Vinai Venkatesham - CEO

[SubZero]

I remember Conte in one of his first interviews after he joined saying that the facilities were incredible but “maybe too much”. So I wonder if the 5 star environment has had an unintended effect. Also re Maddison, everyone loves him and I don’t doubt his positive impact on morale. But as a focal point, the main man…? I’m not so sure if he’s what we need.

Have to add that it wasn't a dig at Maddison, but the general atmosphere. Again, I don't know, but something struck me as "not right". Like guys going to work at a place they had limited respect for but in an environment they enjoyed. Like having a boring job but a superb canteen. I don't want to put too much into it and it's probably badly worded, but I would have loved to see a bit more grit, so to speak. The professional level is so high, and very, very few players are that much fundamentally better than all the others so any kind of edge can make all the difference. The age of footballers vs plumbers is long gone. We have struggled against League 2 sides. And I don't give a rats about badge-kissing and interviews, again it's part of their jobs. I don't want players complacently going to work, I want players running themselves into the ground for Spurs, or at least looking like they would. Not players happily playing 5-a-side in the middle for most of 90 minutes, avoiding injuries. We suck at both anyway. Just look at Arsenal. Mind games aside, they have a habit of making 6-months injuries into 2-week injuries, while we can make papercuts into career-enders.

To me, one of Levy's biggest mistakes was making his goals public. Which were achieving a top 4 place, and so we did in consecutive seasons. Players viewed and came to the club with the mindset that this was a top club, but not a winning club. Because the chairman says so. This is not a club that you sign with to win things. This is a club where you can ply your trade, get into the spotlight on the biggest stage and hopefully get picked up by a club that really wants to win stuff. I can understand those sentiments in a bankrupt 90s Spurs, but it's not a signal for a serious contender which we were at the time. If not, we can go back to being a Villa or Saudi Sportswashing Machine and stop wasting time pretending we're Liverpool or Man Utd. We can work with that too, as long as the entire club has the same targets. I welcome thinking new.

 

[Raziel]

Arsenal etc regularly spent 65 million plus on players with money provided by the board/owners, that's what we are up against

"The Lewis Family" won't do that, they won't spend £100 million on one player and the wages.

Which is what will have us competing.

We apparently had money in Jan window, as soon as the window shut and the pressure was on the board "we didn't have money because of Levy" what a load of rubbish.

No issue with Levy getting his fair share of the blame, but the bigger issue was and is The Lewis family

We are not competing with Arsenal, Liverpool or City (at this point)

And this is where nuance matters and everything Vinai/Lange have said is fudgery/deflection and just brick leadership, and the lack of genuine journalism in this country combined with the gullibility of Spurs fans to lap up anything against the club is hilarious

Let's look at the real issues that none of Vinai/Charrington/Lange/Lewis family are addressing

- Why was Frank hired? are we to believe that was all Levy, nothing to do with their 25 point (or whatever the fudge metric) evaluation, or that he just happened to be a countryman of Lange? How are we ensuring that mistake doesn't happen?
- Why did it take so long to course correct? (fire Frank, lack of Jan investment, why Tudor) who is to blame for that?
- You have identified an on pitch gap, ok, with who? what is our rightful position? I'll give an opinion, we have spent 900M since 21/22 season, that puts us in 5th place in league (and after top 7, spend drops considerably in the league), even last season we were 7th in spend (Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Liverpool jumped ahead) for an average league position of 10th, with the obvious two 17th place finishes.
- So is it managers, recruitment, injuries? because while I welcome the investment, that may be an issue if we really want to compete with Arsenal, City, United, etc, it isn't the reason we finished behind Fulham, Brentford, Sunderland, Brighton, Everton, list goes on for two seasons in a row.

And the leadership vacuum still exists, who is running the club? who is ultimately accountable? is it Charrington, Vinai, Lewis family?

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

Yeah agreed. He talks about RDZ and the fact "he plays the style of football that our supporters and the broader football public want to see". Okay, then the next question is, where on your 30 point checklist was that last summer and, if it was there, how did you select Thomas Frank? And when you saw that the style he was playing was anything but the style of football we want to see (Bouremouth home, Arsenal away, Chelsea home, Forest away, Brentford away etc.), why did you keep him when the football was brick and results were worse? That does not stack up - he has to be accountable for what he says and does.

