Welcome Ange: To Dare is to Didgeridoo

[DeanoAustin]

I think that outlook assumes that Ange doesn't learn/improve as we go.

This is his first real job, he's still got a lot to learn. He's starting from a decent base, let's see where that goes over the next few years.

Yep, that's fair. He is entitled to the chance to learn as he goes. But even if he does, the playing field is weighted so heavily against him in terms of clubs on cheat mode that finishing above 3rd or 4th would be an incredible achievement.

 

[DeanoAustin]

What fortune have we actually had?
The Var error vs pool
Anything else?

We had the VAR against Liverpool, we got away with a few first half against United (and the Romero one could have been given as a pen), Jesus misses an absolute sitter that could have buried us at Woolwich and we scored two late goals v Sheffield United. I guess fortune is probably too strong a word but the first 10 games, the momentum was insane and was never likely to last.

 

[JerusalemMan]

I was on the edge of my seat last night, kicking every ball and heading every header - that's what Ange brings for me - the old love of our team. The way we had the Spammers hemmed in last night for the first 30-35 minutes was exceptional, when considered in terms of the job of pressing and shutting down the oppositions impact on the game.

Where we fell short, again, was that despite a shed load of high intensity work on the edge of their box, everyone apart from Porro and Johnson seemed scared to shoot. Yes the ball might fly over the bar or slide wide, but if you don't buy a ticket you can't win the lottery....

We're going to spank someone soon, I'm telling you. I predicted it was going to be last night and I'm disappointed we didn't, but I'm telling you, in the locker somewhere is high scoring win, a five or sixer. When that happens, we need to bottle that emotion and keep striving for that feeling again.

Totally agree on the battering someone.
Let's hope it is Saudi Sportswashing Machine on Sunday.

I'm generally ambivalent towards them, quite favourable even. But the trauma of last season's mullering gives me such a desire for vengeance.
They are tired too, they are struggling with squad depth and they also have an eye on a European mid-week game.
Let's unleash our pain on them, I trust Ange to motivate the team, let's trust the forward players to get shots on goal now.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Where/how would you play the central striker? by moving Son back out wide?

I'd be concerned that would limit Son's output, I also think it's probably easier/cheaper to find a goalscoring winger than a top #9

I’d drop son
He has a poor record against bus Parker’s
You then bring him on once we are ahead

 

[parklane1]

I have no concerns with Ange. I'm happy for him to live or die by his principles. Like with Conte it just means that you have to get players in that suit his system. Unlike with Conte this is a much easier thing to do as his system isn't so niche and frankly unappealing. If the transfer committee can continue to bring in suitable players then Ange will be a success. Just look at what he's managed so far with squad of largely deadwood.

The issue is we started so well and some people have let that dream run away with them and now their expectations are unrealistic. We are a good side when everyone is fit, we can play anyone and even beat any team in the PL but as soon as we lose some players the thin quality of the squad is apparent.

I would argue we really only have 12 players maybe 13, which would the fully fit first 11 we've seen this season with Johnson instead of Richy and Bentancur as the 12th player and maybe Royal as the 13th. Pretty much everyone else is debatable or a significant drop on quality so what do we really expect given the raft of injuries we have suffered. Beef the squad up with more quality players and we won't have these dips.

Great post mate and sums up my feelings as well. I think a lot of fans got carried away by our start and expectations rose to quicky, now the reverse is happening and SOME fans are all doom and gloom about us. The truth is we are a work in progress and it WILL take longer then a dozen or so games to see just how much our progress is working.

Add to the fact of having a new manager with a new system, several new players who have to have time to settle and a shocking injury list ( i know all teams suffer injurys) but we seem to be getting a lot to our better players. Ange has had ONE transfer window to bring in the players who he believes we need to suit his style of play and i am sure others will come in to suit his needs.

Rome was not built in a day ( is the old saying) and we will NOT turn around our poor last couple of seasons overnight let alone 4 months into his first season.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

We had the VAR against Liverpool, we got away with a few first half against United (and the Romero one could have been given as a pen), Jesus misses an absolute sitter that could have buried us at Woolwich and we scored two late goals v Sheffield United. I guess fortune is probably too strong a word but the first 10 games, the momentum was insane and was never likely to last.

