The Overlap - some interesting comments from Ange

[Robspur12]

Ange is an enigma; fair play he does win stuff. He also seems to have a good relationship with his players and his football when it works can be scintillating to watch. So then you wonder why is he not universally loved by Spurs fans.

I'm afraid I am not convinced that winning the Europa League was an "amazing achievement" given the context around the win, i.e that he was able to give up on the league to do it and the quality of opposition in Europe just doesn't seem to be even close to that of the PL currently. That's not to say that it was not something great for us fans. But it wasn't the sign that Ange had somehow built us for repeated success. In fact, it could be argued that the Ange era (alongside other factors) kicked off the accelerated decline we are seeing now.

I believe that if any of the contextual stuff that had stopped us winning trophies with previous managers, existed last season, i.e having to compete in multiple tournaments at the same time or having to face a top team in the final, we wouldn't have got over the line. I mean even if we faced the same kind of challenge from teams around us for the last relegation place would we have still won the Europa League? Would we have been more resilient to the relegation threat than this season? His Forest experience suggests not.

And I'm afraid this is why I believe he was sacked and still think it was the correct decision. Now whether he should have been replaced by Thomas Frank is another discussion entirely.

 

[NoLimits01]

Whether anyone remembers what he did to Forest or not, I'm unsure how that would preclude him from having some thoughts/observations/criticisms, valid or otherwise, of our club? Or indeed, any other club he may have worked at.

That’s not what I meant

 

[braineclipse]

You probably want to watch the full interview with Ange before sticking with the ‘VDV and Romero forced him to change’ line. At the very least Ange offers an alternative and obviously fair perspective, and honestly it was always ridiculous stick to beat him with. And again I ask, if his system had been sussed then why were we doing ok in the top 7 up until our injuries started to bite after the City 4-0 win? We’ve clearly been ‘sussed’ far more this season.

Genuinely great watch for me though, the whole thing,

- commenting on the people running football clubs not really getting football. I actually never believed it until the decision to sack Ange and appoint Frank, and it’s unravelling.

- his point on the Europa win meaning he had the players in the palm of his hands and it would have been interesting to see what he could do. 100% agree with this and also that it would definitely have been better than whatever we had this season.

- open about where he’s taken risks with injuries and where he could have done better, eg VDV vs Chelsea.

- comments on leadership, and actually having won something being a really meaningful aspect. His choice to double down on the always in his second season comment. If he expects players to follow him, he has to project that confidence. Without wanting to stick the boot too much into Frank, he was just so far away from Ange’s level on this specific point.

- acknowledged the terrible decision to join Forest.

Loads of other good things. I really hope he lands somewhere great.

What we know is that VdV and Romero talked to Ange about our playing style in the EL and that we changed how we played.

That won't stop people saying that VdV and Romero forced him into it. However they actually would have done that I don't know. To me a manager being receptive to input from some of his best players seems like a strength, not a weakness.

 

[Lemonade Money]

To me a manager being receptive to input from some of his best players seems like a strength, not a weakness.

I agree, but Ange said he studied previous winners, saw they all played defensive, put it to the players, and they bought into it.
Like he said, 17th place no one wanted to take some of the blame, but winning the EL? Everyone wanted to take some credit.

 

[Bishop]

What we know is that VdV and Romero talked to Ange about our playing style in the EL and that we changed how we played.

That won't stop people saying that VdV and Romero forced him into it. However they actually would have done that I don't know. To me a manager being receptive to input from some of his best players seems like a strength, not a weakness.

I'd personally want the manager to have the perception themselves to make the adjustments that everyone but him could see were needed. It is a strength that he was receptive but it's primarily a weakness that it took his two senior CBs approaching about needing a change for him to actually make that happen.

 

[braineclipse]

I'd personally want the manager to have the perception themselves to make the adjustments that everyone but him could see were needed. It is a strength that he was receptive but it's primarily a weakness that it took his two senior CBs approaching about needing a change for him to actually make that happen.

Sure, he could have been a better manager had he seen that all on his own. I'm a rather strong believer in these things being a team effort including both the coaches and players as well as the manager in the vast majority of cases possibly with some exceptions for the very few elite managers around. Ange isn't one of them.

