• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The 'If You Still Need to Purge Yourself Of Ange' Thread

Does this thread need to exist?


  • Total voters
    18
...while I'm here, expressing my opinion on Ange and the various counter views, here's something to share...

...just because some of us (I include myself) wanted to see where an Ange - Spurs would've gone next season given the intangible gold dust of a trophy and the psychological bonds it forges, it doesn't mean we don't undersrtand that the bloke presided over 22 defeats. We get it. I personally chose to add the context of injuries and club mistakes to the mix (alongside some failings of Ange's too). That I did so does not make my opinion/that opinion any more or less accurate than anyone else's. I really don't need someone banging on at me about '22 defeats' all over again. As it happens, I think the direction we have chosen is best for this club and how it operates in all senses (I've been clear about that in other threads). But people telling me that 'if' Postecoglu had stayed 'we'd have been in this state by October' and telling me with a factual air what 'would've' gone wrong? Nah. Not having it. You don't know. You're guessing just like I am. And that's all good, different opinions, right? Right!

Also perfectly said. It’s the idea that because we lost 22 games, we’d definitely just be in that place again the following season. It’s as stupid as saying that now we’re actually a cup team and sacking him is saying that we don’t want win more trophies.
 
Imo let's not hold each other to our "worst" moments, posting in affect.

For me at least is more annoying when the same points are being repeated over and over again and in threads that are nominally about other stuff. I'm sure I'm guilty of that too, again appreciate not being held to that too harshly.

I vote keep this thread, comparisons with Ange are fine, but let any discussion, grief or grievances happen here.

Then when the football starts back up we can focus on that. Lock this thread. Tommy can take the role of Steff with Pochettino and remind us of how awesome Ange was and would have been had he been kept on from time to time. I'll join with that at times, but it won't derail conversations like it may now when there are no games and we're only signing players already here.

I largely agree, but the truth is even Ange supporters would not say something like that because it would, indeed, have been a giant gamble and we'd be relying on whether lessons had been learned alongside the hope that invisible energy and belief from winning would've infused this group to greater heights. I think in my case, what I'd say is that I would've enjoyed the gamble and the spirit of hope and belief behind it. As it goes, and as I've said for a while, I think we have made the best decision for this club given the way we are run...
 
Also perfectly said. It’s the idea that because we lost 22 games, we’d definitely just be in that place again the following season. It’s as stupid as saying that now we’re actually a cup team and sacking him is saying that we don’t want win more trophies.

When Ange first joined I thought it would be a bit like with other managers near the top end of the division where they plateau and get replaced after a while. Brendan Rodgers seemed to do that with Pool. Mancini and Pellegrini were even replaced after getting major honours. I guess you could even say that about Poch at both PSG and Chelsea. Then there is Arteta right now. Could he even be replaced soon?

I guess if you normalised all this and removed all the injuries / fatigue etc and we had the season that we were all hoping / expecting, where would we have finished? Would I have been right that Ange could get us so far but not ultimately where we wanted to be?

In numbers it is interesting. Even if we had got 66 points again we would have been level with Toon who got 66 points, 5th place and CL qualification. That's not mentioning the league cup trophy. 3 more points equal with Chelsea. 5 more points equal with City. 8 more points equal with Arsenal.

Whichever way I digest it, there were always question marks about what Ange might have achieved in the 25/26 season. I'd have been quite surprised if he would have got us 70 points or more to be fair. That's where we should be minimally in season 3 with the investment and a fully fit squad with normalised injuries.
 
I largely agree, but the truth is even Ange supporters would not say something like that because it would, indeed, have been a giant gamble and we'd be relying on whether lessons had been learned alongside the hope that invisible energy and belief from winning would've infused this group to greater heights. I think in my case, what I'd say is that I would've enjoyed the gamble and the spirit of hope and belief behind it. As it goes, and as I've said for a while, I think we have made the best decision for this club given the way we are run...
Due to the amount of rotations we have on managers anyway, I'd have been quite happy to roll the dice on a Ange 3rd season. (Of course, blindly discarding the sheer bloody awkwardness of changing manager mid season if it wasn't working out).

I was aligned with @BrainOfLevy assessment that Ange was trying to do something different, and I supported that.,
That there was a bigger thing, an untapped avenue, that a club like ours required to be successful. We'd tried so many 'normal' paths ffs.

But whatever that 'thing' was, it felt like we were drifting further and further away from it (partly due to circumstances), and the boat so full of holes the bailing out became exhausting, and whatever it was at the beginning we barely recognized anymore.