Sitters aren’t bad luck. That’s bad finishing as we know

We had bad luck vs Brentford when they got a penalty for a foul but the player held the wrong foot

The Romero one was 100% a pen, but so was the foul on him later on

Jesus missed because he isn’t a good striker. Their second goal came after the ball was handled by their player don’t forget

Pool was on VAR but that’s incompetence again

We haven’t had penalties that should have been given this season and have had quite a few OGs and pens against us … we have spent more time in the opposition area than any side so the numbers don’t add up

That’s why I don’t agree….

But I love the debate

 

[Bedfordspurs]

That's fair but a couple of points on this for me. We're playing front foot football on steroids and, for me, we're taking unnecessary risks. I don't fault Ange for it because we'd have lost anyway and it was fun but to illustrate the point, would any of those sides have gone as attacking as us against Chelsea down to 9 men? We know Liverpool sat in against us when they were down to 9.

The second point in my opinion is that we aren't going to seriously challenge those clubs for the league unless there is a change in our recruitment strategy.

Pool sat in and lost don’t forget
When the teams were evenly matched we played better football as they attacked

How many goals have we concede because of the way we are playing in reality??

Last night was two random luck moments

City… the third goal for sure

Villa… maybe the second but that’s tenuous. The first was a great goal by the way

Wolves.. that was players switching off and also IMO some rustiness.. and Ange giving players games because they played well in the last one

Chelsea… our tactics almost won us the game. With 9 men. Luckily they are brick though

I don’t think it’s the way we’re playing that means we’re conceding

It’s the opposite. It’s why we should be scoring more that’s hurting us IMO of course

 

[scaramanga]

Yep, that's fair. He is entitled to the chance to learn as he goes. But even if he does, the playing field is weighted so heavily against him in terms of clubs on cheat mode that finishing above 3rd or 4th would be an incredible achievement.

They have a head start, certainly.

But we (along with 99% of the rest of the football pyramid) have to hope that at some point, someone will start properly applying the rules.

When (if) that happens, we will be in a far better position than most as we're already working to a sustainable model.

 

[DeanoAustin]

Sitters aren’t bad luck. That’s bad finishing as we know

We had bad luck vs Brentford when they got a penalty for a foul but the player held the wrong foot

The Romero one was 100% a pen, but so was the foul on him later on

Jesus missed because he isn’t a good striker. Their second goal came after the ball was handled by their player don’t forget

Pool was on VAR but that’s incompetence again

We haven’t had penalties that should have been given this season and have had quite a few OGs and pens against us … we have spent more time in the opposition area than any side so the numbers don’t add up

That’s why I don’t agree….

But I love the debate

Yeah maybe luck/fortune was the wrong word but it was the honeymoonist (is that a word) of honeymoon periods. The momentum was never going to keep going. Jesus, as brick as he can be in front of goal, scores that 90% of the time. The Romero one is a lottery because f**k knows what's handball these days from game to game. The Dipper one is just crazy. We had a media falling in love with the manager, we were unbeaten in 10, Robbie WIlliams and The Fonz joining in...it was just a crazy period where everything went right. And Ange deserves great credit for that but it was never going to continue.

Pool sat in and lost don’t forget
When the teams were evenly matched we played better football as they attacked

How many goals have we concede because of the way we are playing in reality??

Last night was two random luck moments

City… the third goal for sure

Villa… maybe the second but that’s tenuous. The first was a great goal by the way

Wolves.. that was players switching off and also IMO some rustiness.. and Ange giving players games because they played well in the last one

Chelsea… our tactics almost won us the game. With 9 men. Luckily they are brick though

I don’t think it’s the way we’re playing that means we’re conceding

It’s the opposite. It’s why we should be scoring more that’s hurting us IMO of course

I'd contend that the first against Villa and the first against City are down to how we play. The winner v Wolves for me is a team not being streetwise. The third against City, as you say. The goals against Chelsea albeit they were in exceptional circumstances.

