Reading reports on the Spurs Everton game I am, not for the first time, struggling to reconcile the descriptions of the match with what I actually saw at White Hart Lane.
According to practically everything I've read Everton carved out numerous chances and were very unlucky not to get anything from the game. The strange thing is I can only remember Loris making one real save, a brilliant one admittedly. For the rest of the game he picked up a couple of what amounted to back passes from Everton players and watched a few shots go well wide.
The aerial stuff was dealt with by the defenders. What I actually saw was two hard working teams who largely cancelled each other out. Even though all six substitutes were used the pattern of the game never really changed. The crucial difference was we had a centre forward and they didn't, one moment of strength, skill and clinical finishing decided it.
As I say its not the first time I've struggled to reconcile what I've read with what I've seen. I do wonder whether reporters simply write about the game they wanted to see rather than the game they have actually watched. The problem is when you go on to draw conclusions based on a game that never actually took place the whole thing becomes ridiculous.
Written by jod