**** OMT Tottenham Hotspur vs SCBC ****

[Lilbaz]

If the team doesn't win, it's dead. Entertainment is a distant second. As I said in another post, give the fans 30 1-0 wins and 8 0-0 draws with a title as a result and they wouldn't care. Consistently win trophies playing agricultural football and no fan is going to say "I wish we played better football instead of winning trophies." This is a results business and that's what the fans want too. If you play great football along the way, that's just a bonus.

But we're not winning! We're playing brick football and losing to the likes of sheff utd and wolves.

 

[Bullet]

Because he has played so many league games that he should be used to the pace by now, eh? I think you are being too harsh on him.

I'm used to the pace, and I've played fewer games than him. He's sat and watched the games all season, he knows you can't watch a ball loop up and bounce and then try a karate kick in your own box. Hopefully he has now fully learnt that.

 

[alekaras]

But we're not winning! We're playing brick football and losing to the likes of sheff utd and wolves.

No kidding, Sherlock, but I was responding to your comment "If the team doesn't entertain the fans. It's dead." Your opinion is that, because this is an entertainment industry, a team needs to entertain. Mine is that it needs to win, even if it doesn't play entertaining football. No one disagrees that the current Spurs team is doing neither, but I thought we were discussing more generally whether it is better to play entertaining football or to win and the football quality be damned.

It would help if you read your original posts before replying sometimes.

 

[Lilbaz]

No kidding, Sherlock, but I was responding to your comment "If the team doesn't entertain the fans. It's dead." Your opinion is that, because this is an entertainment industry, a team needs to entertain. Mine is that it needs to win, even if it doesn't play entertaining football. No one disagrees that the current Spurs team is doing neither, but I thought we were discussing more generally whether it is better to play entertaining football or to win and the football quality be damned.

It would help if you read your original posts before replying sometimes.

No. I'm talking about what we want to be going forward. What type of manager we want. What typeof football we play. Then we get the dof to choose that type of manager and players that suit that style the best that can win games. And keep it. Create an identity.

That jol, redknapp and poch have been popular with fans and fairly successful. That that is the type of manager we should look at and back them.

Baleforce then tried to suggest that we can't be successful that way and that we need a mourinho, conte type.

I disagree.

Re read the posts.

 

[We are Tottenham]

I agree but we knew that before we appointed him. Can't help thinking his appointment was a vanity project. Shiny new stadium and appointing a high profile super coach. The optics are brilliant for the corporate brand.

not so sure..we need the best coach to win us something,thats why he was chosen..but who knows

 

[We are Tottenham]

I’m thinking much longer term, even in the glory years of the 1960’s we massively underachieved with the team we had.

Yeah we should have won more..but bad luck with individual players killed that Team.

Also,we didn't have half a dozen super world class tug of war guys in those days to come on as subs and pull the other lot over the line..
plus the best squads you can get..lol, players to rotate when a couple are a bit fatigued ..or going through a bad patch!
Rotation and subs have killed football to what it should be ... in my opinion..its completely ridiculous now and you can see some of the SAR decisions are badly wrong as well..so whats going on?
The only thing subs and rotation add is you can see someone else coming on for the players that are having a brick game.
...But it just ain't the same game boy....