On the 9 man thing, my point was that we're more front foot than anyone else. No other team goes out like that down to 9 men. It's illustrative of the fact that Ange is more wedded to front foot football than Pep, Klopp or Arteta. No matter what he did that night, sit in or attack, we'd likely have lost to be fair.

 

[Kandi1977]

they have the same points as us, so hardly a good comparison.

I would say it's a perfect comparison! We play splendid football and outplay pretty much everyone, they're a mess, with no apparent plan. Still have the same number points.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Yeah maybe luck/fortune was the wrong word but it was the honeymoonist (is that a word) of honeymoon periods. The momentum was never going to keep going. Jesus, as brick as he can be in front of goal, scores that 90% of the time. The Romero one is a lottery because f**k knows what's handball these days from game to game. The Dipper one is just crazy. We had a media falling in love with the manager, we were unbeaten in 10, Robbie WIlliams and The Fonz joining in...it was just a crazy period where everything went right. And Ange deserves great credit for that but it was never going to continue.


I'd contend that the first against Villa and the first against City are down to how we play. The winner v Wolves for me is a team not being streetwise. The third against City, as you say. The goals against Chelsea albeit they were in exceptional circumstances.

On the 9 man thing, my point was that we're more front foot than anyone else. No other team goes out like that down to 9 men. It's illustrative of the fact that Ange is more wedded to front foot football than Pep, Klopp or Arteta. No matter what he did that night, sit in or attack, we'd likely have lost to be fair.

The way we defend free kicks is a challenge when we had no CBs
You don’t really attack the ball

And city’s first was an OG don’t forget

I disagree on the other managers. They are fixed in their preset way of playing. They just haven’t had injuries to weaken them so early in their reigns after raising the bar so quickly

I do agree the only other teams that may go that front foot with 9 would be city and maybe… arsenal

It all depends on who you can bring on

We couldn’t bring on defenders like pool did vs us as we didn’t have them. That option may have changed Anges thoughts. We had none though.

 

[DubSpur]

That's fair but a couple of points on this for me. We're playing front foot football on steroids and, for me, we're taking unnecessary risks. I don't fault Ange for it because we'd have lost anyway and it was fun but to illustrate the point, would any of those sides have gone as attacking as us against Chelsea down to 9 men? We know Liverpool sat in against us when they were down to 9.

The second point in my opinion is that we aren't going to seriously challenge those clubs for the league unless there is a change in our recruitment strategy.

We didn't have the option of going full turtle like Liverpool did as we didn't have the players, not that I think Ange would have anyway. He also may have looked at it as an opportunity to further install what he wants when the odds were we were going to lose anyway.

I don't think we need a change in the recruitment strategy since Paratici came in. We've done well at identifying young players that fit what we need. We just need to keep unearthing a few gems like VdV, Udogie, and Vicario with the odd more experienced player. We're likely not going to get there in the next year or two but if we stick to the plan and let the team mature and grow together we will hopefully have in 2-3 years a team to make a challenge. Look at Arsenal, the core of their team wasn't expensive signings, it just took time for them to develop together.

The more important thing for me now is that we stick with managers that have the same philosophy and don't need to make wholesale changes to the squad when Ange is replaced (hopefully in 20 years time after winning a bucketful of trophies).

 

[DeanoAustin]

We didn't have the option of going full turtle like Liverpool did as we didn't have the players, not that I think Ange would have anyway. He also may have looked at it as an opportunity to further install what he wants when the odds were we were going to lose anyway.

I don't think we need a change in the recruitment strategy since Paratici came in. We've done well at identifying young players that fit what we need. We just need to keep unearthing a few gems like VdV, Udogie, and Vicario with the odd more experienced player. We're likely not going to get there in the next year or two but if we stick to the plan and let the team mature and grow together we will hopefully have in 2-3 years a team to make a challenge. Look at Arsenal, the core of their team wasn't expensive signings, it just took time for them to develop together.

