho an awful lot of extra transfer budget to beat said declining talent.

Not just the transfers either. As you doubtless are aware, historic research shows the correlation between the tendency of clubs who spend highest on wages to do better. How does that bear on Pochettino v Mourinho? Here goes: (the following figures come from the highly respected David Conn of the Guardian):

Tottenham spent 39% of their £381 million turnover on wages (a total of £148 million)
Manchester United spent 50% of their £590 million turnover on wages (a total of £296 million)

As to the Klopp comparison:
Liverpool spent 58% of their £455 million turnover on wages (a total of £264 million)

Regarding Mourinho, that's exactly double. Or, to put it another way, £37 million more spent per each extra point gained by Mourinho over Pochettino. £5.333 million more spent per each extra point gained by Mourinho over Klopp.

In Europe, Mourinho's team advanced no further than Pochettino's, and three rounds less than Klopp's.

Into what did Mourinho walk? Stats for 2015/16
Tottenham £100 million wage bill / 48% of £210 million turnover.
Manchester United £232 million wage bill / 45% of £515 million turnover.
Liverpool £208 million / 69% of £302 million turnover

Compare to 2016/17.

Tottenham £127 million wage bill / 42% of £306 million turnover
Manchester United £263 million wage bill / 45% of £581 million turnover
Liverpool £208 million wage bill / 57% of £364 million turnover

So in reward for taking Tottenham into the CL for the first time since 2010, Pochettino was given £27 million of Spurs' £96 million cash rise (in fact, £24 million - Daniel Levy's pay rose from just under £3 million to £6 million).

Manchester United earmarked a £31 million war chest for salaries out of their £66 million TV money bonus.

So Klopp's wage bill didn't increase. He couldn't finish ahead of Spurs, but still made the Champions League.

Have you noticed how in 2017-18, Spurs rewarded Pochettino for the £75 million growth in their revenue by giving him £21 million extra to pay the talent who actually achieve results on the field, while Manchester United, whose income rose £9 million, gave Mourinho every single penny of it, as well as an additional £24 million to entice recruits?

Meanwhile, since you compare Pochettino's failure to improve Spurs unfavourably with Klopp's improvement of Liverpool, let's consider that Klopp was given £56 million extra for wages out of £91 million extra turnover. Is there any mitigation in those numbers? Perhaps more to the point, is there any surprise that a great coach, given greater resources than a rival, surpassed his achievements?

In other words, in 2016-17 and 2017-18, Levy effectively said to Pochettino, "Thanks for your great work last season - rest assured, we're going to make sure that next year the odds are stacked even more against you than they were this."

Strange, isn't it, that Pochettino grew disenchanted and that Spurs lost ground over the 38-game marathon of the league campaign?

Or perhaps not.

By the bye, wage bill spend was far more liberal when Harry Redknapp and Villas Boas managed Spurs. But this post is awash with enough stats as it is.

Mourinho would point to Manchester United failing to sign the players he demanded in summer 2018, and instead spending vast sums on Fred. Pochettino would point to Spurs spending nothing. Both took badly to the business, or lack thereof, the difference being that Pochettino led fourth place in the league and a Champions League final, while Mourinho was sacked with the Red Devils in sixth spot.

 

[Stray Wasp]

Highly unlikely that Spurs will end up top 4, but not impossible any longer. But instead of making this a Spurs-thread I think it is interesting to see some of the changes Mourinho has made. Very common sense ones I would argue...

Do I believe this was because Pochettino is that bad? No. But I do believe he is a very stubborn man that lost his way. Both tactically and maybe even worse starting to be a moaner clearly indirectly blaming others for his failures. How can you believe that stating publicly that you need another 5 year plan to build a new team will be helpful when most of your core is in the prime and in some cases at the very end of it? How motivating is it for Lloris, Alderweireld, Vertonghen, Kane, Son etc to hear that they will have to wait years to be competitive again? Completely clueless. Do I believe Pochettino is that stupid? No, but I believe he became that stupid - if only temporary.

I am actually looking forward to see how Pochettino will manage his next team. I honestly have no clue as to how good he is as a manager. Based on the last two years in my judgement he is very average. And I believe there is a good possibility he will fail in his next job at a big club. At the same time if he can readjust himself that 16/17-team played some fantastic football. If he can make a team with better individual quality play like that it will be sensational. We will see.

