Tottenham 1-5 Manchester City: Dzeko scores four but City impressive across the pitch
The starting line-ups
Manchester City produced an excellent performance to maintain their 100% start to the season.
Harry Redknapp was forced to use Niko Kranjcar and Luka Modric in the centre of midfield, whilst Peter Crouch got a start upfront.
Roberto Mancini gave Samir Nasri his debut in place of James Milner, whilst Nigel de Jong missed out through injury.
City were better in every department throughout this game.
City dominate first half
The first half started slowly, almost as if the game had kicked off too early for the players and supporters. It was also scrappy, with some needless bookings on either side. When it eventually settled down, City took command.
Whilst the sides were broadly playing the same system, the key was the use of wide players. Spurs’ are classic wingers who remained near the touchlines and wanted to take on full-backs, whilst Samir Nasri and David Silva came inside, picked up possession and contributed to flowing passing moves.
It can be a problem playing two wide players who like to come inside, because it makes the play narrow and predictable, and decreases the active playing zone meaning the opposition are less stretched (with the caveat that the full-backs get space to dart forward and provide width). Here, however, it worked quite well because Spurs had no true holding player – in fact, they had nothing like a holding player. Tom Huddlestone was only fit enough for the bench, and whilst Luka Modric and Kranjcar did a decent job in possession, they left too much space behind them. With Silva and Nasri both able to move into that position (which produced a good chance for Silva after seven minutes) and Aguero dropping deep, Tottenham were always likely to struggle in that zone.
The key was that Nasri didn’t both continually come inside. Nasri, in particular, kept width down the left and played in a different way to in his Arsenal days – in the sense that he got to a position near the byline, and then crossed the ball – albeit after checking onto his right foot. The first two goals, for Dzeko, both came from Nasri assists. He also enjoyed his relationship with Gael Clichy, who he knows from both Arsenal and France.
Second half
Redknapp tried to get some control of the midfield zone with the introduction of Huddlestone, who did a decent job in front of the back four. Still, City were the better side and Dzeko poked home another cross for his hattrick, whilst Aguero scored a great goal after another Nasri assist.
Tottenham’s problem was that City were finding too many gaps – and yet the more Tottenham tried to get back in the game, the more gaps they were going to leave. Being forced to replace Modric with Jake Livermore was maybe a blessing in disguise, but it meant there was less attacking threat. Jermain Defoe came on upfront but was forced to fend for himself.
In truth, the game was over by the time of Dzeko’s 55th minute goal, and the second half was a non-event as contest. Dzeko, however, was superb – clearly in form, now confident in the Premier League, and ready to lead City’s title charge. He was always a danger – he attempted ten shots in total.
Conclusion
An excellent performance from City, who utilised their three creative players well. The main man to benefit was Dzeko, who can now be sure of decent service in various ways – balls slid through the defence, crosses hung up, cut-backs from wide. City have a lot of attacking weapons.
Tottenham capitulated – they made it too easy for City between the lines and couldn’t get their creative players into the game.
Tottenham 1-5 Manchester City: Dzeko scores four but City impressive across the pitch
It’s going to be hard to keep writing about tactics when one side can just buy all the best players, surely. If half your team can beat people one-on-one and pass and move better, then no tactics are going to stop them.
Mind you, gung ho attack, ‘Arry style is clearly not the way to go.
City have incredible players, but this wasn’t about individual battles. And Tottenham’s main problem was as ZM pointed out, too much space in the hole. They should have started Huddlestone, even knowing that he would need to be subbed out at some point.
All of Tottenham’s holding midfielders are injured (before the season starts… nice). Playing two very wide wingers was a mistake, but he always does that against anyone.
I find comments like this strange. First, Man City quite obviously don’t buy the best players. To be sure, they buy exceptionally good ones, but the best? I reckon Man City have only one player who might be considered the best in the world in his position, and that’s Yaya Toure.
Second, how those players are deployed is paramount. The difference between the success Real Madrid had under Del Bosque and their ’success’ after the Galacticos project started is marked, and showed that “buying the best players” doesn’t alone guarantee success — even when a team literally does do that, which City haven’t to such an extent.
Man City have bought a serious amount of talent, but they’ve only really caught up to Man Utd, who’ve been spending big for 15 years. Man City and Chelsea, and Blackburn and Newcastle before them, had to “catch up” by spending lots in a short period.