The more important thing for me now is that we stick with managers that have the same philosophy and don't need to make wholesale changes to the squad when Ange is replaced (hopefully in 20 years time after winning a bucketful of trophies).

I think Paratici's recruitment has been insanely good as was the business we did during the summer (which he was probably involved in). My point isn't a dig at what we're doing, it's arguably some of the best recruitment in the league, it's that I don't think we'll ever win the league with it.

Under Levy, we'll never make the Alisson/VVD type signing, the Declan Rice type signing that could be needed to push us on.

I know I've appeared a bit negative today. I'm not. I'm absolutely behind Ange and I'm enjoying the football (albeit last night was the first time I left the ground a bit angry this season because I really felt we could have been better second half). I do see some problems in Ange's approach but, let's be fair, most managers have them and at least what I perceive to be Ange's shortcomings result in great football. I'm simply trying to keep my expectations realistic and in check.

 

[DubSpur]

I think Paratici's recruitment has been insanely good as was the business we did during the summer (which he was probably involved in). My point isn't a dig at what we're doing, it's arguably some of the best recruitment in the league, it's that I don't think we'll ever win the league with it.

Under Levy, we'll never make the Alisson/VVD type signing, the Declan Rice type signing that could be needed to push us on.

I know I've appeared a bit negative today. I'm not. I'm absolutely behind Ange and I'm enjoying the football (albeit last night was the first time I left the ground a bit angry this season because I really felt we could have been better second half). I do see some problems in Ange's approach but, let's be fair, most managers have them and at least what I perceive to be Ange's shortcomings result in great football. I'm simply trying to keep my expectations realistic and in check.

Hope for the best and expect the worst...

 

[DeanoAustin]

Hope for the best and expect the worst...

That really should replace Audere est Facere

 

[billyiddo]

I hope I’m wrong, I really do. I’m just offering an opinion on what I’ve seen over 15 games. He’s been very unlucky with absentees but, IMO, there are some issues that are down to how he sets up. Take the two free kick goals conceded against Villa and City. For me, that’s not personnel. That’s allowing the opposition to get a run on our defenders. I know there's an alternative view and other clubs do it but, ultimately, it's cost us two goals.

The Chelsea game was beautiful madness. I'm not going to go too hard on that because whatever we do with 9 men, we're probably losing. But the approach was bonkers. Great fun but mad stuff.

Bissouma losing the ball against City is because that’s what he’s being encouraged to do. If he did that under Conte or Mourinho, he'd be dropped. He'd have laid it off to Udogie all day. Again, it cost us. Royal against Wolves at 1-1 helped turn the ball over for the winner when we were in a situation where we should have accepted the draw and he was looking to get a winner. A streetwise team knows that momentum has shifted and they play out the game.

I don’t think any manager can get us challenging in all honestly. We’re just not set up to compete as a club. And all managers come with weaknesses. For Ange, it’s a lack of being streetwise and a gung go approach at any cost. It’s entertaining which is the trade off but we won't challenge for the league with it in my view. I love Ange's principles, I love how he sees the game but at this level, I don't believe you can get away with what he's doing.

Attacking, front foot football comes with risk. It's not a guarantee of success. Ange takes too many risks.

It's Friday night so I'll try to be quick/blunt - but your opinion there seems to me to be influenced more by the narrative around us than what we see on the pitch, the narrative is Ange Ball is all out attack and to hell with defense but I'm left scratching my head at that because it's not what I'm seeing game in game out this season - we're attacking, much more attacking than we are used to recently, but no more so than at our best under previous managers who played on the front foot.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I think Paratici's recruitment has been insanely good as was the business we did during the summer (which he was probably involved in). My point isn't a dig at what we're doing, it's arguably some of the best recruitment in the league, it's that I don't think we'll ever win the league with it.

Under Levy, we'll never make the Alisson/VVD type signing, the Declan Rice type signing that could be needed to push us on.