It suits him now to say that the style of football is an important factor because our current manager plays attacking football. But that either means it wasn't a factor last summer or you hired the wrong man despite what was an allegedly thorough process.

What he's saying does not stand up to scrutiny.

Yep, the whole thing is a complete mystery to me. I can only deduce that it is actually Frank who convinced people he was a football messiah because it’s the only explanation that makes sense - everyone with a decision veto seemed very convinced he was doing at minimum an ok job and it would turn around.

I really agree with you though - he needs to he held accountable. It’s a really bad explanation among a lot of fair points in my view.

 

[DeanoAustin]

Yep, the whole thing is a complete mystery to me. I can only deduce that it is actually Frank who convinced people he was a football messiah because it’s the only explanation that makes sense - everyone with a decision veto seemed very convinced he was doing at minimum an ok job and it would turn around.

I really agree with you though - he needs to he held accountable. It’s a really bad explanation among a lot of fair points in my view.

I've always been a defender of Levy and always will be. I do acknowledge the last 5 years of his time haven't been good enough but, overall, I think he was great for the club and the local area.

I don't even really mind if people have a go at the state they found the club in but only if they first acknowledge and explain their role in the demise or in the continuation of that demise. Just pointing at Levy is deflection in my book and that's not leadership - it's cowardly. That's what I've seen from VV, Charrington and the Lewis' over the last three days.

 

[Raziel]

Yep, the whole thing is a complete mystery to me. I can only deduce that it is actually Frank who convinced people he was a football messiah because it’s the only explanation that makes sense - everyone with a decision veto seemed very convinced he was doing at minimum an ok job and it would turn around.

I really agree with you though - he needs to he held accountable. It’s a really bad explanation among a lot of fair points in my view.

Honestly, if you want a completely unsubstantiated opinion

- I suspect there was a general push within the club to move football decisions away from Levy (does not absolve him of the decision, just like Vinai doesn't get absolved of other decisions)
- Vinai was just coming in, Paratici was still in consult mode, Charrington was running interferance.
- The club got itself caught up in the data/smart decisions/"Brighton admiration" nonsense. If you want to follow someone, follow someone that did the path you need to. I've said it time and time again, the Brighton/Bretford models don't scale, if they did, Bayern/PSG/Madrid/City would be doing it, instead at the highest level you tend to see significant spend with managers having a lot more say, and a lot more acceptable changes as season go by.
- Lange ended up having to make a call he's deeply unqualified for, and his personal bias (countryman) combined with the idea of efficiency, i.e. if we could just be Brentford/Brighton with a bigger budget, plus the initial perspectives that didn't survive scrutiny (Frank's success at previous club). Again personal anecdote here, I've interviewed plenty of people who have worked at way bigger companies, and bigger projects than Spurs, the real question isn't were you part of a successful team, it's "what did you do" and that's where we fudged up with Frank. Everyone who supported that call is culpable but I don't see it as anything but a Lange call.
- After that it's sunk cost fallacy and cowardice. Instead of blaming Levy now, they could easily have fired Frank in November, muttered something about Levy swinging from one manager type to the other (fans would have lapped it up) and course corrected. But poor executives do nothing, and they sat on their assess for months on end.

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

I've always been a defender of Levy and always will be. I do acknowledge the last 5 years of his time haven't been good enough but, overall, I think he was great for the club and the local area.

I don't even really mind if people have a go at the state they found the club in but only if they first acknowledge and explain their role in the demise or in the continuation of that demise. Just pointing at Levy is deflection in my book and that's not leadership - it's cowardly. That's what I've seen from VV, Charrington and the Lewis' over the last three days.

Agreed. They’re sort of shifting the Levy era into ‘great infrastructure but bad football’ and again that only relates to the last few years. It glosses over the reality that we became part of a new Big 6 under him, were consistently in Europe, challenged for the title etc. It’s unfair to not acknowledge that.

