Tottenham Hotspur manager Andre Villas-Boas has carried himself well since taking over at Spurs at the beginning of last season, his earnest, temperate behaviour earning the respect of supporters and the football community alike. No doubt he still bears the scars of a media mauling while he was at Chelsea but he’s hidden them well, preferring to get on with his job and ensuring that attention remains on his team rather than on his merits as an individual.

Until now that is. The headlines after our last two matches have all been about the manager. After a squeaky win over Hull, he blamed the poor performance on the home crowd for allowing their anxiety to transmit through to the players. Yesterday he railed against anyone prepared to denounce the decision to keep Hugo Lloris on the field last Sunday after he inadvertently head-butted Lukaku’s knee. It’s a sudden and marked change in his approach. He’s come out to battle but the problem is, I’m not sure who he is fighting and frankly, whether AVB himself knows the answer.

After the Hull match, my concern was not so much what he said about the fans but more why someone so singleminded had allowed something beyond his control to intrude upon his decision-taking and distract from his focus on the team. This was nothing compared with his sustained, aggressive rebuttal of widespread accusations of negligence over the Lloris incident. The Frenchman took a heavy blow to the head and appeared dazed and disoriented for several minutes. Any player who is concussed or appears to be concussed should receive treatment and not carry on. This is the case in other contact sports like rugby or American football.

Villas-Boas was having none of it. Described as ‘angry’ in most papers, Villas-Boas was adamant that he stood by his decision to allow our brave keeper to play on. “I have registered the fact that a couple of people have taken this opportunity to find the chance to get themselves publicised. They have no experience on the pitch whatever in these situations.”

More than mere commenting on a controversial decision, Villas-Boas upped the stakes by suggesting people are using him and the club to criticise and make something of their own position. presumably he means the media or pundits. He denied that he takes this personally, saying enigmatically that, “After my Chelsea experience I took a vaccine that makes me immune to a couple of things.” He must be referring to the media here, yet has chosen to add remarks to his discussion of the incident itself that amount to an attack on that media, or at least sections of it. It’s clearly got under his skin. I hope my flu-jab is more effective than that vaccine.

The Lloris incident is a classic example of the clash between the old values of gutsy football hardmen, playing on regardless (think blooded bandaged Terry Butcher) and the modern application of science, where sports medicine has moved on from smelling salts and a cold sponge. There’s not a Spurs fan reading this who could deny admiring Lloris hugely for carrying on, and the same can be said for Townsend after his tumble into the stands the Sunday before. It showed committment and emotional investment in the club. Unfortunately, his bravery could have put his long-term health at risk and the decision was not his to make.

If Villas-Boas is searching for an issue where he wants to take a stand, this was a poor choice. Eminent experts in sports medicine queued up to explain the risks and condemn the decision. His denial of the value of comparisons with other incidents leaves him flailing wildly, his adversaries the best people in the medical field, not the media.

He’s also inconsistent regarding the key attribute of a good leader, accountability. On TV it looked clear that Spurs’ medics wanted him to come off. After the game, AVB implied he had overruled them, whereas yesterday he still took ultimate responsiblity for the decision but added that the doctors agreed.

We will never know the full truth but it is a shame, as AVB pointed out, that the team who saved the life of Fabrice Muamba are now under fire.

It’s hard to recall now the way sections of the tabloid media gleefully lined up to wait for what they saw as Villas-Boas’ imminent and inevitable downfall. His appointment was derided. Couldn’t handle the big boys of the Premier League. This coaching dossiers malarkey counted for nothing. Reports of disruption in the camp. Lloris was unhappy because he was not in the team. Now look at him – just one example of how Villas-Boas proved them wrong. So why start having a go now?

Perhaps he has had enough. Feeling secure, it’s time to fight back. Connected with this, it could also be that he is adopting the favourite managerial ploy of creating an ‘us against the world’ mood in the squad. We’re under bombardment, everyone is against us so we will stay strong. If this is the case, his public comments over the fans and the Lloris incident were in fact intended more for the private consumption of the team.

It’s perfectly possible that he believes this is a worthy cause, that he is defending his honour and that of the medical staff. He undoubtedly feels aggrieved but if that were the whole story, I suspect he would not have gone on the offensive against mysterious forces of evil with such determination.