I'm hoping the resolve, the mentality, the feeling of winning, the team bonding doesn't all leave these players just because Ange has left. Tbh I don't believe it does. He leaves that behind as his legacy (and a shiny pot:)).

I think it helps that Frank comes across as another solid human being (Important from my pov). An energetic, bright, intelligent fella who looks an engaging manager to work alongside or under.

I think it's helped a big part of the fan base (a complete guess tbh😂) reconcile the transition the more content they've soaked up on the new man.
 
Something that bugged me the other day was reading that ‘actually he wasn’t a good communicator because he didn’t speak much to the players during the week’ just ignoring the fact that it’s very deliberate by Ange in order for his words to have maximum impact when he delivers them.

Like, you can have all the opinions you want on his tactical nous, his rotations, we can debate that. But taking away the fact that he’s a great communicator?? Come oooooon!!!

Thought he communicated terribly when with us.

As I said in a thread elsewhere a few days ago, he can’t have been communicating effectively with the players if they lost 22 PL games, these losses often involving a goal conceded within the first 10 minutes, shortly after he was apparently delivering his words with ‘maximum effect.’

In press conferences, he was often snippy and unnecessarily aggressive. He spent post-match interviews staring at the floor.

Imo he also gaslit the press and the fans, moving from the position of ‘I would never sacrifice a game’ when we were playing City as Arsenal went for the title, to informing us that he had chucked in the PL this season in January (interestingly, he only chose to communicate that to everyone post the EL win - for me, he was attempting to rewrite history at that point and looking to excuse his own PL failings).

And there were also the unnecessary rows with fans, and the cupping of his ear to the away fans at Chelsea (and then very obviously being caught out when asked about it in the post-match interview, ridiculously saying he was encouraging them to make some noise)…

For me, the myth of him being an excellent communicator is right up there with the myth of Angeball. Both are as real as unicorns.
 
Thought he communicated terribly when with us.

As I said in a thread elsewhere a few days ago, he can’t have been communicating effectively with the players if they lost 22 PL games, these losses often involving a goal conceded within the first 10 minutes, shortly after he was apparently delivering his words with ‘maximum effect.’

In press conferences, he was often snippy and unnecessarily aggressive. He spent post-match interviews staring at the floor.

Imo he also gaslit the press and the fans, moving from the position of ‘I would never sacrifice a game’ when we were playing City as Arsenal went for the title, to informing us that he had chucked in the PL this season in January (interestingly, he only chose to communicate that to everyone post the EL win - for me, he was attempting to rewrite history at that point and looking to excuse his own PL failings).

And there were also the unnecessary rows with fans, and the cupping of his ear to the away fans at Chelsea (and then very obviously being caught out when asked about it in the post-match interview, ridiculously saying he was encouraging them to make some noise)…

For me, the myth of him being an excellent communicator is right up there with the myth of Angeball. Both are as real as unicorns.
I don't think it's a myth.

What he says to the press, on the TV etc is no yardstick... honestly who gives a fudge about any of that (circus). By virtue of thats what the fans hear and read and so form their opinions on, well, more fool them if that's how they form their opinion of someone.

The only thing that matters is how he communicates inside the boundary of Hotspur Way. That could be with the people above him and below him BUT most importantly the players and coaches, and those players always stuck with him, almost unheard in this game considering the amount of defeats suffered. They believed they could achieve something right to the end.

And there's also plenty of evidence within those inner circles at the various clubs he's been at to support that.
 
Last edited:
Can we have a poll decide whether a poll is the best solution? Whilst we're at it can I have a Conte thread where I can wax lyrical over his remarkable achievements in the game and subsequent meltdowns?

Maybe I'm misreading it because I'm thoroughly hungover but the thread seems a bit tetchy. I blame Ange for having the audacity to win a trophy with us, definitely makes things a bit wierd for those who are usually used to sneering at success.
 
Thought he communicated terribly when with us.

As I said in a thread elsewhere a few days ago, he can’t have been communicating effectively with the players if they lost 22 PL games, these losses often involving a goal conceded within the first 10 minutes, shortly after he was apparently delivering his words with ‘maximum effect.’

In press conferences, he was often snippy and unnecessarily aggressive. He spent post-match interviews staring at the floor.

Imo he also gaslit the press and the fans, moving from the position of ‘I would never sacrifice a game’ when we were playing City as Arsenal went for the title, to informing us that he had chucked in the PL this season in January (interestingly, he only chose to communicate that to everyone post the EL win - for me, he was attempting to rewrite history at that point and looking to excuse his own PL failings).

