“Things aren’t working as well as I had hoped and I’m worried.” That’s not what Andre Villas-Boas said after Spurs narrow win against Hull yesterday but that was what he meant. It’s not so much what he said about the atmosphere or the fans, it’s why it was on his mind in the first place.

Villas-Boas strikes me as someone whose understated manner and schoolteacherly demeanour hides a burning determination not merely to find success but to do it his way. I welcome that: Tottenham need a leader with fierce ambition. So it’s odd that for someone so single-minded, he’s allowed factors outside his control to intrude.

I’ve seen Spurs play a lot worse than they did yesterday but we certainly should have made much more of our superiority in terms of possession and territory. Not for the first time this season a debatable penalty gave us all three points in a match we dominated but where we failed to score from open play, make that seldom looked like scoring from open play. We’re fourth in the table with a squad that needs time to gel, yet something is bugging our manager when his sole focus should be on the team. The last thing Tottenham need is a distracted manager. After all, he has more than enough to occupy his mind.

The Machiavellian interpretation of Villas-Boas’s comments suggests it was a planned diversion away from questions about the quality of his team. Today’s headlines are all about the press-conference not the match, but I doubt it. In time-honoured media tradition he slammed” the fans and “lashed out” in a “post-match rant.” In fact, its tone was more considered:

“Today we played in a very difficult atmosphere – very tense, very negative. We looked like the away team…I think the stadium reflected that atmosphere – very tense, very little support and it made it very difficult. I’m very happy with the players and the way they fought against that anxiety and kept their cool to get the three points.”

At its best there’s no place like the Lane but the atmosphere is undeniably subdued at many home games. Yesterday was more raucous than many recently, not much singing or chanting but plenty of noise in the second half as Spurs upped the tempo to try to force a goal. There was tension in the air but that’s only because the crowd are genuinely anxious. It’s not so much that we expect a win, more that we know how important these home games against teams below us in the league are. The stakes are very high these days – when we are challenging for the top four there is bound to be anxiety in the air.

In an ideal world we would be carefree and happy-go-lucky. In real-life that anxiety leaks out. Most of the time I can keep a lid on it but our lack of application after we scored was infuriating. We gave away two unnecessary free-kicks in dangerous positions and could not keep the ball. Most of the time, though, I stick to a self-punitive approach. At one point I was so angry, I punched my hand in frustration, so hard that I have a bruise today. Others let it all out, and no wonder.

Yesterday I felt there were as many moments in the second half when the crowd tried to lift the team as there was negativity. I wonder if the manager was irritated by some impatience shown when we had possession but were going sideways. Patience is important – we had to move the ball around to break down the massed ranks of Hull defenders who dropped further and further back as the match wore on. There was one moment when Dawson was roundly barracked for passing the ball backwards but that was unreasonable on the part of the fans because he was under pressure and sensibly played it the way he was facing. We have to be patient.

Equally, some of the problem comes because Spurs fans know their football. For the last few games we have not played with a consistently high tempo. This makes it easy for teams to defend against us. We know the solution and have the players to put that into practice, so it’s frustrating when they don’t respond.

What I dislike about AVB’s statement is the oppositional position he takes up between team and fans. The team were battling Hull, not the anxiety in the stands. This is the reality of being contenders. Sadly it’s part of football culture these days. Manchester United supporters booed their team off the field at half-time on Saturday, Arsenal fans were apoplectic after their first home game (wonder how the guy who threw away his season ticket is feeling now?) and for many Chelsea fans last season represented abject failure.

However, regardless of this, Spurs were not playing well and they should look at their own shortcomings rather than those of the supporters if they wish to solve the problem. We put a lot into the club and chant AVB’s name. I hope he’s not creating an ‘everyone is against us’ mindset in the dressing room. Later he added that, “I represent the group and I’m speaking for them. This [anxiety] is a feeling that invades us in games like this.”

Still, hardly a rant of negativity as he went on: “I’m extremely happy with the crowd normally. Fans for me represent the essence of football. To put myself in this position is very difficult for me. The away support has been immense but the reality is we have managed to beat the record of away wins because we play comfortably away from home – we don’t find situations of pressure.”