The funny thing is, there's so much of the detail in your tactical analysis in the greater part of this post that I consider sound.

On point 1, though, you mention that after five years Pochettino hadn't found goalkeepers and defenders suitable to playing the ball out from the back. Footballing goalkeepers and defenders who can also be relied on to do a defensive job against the best attackers are difficult to find - and expensive (as witness Bournemouth's goals against column down the seasons). I'd suggest Spurs' budgetary restrictions hindered Pochettino here, and if you must err, surely better to err on not conceding too many, as Pochettino's Spurs. You certainly can't say he wasted every penny he was given in the summer of 2018. You can't waste nothing.

On point 2, your basic point about balance makes perfect sense. Alas, the sentence 'What did Pochettino do? Dier went shit and Wanyama got injured' seems to connect Pochettino with at least one circumstance he can't possibly be blamed for (unless during training sessions he was throwing bricks at Wanyama).

What I would observe about Dier is that when he arrived he was described first and foremost as a defender, not a midfielder. Perhaps the longer he plays in the latter role simply exposes the limits that led him to be earmarked to play yet deeper in the first place (if so, there's a degree of logic in how Mourinho is using him). In which case, the question becomes whether the expense of sourcing a superior replacement is a factor in him hanging around.

On point 3, for all I agree with your assessment of Ali (although I'm less high on his passing ability than you), you end by saying that 'in his last years' Pochettino didn't buy the right kind of players'. Again, summer 2018 needs striking from the records because he bought nobody.

On point 4, no argument from me that constant confusion of formations tends to undermine teams, to say nothing of the damage done by trying to shoehorn players into unsuitable roles. Again, though, your mention of the lack of cover for Kane raises the question of whether Pochettino was the one responsible or whether he wasn't presented a striker he thought was worth spending what money was available on - Janssen and Llorente were previous, unsuccessful attempts at finding such a player.

You mention Lloris, Alderweireld and Vertonghen being demotivated by Pochettino saying the squad needed years to become competitive again. Don't forget that you earlier pointed out how these three players aren't suitable to the style the team needs to play to mirror that used by the league's two top teams. Unwise as Pochettino's public comments were, to find a goalkeeper and two CBs more suited to playing out from the back is incredibly difficult to achieve in a short space of time, so at the very least there's a logic in the notion that a rebuild would require patience - unless Mourinho can bring about that change (I wouldn't bet in it, given his past methods). Or that there will be more money to spend.

The bolded part I agree with, too, and I'm intrigued to see what happens with Pochettino next. So many coaches find one team that perfectly suits what they want and seek the rest of their career searching fruitlessly to recreate that chemistry. His one full season at Southampton was excellent - eighth place on the league's 14th highest wage bill. Perhaps part of his problem was that for too long he did so well with less money than his peers, he began to be taken for granted - until it was too late and his heart and head was no longer in the job.

It's equally intriguing to see what Mourinho will do. Whether a success, failure or something in between, this may be his last EPL job - though one never can tell.

 

[Havre]

You make it sound like you are disappointed that you agree with me?

A lot of our disagreement I believe stems from who one consider to be responsible for how the squad looks. It seems to me you believe Pochettino had less of a say than I believe he had. Neither can of course prove their position to be the right one. Maybe we´ll know one day if there is a Levy and another Pochettino book coming.

Point 1: Doesn´t explain why he had to change things so drastically from a team that worked very well in 16/17. Neither does it explain why a player like Sanchez was the big buy and a player like Davies was signed on a new long contract. Neither of them well suited to the style Pochettino since have started to implement.

No team can get it all. Klopp has sacrificed having a traditional playmaker as he wants his midfield and to some extent attacking players to be able to handle the aggressive press game after game. The sensational Barcelona team from about 10 years back had very few solid headers of the ball. Bournemouth got a defence that can play the ball. Of course Spurs could have had a team more comfortable at that part of the game.

