Parklaner81
Steve Hodge
Don't be ridiculous.
-
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
Fair play Daniel Levy
- Thread starter Craig_J
- Start date
Don't be ridiculous.
lurker of old
Ramon Vega
So if you asked Spurs fans this morning: "Were we right to let AVB go?", I wonder what the answer would be? 50/50? Majority saying we were wrong?
I do think that we would have bounced back under AVB and won last night, but at the same time for a while last night we looked as though we were playing decent attacking football. Assuming we lose against the Saints, the boxing day fixture becomes a "must win". Were we to lose that, there is a real danger of a tailspin developing with the away games to Manure and the ****....a real danger of it all going pear-shaped.
...oh well, at least I will be there to enjoy the ride, and West Brom aren't exactly giant killers.
I do think that we would have bounced back under AVB and won last night, but at the same time for a while last night we looked as though we were playing decent attacking football. Assuming we lose against the Saints, the boxing day fixture becomes a "must win". Were we to lose that, there is a real danger of a tailspin developing with the away games to Manure and the ****....a real danger of it all going pear-shaped.
...oh well, at least I will be there to enjoy the ride, and West Brom aren't exactly giant killers.
chancer
Gudni Bergsson
It's really complicated, isn't it?
I (marginally) didn't favour sacking him, but now it's done I can't say I blame Levy. Our front 6 were so far away from being a coherent offensive threat that I simply don't know how you'd have fixed it, even with time. And if AVB dropped that second DM/high line formation, or changed to 4-4-2 or whatnot you're looking at a totally different set-up, and I don't see the evidence that he'd have been prepared to do that. Maybe more importantly, how do you turn around to the players and say we're totally changing everything I've been telling you for the last 6 months?
Also, there is something about AVB's energy/aura (to get all New Age about it) that I had concerns about. It was always just so highly strung and filled with a sort of frantic tension. People say he's much nicer behind he scenes than in public, but there's a thin line between healthy, competitive intensity and a sort of obsessive mania. Again, maturity might be the crux of that personality issue.
As I said when the announcement was made, sacking AVB can only be a right decision if Levy has someone lined up soon.
And that someone cannot be Sherwood, Hoddle or some other no name, no brand type of manager. While some people will no doubt mention somebody like Lambert or that level, if we want to be a top 4 club, we need to act/appoint like a top 4 club.
Of the names being proposed, would City/Cheat$ki/Manure appoint or consider any of them?
And that someone cannot be Sherwood, Hoddle or some other no name, no brand type of manager. While some people will no doubt mention somebody like Lambert or that level, if we want to be a top 4 club, we need to act/appoint like a top 4 club.
Of the names being proposed, would City/Cheat$ki/Manure appoint or consider any of them?
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
Would any of those teams have appointed AVB after he got sacked by Chelsea? Would any of those teams have appointed Redknapp? Jol? I don't think so.
We don't have the pull of some of those clubs, this has been shown both with players and with managers.
Sometimes you have to make the first move. We can't start official negotiations with someone for a position that is currently filled and yes, I know we tapped up Ramos while Jol was still in charge.
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
Well, you can and Levy has in the past.
Either the majority of Spurs fans or a very vocal minority of Spurs fans weren't particularly happy about it though.
The lesson has to be "if you do it, don't get caught" I think.
parklane1
Tony Galvin
What a lot of ********.
The day we stop selling our best players and once just ONCE my season ticket doesn't rise in price like clockwork in the summer I'll take it back and say he isn't a crook. Until that day in my eyes he's a crook.
thfcsteff
Garth Crooks
indospurs
Young-Pyo Lee
Got my daily dose of a mineral from this article : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ics-at-Tottenham-Hotspur-must-be-praised.html
Last edited:
My current view is that Levy's gone too soon with AVB.