I don’t mind them calling out what they see as improvements to be made, and I think it’s fair to also acknowledge where Levy had flaws that held us back. But Vinai’s interview and even the Lewis family ‘we always just let the experts run the club’ line seen to be a bit of a cowardly buck passing to try and explain why they allowed this supposed horrendous situation with such deep rooted issues to go on for 25 years.

It’s too transparent. I think you can paint an optimistic picture of where we’re headed without tearing down completely what came before.

 

[Raziel]

I've always been a defender of Levy and always will be. I do acknowledge the last 5 years of his time haven't been good enough but, overall, I think he was great for the club and the local area.

I don't even really mind if people have a go at the state they found the club in but only if they first acknowledge and explain their role in the demise or in the continuation of that demise. Just pointing at Levy is deflection in my book and that's not leadership - it's cowardly. That's what I've seen from VV, Charrington and the Lewis' over the last three days.

Well, they have already broken the "rules". Typically, any incoming executive has 6 months to blame his predecessor, you can't be in the role a year later and still saying "not my fault"

Again, if we had journalism instead of influencers and AI aggregators someone would ask for an interview or club for comments and the questions should be

- We now have 3 letters to fans stating the results are unacceptable, Levy is the spacegoat, and you are going to spend/fix it
- What is the plan? so outside of investment (how much, how is that different from money spent over last 5 years?) and hiring RDZ
- What is the objective? 17th is unacceptable, what is? is European football the minimum bar, is there a 1/2/5 year plan?
- What do the fans get back for 2 years of low single digit home wins for their season ticket? any token gestures (concessions?)
- Who is running the fudging club? why do we need 3 letters to fans (fudging concerning)
- Is everything from now on in your accountability?

 

[Finney Is Back]

First act of a poor leader - blame your predecessor

Second act of a poor leader - restructure

First act of a good leader. Assess the operation and work out what is working and failing.
Second act of a good leader. Restructure to address the parts that are failing

 

[Finney Is Back]

Some of the ills at the club are undoubtedly down to Levy - they didn't appear overnight, and will not disappear overnight.

But yes - very much a 'blame my predecessor' thing going on with ENIC and Vinai right now, and you only get one bite at that cherry.

Like the joke goes - a new prime minister walks into his office, opens his desk and finds two letters from his predecessor. Opens the first letter and it says... "In your first crisis, blame me". So, he duly does.

Eventually a second crisis rolls around. And, in desperation, he opens the second letter.

"So, you need to write two letters..."

I'm not sure quite who you expect the blame to be apportioned to? Do you agree or disagree that our performance against (what should be) our main metric (on the football side of things) had badly regressed? If so then do you not think that the blame can only lie with the predecessor?

 

[Finney Is Back]

In my time in industry the new CEO always does a big restructure after 6 months or so in post even when you don't really need one.

Its like a Boston/McKinsey personal coach guidebook for the new leader.

Either way. We desperately need some big changes some where.

Tarnishing Levys legacy all along the journey is classless imo. That being said, we don't know how much their relationships broke down and over what.

It takes a brave new CEO to come in and change nothing at all. I'm not sure that any CEO simply makes changes for changes sake though. They will typically think that something could operate better and make changes to try to accomodate that. A few minor tweaks for a business that is performing pretty well or more major changes if not. Looking at THFC since our new stadium opened my inclination is that we need pretty major changes, with a whole host of departments not performing at elite level.

 

[Raziel]

I'm not sure quite who you expect the blame to be apportioned to? Do you agree or disagree that our performance against (what should be) our main metric (on the football side of things) had badly regressed? If so then do you not think that the blame can only lie with the predecessor?

Levy wasn't the reason we ended up 17th this season, no matter how hard some people want to spin it. Blame him for the downward trend, blame him for the Frank hire if you want, blame him for an unbalanced squad in August.

Where is the blame for
- Not firing Frank in November?
- Not spending significantly and bringing in 3-4 players in January
- For the failed recovery of players (supposedly reason we didn't "panic buy")
- For Tudor
- For waiting till we had 7 games left to get RDZ
- For the fact we went into last game of season with a real chance of being relegated.