I’m left to conclude that this is an outburst of underlying anxiety about the current situation at Spurs that he has projected onto other events. We all know in life that when people lose their rag, often the incident that provoked it was not in proportion to the level of expressed anger and irritation. It’s the tip of the iceberg, a trigger for deeper meanings.

Our Andre knows things are not going as well as he hoped. For the first time, attention is turning to the way he has set his team up. His chosen tactics and personnel do not enable us to score goals. He is more ambitious than any of us, a burning, overwhelming desire to prove himself through his methods and his team, to receive validation through the medium of his side. While many of us are counselling patience, AVB is rattled.

He has plenty of options and it’s wrong to characterise him as rigid in his thinking. However, he needs to keep his mind firmly on the job. Having a rattled manager is not good for the club. Never mind the crowd, it’s his anxiety transmitting itself to the players that we should be concerned about. Frankly he’s not handled this well. Going public is not helping Andre Villas-Boas and not helping the team.

I didn’t get to see my old yiddisher aunt very often but when I did, at some point in the conversation she always gave me the same advice. “Boychick, listen to an old woman. You need a good basis in life. Make sure you have a good basis.”

Turns out basis could mean, well, anything she wanted it to mean. If I should be a doctor, lawyer or accountant, so much the better but get a job that made money and lasted a lifetime. Qualifications, a very good basis. A good woman, and steer clear of shikses. Or a couple of lamb chops in the freezer, just in case.

Sound advice, though, that’s stood me in good stead and applicable in any situation, although I confess I’ve not followed it too closely. Social worker – feh! What’s with those people? I guess the footballing equivalent is an uncompromising defence. Can’t do without it. No point having these fancy-dan flighty forwards, as I’m sure auntie would have said if she didn’t reject football as a worthwhile activity so comprehensively, if you let them in at the other end.

Spurs have conceded one goal in five away league games, five all season and three of those in one match. So why kvetsch? Surely everything is just fine, the perfect basis in fact for a great season. Tottenham Hotspur not giving goals away. Hard to believe and hard to believe there’s a ‘but’ floating around here somewhere. I don’t know which is more bizarre. A good point away from home but the prospect of more still tantalises.

Yesterday’s first half against was the season so far in microcosm. By far the superior side, we failed to score, our fluent, neat approach play producing a few chances and a few more shots from range but no goals. It’s a good season so far but it won’t get better until we turn dominance into chances and chances into goals.

I won’t dwell on problems that have come to rule recent match reports. Playing two inverted wingers creates more bother than they are worth. We’re lucky to have two wide men as good as Lennon and Townsend – I like them both. However, their pace and ability to cut to the byline or into the box is largely nullified when they come inside. As they cut across, they slow down. If they pass, it’s more likely to be sideways not forwards, and usually they face a packed defence relieved to find safety in numbers rather than being isolated and exposed out wide. I’d willingly trade a couple of long-range pearlers for a ready supply of crosses or through-balls.

TV and the feeling that actually we weren’t going to concede every time the ball went into our half gave me the luxury of studying Soldado’s movement off the ball. As the wingers get the ball, he moves into space but then often stops as he watches them wriggle across the box. He doesn’t know what to expect or where to go. He likes to meet the ball in front of him and slide off the defender’s shoulder into the channels. In fact, everyone stops. The momentum that kept Everton on the back foot for the first 30 minutes disappeared each time.

The same thing happened to Spurs when Ginola played, which is why I’ll never put him up there in my modern Spurs greats. All eyes on him, the reality is that he often slowed everything down. If he didn’t know what he was going to do, then his team-mates certainly didn’t. Pass and move – it shifts the ball quickly and draws defenders out of position.

Soldado needs help in the box. Lennon and Townsend are not the best players for that. Twice Lenny got the ball in the box on his left foot, once to cross from near the byline, once to shot. Both times he turned inwards to get the ball on his right foot, both times the opportunity was lost.

Bobby the soldier did not have a good one. He missed the two opportunities, neither straightforward, that came his way and could not keep hold of the ball. More worryingly, at times he followed the poor example of his team-mates by hanging back when he should have been bombing towards the 6 yard box at full pelt. Too many of the forwards opted for the comfort zone at the edge of the box. Too many providers, not enough finishers. Siggy made a noticeable difference towards the end, lifting the whole side who had appeared weary until his arrival.