We all knew that having brought in so many new players, it'd take a good few months to get things ticking. I suspect that if at the beginning of the season we'd been told that at this stage we'd be 6 points off second and the team in second have Chelsea and City, both away, in their next three games, most of us would have taken that, especially if at was on the basis that we'd done that (a) without playing well and (b) having qualified for the last 32 of the EL with a 100% record.
It is perfectly conceivable that had AVB remained at the helm that we would have been in or around the top four at the turn of the year.
Instead, we now have Sherwood at the helm going into the crucial Christmas period and I see little evidence of us bringing in a decent manager in the immediate future.
I think there is every chance that we'll finish 7th or lower this season. If that is the case, there will almost certainly be an exodus of the likes of Sandro, Vertonghen, Eriksen and Lamela and we will be back to where we were in 2008.
I could be wrong. The new manager might come in and immediately get the team to gel and we might push for 4th, in which case Levy was clearly right. I suspect though that we are in for a painful few years of once agin trying to put together a squad who can challenge for the top four.
I might be wrong though.
We all knew that having brought in so many new players, it'd take a good few months to get things ticking. I suspect that if at the beginning of the season we'd been told that at this stage we'd be 6 points off second and the team in second have Chelsea and City, both away, in their next three games, most of us would have taken that, especially if at was on the basis that we'd done that (a) without playing well and (b) having qualified for the last 32 of the EL with a 100% record.
It is perfectly conceivable that had AVB remained at the helm that we would have been in or around the top four at the turn of the year.
Instead, we now have Sherwood at the helm going into the crucial Christmas period and I see little evidence of us bringing in a decent manager in the immediate future.
I think there is every chance that we'll finish 7th or lower this season. If that is the case, there will almost certainly be an exodus of the likes of Sandro, Vertonghen, Eriksen and Lamela and we will be back to where we were in 2008.
I could be wrong. The new manager might come in and immediately get the team to gel and we might push for 4th, in which case Levy was clearly right. I suspect though that we are in for a painful few years of once agin trying to put together a squad who can challenge for the top four.
I might be wrong though.
I know Norman has an agenda, but I think his article in the telegraph which you linked above is pretty observant. It must be the case that either Levy is trigger happy or appoints the wrong managers.
Liverpool could have sacked Rodgers this time last season when they were in a worse position than we were under AVB, but they gave it time, showed confidence in their appointment, kept their best player and, guess what, they're second and just gave us a kicking.
Hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing, but Levy could have used hindsight and looked back at our recent history to inform himself as to how well this approach has worked in the past before deciding whether it was the right approach. Levy's a man of above average intelligence, but intelligence, football knowledge, business acumen and common sense are all very different and I think to be a good Chairman you need all four of them. levy has the first and the third, but not enough of the second and fourth, in my view.
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
You're using Liverpool for you example as the club that gave their manager time and it ended up working for them? Really? After them sacking Benitez in the summer of 2010 and since then have fired another two managers. If anything this seems like an example of "give the manager a season and a half to sort it out, if it doesn't work by then sack him and give a new dude the chance until you find something that sticks".
Edit: And no, sacking Rodgers at this time last season would not have been comparable to us sacking AVB now. If they sacked him then he would have been less than a season into his career there. Had Rodgers delivered the same performances and results this season as we have had topped off by losing 6-0 and 5-0 within the span of a couple of months I think the wheels would have been in motion for Rodgers to follow in the footsteps of Benitez, Hodgson and Daglish out the Anfield gates.
Last edited:
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
Not sure if this has already been posted here or elsewhere, but a (in my eyes) good article on some of the off the pitch stuff that in the end was a big part of AVB losing his job.
http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2013/12/17/4484755/the-rows-fallouts-that-cost-villas-boas-his-job-as-tottenham
A couple of points:
-Seems to confirm that the Sunday meeting was at least an opportunity to clear the air and work towards a solution to our problems. And first after that meeting was the decision made to get rid of AVB.