I find comments like this a little strange. I meant the point more generally than just Man City, as this is hardly a EPL-only phenomenon. However, even regarding just Man City I think you’ll find they have pretty good players in most of their positions.
Oh, but I see what you’re saying. I used the word ‘best’, so I must mean they have the world dream team, which they don’t, therefore my entire point is invalid. Well done, sir, for that stunning leap of logic which wins you the argument.
Tell you what, lets draw up some graphs mapping player salaries against club and league success and see how they compare. I assume you’ll expect no correlation.
That’s not what I said. I would expect there to be a very strong correlation between salaries and fees paid and league position. My main problem with your original post was that (1) nobody seems to make these “buying the title” points about Manchester Utd, when they have been consistently one of the biggest spending teams, (2) there is every point in continuing writing these reviews, because how players are deployed is of paramount importance — as much as the actual players that are bought, really.
So, when you bemoan that City are buying the best, whether you actually meant the best, or just “very good”, it’s a strange thing to say, because all teams who win the league have done the same — at least since the advent of the EPL. Even stranger was your implication that it’s going to be a waste of time to continue talking about tactics.
money and tactics do have a correlation. The more money a team has, the better manager they can afford hence better tactics.
disagree. If that was the case, theres no way teams like greece win the euro with the individuals playing for England, France, spain etc
What a bizarre retort. Do the massive differences between club and international competitions really need to be explained to you as to reveal the nonsensical nature of your reply?
It was an impressive performance by a newly liberated Man City, but this match, for me, was mostly about appallingly bad management from Redknapp.
It was obvious what was going to happen as soon as Redknapp made his bone-headed team selection. Man City had three players in their front four who thrive on space between the lines (and were likely to have at least two almost no matter what team Mancini sent out). So why-o-why did he pick two number tens in the centre of midfield? With Modric and Kranjcar, there was always going to be a massive gap between the midfield and defensive lines, giving all the oxygen Nasri, Silva and Arguero needed to tear Tottenham apart.
Furthermore, against a team that’s going to have plenty of men in midfield — either by virtue of Arguero dropping deeper, or Silva and Nasri coming inside, or some combination thereof — why did Redknapp pick two wingers who hug the touchline? If he wanted to do that, he needed to remove a forward and play an extra midfielder to ensure that he wasn’t simply outnumbered and overwhelmed. Van Der Vaart could in theory do that, but he’s tactically indisciplined, so it wasn’t gong to work.
Of course Spurs have injury issues, but it would have been surely better to chose, for instance, a substitute full back, at the base of midfield, than to surrender the game before it had started. Kranjcar is a class player who could, in my view, fill Modric’s boots when he leaves, but he was hung out to dry here.
Woeful management from Redknapp.
Spot on mate, couldn’t agree more. The point you make here, more than any other factor, influenced the outcome of the game.
Wonder how the press will react. It’s interesting that Man Utd’s win was all about Arsenal’s utter ineptitude (true), but Man City’s was all about MAn City’s brilliance (true, to an extent, but it was as much about Redknapp’s idiotic selection.)
Anyone would think that Harry was favoured by the press, wouldn’t they?
It is surprising as you would think that it would be the opposite. I guess it just has to do with the current public/press perception of where the two teams (spurs/arsenal) are heading – not to say that is accurate. Lately the press may assume Spurs kept Modric and signed Adebayor they must be getting better so credit to City, Arsenal loses two top players and doesn’t replace them – so discredit goes to Arsenal.
Also I added your comments to our Spurs Forum thread: http://www.tottenhamhotspurs.tv/forum/players-lounge/23635-some-thoughts-man-city-home-game-2011-2012-a.html
Your more than welcome to pop in and check it out. Cheers.
love this comment.
Thanks very much.
ZM, return of the 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1?
Man U, Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Tottenham?
EDITED by Carbo
City’s 4-4-2 is not a traditional English 4-4-2.
More of a 4-2-2-2.
I wonder if Mancini could make Vanderlei Luxemburgo’s magic square idea work? A few managers have tried, and failed, to implement a true 4-2-2-2 in Europe, including Luxemburgo himself at Real Madrid. But with Arguero, Dzeko, Silva and Nasri, I could actually see it working.