 

[Raziel]

He does football for a living, his whole life, is well respected, and he wins stuff.
Let's hear what you've achieved in football?

With that logic, I'd assume you will never complain about any of our players again? after all

The guy's career is simple, he spent 30 years building a system that either 1/doesn't work at all at top level or 2/IS some kind of Pep/Flick thing that only works if you buy the best of the best (which he will never see the opportunity to)

I just disagree on the thrust of this and the idea that Ange is a charlatan.

It’s going to be hard to maintain a 10 wins from 11 games level of form so of course there was a drop. The two bad runs in the first season consist of the Chelsea home game and following, where we lose Udogie and Romero to suspension and I think also pick two injuries, and then the end of the season where we play the top 4 all in a row including the weird City game that half the fans shared to lose. But if you actually look at the results through the course of the rest of the season there were plenty of big wins and good runs of form. Ditto season 2 until after the Emirates Marketing Project 4-0.

So I just don’t agree that he was sussed out, and I don’t think you can just say ‘ignore the injuries’ or anything else because it’s a massive part of the context. He played a teenage central midfielder in his debut season in the top flight at centre back for most of his last year, because he had to.

And personally I think it’s mad to think that Ange wouldn’t do better this season. I think the fact that he actually won the trophy meant the players would have been behind them, because he promised them success after the toughest season of their lives and delivered it. I think the players knew what they went through, and why last season ended up the way it did. And would absolutely have wanted to push on.

I watched the whole interview and I don’t think anything he says is inconsistent. Of course if you want to take literal VDV’s words and completely disregard Ange’s, then of course you give him no credit for the Europa and all credit to the centre backs. But he gives a well reasoned explanation for what he did and why he did it. I also thought it was interesting that he was perfectly willing to acknowledge his bad decisions - that playing VDV in the Chelsea game last season was a risk. That joining Forest was a mad decision that everyone was advising him against. It wasn’t like he just swept over everything. He was perfectly fair.

As for Forest proving he was sussed, it’s an extremely black and white way of looking at something. He correctly deduced that the players weren’t desperate for what he offers, and liked playing under Nuno. He also joined mid season and was expected to implement his style immediately. It just wasn’t going to work. But it’s not the style or system itself, it’s the context. In the same way our players were begging for some more aggressive football after years of struggle post Poch, they bought into him more quickly. Ange acknowledged he didn’t really speak to Maranakis enough about the expectations, and went in too confident in changing the style. So it’s a lesson he learned that should have been obvious, you can do it when the club and the players actually want what you bring, by the same token I think the players never wanted what Frank brought, I think they were happy with Ange. But mad owners think they know better.

Ange is a good manager in a lower level league (where opposition lower conversion rates allow his system to work), he's obviously a motivator with the way he talks, the guy that gave that interview (as an ex manager) is a charlatan pitching a message that simply doesn't line up with the truth.

Go watch it again, it's the classic brick that Jose/Conte/other fudging narcissists do when they fail, they take 5% truth and deflect and convince everyone "if only x" I would have delivered. Ange cannot explain why he got 17th, he doesn't acknowledge it, he doesn't say "yes, we prioritized the cup, but league performances still weren't good enough, we never should have finished 17th"

And time and time again, this is where it breaks down, injuries, squad not good enough, we don't play the wages, excuse after excuse, if Ange or Frank was 10th-12th, both would still have a job .. and the reason the club is where it is today (and ex players say this all the time), both Ange and Frank gave them the excuses (priority, injury, we will lose games)

 

[Lemonade Money]

With that logic, I'd assume you will never complain about any of our players again? after all

The guy's career is simple, he spent 30 years building a system that either 1/doesn't work at all at top level or 2/IS some kind of Pep/Flick thing that only works if you buy the best of the best (which he will never see the opportunity to)



Ange is a good manager in a lower level league (where opposition lower conversion rates allow his system to work), he's obviously a motivator with the way he talks, the guy that gave that interview (as an ex manager) is a charlatan pitching a message that simply doesn't line up with the truth.

