• 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
    52
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
Will always go down as quite a weird and absolutely a risky decision to let a trophy winning manager who hasn’t lost the dressing room go. We’ll see how it goes with Frank but there’s a big part of me that thinks Season 3 would have been a riot.
Click to expand...

The reason many wanted rid of him was because "if we started badly it would just be a waste of the first few months."

Really glad that hasn't turned out to be the case.
 
tommysvr said:
The reason many wanted rid of him was because "if we started badly it would just be a waste of the first few months."

Really glad that hasn't turned out to be the case.
Click to expand...

We're more than halfway to 42 points already and not yet halfway through our fixtures. That's progress on where we would have been.
 
thfcsteff said:
I think it's pretty clear which players are not onboard right now. Yes, season 3 would've been a riot, I agree. Having gone through all that hardship and pain to STILL win a major trophy, I mean, culturally that squad would've been at a revving point.


Sadly though they'd made the decision a while back to change; that's the truth. The bit I cannot figure out is the 2 week delay in the summer, and I am guessing a large part of that comes down to Levy second-guessing himself and trying to get a quorum to agree to backtrack. It would be classic Daniel, he has form for that sort of thing...
Click to expand...
My biggest bugbear, is we finally found a manager who could get us over the line. isn't that what we've been looking for? Couldn't we have nurtured that, and said you need better coaches?
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
Will always go down as quite a weird and absolutely a risky decision to let a trophy winning manager who hasn’t lost the dressing room go. We’ll see how it goes with Frank but there’s a big part of me that thinks Season 3 would have been a riot.
Click to expand...
Worth reading all of VDV’s interview not just the first part where he praises Ange. Also said the following:-

Although he enjoyed Postecoglou's style of play, Netherlands international Van de Ven believes Tottenham lacked a "plan B" and revealed he and Cristian Romero discussed taking a more defensive approach with the manager.

"I liked the offensive play [under Postecoglou] but I like what we have now with Thomas Frank. We are more secure at the back. I don't like getting exposed every game on the counter-attack," he said.

"At the beginning [under Postecoglou], no team was used to playing against our system. We were playing unbelievable football.

"But managers analyse everything and people knew what we were doing. Sometimes we didn't really have a plan B and we were getting exposed. We didn't have solutions to get out.

"At one point [me and Romero] walked up to the gaffer and said we need to change some things and play more defensive to make sure we win those games. He was like I agree with you but I expect you two guys to sort this on the pitch, make sure everybody knows."

That explains in a nutshell what Ange’s problem was in the PL in his second season ( and possibly why he failed to register a win when he was boss at Forest) - managers and coaches in the PL analyse everything. His system got found out and he then struggled in the PL. I don’t subscribe to the view that his third season would have been a “riot.” I think it would very likely have mirrored what happened at Forest.
 
Robspur12 said:
Worth reading all of VDV’s interview not just the first part where he praises Ange. Also said the following:-

Although he enjoyed Postecoglou's style of play, Netherlands international Van de Ven believes Tottenham lacked a "plan B" and revealed he and Cristian Romero discussed taking a more defensive approach with the manager.

"I liked the offensive play [under Postecoglou] but I like what we have now with Thomas Frank. We are more secure at the back. I don't like getting exposed every game on the counter-attack," he said.

"At the beginning [under Postecoglou], no team was used to playing against our system. We were playing unbelievable football.

"But managers analyse everything and people knew what we were doing. Sometimes we didn't really have a plan B and we were getting exposed. We didn't have solutions to get out.

"At one point [me and Romero] walked up to the gaffer and said we need to change some things and play more defensive to make sure we win those games. He was like I agree with you but I expect you two guys to sort this on the pitch, make sure everybody knows."

That explains in a nutshell what Ange’s problem was in the PL in his second season ( and possibly why he failed to register a win when he was boss at Forest) - managers and coaches in the PL analyse everything. His system got found out and he then struggled in the PL. I don’t subscribe to the view that his third season would have been a “riot.” I think it would very likely have mirrored what happened at Forest.
Click to expand...

I understand the quotes, but two things:

1. He actually did adapt. He listened to his players. Plenty of top level managers have listened to their players feedback and ended up successful.