-Baldini was a part of that meeting on the Sunday along with Levy and AVB. Baldini was supposedly AVB's first choice man for the DoF/technical director position this summer and someone he wanted to work with. Yet so soon into their relationship this was what it had come to.
-Behind the scenes conflicts were fairly widespread. Stobart's words: "In the end, almost everywhere you looked at Spurs, there was someone with whom Villas-Boas had clashed."
Several other quotes in that article that would be worth posting. I think Stobart is one of the most reliable journalists for Tottenham information. It might not all be true, it might be tinted by whoever he's getting various pieces of information from.
I honestly think Levy didn't have much of a choice in the end, I think this sacking is fairly comparable to the Redknapp one. The results weren't quite there, there were clear on the pitch problems, but matched with some off the pitch problems that made the sacking the logical thing to do.
http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2013/12/17/4484755/the-rows-fallouts-that-cost-villas-boas-his-job-as-tottenham
A couple of points:
-Seems to confirm that the Sunday meeting was at least an opportunity to clear the air and work towards a solution to our problems. And first after that meeting was the decision made to get rid of AVB.
-Baldini was a part of that meeting on the Sunday along with Levy and AVB. Baldini was supposedly AVB's first choice man for the DoF/technical director position this summer and someone he wanted to work with. Yet so soon into their relationship this was what it had come to.
-Behind the scenes conflicts were fairly widespread. Stobart's words: "In the end, almost everywhere you looked at Spurs, there was someone with whom Villas-Boas had clashed."
Several other quotes in that article that would be worth posting. I think Stobart is one of the most reliable journalists for Tottenham information. It might not all be true, it might be tinted by whoever he's getting various pieces of information from.
I honestly think Levy didn't have much of a choice in the end, I think this sacking is fairly comparable to the Redknapp one. The results weren't quite there, there were clear on the pitch problems, but matched with some off the pitch problems that made the sacking the logical thing to do.
chancer
Gudni Bergsson
Well, let's first stipulate that this is Tottenham's spin on events - the story has clearly been informed by leaks from the club. So AVB would have counter-arguments and it's only fair we should acknowledge that.
However, there is an overwhelming ring of truth to all this for me. Not least because it sounds so similar to what happened at Chelsea. But also because we have circumstantial evidence to corroborate it.
1. The fact AVB wasn't sacked on Sunday night strongly supports the Goal version of events. If Levy/Baldini had it in for AVB they'd have moved on Sunday night. The fact they didn't seems to support the idea that the Sunday meeting was indeed an attempt to clear the air. But it seems AVB read that all wrong, dug his heels in and didn't budge.
Considering recent humiliating results he was in no position whatsoever to do that. None. If the Chairman and DoF wanted a discussion about where we were going, they had a right to ask those questions. It was time for a cool head and good politics from AVB. But it seems that was beyond him and instead there were his old problems of intransigence, stubbornness and immaturity. This version of events really does explain the Sunday/Monday meetings and it's hard to think of another explanation for why it happened that way.
2. We all heard AVB when he was appointed going along 100% with Spurs' strategic vision. That included youth development, a DoF and good football. Well, we didn't get good football. Certainly not. We didn't have youth development - instead, we had Paulinho, Vertonghen, Dembele and Walker playing every game that came along. We had AVB's apparent dissatisfaction with the transfer team and demands for Hulk, Moutinho and Villa, and rumblings when they didn't come off. Again, I see circumstantial evidence here that AVB said one thing and did another.
3. Conflict & communication problems. Again, there is evidence of plenty of it. With Levy over Moutinho, with Sherwood over perceived spying, with BAE and AE, with Freund who was relegated on the bench, and an inability to get his ideas across on the training pitch and then see them on match day. Again, this has a ring of truth and rhymes with what happened at Chelsea.
Sadly, I have to say I'm buying the broad outline of this story. His time was up.
Pirate55
The Last Man Standing 17/18
This rings true with me too. All things considered, his time was up. We couldn't afford to let this experiment run any further.