Go watch it again, it's the classic brick that Jose/Conte/other fudging narcissists do when they fail, they take 5% truth and deflect and convince everyone "if only x" I would have delivered. Ange cannot explain why he got 17th, he doesn't acknowledge it, he doesn't say "yes, we prioritized the cup, but league performances still weren't good enough, we never should have finished 17th"

And time and time again, this is where it breaks down, injuries, squad not good enough, we don't play the wages, excuse after excuse, if Ange or Frank was 10th-12th, both would still have a job .. and the reason the club is where it is today (and ex players say this all the time), both Ange and Frank gave them the excuses (priority, injury, we will lose games)

He's in your head.

 

[thfcsteff]

With that logic, I'd assume you will never complain about any of our players again? after all

The guy's career is simple, he spent 30 years building a system that either 1/doesn't work at all at top level or 2/IS some kind of Pep/Flick thing that only works if you buy the best of the best (which he will never see the opportunity to)



Ange is a good manager in a lower level league (where opposition lower conversion rates allow his system to work), he's obviously a motivator with the way he talks, the guy that gave that interview (as an ex manager) is a charlatan pitching a message that simply doesn't line up with the truth.

Go watch it again, it's the classic brick that Jose/Conte/other fudging narcissists do when they fail, they take 5% truth and deflect and convince everyone "if only x" I would have delivered. Ange cannot explain why he got 17th, he doesn't acknowledge it, he doesn't say "yes, we prioritized the cup, but league performances still weren't good enough, we never should have finished 17th"

And time and time again, this is where it breaks down, injuries, squad not good enough, we don't play the wages, excuse after excuse, if Ange or Frank was 10th-12th, both would still have a job .. and the reason the club is where it is today (and ex players say this all the time), both Ange and Frank gave them the excuses (priority, injury, we will lose games)

Like it or not, Postecoglu did not fail.
He won the Europa League trophy.
Fact.
Of course, we're so terrified of seeing where winning a major trophy could've taken us, that we sack the bloke and get a clean, smart yet compliant middle manager in to what? 'Build on the shoulders of others' or 'change the culture' (the one that did something we hadn't done in Europe for over 40 years)? I mean, what did we do other than brick on success and the huge vibe of winning in such a comprehensive way that May seems a decade ago. Yes, our board decimated that winning feeling in record time! Remarkable.

"We will lose games" is not on the players, it is on a misplaced manager who felt it important to say, and those who hired him in the first place.
This mess has a lot, lot more parts than a demoralized, injured, and ill-balanced squad.

 

[DeanoAustin]

Like it or not, Postecoglu did not fail.
He won the Europa League trophy.
Fact.
Of course, we're so terrified of seeing where winning a major trophy could've taken us, that we sack the bloke and get a clean, smart yet compliant middle manager in to what? 'Build on the shoulders of others' or 'change the culture' (the one that did something we hadn't done in Europe for over 40 years)? I mean, what did we do other than brick on success and the huge vibe of winning in such a comprehensive way that May seems a decade ago. Yes, our board decimated that winning feeling in record time! Remarkable.

"We will lose games" is not on the players, it is on a misplaced manager who felt it important to say, and those who hired him in the first place.
This mess has a lot, lot more parts than a demoralized, injured, and ill-balanced squad.

I don't think it's a binary thing with failure or not when it comes to Ange.

Finishing 17th with this club is incompetent in my book. I've never seen any club sink as low as quickly as we have from top 6 finishes to bottom 4-5 teams. Maybe Leeds in the early 00s but that was because, financially, they came apart.

There is an argument, and I believe there is a degree of truth in it, that Ange lowered standards and made losing acceptable at Tottenham. We lost 22 league games last year - that's mind boggling. The trend has continued this year. Lots of people have responsibility for our current predicament and Ange is one of them in my view (albeit not as much responsibility as some of the board, Lange and Frank). The price of the Europa League could be a catastrophic lowering of standards that carried into this season.

 

[Mcfee]

It feels like a lot of people would’ve preferred to finish e.g. 8th and not win the Europa. Not me. It’s not really clear how winning the Europa lowered standards! I said this time last year that Ange was done for because the board wouldn’t countenance another season like it. I was only half right. One mistake was replacing him with Frank. The bigger one was not recognising Frank was the wrong man until about 3 months too late. We are where we are due to incompetent leadership. That’s all.