2. I think there’s a fair chance, which is alluded to in the other Micky quotes that you didn’t share, that with more first choice players playing more often, it would have been better. I’m never denying that Ange was all about getting one thing to work, and I’ve always argued that it simply was never going to work with so players out, so it was simply about managing through. He did manage through, and we won something. But the whole point, that we never really saw, was to see how a deep and fit Ange squad properly playing his football would look.

That’s always the bargain with system managers. Yes, if you don’t have the players to play it, other teams will pick apart the weaknesses. But if you do have the players to play it; because you’ve made strategic choices to sign certain types of players and want to play them a certain type of way compared to other clubs, that it can actually be a big strategic advantage.

We just never saw what it would look like with a deep and fit squad.
 
thfcsteff said:
Nope, that's just conjecture you're presenting as 'truth'. You can believe it would've happened but it is without any evidence.
Click to expand...

True, but if we were to look at his PPG in his 2 years with us, there was definitely a trend and that was for every quarter of a season he was with us, the PPG got worse. I dont see how that would've changed in season 3 personally.

There weren't any performances I can think of that gave me any encouragement for the future.

Im hoping we're not saying the same about Frank in 18 months but it's not looking promising.
 
The Ange in people’s heads is the one that didn’t listen to his players, didn’t adapt, and gets knocked out to Frankfurt.

There is a world in which that easily happens. Because it’s happened enough in our recent history that we actually won something. But it’s telling that Micky refers to Ange as the manager who brought a trophy to Spurs. Not ‘the idiot that we had to force to change and happily he got sacked’.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
Yep, not really seeing the issue. Seems like he had the respect of the players, he also listened to them, he understood the squad dynamics and how those players might influence others, and it all worked in delivering a trophy.
Click to expand...
Yep hard to disagree with that.

But it doesn't change the central point that he struggled in the premier league after the flying start or that he was unable to compete in multiple tournaments at the same time. Or that the club were wrong to replace him.
 
carl said:
True, but if we were to look at his PPG in his 2 years with us, there was definitely a trend and that was for every quarter of a season he was with us, the PPG got worse. I dont see how that would've changed in season 3 personally.

There weren't any performances I can think of that gave me any encouragement for the future.

Im hoping we're not saying the same about Frank in 18 months but it's not looking promising.
Click to expand...
It continued at Forest too.
 
Robspur12 said:
Yep hard to disagree with that.

But it doesn't change the central point that he struggled in the premier league after the flying start or that he was unable to compete in multiple tournaments at the same time. Or that the club were wrong to replace him.
Click to expand...

Yeah no doubt the league form was a struggle. I think I’ll always keep coming back to this thread because I always want to defend the idea that any manager we’ve had - let alone someone who is a decent man, actually won something, had the respect of the players and dealt with extraordinary circumstances - is definitively ‘bad’, ‘not up to it’, ‘failed’ etc.

Because it isn’t true for most managers, and I will sympathise and see what Frank is trying to do in the same way. Ultimately so much of whether a manager is successful is down to timing, and down to circumstances outside of their control. Look at Moyes. He’s finished 17th with Everton, then 4th, then failed at United, got Sunderland relegated, but has now redeemed his reputation from being a joke figure. I’m sure managers learn and get better of course but my point is…so much of it is the circumstances they were dealt.

And with respect to Ange, it’s also why we hire them in the first place. We hire Ange because we are a un-unified mess of a club, with a mutinous fan base that feels we have gotten away from an attacking style of football and developing young players. So we hire a manager who is always clear that he is what he is. He isn’t changing. But it’s what we wanted. And I think an ideal Ange state, with circumstances going in his favour, is having a deeper squad of players signed for him and less injuries. Then we can really judge whether he is ‘up to it’ at the very highest level. Because a system manager needs the pieces. We didn’t hire him for his adaptability and pragmatism. (Even ignoring the fact that he demonstrated it anyway to win the trophy)

But we never had the chance to see it. And I think he did the best with what he had. He lives by the choices that he made, and he brought us success. I will always defend that, both because there is a specific reason he was hired, and because he dealt with truly exceptional circumstances that clearly the players remember, but most fans seem to not. Especially when discussing the context of the bad league run last year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back