• 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

Antonio Conte - officially NOT the coach of THFC

Gazza Dazzla said:
I looked at the numbers back in Jan and since the CL final we’d bought 24 and sold 18, weighing out £355m and receiving £112m, so net spend of £243m. Contrary to the popular narrative, we’ve spent brick loads.

The “painful” rebuild has been well on the way for 3 years already, it’s just we’ve bought a load of old brick. Probably why Paratici was brought in to rectify the mess and wasted millions.
Click to expand...
We’ve not really brought a load of brick at all…. The problem is that we keep on sacking managers and bringing in new ones with completely different football philosophies and systems.
 
DubaiSpur said:
The oddest thing to me about the summer was hiring Nuno, *not* letting him hire his full set of coaches, and then forbidding him from playing 3 at the back for some bizarre reason.

Yes, he was our 210th choice and a bargain bin pick-me-up, but why hobble him like that out of the gate for literally zero reason? 3 at the back is what brought him success at Wolves, and his coaches were probably a big part of his few successes - he isn't the most communicative, so I imagine his coaches do that for him and he trusts them.

If we miss out on top four as seems likely, it will come down to appointing Nuno in the baffling way we did. One day I'd like to see an explanation of the thought processes of that summer.
Click to expand...

Appreciate the response but one thing that stands out is your apparent knowledge of him being forbidden to play a back three, I’ve not heard that theory before, what makes you so sure of it?

I’m still perplexed about Conte’s reasoning for not joining in the summer but being able to come in once things had gone south a quarter of the season through. The fallout between him and Inter seems even stranger to me looking at the serie A league standings seeing that they are potentially going to successfully reclaim the league.
 
DubaiSpur said:
The oddest thing to me about the summer was hiring Nuno, *not* letting him hire his full set of coaches, and then forbidding him from playing 3 at the back for some bizarre reason.

Yes, he was our 210th choice and a bargain bin pick-me-up, but why hobble him like that out of the gate for literally zero reason? 3 at the back is what brought him success at Wolves, and his coaches were probably a big part of his few successes - he isn't the most communicative, so I imagine his coaches do that for him and he trusts them.

If we miss out on top four as seems likely, it will come down to appointing Nuno in the baffling way we did. One day I'd like to see an explanation of the thought processes of that summer.
Click to expand...
Who forbade him from playing it? What coach is going to let someone else dictate the system they use?
 
spurspinter1 said:
Appreciate the response but one thing that stands out is your apparent knowledge of him being forbidden to play a back three, I’ve not heard that theory before, what makes you so sure of it?

I’m still perplexed about Conte’s reasoning for not joining in the summer but being able to come in once things had gone south a quarter of the season through. The fallout between him and Inter seems even stranger to me looking at the serie A league standings seeing that they are potentially going to successfully reclaim the league.
Click to expand...
Conte also needed to negotiate his Pay off from inter before taking the new job
 
Philosophies and systems need to be fluid though, you are going to have injuries and sendings off, you have to be able to change shape, you have to be able to react to the opposition.
 
Baleforce said:
Philosophies and systems need to be fluid though, you are going to have injuries and sendings off, you have to be able to change shape, you have to be able to react to the opposition.
Click to expand...

You do, but reacting to particular situations is short-term/tactical, the overall philosophy of style of play, system etc. is more long-term/strategic. Successive managers would ideally be cut of the same cloth for the latter, whilst being able to adapt to the former when needed.
 
Finney Is Back said:
A 9th choice one I expect :D
Click to expand...

Might be why he was strongly linked, then the links went quiet on him with it being reported that we were no longer after him as he was getting a downvote on Twitter. Then the club did appoint him.
If there is truth then I wonder why Levy was so against a back 3.
 
Lost Mango said:
I may be in a minority but I don't want Poch back. He had run out of ideas and enthusiasm and nothing I have seen from his PSG stint suggests he has been revitalised.

He was amazing for us and a appears to be a lively man but going back to him post-Conte will end in quick disappointment IMO.

Don't think Conte will bail on us after less than a season anyway. Lazy journalism.
Click to expand...

Fully agreed with all of that.

Should Conte walk we may end up in a situation where Pochettino is seen as the best option. I still think it's too soon for him, but we may not be able to attract top quality managers, so it would then, perhaps, be a fine decision.

Keeping Conte, keeping him happy here, should be our highest priority.
 
I find it interesting that after Brighton Conte talked about the importance of not losing a game like that. He left Emerson and Reguilon on the pitch with more risky attacking gambles on the bench.


Then Brentford, another game where we struggled. We did end up getting the point, but after fairly conservative substitutions. Sanchez for Sessegnon. Moura for Emerson left very late on.

This was after Arsenal had beaten United. Leaving us in the rather uncomfortable "may have to win all the remaining games to finish forth" situation.

Does Conte see it differently to that? This one point be being a potential difference maker and him expecting Arsenal to slip up a couple of times before the end of the season?

Just struggling a bit to see the rationale of not going for more high risk options, trying to understand what Conte may be thinking.
 
braineclipse said:
I find it interesting that after Brighton Conte talked about the importance of not losing a game like that. He left Emerson and Reguilon on the pitch with more risky attacking gambles on the bench.


Then Brentford, another game where we struggled. We did end up getting the point, but after fairly conservative substitutions. Sanchez for Sessegnon. Moura for Emerson left very late on.

This was after Arsenal had beaten United. Leaving us in the rather uncomfortable "may have to win all the remaining games to finish forth" situation.