Far be it from me to suggest the media have made too much of this. But to return to my question, if the crowd have been good normally, why did it get to him yesterday? AVB knows something is not quite right, which comes back to one of my recent themes about not knowing his best team. Our team does well away from home not primarily because of the support but because we are well placed to profit from counter-attacking. Yesterday it was no coincidence that our three best first half attacks were all on the break after a Hull set-piece.

The other reason is that teams do not put ten men behind the ball at home. As I predicted, the West Ham performance has become a template for how to play against us. We still lack the wherewithal to prise open a packed defence. Two things from yesterday. Much as I love seeing a winger in full flight, two wingers means we have width but no one in the middle to give the ball to, or with the inverted wingers, they come inside and are gobbled up by opponents grateful that they are not being torn apart out wide. Also, however quick they are, wingers aren’t as fast as the speed of a moving ball being passed at speed. When defenders are packed deep, it’s easier for them to recover when faced with a man running with the ball.

Connected with this, yesterday we were trying one-twos through the eye of a needle. None came off. It’s more than one or two men, we failed to involve three, four or more men in the moves. Contrast that with Liverpool and Arsenal who at their best involve several players with purposeful movement at pace off the ball.

Spurs have put in more shots on goal than almost any other side but have a low percentage of chances and converted chances. Soldado missed our only genuine chance in the box, shooting tamely for Harper to save. We have to get the ball in the box more often and have more players to compete there. Pointless having Eriksen or Holtby as the number 10 if there is no one to pass to.

Time. Time and patience. Time and patience to find a good blend and the right balance. We are fourth with another clean sheet so that’s a good place to be even knowing that it could be better. In that respect, it’s something the crowd, the players and the manager should have in common.

That Erik Lamela, seems like a nice boychick. Needs to fill out a bit but a lovely touch, easy on the eye with the ball at his feet and a flowing stride that whets the appetite. More please, but I’m not sure when, not in the League at least.

So how about our Andros then? Our policy of loaning out young players to gain experience has paid dividends, although using England as our feeder club is a little cheeky. Hearty congratulations to him on two fine, eye-catching performances for the national side. Particularly impressive was the way he mixed it up, going outside to cross right-footed as well as cutting in, knocking the ball short to keep possession if he could not make any headway (rather than trying a futile dribble) and his link-up play with Rooney and others up front.

I don’t want to rain on his parade or pee on his bonfire when I add that for us, it’s not worked as well. Against West Ham he ran into brick walls and blind alleys, unwilling or unable to go wide and cross with his right foot, while Chelsea turned the match in their favour by targeting our right-hand side. In the end, Townsend was substituted.

It’s stating the bleedin’ obvious to say that the Premier League is different. Lamela and Townsend have different styles and are at different stages of their development but both face the same issue. They have little to space in which to operate and any defensive shortcomings will be ruthlessly exploited. Also, the Wham game will become a template for how to play against us.

As Villas-Boas struggles to create the best blend from the riches at his disposal, he has to get that balance right, not just for these two young men but for the team as a whole. More bleedin’ obvious: the side needs time to bed in. It takes a while before players can settle. Most of the new signings are young, although Eriksen and Lamela have already played for years outside their home countries. The singular demands of the Premier League are by no means insurmountable but they exert considerable physical and mental pressure. Add to that the fact that Villas-Boas has yet to decide his best side and the question becomes not whether they need time but how much time is reasonable?

Hardly part of the Spurs pantheon but Steve Hodge always sticks in my mind. Signed from Forest, he made an immediate impact when he arrived only to fade into obscurity as his influence dwindled away to nothing. I mention this only because his experience was unusual. The vast majority of players give of their best after many months or typically in their second year. I’m including most of the best here: Ardiles, Mabbutt, Waddle, Sheringham, Bale. Not everyone fits the bill – Gough and Lineker hit the ground running – but although it is an obvious point, it tends to get lost in these days of media hype and inflated expectation. Players need time and fans need to be patient.

So maybe a year is reasonable, not to peak but to significantly raise the level of influence a player has. We probably haven’t got that but our buying policy is based around playing the long game, with developing talent able to take us to the level of contenders but, crucially, with room to improve still further. Holtby, Lamela, Paulinho, Sandro, Chadli, Eriksen, these are the imports who fit the bill, with Townsend and Rose as home-grown talent. Lloris, Dembele and Vertonghen have their best years ahead of them.