Point 2: Every manager/coach has to plan with some redundancy. Spurs bought Aurier even if they had Trippier. Llorente was brought in, but hardly used. And when used we never really crossed the ball (another strange decision by Pochettino - bringing in Llorente to a team that was never built around crossing). Even when buying those players they didn´t even try to find a Matip-type of signing that at least could cover in that DM role.

If Pochettino wanted to blow up the team then I don´t blame Levy for saying no. Only mistake then was that they should have parted ways this summer. Obviously impossible for Levy to sack Pochettino in the summer. Don´t blame Pochettino for staying, but when he decided to stay he should have been loyal to the decision not blowing up the team (if that was what he wanted - clear hints in some of those summer press conferences that he was frustrated - rightly or wrongly).

 

[YNWA14]

I will say that despite the wage and spending discrepancy Spurs had better talent and balance to work with as a team than United when Poch and Mourinho were respectively in charge. Now Poch deserves credit for that and Mourinho apparently was at odds with the board or whoever the whole time but in this case I don’t think the money tells the whole story.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

The PL should be BEGGING that ManU struggles and Poch comes in after the season. Holy shit.....that would be amazing, just amazing. Then Pep leaves ManCity to lead Arsenal and game on!

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Highly unlikely that Spurs will end up top 4,

I mean. How?

 

[Havre]

I mean. How?

How? They still got 6 points to catch up. Not like Spurs will just win the rest of the games.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

How? They still got 6 points to catch up. Not like Spurs will just win the rest of the games.

Each team can get 72 more points, so 8% of those points flipping isn't much to ask, especially with 1 head-to-head match.

Though....Spurs are only 6 points from 16th, too.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Tons of games left. We'll see.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

 

[YNWA14]

I dunno when I said that he wasn't a good CM I was told he was great there.

But really, yeah, he's not even really a 10 so much as a good secondary striker IMO. Still not his biggest fan but it's clear that's where he belongs positionally.

 

[Stray Wasp]

I will say that despite the wage and spending discrepancy Spurs had better talent and balance to work with as a team than United when Poch and Mourinho were respectively in charge. Now Poch deserves credit for that and Mourinho apparently was at odds with the board or whoever the whole time but in this case I don’t think the money tells the whole story.

I mentioned myself earlier in the thread the qualification that money is an advantage if spent wisely - the simple fact of having more money to spend than your rival gives you greater choice than him to exercise wisdom, if you have it. Naturally, however, the greater your budget, the bigger your leeway to withstand mistakes and vice versa.

Spurs had to break their wage structure to pay Harry Kane less than half of what Manchester United poured down the human drain that was once a footballer called Alexis Sanchez. The Fallen Empire's wealth allowed them to absorb that deal without collapsing - even if it was likely an anchor on their recruitment plans in 2018/19. Spurs couldn't afford to carry a passenger who earned a quarter what Sanchez did.

 

[Stray Wasp]

You make it sound like you are disappointed that you agree with me?

A lot of our disagreement I believe stems from who one consider to be responsible for how the squad looks. It seems to me you believe Pochettino had less of a say than I believe he had. Neither can of course prove their position to be the right one. Maybe we´ll know one day if there is a Levy and another Pochettino book coming.

Point 1: Doesn´t explain why he had to change things so drastically from a team that worked very well in 16/17. Neither does it explain why a player like Sanchez was the big buy and a player like Davies was signed on a new long contract. Neither of them well suited to the style Pochettino since have started to implement...

If Pochettino wanted to blow up the team then I don´t blame Levy for saying no. Only mistake then was that they should have parted ways this summer. Obviously impossible for Levy to sack Pochettino in the summer. Don´t blame Pochettino for staying, but when he decided to stay he should have been loyal to the decision not blowing up the team (if that was what he wanted - clear hints in some of those summer press conferences that he was frustrated - rightly or wrongly).

The change of direction in your posts surprised me - in a positive way, I'm pleased to say.

As regards Point 1, Spurs players attract so many rumours you never can tell what to credit, but this article may suggest why both Sanchez was signed and Davies extended:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...ld-plunges-spurs-future-doubt-demand-correct/

We know the £25 million clause alluded to regarding Alderweireld existed. Perhaps the intended timetable was for Spurs to find a young, relatively low-paid CB for 2017/18, in the expectation that if they proved successful the club could shift Alderweireld in 2018/19, give the young CB a pay rise, and find another young CB to back him up. (Sanchez did sign a new contract in 2018. The costly surprise was that the much-rumoured sale of Alderweireld to Manchester United for a fee above his 2019 release clause never occurred).