We can't just gloss over the last 9 months with "Levy bad man"

 

[Finney Is Back]

We are not competing with Arsenal, Liverpool or City (at this point)

And this is where nuance matters and everything Vinai/Lange have said is fudgery/deflection and just brick leadership, and the lack of genuine journalism in this country combined with the gullibility of Spurs fans to lap up anything against the club is hilarious

Let's look at the real issues that none of Vinai/Charrington/Lange/Lewis family are addressing

- Why was Frank hired? are we to believe that was all Levy, nothing to do with their 25 point (or whatever the fudge metric) evaluation, or that he just happened to be a countryman of Lange? How are we ensuring that mistake doesn't happen?
- Why did it take so long to course correct? (fire Frank, lack of Jan investment, why Tudor) who is to blame for that?
- You have identified an on pitch gap, ok, with who? what is our rightful position? I'll give an opinion, we have spent 900M since 21/22 season, that puts us in 5th place in league (and after top 7, spend drops considerably in the league), even last season we were 7th in spend (Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Liverpool jumped ahead) for an average league position of 10th, with the obvious two 17th place finishes.
- So is it managers, recruitment, injuries? because while I welcome the investment, that may be an issue if we really want to compete with Arsenal, City, United, etc, it isn't the reason we finished behind Fulham, Brentford, Sunderland, Brighton, Everton, list goes on for two seasons in a row.

And the leadership vacuum still exists, who is running the club? who is ultimately accountable? is it Charrington, Vinai, Lewis family?

Why was Frank hired?..... Because he was Lange's Danish mate I think.
Why did it take so long to correct?.... I suspect because they wanted to trust the 'expert' (the DoF). Let's see what happens to the DoF this summer as a result.
The on pitch gap exists because of all of those things, managers (bad flip-flopping between styles, injuries (I bet they do a massive overhaul of the medical department), poor scouting/data (perhaps both are under invested in - I know they were really, really badly pre Paratici)

Who is running hte club? Vinai - he is the CEO. I'm keen to see what he can do in the next few years now that Levy and his cronies have been jettisoned.

 

[Raziel]

Why was Frank hired?..... Because he was Lange's Danish mate I think.
Why did it take so long to correct?.... I suspect because they wanted to trust the 'expert' (the DoF). Let's see what happens to the DoF this summer as a result.
The on pitch gap exists because of all of those things, managers (bad flip-flopping between styles, injuries (I bet they do a massive overhaul of the medical department), poor scouting/data (perhaps both are under invested in - I know they were really, really badly pre Paratici)

Who is running hte club? Vinai - he is the CEO. I'm keen to see what he can do in the next few years now that Levy and his cronies have been jettisoned.

First two I 100% agree

Last one, not sure, why 3 fan letters with Vinai in middle, I think the lack of the "buck stops here" guy is a problem right now, maybe Vinai will transition to that, but he isn't that guy right now.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Levy wasn't the reason we ended up 17th this season, no matter how hard some people want to spin it. Blame him for the downward trend, blame him for the Frank hire if you want, blame him for an unbalanced squad in August.

Where is the blame for
- Not firing Frank in November?
- Not spending significantly and bringing in 3-4 players in January
- For the failed recovery of players (supposedly reason we didn't "panic buy")
- For Tudor
- For waiting till we had 7 games left to get RDZ
- For the fact we went into last game of season with a real chance of being relegated.

We can't just gloss over the last 9 months with "Levy bad man"

Levy is more than 50% the reason that we ended up 17th this season, I don't think one has to spin it at all.
This season has come about because of half a decade plus of the club being badly run from a football perspective. The buck stops with the chief exec. Let's see whether or not we get better over the next 2 or 3 years now there is a new exec team in place who can shape the club as they see fit. Only time will tell whether we remain 17th (or worse) or we push back up the league table again.

 

[Finney Is Back]

First two I 100% agree

Last one, not sure, why 3 fan letters with Vinai in middle, I think the lack of the "buck stops here" guy is a problem right now, maybe Vinai will transition to that, but he isn't that guy right now.