Sounds good but there is frustration in store. The media will severely scrutinise any weakness as a sign of failure. Having built us up to title contenders after our good start to the season, anything less than that will be deemed by them as failure. The narrative has been created even though it was false in the first place – I would be amazed if we got near the league title this year.

The issue for supporters is different. For us, we can see the potential and desperately want the success we crave after so many years of loyalty and unfulfilled dreams. It’s the what-might-be that gets us, every time and there is so much to look forward to here.

So what to do? In this next phase of the season, Villas-Boas has to let loose the skill and creativity he has invested in. I follow the tactics discussions a little and like to think I can grasp most of it. Basically however, in the Premier League you need to get enough players back to defend and enough to get forward. Easy, huh? You need quick, flexible and versatile players. Check – we have that in abundance. The formation itself is less significant than players having an awareness what’s going on around them, to know when to get forward and when to hold back. Check – we should be able to do that.

Back to Lamela and Townsend – either they (and Chadli, Siggy or Lennon) learn to work harder and track back or you sort out the rest of the team to give them some cover. We have played most of the season in a 4-2-3-1 with one of the DMs getting forward to support an attack if there is room, the wide players in the three cutting in and width coming from the full-backs. Who would have thought the return of Danny Rose would ever be so anticipated? One of the key elements of our balance disappears without him.

At home I’m inclined to have one DM to enable another in a further advanced position to ensure we dominate that area and support Soldado in the box. Attacking full-backs should be extras – they can join the attack later, the second phase so to speak, or break from deep on the counter with others staying back to cover. With their first thought a defensive one, hanging back gives the midfield more freedom to get forward. Siggy has done well but I would give others a go. Holtby in particular looks raring to go. Townsend will have more freedom and Lennon is waiting in the wings. Soldado needs crosses – I think he tends too far towards the near post and should remain more central in the box. This positioning is even more important if we have left-footers on the right and right-footers on the left. The near post is less profitable for strikers in this set-up as crosses curl to the back post or the centre.

At centre-back, Kaboul’s absence worries me. if fit, he should replace Dawson. In reality, I am worried that he will never recover his pace and strength that was so formidable. Chiriches needs game time, and the upcoming round of the Europa League and League Cup is perfect. We must rotate. So far playing a strong team has put us in a good position and allowed the team to play together. Before Christmas, many need a rest.

So far this season Spurs have been all feline grace and power, leaving the fans purring with delight. Yesterday all we could do was retch and heave, coughing up a giant spittle-ridden fur-ball that covered north London. We were heavily defeated and deserved it.

The Hammers completely dominated this match, not in terms of possession or territory – they were pinned back in their own half for extended periods – but the manner in which their tactics dictated the game’s shape and pattern. Spurs spent 90 minutes trying to catch up. Like some sadistic episode of the Crystal Maze, the boleyn boys set us a series of puzzles to which we could never find the answer.

Big Sam is fond of his equally large centre forwards. Poor man, he’s never quite got over the fact that Kevin Davies has got older as the years passed. As the Hammers struggle for form and goals, I swear he wakes at night in a cold sweat screaming, ‘Just give it to Kevin…’ before sheepishly realising he’s had to make do with Carlton Cole. Maybe he’s discovered the way out of this recurring nightmare. How about passing the ball? Worked a treat yesterday. Bereft of centre forwards, he packed his midfield and told the front men, or rather the least defensively minded midfielders, to close down in our half. We couldn’t play out from the back and could never settle on the ball. They seldom allowed Vertonghen to hold the ball so it ended up at Dawson’s feet, which in turn meant it was only a matter of time before they got the ball back again.

Elsewhere they closed down ferociously and funnelled our wide men into the middle where they were gobbled up by hungry defenders. We spent most of the time trying to thread the ball through non-existent gaps before giving up the ghost and just cut out the middle man by passing it directly to them. Eleven men back within 35 yards of goal is hard enough to overcome even on a good day, which this most certainly wasn’t. However, the hammers made it more difficult by playing the ball out of defence and then in the second half becoming increasingly adept on the counter. They certainly have a better grasp of the offside law than the Chel**a players demonstrated last week.

