• 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

Ange’s system / formation

I put a fanbases opinion ahead of outsiders when it comes to whether or not a manager is doing a good job.

Well i was proved right last time when i said they were idiots for sacking him. We'll see if i'm proved right this time.

Also it's only a section of fans that want him gone. Not the majority.
 
If you are a midtable club that replaces their manager. Next season the new manager gets you relegated 100% it was the wrong decision to sack the old manager. You'd be better off if you kept the old one.
Really.. how has that worked then because many mid table clubs did just that and haven’t been relegated
 
Really.. how has that worked then because many mid table clubs did just that and haven’t been relegated

Do you not understand what a hypothetical is? I was giving you an example of how replacing a manager doing a good job can be a mistake.
 
He is trying to create a team that dominates games like City, Liverpool, Arsenal etc and until it clicks it won’t be pretty. Yes the defence looks shocking but its because we are not winning the ball high up the pitch like the teams above do. City, Pool and the goons are suspect at the back when they are left exposed, the difference is it doesn’t happen very often because they are good at retrieving the ball in the midfield and turning it straight back into more pressure. We are trying to do that but it will take time and the right players. Ange wants us to push back the opposition and when we lose the ball we get it back almost instantly like you see the teams above do. It will work eventually but it needs time for players to adapt and to get new players in. The first 10 games was better due to no one knowing how to handle our system and the fact other teams were also getting up to speed. It papered over any cracks we had but Spurs fans being spurs fans got over excited and unrealistic in their expectations.
 
I will continue to applaud Ange for his "dogmatism". I don't think he's any more or worse in his dogmatic approach than Pep, Klopp, Arteta etc.

I think he knows that there will be real bumps in the road with that approach. But I also think it's a good path forward. To actually instill a system of play over time.

He does make tactical tweaks and changes. But not big strategic changes. Had he done that at this point I would start being concerned.

I don't think we can realistically describe things going wrong now as "glaring flaws" in his system. Give other system based managers similar squad weaknesses and I think you would see similar flaws. As we have seen with others in the past. Here and elsewhere.

Pochettino gets brought up repeatedly and the point is often made about a lack of signings and it's a valid point. It was a huge obstacle to overcome. He ended up with too many players that either weren't good enough or didn't fit the system. And it fell apart. Similarly early on for Klopp, Arteta, even Pep.

Sticking dogmaticly to a system will sometimes fail spectacularly. But imo it's also the best path to real growth and development into something that can be really good.
But, but, but he's lost some games, so let's completely write him off, and pine after an ex-manager who's lost even more.
 
Ta-Ra-Fergie-banner-007.jpg

Imagine if the 'experts' had got their way. They would still to this day be saying we were never going to win anything with him.
 
Redknapp wasn't about league position. Levys mum had just died so he took time off. Lewis took over in the interim. Redknapp came in demanding a new contract. After turning one down in jan. The court case and the england fiasco. Lewis told him to do one.
Silly move…. Should’ve negotiated a new contract.
 
Back