 

[DeanoAustin]

It feels like a lot of people would’ve preferred to finish e.g. 8th and not win the Europa. Not me. It’s not really clear how winning the Europa lowered standards! I said this time last year that Ange was done for because the board wouldn’t countenance another season like it. I was only half right. One mistake was replacing him with Frank. The bigger one was not recognising Frank was the wrong man until about 3 months too late. We are where we are due to incompetent leadership. That’s all.

Have you ever seen any team bin off the league in the fashion that we did last year? We lost 22 league games. We had a horrific home record. Losing becomes a habit and a habit that is hard to break. Ange has admitted that he wrote off the league pretty much so he accepted losing and the players accepted losing.

Winning the Europa was a great achievement in my book. All credit to him for that. However, there is a strong argument that it came at a cost and the cost was that losing in the league was normalised. That doesn't mean Frank was anything other than a very poor appointment and the board didn't make an absolute mess of things by not firing him earlier and not doing more in the transfer window. That doesn't absolve Ange of his responsibility here though IMO.

 

[Raziel]

It feels like a lot of people would’ve preferred to finish e.g. 8th and not win the Europa. Not me. It’s not really clear how winning the Europa lowered standards! I said this time last year that Ange was done for because the board wouldn’t countenance another season like it. I was only half right. One mistake was replacing him with Frank. The bigger one was not recognising Frank was the wrong man until about 3 months too late. We are where we are due to incompetent leadership. That’s all.

No people were willing to finish 12th (equal to our worse finish in the previous 20 years) and win Europa.

@DeanoAustin is 100% correct, Ange started the rot in the league that we still cannot fix, that will cost us years of correction (even if we don't go down), and we gave a team excuses/the right to lose 22 home games, and they have continued to take it.

Like it or not, Postecoglu did not fail.
He won the Europa League trophy.
Fact.
Of course, we're so terrified of seeing where winning a major trophy could've taken us, that we sack the bloke and get a clean, smart yet compliant middle manager in to what? 'Build on the shoulders of others' or 'change the culture' (the one that did something we hadn't done in Europe for over 40 years)? I mean, what did we do other than brick on success and the huge vibe of winning in such a comprehensive way that May seems a decade ago. Yes, our board decimated that winning feeling in record time! Remarkable.

"We will lose games" is not on the players, it is on a misplaced manager who felt it important to say, and those who hired him in the first place.
This mess has a lot, lot more parts than a demoralized, injured, and ill-balanced squad.

Like Ramos or Di Matteo at Chelsea type of success, and I'm glad we got the trophy, but can't say I enjoyed the ride to get there (whole other conversation)

Again Frank's failure does nothing to change Ange's, after Forest surely you can admit he'd be fired by now as well?

Re the club hiring the wrong guy, killing the moment/vibe, failure to correct early enough, failure to help squad in January, no argument from me

 

[Mcfee]

Have you ever seen any team bin off the league in the fashion that we did last year? We lost 22 league games. We had a horrific home record. Losing becomes a habit and a habit that is hard to break. Ange has admitted that he wrote off the league pretty much so he accepted losing and the players accepted losing.

Winning the Europa was a great achievement in my book. All credit to him for that. However, there is a strong argument that it came at a cost and the cost was that losing in the league was normalised. That doesn't mean Frank was anything other than a very poor appointment and the board didn't make an absolute mess of things by not firing him earlier and not doing more in the transfer window. That doesn't absolve Ange of his responsibility here though IMO.

Again, I’d no problem with Ange being removed. Yes we finished 17th but we started this season on the same points as everyone else. Maybe the new manager specifically stating 17th was some kind of benchmark for improvement contributed to the normalisation of losing.

 

[Raziel]

Again, I’d no problem with Ange being removed. Yes we finished 17th but we started this season on the same points as everyone else. Maybe the new manager specifically stating 17th was some kind of benchmark for improvement contributed to the normalisation of losing.

And we will lose games is guaranteed.

Frank was truly an awful appointment, he lacks the charisma of Ange and it seems he walked in thinking he was building from 17th, in reality what we needed was a manager who treated last year as an abnormality in the league and demanded instant and consistent improvement

 

[DeanoAustin]

Again, I’d no problem with Ange being removed. Yes we finished 17th but we started this season on the same points as everyone else. Maybe the new manager specifically stating 17th was some kind of benchmark for improvement contributed to the normalisation of losing.