Sandro efficiently protected the back four where Daws and Chiriches handled Lukaku well enough. Vertonghen had a good game, undeniably, but odd what the commentators see. Provan gave him man of the match saying he hadn’t put a foot wrong, but just before he was way out of position when the Everton sub waltzed his way through the defence only for Lloris, ever alert, to deal with it. Also, he could have lost the match with a missed tackle on Coleman that looked as sure a penalty as the same player’s foul on the Belgian in the first half. Still, he and Walker linked well with the wingers, which is the way to go and should have brought more reward in the first half.

Back to the penalties: one each but ours was more crucial. A goal up when we were playing so well but struggling to score could have altered the course of the whole match. However, the game was poorly refereed throughout.

Lloris proved he has the head of a battering ram and the heart of a lion, refusing to come off when Lukaku accidentally crashed his knee into the Frenchman’s head. For the second week running, the spirit and motivation of the squad was demonstrated by players refusing to quit after an injury. It was the first time I’ve seen player and club doctor arguing over whether to stay or leave the field. Hugo has gone up even more in my estimation – he was fearless and impeccable after the bump – but he should have gone off and AVB should not have given him the option.

As an aside linked to my last piece about the crowd and impatience, note that the Everton fans were straight on to their players when they missed two easy passes with less than ten minutes gone.

This is all becoming a bit samey. Patience is still the watchword but I need a change and so does Villas-Boas.

All in all, not a bad week for Tottenham Hotspur. Sunday’s win, squeaky and muddled though it was, left Spurs fourth in the league, only 3 points behind an Arsenal side playing the best football of the Premier League season. The following Wednesday we staggered through into the League Cup quarter finals, on penalties but we’re there. Players on the edge of the side, either through injury such as Kaboul, or because like Kane and Lamela they are not quite ready, are getting game time.

Despite this, the debate around the club this week has been about what’s gone on in the stands, not on the pitch. Read the papers or spend any time at all on social media and you would discover a different narrative. The manager has been critical of the crowd, blaming our anxiety and negativity for below par home performances. On social media, there has been a level not merely of frustration at the quality of some of our football but a disproportionate outpouring of anger.

For some time now, the atmosphere at White Hart Lane for an average game has lacked intensity. For periods in some games, it’s been more like Lord’s or the Oval rather than a football ground, the players going about their business to a background of a thousand murmured conversations. This isn’t unique to Spurs. Old-time Chelsea, Arsenal and Manchester United fans ruefully say the same things. This week Arshavin endeared himself still further to the gunners by ripping into the supporters: the “atmosphere at the Emirates were [sic] mostly weird. It felt like the crowd was there to see at the theatre.”

There are many reasons for this unwelcome phenomenon. No single explanation predominates but all are linked to the distorted priorities of the Premier League and the Champions League. High prices exclude large sections of a population hard pressed to justify the vast expense of watching Premier League football as living standards continue to fall. Those who do attend are treated poorly by the clubs who genuflect before the twin false idols of profit and Sky TV.

These and other factors have created a sense of alienation amongst fans who experience a growing distance between themselves and the team they support. This is more than just whinging or not turning up at matches. Under demands for entertainment and success lie deep emotional attachments that last a lifetime. Caring about this bloody club is by far the most prolonged relationship I have ever had and forms the only consistent thread from boyhood to man. I am an only child, my parents died many years ago, I have divorced and have no connection with the area where I was born and brought up. Yet since I was five years old, I am Spurs. Since I was 10, I go to Spurs. It’s not about football, it’s about identity.

Alienation is something to feel. It affects our attitudes and behaviour but it’s not tangible. We can’t touch it, often we can’t even identify it. It goes by other names, like anger, frustration, despondency, resignation, but it is very real. Mostly it co-exists alongside the joys of being a supporter – the unsurpassable highs of winning the big matches, the friendship, being part of something. It’s a sort of cognitive dissonance, holding two apparently contradictory ideas at the same time. I know the problems, feel the change in the Tottenham air but remain endlessly fascinated by the game and this club. When I sing Tottenham til I die, I mean it, and so do most of you reading this.

Yet alienation lingers. Once established, it’s hard, impossible probably, for it to disappear completely. Some socialist theorists would say it is an intrinsic element of social relations under capitalism. That’s how difficult it is to shake. Most of the time it stays dormant, occasionally bursting through the thin core that keeps it under control. Like a volcano, when it erupts, it causes damage that makes permanent changes to the landscape.