Yes that’s a very interesting point. A little like Villarreal perhaps.
I guess the key with this is the mobility, work-rate and intelligence of the players between the midfield two and the attacking two. The team needs to create width in addition to the full backs pushing right up, and so the two in the hole need to be able to move wide to provide that width and stretch the play. If they’re two traditional number tens, who like to sit and create, it’s simply not going to work.
And in Nasri and Silva, Man City have two players with that combination of work-rate, intelligence and mobility.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
we did to an extent play something that looked like a crossbreed between box midfield and a typical italian 4-3-1-2 under Claudio Ranieri last year, with the wide cm’s taking turns acting like the secound volantes/meias depending on which side the attacking movement developed, while the formation reverted into being a narrow diamond in defense
with Riise being injured/on poor form, and Cassetti as the best wide defenders maybe it was not possible to make it work constantly
I made a cack handed comment about in on ZM’s GU piece, about Mancini playing what amounts to a broken team, thinking about Madrid’s magic square of Zidane, Figo, Raul and striker, with Makalele holding.
You’ve put it much better of course. It seems to me that the player’s individual discipline and motivation is very important when playing a formation so reliant on the invention from the front three plus striker. I use this term because it’s that specific forward play that provides an outlet or decoy, the elasticity in the square. Does that make sense to you?
Yaya’s ability to play in a variety of positions make him a luxury in a team this specific. Albeit a very effective one.
You could say the same about United’s. And Liverpool’s as well, at least when Downing isn’t on the pitch. And even then they have a clear defensive ‘2′ in CM. So, maybe rise of the English 4-2-2-2 instead?
I hope this doesn’t mean you won’t be covering the Man Utd-Arsenal game
not much to say. Arsenal’s offside trap was catastrophically bad, United’s quick attackers (particularly Young) and skilled passers (especially Anderson) took advantage. All goals created by simple balls into the channels, and direct running at the back four. Arsenal badly miss Sagna, Vermaelen, and even Gael Clichy.
Yep. Was very reminiscent of the 5-0 El Clasico at the Nou Camp last season, except with players who aren’t quite as talented.
>not much to say. Arsenal’s offside trap was catastrophically bad,
Why wouldnt it be?
Why insist to play the offside trap with 2nd and 3rd stringers who have never played together?
Its a play that demands cohesion and familiarity with teammates and ones own role.
I didn’t see the match but the line-up indicates a return for Touré to his natural position, no longer sitting above two midfielders but holding himself. I’ve been clamoring for this for a while (there never was a need for the admittedly-effective De Jong); Barry and Touré are intelligent and will work well holding, distributing, surging, and linking. The team to watch in England for me this season.
Really cant understand y rednap would play 2 wingers who stay wide and no holding player. looking at the shapes of both teams, spurs lost the match b4 it even started.
While this Tottenham team had some serious injury issues, and arguably some terrible tactical problems, I also think this game may be a showcase of the City team this season. Nasri, Clichy and Aguero are all fantastically talented, and if Dzeko manages to hold on to this form, they’ll be tough to stop.
Can’t wait to see City play Chelsea, Arsenal or United in the league this season.
With 6 goals in 3 games, it’s pointing out the obvious to say that Dzeko has had a magnificent start to te season, but what has really impressed me about him is his all-round game. He’s tall and strong, and so is able to play the role of a traditional target man, but he is also surprisingly quick, and so can score goals by getting in behind defences. These assets make him a perfect foil for City’s attacking midfielders (Nasri, Silva, etc), and for this reason I think he could be more effective for them than Tevez, whose movement may cause difficulties in this way (as we have seen with Argentina and Messi).
What’s interesting about Dzeko is that at Wolfsburg he was so insistent that he liked playing as part of a front two, as opposed as a front one in a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1, that he forced McClaren to change tactics completely mid-season. When Second-Choice Steve first went there, he tried to implement the 4-3-3 that’d been so successful for him at Twente. But Dzeko basically forced him to change it back to a 4-3-1-2/diamond 4-4-2.
When he went to City, I wondered whether he was, indeed, unable to play without a partner alongside him; however, this season, even before Arguero came along, he looked superb in the lone striker position.
As you say, he’s tall and strong, but he also brings excellent technique and skill, as well as football intelligence, to a game, and that makes him almost the ideal focal point of an attack. There’s no reason to think that he can’t do for City what Drogba has done for Chelsea until the last six months or so (although clearly they’re very different types of players).