Does Conte see it differently to that? This one point be being a potential difference maker and him expecting Arsenal to slip up a couple of times before the end of the season?

Just struggling a bit to see the rationale of not going for more high risk options, trying to understand what Conte may be thinking.
Click to expand...


I can only hope and think that he is trying to instill a mentality.
 
braineclipse said:
I find it interesting that after Brighton Conte talked about the importance of not losing a game like that. He left Emerson and Reguilon on the pitch with more risky attacking gambles on the bench.


Then Brentford, another game where we struggled. We did end up getting the point, but after fairly conservative substitutions. Sanchez for Sessegnon. Moura for Emerson left very late on.

This was after Arsenal had beaten United. Leaving us in the rather uncomfortable "may have to win all the remaining games to finish forth" situation.

Does Conte see it differently to that? This one point be being a potential difference maker and him expecting Arsenal to slip up a couple of times before the end of the season?

Just struggling a bit to see the rationale of not going for more high risk options, trying to understand what Conte may be thinking.
Click to expand...
Think you're just refusing to accept Conte's philosphy since he's been here.

Either we have played well and blown teams away, or we have been poor and struggled to break teams down and in any of these games he hasn't thrown caution to the wind. It has been the same old wait until near the end and throw Bergwijn on for five minutes and hope something happens....
 
Finney Is Back said:
We’ve not really brought a load of brick at all…. The problem is that we keep on sacking managers and bringing in new ones with completely different football philosophies and systems.
Click to expand...
I thought Levy's philosophy is to hire by committee which largely means Hitchen has a big say.... By his sacking it would seem to be true, they pinned the blame on him.

Dof role can only work well if there is alignment with the coach.

Sent from my SM-T865 using Fapatalk
 
braineclipse said:
I find it interesting that after Brighton Conte talked about the importance of not losing a game like that. He left Emerson and Reguilon on the pitch with more risky attacking gambles on the bench.

Then Brentford, another game where we struggled. We did end up getting the point, but after fairly conservative substitutions. Sanchez for Sessegnon. Moura for Emerson left very late on. This was after Arsenal had beaten United. Leaving us in the rather uncomfortable "may have to win all the remaining games to finish forth" situation.

Does Conte see it differently to that? This one point be being a potential difference maker and him expecting Arsenal to slip up a couple of times before the end of the season? Just struggling a bit to see the rationale of not going for more high risk options, trying to understand what Conte may be thinking.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Conte doesn't want to risk meeting Spurs next season in Champions League. According to a report in the Guardian today about the grumpy ending to PSG's season, he's heading for Paris once this season is done. One guess who's taking over at Spurs?

"Faced with an entrenched cycle of hope, failure and a deepening malaise bred by European misadventures, the Qatari owners are now looking to reshape the club. Pochettino will be the first to go. A coaching swap with Tottenham for Antonio Conte seems likely, with the Italian reportedly offering to join PSG. Spurs chairman Daniel Levy has been in regular contact with Pochettino in recent months about a return to London."
 
greatwhitenorf said:
Perhaps Conte doesn't want to risk meeting Spurs next season in Champions League. According to a report in the Guardian today about the grumpy ending to PSG's season, he's heading for Paris once this season is done. One guess who's taking over at Spurs?

"Faced with an entrenched cycle of hope, failure and a deepening malaise bred by European misadventures, the Qatari owners are now looking to reshape the club. Pochettino will be the first to go. A coaching swap with Tottenham for Antonio Conte seems likely, with the Italian reportedly offering to join PSG. Spurs chairman Daniel Levy has been in regular contact with Pochettino in recent months about a return to London."
Click to expand...

That would be an error.
 
braineclipse said:
I find it interesting that after Brighton Conte talked about the importance of not losing a game like that. He left Emerson and Reguilon on the pitch with more risky attacking gambles on the bench.


Then Brentford, another game where we struggled. We did end up getting the point, but after fairly conservative substitutions. Sanchez for Sessegnon. Moura for Emerson left very late on.

This was after Arsenal had beaten United. Leaving us in the rather uncomfortable "may have to win all the remaining games to finish forth" situation.

Does Conte see it differently to that? This one point be being a potential difference maker and him expecting Arsenal to slip up a couple of times before the end of the season?

Just struggling a bit to see the rationale of not going for more high risk options, trying to understand what Conte may be thinking.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Mystifying from Conte. Seems to say one thing and do another. Hope he stops talking about every game being a cup final. Our players dont turn up for those !
 
For a team down the bottom of the league, 1 point here and 1 point there can be vital to inch your way away from trouble, because your peers get zero points a lot of the time.

But for a team right up near the top of the league, 1 point is a fairly rubbish return because your rivals often get 3. So for me we should push things and take risks when faced with a weak opponent, to try to force SOMEONE to win.

I.e. tell the wing backs to stay forwards and not track back (let the 3 centre backs plus Hojbjerg mop things up).
I.e. swap a wing back that cannot play football, for a player that can play football. I do NOT mean flipping Davinson Sanchez.
I.e. let Kane drop into the 10 position and bring on Bergwijn up top.
I.e. provoke something from Brentford to pull them out of position, even if that is conceding space and drawing them forwards, let them attack so we can break on them.

Don't just sit and watch the paint dry.


We just watched paint dry for 2 matches, zero shots on target and 1 point. Could have been 2 points.
I feel we would have got 3 points if we had provoked chaos in those matches.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back