And there were also the unnecessary rows with fans, and the cupping of his ear to the away fans at Chelsea (and then very obviously being caught out when asked about it in the post-match interview, ridiculously saying he was encouraging them to make some noise)…

For me, the myth of him being an excellent communicator is right up there with the myth of Angeball. Both are as real as unicorns.

On losing 22 games, I want to avoid that because we’ll just get into a circle about whose context for those losses is the right one. I’m happy to concede for the purposes of this debate that Ange is a terrible League manager.

On press conferences - I genuinely would love to know why this matters to you? Because I agree with the post above that the communication that matters most is with the players. And I would say, often his audience for the press conferences wasn’t us as fans, but the players themselves. For instance, the interview where he says ‘I always win things in my second season’ is completely calculated. Emma Saunders puts him on the spot, and you can see his mind working. He knows that she has allowed the potential for doubt in the players to come out in public, and he deliberately doubles down. Because his entire messaging was about belief that they were going to do something. His belief that he was a winner, and that the players could get behind him. It goes down in infamy, but it’s an example of his great communication capabilities. He understood how to use the press conferences to create a belief among the players. And would reinforce those messages through the rest of the season. His point at the end that the club couldn’t talk about being a winner but he could is absolutely right. He was instilling that belief.

As for gaslighting the fans, this point just feels neeedlessly anti Ange. Again, there is context. One is, when we still have something to play for, saying that we shouldn’t be wanting to lose so that Arsenal can’t win something. And the other is prioritising his best players for a competition we still have a chance of winning. If you don’t believe that he prioritised the Europa League despite the very obvious difference in our team selection, then that’s why I say you’re just clearly extremely anti Ange and denying what’s obvious in front of you.

At the end of the day almost every player and coach that has seen him in action thinks he is in the highest tier of communicator. And again, we’ve just won a European trophy after getting close a lot of times and not getting over the line. I am certain that communication, and belief, and messages that were reinforced over the course of months played a part in getting us there.
 
players with belief don't lose 22 games

Arrggggghhh dammit you’ve pulled me back in to discussing this.

Which players though? The Ben Davies / Archie Gray centre back run? Or just the patched up 11 that was basically playing every 3 days for 3 months straight?

I would argue that the fact that they came through that period and STILL believed they were going to win something is testament to Ange’s ability to foster belief in a set of players who play for a club that had become a joke when discussing ability to win trophies. Any other manager would have gone through that run and lost them. He didn’t.

But if your view is that Ange is bad because of the league defeats, we simply will never agree. There’s no point debating it.
 
Arrggggghhh dammit you’ve pulled me back in to discussing this.

Which players though? The Ben Davies / Archie Gray centre back run? Or just the patched up 11 that was basically playing every 3 days for 3 months straight?

I would argue that the fact that they came through that period and STILL believed they were going to win something is testament to Ange’s ability to foster belief in a set of players who play for a club that had become a joke when discussing ability to win trophies. Any other manager would have gone through that run and lost them. He didn’t.

But if your view is that Ange is bad because of the league defeats, we simply will never agree. There’s no point debating it.

👍
 
Also perfectly said. It’s the idea that because we lost 22 games, we’d definitely just be in that place again the following season. It’s as stupid as saying that now we’re actually a cup team and sacking him is saying that we don’t want win more trophies.

I wanted him gone but we would not have lost 22 games again. The question is how much less?

How was he going to lose 12 less games, concede 20+ less goals, score 28 more points? all while in CL. Too much to expect without some major change in playing style (which isn't him), tactics/coaching plus (obviously) some re-enforcements.
 
Due to the amount of rotations we have on managers anyway, I'd have been quite happy to roll the dice on a Ange 3rd season. (Of course, blindly discarding the sheer bloody awkwardness of changing manager mid season if it wasn't working out).

I was aligned with @BrainOfLevy assessment that Ange was trying to do something different, and I supported that.,
That there was a bigger thing, an untapped avenue, that a club like ours required to be successful. We'd tried so many 'normal' paths ffs.

But whatever that 'thing' was, it felt like we were drifting further and further away from it (partly due to circumstances), and the boat so full of holes the bailing out became exhausting, and whatever it was at the beginning we barely recognized anymore.

I'm hoping the resolve, the mentality, the feeling of winning, the team bonding doesn't all leave these players just because Ange has left. Tbh I don't believe it does. He leaves that behind as his legacy (and a shiny pot:)).

I think it helps that Frank comes across as another solid human being (Important from my pov). An energetic, bright, intelligent fella who looks an engaging manager to work alongside or under.

I think it's helped a big part of the fan base (a complete guess tbh😂) reconcile the transition the more content they've soaked up on the new man.

I feel this way for sure.
 
Back