It is good to see Mancini being more positive. I was getting worried that they were going to turn into Chelsea or Liverpool of a few years ago.
Stop moaning Totty fans – you are a decent mid-table side with delusions of grandeur. Get over it. ‘Arry is a great manager. Anyone who has Huddlestone and Modric as a pair in midfield (when fit) is a fine man.
To what extent is the way Manchester City play, and the players they have chosen in the last two years, indicate that they are inspired by the Guardiola formation of Barcelona?
And do they have any strength that Barcelona is missing, indicating that they could match the team to beat for the moment?
I think Zonal Marking has made the point before that the team to beat Barca — or, more relevantly, consistently have the beating of them — will not simply copy the way Barca play. In all sports, I would say that simply producing a carbon copy of the best, but with inferior players, or players not as grained into the system, guarantees defeat. Going like-for-like against Barca just means that the quality of the players is all that more important.
And alas, there really is only one Lionel Messi, one Xavi, one Iniesta, etc.
To be sure, the team to beat them will have to be technically adept, but I think they’ll have to battle Barca asymmetrically. They’ll have to be extremely powerful and physically impressive, as one could imagine Barca’s smaller players being bested there; they’ll need a robust and aerially threatening centre forward, as Barca often play smaller players at centre back; and they’ll have to be comfortable defending deep and able to retain their shape during long periods without the ball and in the face of sublime passing and movement.
Chelsea always caused Barca problems under Mourinho, and even later. I think City have at least some of the elements to do likewise.
But, of course, it’s far too early to start thinking about taking on Barca for the crown as Best Team in the History of the Universe Ever. How about beating Man U and Chelsea to the EPL and qualifying from a very tough Champions League group first? Talk like this is far too premature at this early stage, and will at least at one stage before February look silly.
I agree fully about the physicality there, to overtake Barca someone will probably need to play upon their weakness.
Malcolm Gladwell wrote a fascinating story for The New Yorker ages ago titled How David Beats Goliath. It looked, in particular, at a girls junior league basketball team, and how they won by doing things that no good team does — primarily, aggressively playing the full-court press for the entire match.
Basketball is one of the very few sports I know little about, but it seemed to me that the lessons would be relevant to football.
http://www.gladwell.com/2009/2009_05_11_a_david.html
That was a very interesting article Carbo, thank you.
If City can consistently put together their attacking players in a cohesive and effective manner, there is no reason why they shouldn’t win the league. As demonstrated today, Eden Dzeko is now a force to be reckoned with in the Premier League, while Sergio Aguero is also a threat.
As a United fan, I’m worried. For me, winning 5-1 away at Spurs is just as, if not more, impressive than beating an out of sorts Arsenal 8-2 at home.
I think individually, Man City have a better lineup that Madrid. All it will take now is chemistry, and they will be unstoppable.
Casillas>Hart
Ramos>Zabaleta
Kompany>Carvahlo
Pepe>Lescott (they are both clumsy and unpredictable, but Pepe is better)
Clichy=Marcelo (Marcelo better offensively, but he is a complete joke defensively)
Madrid have a better defense
Toure>Xabi Alonso (in my opinion, Toure is just a better player)
De Jong>Khedira
Silva>Ozil
Aguero>Di Maria
Nasri=Di Maria (both at their best, I don’t know which one is better)
Dzeko>Benzema
Barcelona’s starting 11 is still a tiny bit stronger, but they lack a Striker, and I really believe that takes away a lot of their options in attack. They are a better team now than in the 2008/2009 season, but back then they were much more complete in attack and were able to score from any situation. Now, they can rely on their brilliance and chemistry, but they shouldn’t have to, because eventually they will face a team on their level, and without a Striker, they will struggle to win the tactical battle.
wow disagree on a fair few of your player comparisons. I’d say Hart is now better than Casillas as he’s defo past his sell by date. Toure over x.alonso = no chance, toure comes off as very lazy at time. De Jong over Khedira = no chance, as de jong’s ball retention is very poor. Silva over ozil no chance. Not that ozil’s better but surely it would be hard to say ones better than the other, as they are both top class and similar players. and Dzeko over benzema is a very big statement and i like dzeko.
