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.

“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.

If I were you Andros my friend, I’d pop down the bookies and bet on every 100-1 shot, buy a lottery ticket (you’ll only need one) and nip into the casino on the way home. When you’re hot, you’re hot and Andros my boy, you are currently smoking. If Townsend ever again has a couple of weeks anywhere near as good, we Spurs fans are in for a treat. A sensation for England and yesterday the crucial opening goal, a cross rather than a shot at that. Give Scarlett or Mila a bell when you have a moment, it can’t go wrong.

Spurs deserved this win against Aston Villa without ever reaching top form. After a frantic opening, the game settled into a flat, monotonous pattern, all effort but little guile or inspiration. Just as our performance was in danger of spiralling down the plughole, Townsend’s goal lifted the spirits and crucially the tempo. From then on, Spurs stayed on top save for the period around the hour when Villa talisman Benteke came on. The earth shook and defenders’ nerves trembled as he leapt then fell to the ground, vainly trying to convert a series of dangerous crosses. Narrowly wide on a couple of occasions, the ball went safely by the woodwork and that was essentially that. Spurs’ second, delightfully set up by Holtby and Paulinho, finished by Soldado in style, may have been a rare instance of incisive creativity but it put us out of sight. Again it came at just the right moment, effectively extinguishing hopes of a home revival. From then until the final whistle, the momentum stayed with Spurs.

Townsend won the man of the match award. Undeniably he played well, contributing throughout and running rampant in the last 15 minutes when he had more space as Villa pushed forward in search of a goal. However, our Brazilian central midfield (I can’t believe I’ve written that about a Spurs side, think I’ll type it again), our Brazilian midfield made a telling contribution to victory. Sandro was the unobtrusive powerhouse, loping across in front of the back four to sweep up the danger and provide a platform for our more creative players. Paulinho was industry and application from first until last. He was always available for his team-mates, made a series of telling runs into the box (missing a great headed chance from close in to make it three near the end) and his energy kept the ball moving when Spurs were in danger of falling into the torpor of a slumbering first half.

Last night on twitter Townsend modestly said his award should rightfully be Sandro’s, a rare and interesting insight into the mind of the professional who knows that the dribbles and runs are not possible without foundations of graft and effort, without someone to get the ball back when it has been lost. It was heartening to see the Brazilian’s return. He looked fully fit and determined to play both for a win and for his place in the side. It’s something I advocated in last week’s blog and so it proved. Paulinho began the game alongside him but was able to get further forward as the match settled into a pattern. In the second half in particular he supported Soldado as well as asserting his authority in midfield. This central axis proved decisive yesterday: it has to be the way forward.

After a busy first few minutes, Spurs allowed the tempo to fall and with it the standard of performance. We have to shift the ball around quickly to be at our most effective. Agbonlahor missed early on then Villa posed few dangers. Spurs were lacklustre, giving the ball away too easily and clumsy in our distribution from the back with our opponents’ main efforts coming from our mistakes.

Then Townsend’s goal, an inswinging left-footed cross that Soldado and Holtby both missed at the near post but occupying keeper Guzan’s attention so the ball floated in at the far. It was fortunate in some ways but the quality of the ball created that indecision and the sight of two Spurs players attacking the ball in the box augers well for the future.

Soldado’s goal, his first in the league from open play, was a beauty, calmly converting a well-worked set-up. With the ball at his feet in the box, in a trice he was a player transformed. Upright, calm, in control of the ball and everything around him, it was a moment of high class finishing. He’s busy up front, not a target man but the target for crosses and balls into channels. He waits, that’s what he does, and so we have to be patient and give him the ball in those areas. He can do the rest.

Holtby did well, staying involved and he has both the eye for an angled pass into channels and a left foot to deliver. He deserves a run in the side. While it was good to see Chiriches make his debut, Vertonghen left too many openings in the second half and did not have a strong match. he needs a rest on Thursday. Daws was involved in a couple of shaky moments but won his share of challenges. Pleased to see Lennon scampering enthusiastically onto the field like a puppy out for his first walk.

Overall, a win we earned and, glancing back at last week’s piece, some early signs that Villas-Boas understands more about what might constitute his best side.