Furthermore, I think every defender who comes out of Ajax is presumed to be a capable passer - overlooking the differences between the two leagues. Given Sanchez was 21, there may have been an element of projecting that he'd grow into being a superior ball-playing CB too.

As for Davies, it's highly likely that he benefited from the desire to keep some continuity at left back in the event Rose should leave and need to be replaced by a player who couldn't be guaranteed to fit the system. 'Knowing the system' has saved flagging players from the axe in various sports.

As to the changes between 2016-17 and 2017-18, we can see they brought improvement in European results at the cost of a regression in the league - though still to a points tally pre-Pochettino Spurs hadn't enjoyed since 1984-85 (when the old Division One campaign lasted 42 games).

Concerning the season after, it's hard not to feel that Spurs would have finished 2018-19 far stronger without Europe becoming their focus. Look at their final 12 games over the previous three seasons:

2016-17 33 points out of the last possible 36 (no European games during that spell)
2017-18 28 points out 36 (no European games)
2018-19 11 points out of 36 (nine European games if you count the final).

Manifestly, we'll never know for sure. The attempt to evolve the team may have been flawed, but it wasn't a screw-up on the Ferguson-Veron scale. Given the physical demands Pochettino places on his players, those two finishes at 88 point or greater season pace are striking.

For me, the overwhelming sense from the Pochettino-Levy fallout is one of waste. Prior to this season, I'd never seen Spurs as consistently strong as they have been in the years since 2015-16 began. I wouldn't put it past Mourinho to do an excellent salvage job (Arsenal and Manchester United minor seem hell-bent on assisting him to that end), but the risk of a lost year sending them in the direction of turning into Arsenal of 2006-2013 without the preceding glory seems real.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

 

[Stray Wasp]

But really, yeah, he's not even really a 10 so much as a good secondary striker IMO. Still not his biggest fan but it's clear that's where he belongs positionally.

I reckon it's an error very revealing of the English attitude to the game that so many of them categorise Alli as a number 10.

To my mind he's an outstanding player in his way, but fundamentally a runner and finisher rather than a creator who's blessed in having a player of Kane's skillset playing ahead of him. For all the increased emphasis on pace and athleticism in the contemporary game I believe players of Alli's style are difficult to accommodate without inhibiting those around them. Having an in-form Eriksen out wide has complemented him nicely in the past - Alli compensates for Eriksen's lack of blazing foot speed, Eriksen provides the vision to feed his runs.

 

[Havre]

Alli will never dictate play the way the playmakers in the 80s and 90s did, but very few teams set up that way these days anyway.

Alli is very clever playing short through balls in tight areas. In that sense he fills the no. 10 role. But as Stray says he is primarily a runner and a finisher. He is almost Inzaghi-like in his finishing. Clever and he can finish with both feet and his head. And he has the intelligence to spot the right run - almost like Lampard.

I have no problem seeing why people talk about him as a potential world class player. He has the attributes to be pretty special. At the same time I'm not getting carried away just because he has now looked a lot better for a week or two. For all his good sides he has also been pretty average for a long time. As Stray argues he needs the right kind of team around him.

 

[Jack Straw]

 

[hatterson]

Alli will never dictate play the way the playmakers in the 80s and 90s did, but very few teams set up that way these days anyway.

Alli is very clever playing short through balls in tight areas. In that sense he fills the no. 10 role. But as Stray says he is primarily a runner and a finisher. He is almost Inzaghi-like in his finishing. Clever and he can finish with both feet and his head. And he has the intelligence to spot the right run - almost like Lampard.

I have no problem seeing why people talk about him as a potential world class player. He has the attributes to be pretty special. At the same time I'm not getting carried away just because he has now looked a lot better for a week or two. For all his good sides he has also been pretty average for a long time. As Stray argues he needs the right kind of team around him.

That was probably a good idea. Since this, he's got 2g 0a in 10 PL games and 0g 1a in 4 FA cup games.