Between Hart and Casillas, I don’t know. Casillas makes many mistakes, but I would still take him over Hart. Yaya Toure adds a lot more than Xabi Alonso. Alonso has great distribution but struggles immensely physically, and his tackling is poor. And we are talking about playing as a defensive midfielder. Toure’s ball skills surpass that of Alonso’s, he is a huge presence physically (I still remember Barcelona vs Chelsea when Toure and Drogba wrestled each other for the ball. It was like watching a fight between two grizzly bears). Also, his tackling is good enough so that he can play at CB. Khedira was great in Germany and in the World Cup, but he hasn’t impressed me at all with Real Madrid. Now, a winger is being chosen over Khedira to play as part of a double pivot. De Jong isn’t great on the ball, but he is a huge presence in the middle of the pitch. In a big game, I would easily pick De Jong over Khedira. Silva over Ozil is easy for me. Ozil has good vision and movement, but he falls apart in big games, and he can’t do half of what Silva can do. Silva’s vision is just as good, if not better, than Ozil’s. He is also more versatile, faster, has a much better shot and has much better dribbling. As for Dzeko and Benzema, they are very different players, but in the position they play in, Dzeko is better suited. Both are great, but Dzeko can provide more, as not only is he more physically poweful, but he also has good technique (although not quite as good as Benzema’s).
You are completely ignoring Cristiano Ronaldo who is way better than anyone at Man City.
I actually forgot to mention Ronaldo, that was a mistake. Ronaldo is way better than anyone in Man City. I used Di Maria twice, didn’t mean to.
Yeah way to avoid Ronaldo to help sell your faulty standpoint. And Clichy gets burnt by the most mediocre wingers while Marcelo generally only has trouble with Messi/Villa.
I forgot to mention Ronaldo. But the rest is accurate.
Marcelo is a joke defensively. It is only a myth that he has improved his defensive game under Mourinho. He has pace, but he is constantly turned inside out by average players in La Liga. And he has a lot of trouble marking players. Decent players can often lose Marcelo with simple movement.
Don’t you think that you’re perhaps overreacting based on a few games? Man City have an excellent side, but as we’ve said elsewhere, this match was almost as much about Tottenham’s tactical ineptitude.
Real Madrid were, in my view, the second best team in Europe last season — and third, Man Utd, were a fair old distance behind.
Watching the Spanish Super Cup, it seemed to me, despite being a ‘friendly’, that the the pace, the tempo, skill, technical ability, tactical interest — the overall quality, really — was at least a couple of levels above what I’ve seen anywhere else this season.
It’ll take Man City a few months replicating these kinds of performances before I decide they’re up there in those exalted heights.
Agreed on all but 1 of your ratings there.
Alonso indeed is way past his best, by 70th min he starts fouling & in big matches he’s just totally shot by then, age has caught up with him, loved him as a player, class act.
Have to disagree million % over Ozil.
I don’t think you watch Liga that much or have followed Silva’s & Ozil’s career that much.
Statistic of highest number of goal scoring opportunities created (some 72 i believe it was) last season in Europe, might not be enough to convince some (although i fail to see why not).
Ozil doesn’t go out in big matches as you point out.
He was played by Mourinho in last season Clasico series less than hour or so total. Not his fault.
This month’s clasico’s he showed whats he capable of with wonderful performance against Barca.
Silva is good at club level, although last season he wasn’t even a full time regular at city. Not entirely his fault either as Mancini was just silly.
Now at International stage, I hope you saw Spain’s last Italy Match.
Silva was beyond horrible, i can not describe to you in words how abysmal he was for nearly all of the match, he could not even control the ball pass it 5 years properly, no sense of space.
For Spain he’s been only occasional good as a sub late on when opposition is tired, but he’s no where near Ozil’s quality (for CLub of Country, where Ozil is undisputed)
Long post so that there is no possibility of error left,
you need to reconsider your analysis on those 2, other wise agreed on every other player.
Clichy is nowhere near as good as Marcelo,and know hes not the best defensively but he’s better than Clichy.Marcelo is twice as good going foward as well.
And for people saying Hart is better than Casillas,behave.