From Spurs’ perspective, this performance was devoid of any redeeming features. Lloris did all he could, Dembele was the best of the outfield players, a dubious honour, and Townsend at least occasionally took the game to our opponents although without end-product. Tottenham are a work in progress and there will be bad days. As I said recently, the surprise has been how well the squad has settled down. What concerns me most is how easily we forgot the lessons that apparently we have learned so far. They showed little movement and less patience. To break down defences like this, you have to move them around, stretch them with a bit of width and break that up with some direct running. Against Cardiff we scored in the last minute with our 29th goal attempt, yesterday we ran out of ideas or invention well before half-time.

Also, a few of the niggles that had been around, things that needed more work, became ruthlessly exposed as major faults. In response to the pressure, Villas-Boas rightly pushed up another midfielder but it should have been Dembele not Paulinho. I understand why the manager wants some passing from the back and the Moose did well enough but his shooting, ability to pick out a pass and above all his strength with the ball at his feet surely could have been better employed around the edge of the W Ham box.

There was no leadership or direction. Eriksen, lofty and aloof, played the game at his pace, oblivious of the fact that the game left him way behind. Sigurdsson and Townsend provided little width. Siggy failed to take up dangerous positions in the box to support lone striker Defoe while Townsend’s reluctance to cross with his right foot meant he was running inside and across the back four, where he was less dangerous. We get width from our full-backs. The lacklustre Walker did not exploit the space out wide while Naughton, a right-footer, also comes inside by instinct.

At the back, Dawson was exposed on three occasions, two around the half-way line and was furiously backpedalling for Morrison’s third but although every goal links to a greater or lesser extent to defensive failure, this blog will stick by its rule and praise good play when it happens. It was a shame the talented but dissolute Morrison should come good against us but that was a fine goal, weaving into the space left by Vertonghen as he rightly tried to do something different further up the pitch.

After a dull first half, we upped the tempo at the start of the second. This was our best spell, but when the chance came, Defoe, one on one, failed to lift the ball over the keeper’s legs. One further chance was cleanly hit and well-saved but straight at the keeper. And that was that. A corner at the other end, not for the first time in his Spurs career Vertonghen was drawn underneath a set-piece cross and Reid headed goalward. The ball rebounded to him from a team-mate and he slotted home. Then Lloris saved Vaz Te’s shot but the rebound hit the W Ham man as he fell. He knew little about it but in it went as Hugo threw his hands heavenwards. Morrison finished it off.

Good fortune in the first two goals – MOTD replay also showed Vertonghen being pushed in the back as he leapt, two hands but not picked up on in the analysis because it did not fit the chosen MOTD  narrative of tough West Ham – but a win that was completely and utterly deserved. Time for reflection during the international break but I suspect AVB would like play again tomorrow, just to get this out of our system.

If Sandro is fit, he has to return to offer much-need strength and drive in centre midfield. Rose could find his prospects improved by his absence – there’s been nothing down that left. Of the rest, Soldado, Paulinho and Eriksen need more time to get used to what’s being asked of them. I would rotate the squad for at least three cup games – some are being overplayed. The biggest question is this: Villas-Boas does not yet know his best eleven. He thought he did and he’s allowed this side time to gel, but the balance is not right yet. Plenty of time to ponder in the next fortnight.

The Y word debate overshadowed the build-up to this game. Fans responded in typical fashion – they ignored everything and did what they wanted. Plenty of chants with the Y word, although I can’t vouch for the suggestion that 10,000 voices shouted, “Pid” or “Mid” in unison. I could not hear any abuse from the opposition, although I read some reports of this on twitter and I’m not sure that the chant of ‘Paulo Di Canio’ late on was purely a vote of sympathy for the ex-Sunderland manager.

I’ve written about this before and so I’ve not repeated myself recently. I am probably in a minority of one as a Spurs fan who takes Baddiel seriously, it’s just that I don’t agree with him. I was around in the mid/late seventies when Spurs fans embraced the abuse they received in most away grounds and thus neutralised the hate. As a jew myself I understand better than most just how complex an issue this is. Instinctively I never use the word – not a thought-out position, I merely noticed last season that I’ve never used it to describe myself as a Spurs fan. Context is everything and in our hands it is not a term of abuse.