Frank certainly has culpability for our continued losing run. No doubt. Whether it was that statement specifically I'd be doubtful (silly and all as it was) but I think his lack of presence, his lack of track record and his style of play were bigger contributors. All of that still doesn't get away from the fact that our consistently horrific form over the last 12 months started with Ange. For me, it's hard to make an argument that Ange also doesn't have culpability here for how he treated the league after Christmas last year.

 

[Mikey10]

I don't think it's a binary thing with failure or not when it comes to Ange.

Finishing 17th with this club is incompetent in my book. I've never seen any club sink as low as quickly as we have from top 6 finishes to bottom 4-5 teams. Maybe Leeds in the early 00s but that was because, financially, they came apart.

There is an argument, and I believe there is a degree of truth in it, that Ange lowered standards and made losing acceptable at Tottenham. We lost 22 league games last year - that's mind boggling. The trend has continued this year. Lots of people have responsibility for our current predicament and Ange is one of them in my view (albeit not as much responsibility as some of the board, Lange and Frank). The price of the Europa League could be a catastrophic lowering of standards that carried into this season.

I've never bought the 'we threw the league' narrative.

One, because I never heard it mentioned by the manager until we had a trophy in the bag...funny that.

Two, because the fall-off in our league form started quite a bit before he claims he began to throw league games (i.e. the season before).

 

[DeanoAustin]

I've never bought the 'we threw the league' narrative.

One, because I never heard it mentioned by the manager until we had a trophy in the bag...funny that.

Two, because the fall-off in our league form started quite a bit before he claims he began to throw league games (i.e. the season before).

I think you could argue he's massaging history. My recollection/impression without looking at stats:

1. He started brilliantly with title winning form - Aug 23-Nov 23.
2. We regressed a fair bit as injuries took hold - Nov 23-Feb 24.
3. Our form didn't recover and we took some bad hidings sprinkled with some decent performances - Feb 24 - May 24.
4. We started the league decently - Aug 24 to Nov 24.
5. Injuries took hold and our form dropped - Nov 24 - Jan 25.
6. Our form fell off a cliff completely - Jan 25 - May 25.

Somewhere within that Jan 25 to May 25 time, he clearly started to prioritise the EL because he was leaving out our better players when fit. Micky VdV even commented on it at one point. However, that whole period, IIRC, also coincided with a horrific injury list so I'm not sure at what point he started leaving people out voluntarily.

In league terms, he wasn't a total bust from November 23 IMO because up to November 24 that season, we weren't bad.

 

[harr1984]

I've never bought the 'we threw the league' narrative.

One, because I never heard it mentioned by the manager until we had a trophy in the bag...funny that.

Two, because the fall-off in our league form started quite a bit before he claims he began to throw league games (i.e. the season before).

You probably never heard it, because to this day he has never ever said he 'threw the league.' He said there was a focus on winning the EL, which was again said by VDV in his interview with Neville which is also backed up in the teams that were put out vs the teams that were put out the same week in the EL knock outs.

That doesn't mean he didn't want to win games in the league, but rightly the priority was winning the EL games and as such certain important players were rested for these games. There is a clear difference.....

 

[Finney Is Back]

I think you could argue he's massaging history. My recollection/impression without looking at stats:

1. He started brilliantly with title winning form - Aug 23-Nov 23.
2. We regressed a fair bit as injuries took hold - Nov 23-Feb 24.
3. Our form didn't recover and we took some bad hidings sprinkled with some decent performances - Feb 24 - May 24.
4. We started the league decently - Aug 24 to Nov 24.
5. Injuries took hold and our form dropped - Nov 24 - Jan 25.
6. Our form fell off a cliff completely - Jan 25 - May 25.

Somewhere within that Jan 25 to May 25 time, he clearly started to prioritise the EL because he was leaving out our better players when fit. Micky VdV even commented on it at one point. However, that whole period, IIRC, also coincided with a horrific injury list so I'm not sure at what point he started leaving people out voluntarily.

In league terms, he wasn't a total bust from November 23 IMO because up to November 24 that season, we weren't bad.

I think the league got completely sacked off once we'd got the two wins (against Brentford and Man Utd) that basically meant we were safe by anything other than mathematics.