Question: Which team play more attacking football, aston villa or spurs?

(Posted by: . on 2010-02-05 23:09:34)

Posted by: Superior Quality 85â„¢ (PTSF) on 2010-02-06, 01:23:51

Tottenham, I like their footballing, more offensive than defensive at times

Posted by: © paul d ~ LFC ~ on 2010-02-05, 23:16:10

Spurs definitely. on top of their game they are as good as arsenal and barcelona to watch :) aston villa are a good side but they are not as attack minded as spurs would be :)

Posted by: jyoti on 2010-02-06, 02:03:06

That's a very good question. On paper, Spurs seems to be more attacking side with Lennon at the right. But they don't really have a recognised left midfield player. And they have a great strike force with Defoe and Crouch. But Aston Villa has a better balanced attacking line up. With Agbonlahor, Downing and Young at the wings, they have more potent attack. Even though I like Spurs forward line, I really think Aston Villa are the better attacking side.

Posted by: 4ever & Always ♥ on 2010-02-06, 02:29:36

Spurs...and all the stats show as well Spurs cant defend for their lives

Posted by: JoDee69 on 2010-02-06, 03:04:51

Spurs, no question. Their play is usually based on getting the ball on the floor and pressing further up the pitch with quick passing and movement. Villa seem to base their play on defending very well and inviting pressure onto them, before breaking with speed through Young, Agbonlahor, Milner etc. That's not to say they can't play some proper attacking football, but they tend to be a much more counter-attacking team, which automatically incorporates a more defensive-style approach than Spurs.

Posted by: manchester united 4 life$£££ on 2010-02-06, 04:18:28

Aston villa spurs play is a bit rigid and predictible and villa are playing the best they ever have in this century and im a manchester united dude