That’s our week at Tottenham. Muddling through twice against Hull would have in any other week generated moans and groans. Villas-Boas’s comments caused the red-hot magma of frustration to force its way to the surface and become something more solid. In themselves they were reasonably mild, as I said in my last blog. My problem was that it indicated his mind was on the crowd when it should have been completely focussed on his team and getting them to play better.

In context, they were a tremor rather than a quake but enough to crack the surface. Sitting in the car on the way home, stuck in a jam and going the wrong way because of the changes to the road layout in Tottenham, they did not go down at all well with the Fisher family. Elsewhere, people let loose volleys of sour, bilious bitterness that have reverberated all week.

I understand where it comes from. The club have brought much of it on themselves and I have little empathy with the PLC. However, it was all a bit much. All week I have been reading about how AVB should go because of results and because of the way we are playing. I’ve seen how this is the most boring Spurs team for many years, how it used to be different under Harry Redknapp, how money has been wasted.

And this is what I don’t get. Frustrated at poor performances, yes. Knowing we could do better, I’m with you. Concerns about the way the manager has set up the team with the inverted wingers, it’s all here on Tottenham On My Mind. But it is crazy and wrong to describe this team as boring or as one fan said, ‘the worst Spurs team in memory.” Presumably this was written by a goldfish, because so help me Billy Nick I’ve seen some trash in my time, and I’m talking about sides that stayed comfortably in the top division.

Redknapp indulged us in some glorious attacking football. I lapped it up, but tucked away in my memory are some awful efforts where, guess what, we did not perform to the best of our ability, were not set up properly and made worse sides than us look good. Norwich, Blackpool twice, Stoke, Wigan. It’s not even factually correct. Regular readers know I’m not one for stats but I also read this week that Spurs have the highest number of shots, average possession and percentage touches in the opponent’s third than any other Premier League team this season. We have also conceded very few goals but this is hardly the description of a defensive team.

At the risk of repeating myself, I am not saying everything in the garden is as sweet as a Hoddle chip or a Chivers piledriver. We have an undoubted problem with where those final third passes are going – not to a Spurs player – and the midfield blend is a work in progress. Check my consistency if you like. That’s the thing about writing a blog, it’s all here. I’ve not changed my story after this week. It’s a new squad. Even the players who have been around for a while are surprising us with new form that can’t be ignored. Townsend, Holtby, Siggy and on Thursday Kane have all forced themselves into the reckoning. Lamela is just 21 and a long way from home. Eriksen – 21. There are others. The season has barely begun. We are fourth.

Patience is a virtue but is in short supply in a climate of alienation. This creates the underlying tension and impatience. It skews time and space more effectively than an episode of Dr Who. Perspectives are twisted out of shape, rationality distorted, although that’s never been the core of being a football fan. There’s a danger of losing our bearings.

It worries me that we are in danger of becoming like many (but not all) of the supporters of Chelsea, Arsenal and United. Their Old-timers get it but a generation has grown up used to success. In turn, this creates a sense of entitlement where the team performs for them, success is the norm and anything less than perfection is not acceptable. My end of season blog last time mentioned three Chelsea fans who called 606 as I drove home from Spurs. One slated Benitez because they were ‘only’ third and won the Europa League, a second said this was down to the players who organised themselves in spite of the manager and a third proudly declared he refused to go to Chelsea until Benitez left because a man of his stature wasn’t good enough for his team.

Spurs fans aren’t like that, or so I thought. However, reading the social media this week made me question that. Underlying a substantial section of the criticism of the team and the manager is that same sense of entitlement and inflated expectation. I know we expect something back from the side because we spend a small fortune watching them, but I don’t want us to become like them.

In this month’s When Saturday Comes, I’ve written a short article about the Y word. In it is a moment’s conjecture about what it means to be a Spurs fan. I reckon the use of the Y word has increased because Spurs supporters want to mark our distinct identity in a way that partly is a nod to our history and partly as a response to the taunts from our more successful neighbours. We’ve stayed in N17. We are loyal, not gloryhunters. Being Spurs is something profound, its not fly by night affection. The Y word began as unwarranted abuse from rival fans. We are still being abused and also ridiculed by fans of other clubs with more recent triumphs.

We are different. We recognise our heritage and what happened before the Premier League. I don’t want that to change and we should be very careful, because alienation does not mean we have to be like all the rest.

Next week, a companion piece to this and a review of Martin Cloake’s e-book about the recent history of Spurs supporters, The Sound of the Crowd.