Let's see. However, if Vinai is being allowed to make decisions then he should walk. There's no point in being a CEO if somebody else is actually making the key decisions at the top.

 

[Muttley]

Lange ended up having to make a call he's deeply unqualified for, and his personal bias (countryman) combined with the idea of efficiency, i.e. if we could just be Brentford/Brighton with a bigger budget, plus the initial perspectives that didn't survive scrutiny (Frank's success at previous club). Again personal anecdote here, I've interviewed plenty of people who have worked at way bigger companies, and bigger projects than Spurs, the real question isn't were you part of a successful team, it's "what did you do" and that's where we fudged up with Frank. Everyone who supported that call is culpable but I don't see it as anything but a Lange call.

I can't substantiate this but I think the Frank appointment was a Levy fixation and call, more than a Lange blind spot for his fellow countryman. It was yet another example of Levy not acknowledging his own lack of football operational DNA but overpowering his team to go with what he felt was best. I've always felt Levy should have been nowhere near hiring or firing football managers. It's definitely not his specialist subject.

You would also recognise the work scenario where the most senior leader fixates on a hire so everyone below them keep the peace by following that choice. They even try to convince themselves that the boss is right. Then the passive aggression starts with everyone nodding their heads in meetings and then off to the coffee machine to say what they really think to their closest pal in the workplace. Then a horrible culture ensues.

The thing is, that culture permeates from the CEO. If they were less headstrong and more empowering in the first place then the path would be smoother. What we're actually discovering is that Lange is probably not a Paul Mitchell. He keeps the peace rather than rattles the cages.

 

[billyiddo]

I’m not sure this interview landed as he’d hoped. Vast majority of opinions I’m seeing online and from friends, colleagues, etc have seen right through this!

He's basically repeated back to supporters what their general complaints are and said not our fault but we'll fix it. Telling people what they want to hear essentially.

 

[Yiddo.1882]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Raziel]

I can't substantiate this but I think the Frank appointment was a Levy fixation and call, more than a Lange blind spot for his fellow countryman. It was yet another example of Levy not acknowledging his own lack of football operational DNA but overpowering his team to go with what he felt was best. I've always felt Levy should have been nowhere near hiring or firing football managers. It's definitely not his specialist subject.

You would also recognise the work scenario where the most senior leader fixates on a hire so everyone below them keep the peace by following that choice. They even try to convince themselves that the boss is right. Then the passive aggression starts with everyone nodding their heads in meetings and then off to the coffee machine to say what they really think to their closest pal in the workplace. Then a horrible culture ensues.

The thing is, that culture permeates from the CEO. If they were less headstrong and more empowering in the first place then the path would be smoother. What we're actually discovering is that Lange is probably not a Paul Mitchell. He keeps the peace rather than rattles the cages.

Doesn't stand to scrutiny mate

- One, Frank isn't a Levy type hire, Levy liked "names" Jose/Conte/Harry/Santini/Hoddle, even the non-established hires, AVB/Poch were well regarded up and coming (more importantly seen as having something new to their game)
- Two, and this one is what locks it for me, if Frank was even a 50% Levy hire, he would have been fired in October, the fact that we hung on to him so desperately sells out that someone (Lange and probably Vinai) were the real backers of Frank's hire

 

[Raziel]

Levy is more than 50% the reason that we ended up 17th this season, I don't think one has to spin it at all.
This season has come about because of half a decade plus of the club being badly run from a football perspective. The buck stops with the chief exec. Let's see whether or not we get better over the next 2 or 3 years now there is a new exec team in place who can shape the club as they see fit. Only time will tell whether we remain 17th (or worse) or we push back up the league table again.

That is total spin mate. The season was recoverable in Oct-Dec, it was recoverable in January.

Think Nuno season, fired in 10 games, Conte in, we got Deki/Bentancur in Jan, we ended up 4th.

Sunderland got Europe with a minus 6 GD and 54 points, this of all seasons was recoverable.

p.s. (edit) And if anyone in the club believes (other than PR covering their ass) that spin, we are truly fudged,