I know I've appeared a bit negative today. I'm not. I'm absolutely behind Ange and I'm enjoying the football (albeit last night was the first time I left the ground a bit angry this season because I really felt we could have been better second half). I do see some problems in Ange's approach but, let's be fair, most managers have them and at least what I perceive to be Ange's shortcomings result in great football. I'm simply trying to keep my expectations realistic and in check.

none of those signings were made at this stage of their development
And I’d argue we have comparable options to those players already for less money….
The issue is that this season we let go the best striker on the planet
You can’t strengthen and then weaken yourself in the same window and expect big improvements
And also those signings were part of changing the first 11s in their entirety for those clubs
We need to fix the gaps in the next 2 windows and then its additions and development of younger players

 

[billyiddo]

I understand that it's not a poke at Poch, but winning trophies at Celtic and winning trophies at spurs is not comparable.
Ange winning at Celtic is not going to turn us into winners at spurs.
At Celtic he was competing against managers who had won less than Poch, at spurs he's competing against two elite managers, a manager who has won multiple European trophies and one who has won a couple of f a cups.
Unlike at Celtic most of his competitors also have more funds than he does.
He does definitely have a better way of expressing his mentality than Poch had, it also appears to be stronger and more defined. The rebuff last night of the praise for the style was brilliant, we are here to win, the style is a means to an end and that end is winning.
I suppose for me the biggest difference between ange and Poch is that Poch wanted the players to buy in and hoped eventually they would come round to his way of thinking, ange doesn't appear to care. It's there if you want it, if you don't your out.
Ange has a ruthlessness Poch just didn't have.

I'm not sure we can make that call regarding ruthlessness tbh Ange appears to have a trusted XI much the same way Poch did. Moving forward the positive is that Ange isn't going to be as restrict in the transfer market the same way so can build a better squad, or at least has more resources to do so.

For example early on Poch relied on Bentaleb & Mason as key first XI players and despite that they were upgraded on pretty quickly tbf - had he not been so restricted by the stadium build (and Hitchens transfer department) then i see no reason to think that kind of turnover wouldn't have continued.

 

[DeanoAustin]

It's Friday night so I'll try to be quick/blunt - but your opinion there seems to me to be influenced more by the narrative around us than what we see on the pitch, the narrative is Ange Ball is all out attack and to hell with defense but I'm left scratching my head at that because it's not what I'm seeing game in game out this season - we're attacking, much more attacking than we are used to recently, but no more so than at our best under previous managers who played on the front foot.

No, it’s really not. It’s influenced by what I see on the pitch. I’ve outlined exactly where I see Ange’s approach has caused us problems and cost us goals.

It’s the most risky football I’ve ever seen us play. Poch’s team was attacking but we always had an insurance policy in midfield - something we didn’t have for example in the first half at City.

There are signs that Ange’s approach has shortcomings. At the moment, you could make the argument that that’s driven by personnel. I’m not sure that’s true. Time will tell I guess.

For the record, I’m not against his approach. It’s a bit risky for me ideally but it’s a much better watch than the last 5 years and most of my 40 years as a fan. I’m more than happy to live with it - I just don’t see it enabling us to really challenge the big boys.

 

[billyiddo]

No, it’s really not. It’s influenced by what I see on the pitch. I’ve outlined exactly where I see Ange’s approach has caused us problems and cost us goals.

It’s the most risky football I’ve ever seen us play. Poch’s team was attacking but we always had an insurance policy in midfield - something we didn’t have for example in the first half at City.

There are signs that Ange’s approach has shortcomings. At the moment, you could make the argument that that’s driven by personnel. I’m not sure that’s true. Time will tell I guess.

For the record, I’m not against his approach. It’s a bit risky for me ideally but it’s a much better watch than the last 5 years and most of my 40 years as a fan. I’m more than happy to live with it - I just don’t see it enabling us to really challenge the big boys.

A style of play alone isn't going to get us to that level no matter what it is (defensive/attacking/counter/whatever) and nor is a style of play going to restrict us from reaching that level. Ange plays attackimg football/Mourinho & Conte the opposite- which of those managers would you back to achieve anything here?

What you need is all aspects of the club to be pulling in the same direction, players to buy in to the managers approach a manager who believes in his principals and a transfer department that brings in players of the required quality