Mancity – Great performance, best team i have seen them put out, with maybe the weak link being zabaleta, who is hard working, but lacks the talent to really change games. I thought barry and toure look great in midfield and seem to have a great partnership, though i think relying on barry as your midfield general might not get them the title. Nasri and silva were fantastic and look both creative and a threat. Aguero dropped deep well and help link play, and looked very creative. Dzeko, even taking away his goals, was fantastic, dominating the CB’s and making sure aguero could drop deep and help the midfield out, also showed good finishing with his goals.
Spurs – Tactically were so poor, a far cry from last seasons heroics, though injuries have affected the team. To start with the full backs just couldnt deal with nasri and silva, but even more mystifying, didnt look to push forward when both were coming inside,a chance wasted. Spurs midfield was the worst though, we all know kranjcar cant play CM, and they needed someone who can break up play (injuries have affected this) but modric was poor today with his positioning, he is a seasoned professional and has played in deep midfield lots of time. He should have dropped deeper to try and intercept the balls into that space, very confusing for such a intelligent player. The wide players stayed too wide, not trying to help with possession and build up play, but more importantly werent a threat because of this. I do think crouch and van de vaart were the right choice though, good partnership and if the rest of the team had been working, would have been a threat.
How do people think spurs will do this season? I think they have a good team, but leave themselves too open to really threaten the top teams.
is it just me or is Rafa’s dream of Liverpool finally being formed in ManCity. That team sheet looks an awful lot like how Rafa want his teams to line up…and play
I’m not surprised, both managers are pretty similar tactics-wise.
Or to put it another way, much more than now resembling Barca, the new City in their more attacking mode seem to be a pricier version of both Rafa’s Valencia and the later Mata/Silva/PH (or Joaquin)/Villa front four.
I agree that Spurs’ lack of a holding midfielder was crucial to their tactical failure in this game, but even despite the injury problems that are plaguing Harry’s midfield I don’t see why Jake Livermore has been overlooked as an option – Harry was not ‘forced’ to play Modric and Kranjcar in the centre. Yes Livermore is inexperienced, but he’s a natural central midfielder who would have broken up play, sat in the gap between the back four and the rest of the midfield and screened the defence. When he came on he really made a difference, although you could argue that the game was over by then.
Hopefully the two week break will give Huddlestone a chance to get himself back to a good level of fitness, especially if Spurs don’t sign another midfielder before the window shuts!
i agree very much.
Harry was not “forced” to set up the team this way, unlike Arsene Wenger, who really had no choice..
Furthermore, I wouldn’t have played Luka Modric if he specifically said he didn’t want to. I’m not a fan of either of the mentioned teams but I think its more necessary for Harry Redknapp to apologize to the fans than Arsene Wenger.
Hi ZM, fantastic work. I’m a massive fan.
I had the misfortune to be at this game and I just wanted to share an observation that I felt you got wrong in your analysis.
Both Bale and Lennon made frequent ill-timed runs towards Crouch rather than hugging the touchlines in the first half. The Spurs midfielders and fullbacks were unable to feed the wingers and involve them in play. Indeed the few times that the wingers stayed wide Spurs looked most threatening, for example Bale’s half-volleyed cross for Crouch’s header that should have been Spurs’ equaliser and a lovely low pull back that van der Vaart spun and struck tamely.
In the second half Bale and Lennon were patently instructed to stay wide but this made Spurs even more open for City to pick apart.
Another thing that City did well was press from the front. Only Dawson or Corlula was afforded time on the ball. Of Spurs back four only Assou-Ekotto has good distribution and this stopped Spurs building attacks from the back. This was similar to what Athletic Bilbao did to Spurs in the last friendly
Interesting, thanks for the correction
If Aguero can do that to defenders, there is no tactics/formation of use.
That was FIFA-esque
That is 2 straight matches that Krancjar was useless. He was helped by the nature of the formation/squad selection this match but his play thus far has been poor. One would think that with all that is going on with Modric he would seize the opportunity but he continues to disappoint.
We all know the pressure is on Mancini but with the quality he has on the bench at his disposal we really see how tactically sound he is.
As a Chelsea supporter I am upset that Arsenal caved in and let Nasri go to City. It’s going to be a handful trying to contain the creative midfield they have now. With Nasri & Aguero dropping back you can’t mark Silva as tight or try to get physical with him. Hopefully Tezez will sabotage this new-found chemistry.
‘Hopefully Tezez will sabotage this new-found chemistry’
lol lol lol