Putting any personal sentiment towards West Ham aside, Tottenham and their supporters shouldn't get too disgruntled or disillusioned by Sunday's 0-3 defeat.

It was sobering, healthy and a good thing (as perverse as that sounds), and hardly a cause for panic.

It's important to remember that this Tottenham team is a very new one, and although they have found a superb rhythm and understanding with each other already this season, they must learn to lose as a group as well as win as one.

All the top sides have already had their sobering defeats. Arsenal had theirs on the first day of the season when they were humiliated at home by Aston Villa, and since they have refused to be spanked again so easily. It had an immediate galvanising affect on them and it's no coincidence they subsequently sit top of the table.

Chelsea perhaps had theirs away at Everton but, moreover, the defeat at home to Basel in the Champions League – a team Spurs came up against in the Europa League last season –  was their real 90 minutes of shame.

Manchester City haven't lost at home in the league yet, although they were ransacked by Bayern Munich in the Champions League, but they too have suffered stomach-cramping losses at newly promoted Cardiff and Aston Villa – both places Tottenham have been to and won this season.

Manchester United have toiled even more, losing away at Liverpool and Manchester City, and they were shockingly beaten at home by West Brom. Come on, we've all been watching the Premier League for long enough now; any team can lose to any other, at any ground, no matter how much one side may dominate the other.

Football is almost completely based on psychology, and the psycholical momentum that can shift to and fro between opposing sides during a game. Tottenham dominated West Ham but were hit ruthlessly three times on the break, with each one dealing more cerebral damage than the last. The first sapped Spurs of an already precarious belief that they would score, and injected it into Sam Allardyce's players. The second and third goals only did the same in increasing volumes.

Tottenham lost because they failed to take one or more of the very limited number of chances they made and the effort Jermain Defoe sent into the sprawling legs of Jussi Jaaskelainen in the second half was pivotal. If he'd have scored, the momentum would have continued in Tottenham's favour. As it was, the miss forced Spurs to push harder, and higher up the pitch, allowing certain defenders - or a certain defender - to be caught out for West Ham's first goal. 

Spurs supporters may now fear a number of upcoming games against weaker sides at home in which they will continue to suffer against a Low Block, and ultimately fail to score. But being this presumptuous disregards the team's ability to learn. And they will learn - Andre Villas-Boas will make sure of that.

The only serious question marks from Sunday's defeat surround three players; Defoe, Roberto Soldado and Kyle Walker.

If Soldado had been thrust into the situation in which Defoe missed, would he have scored? The Spaniard has rarely found himself in such a clear goalscoring position yet this season, but when he has he has also found the goalkeeper or found supporters behind the goal. Should Defoe have played? Given his scoring record in other competitions, yes he should. Why didn't he score that chance? Perhaps the pressure of having to win a place in the Premier League starting eleven caused some affliction in his mind.

The other doubt surrounds Walker. It is becoming increasingly clear that the England right-back's focus is unreliable. His decision making has been questionable for a long time, despite his work-rate and obvious technical skill, and he has often been sloppy with his passing and slow to react to breaking opponents. Walker needs to improve otherwise he will continue to let down what was previously the strongest defence in the league.