The decision to fire AVB

[metalgear]

The problem has and continues to be the management at the club. Avb should have stayed. Sherwood should not have been his replacement. My guess avb knew better, levy is too proud.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

I think the going consensus is AVB didn't want to stay (everything is speculation, but if that's the case it's hard to blame anyone)

Moyes is the worse example I could think of, at least we had the excuse of mid season, no managers available. United could have had Mourinho, Ancelotti, almost anyone and they chose Moyes??? they should fire him as quickly as possible, he will never bring them back to the top.

The real issue is does anyone have modern proof (not 25 years ago, in the last 5-7 years), any truly successful club that has done so by sticking with a manager? to me Cheat$ki, City, Barca, Madrid, PSG, Bayern, Ajax, list goes on .. not too much long term management there ..

All of those with massive funds to buy the best players. Punching at their weight and therefore anyone that doesn't get top performances out of them deserves the sack.

The real question should be has anyone ever punched above their weight without some long term foresight and sticking through the patchy performances in the early stages and sustained it? Because that's what we need to be doing. No good comparing ourselves to Chelsea and City as if it means something to us. We are nothing like them.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

I'm really not sure about this "AVB had us solid at the back but we were no good going forward".

First, because it's not really true that we were solid at the back. There was a lot of pulling down strikers' shorts going on and a lot of hammerings dished out. The memory of Ravel Morrisson sprinting into 200 acres of empty WHL grass still haunts.

And second, because the point of football is to score more goals than the other lot. If you won every game 9-8 you'd be champions and nobody would care that you conceded hundreds of goals. I always thought that AVB had a system that needed 12 players in it; the 11 he played and one more to give us more offensive threat. Either that or 10 players plus Bale, which was like playing with 12. With 11 on the pitch though, he was short.

Ahh come on man. Just nonsense.

Of course the job of football is to score more than the others. AVB said the perfect score is 2-0. It's about winning that game and retaining enough energy in the bank to have a good advantage over future opponents too. Mourinho is largely the same.

 

[chancer]

Ahh come on man. Just nonsense.

Of course the job of football is to score more than the others. AVB said the perfect score is 2-0. It's about winning that game and retaining enough energy in the bank to have a good advantage over future opponents too. Mourinho is largely the same.

In all honesty that just sounds like more AVB gobbledegook.

I've just checked AVB's record here:

http://www.topspurs.com/avb.htm

In the league he won 2-0 on 3 occasions, twice against Villa and once against Norwich. That's the same number of times we conceded 5 or more under him. If 2-0 was his ideal score he sure failed to nail it very often.

The 2-0 quote sounds exactly like AVB's philosophy though: competent at the back and just enough up front to get the job done. In fairness, when we weren't losing, that is pretty much exactly what it looked like. I find it deeply unsatisfying as any kind of theory of the game. (And I'm not taking the quote too literally - I understand it's a motif for a wider philosophy...it's that philosophy I don't care much for).

On the final point, Liverpool are proof that there's no correlation between attacking and getting physically worn out. If anything, they prove the opposite.

 

[Millsy_Yiddo]

In all honesty that just sounds like more AVB gobbledegook.

I've just checked AVB's record here:

http://www.topspurs.com/avb.htm

In the league he won 2-0 on 3 occasions, twice against Villa and once against Norwich. That's the same number of times we conceded 5 or more under him. If 2-0 was his ideal score he sure failed to nail it very often.

The 2-0 quote sounds exactly like AVB's philosophy though: competent at the back and just enough up front to get the job done. In fairness, when we weren't losing, that is pretty much exactly what it looked like. I find it deeply unsatisfying as any kind of theory of the game. (And I'm not taking the quote too literally - I understand it's a motif for a wider philosophy...it's that philosophy I don't care much for).

On the final point, Liverpool are proof that there's no correlation between attacking and getting physically worn out. If anything, they prove the opposite.

*awaits someone to say, but Liverpool weren't in Europe this year, they only played 40 games etc etc etc etc

 

[Raziel]

In all honesty that just sounds like more AVB gobbledegook.

I've just checked AVB's record here:

http://www.topspurs.com/avb.htm

In the league he won 2-0 on 3 occasions, twice against Villa and once against Norwich. That's the same number of times we conceded 5 or more under him. If 2-0 was his ideal score he sure failed to nail it very often.

The 2-0 quote sounds exactly like AVB's philosophy though: competent at the back and just enough up front to get the job done. In fairness, when we weren't losing, that is pretty much exactly what it looked like. I find it deeply unsatisfying as any kind of theory of the game. (And I'm not taking the quote too literally - I understand it's a motif for a wider philosophy...it's that philosophy I don't care much for).

On the final point, Liverpool are proof that there's no correlation between attacking and getting physically worn out. If anything, they prove the opposite.

could be said he isn't here because he didn't achieve his perfect result very often. He like Mourinho are of the philosophy of if you don't concede/lose, you have a better chance of winning, not exciting but in fact true.

Re Pool and attacking, my view is regardless of if you attack/defend, it's how hard you make the opponent work (chasing shadows, covering other players, having to get people back) for the duration of the game that influences who runs out of gas first.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

*awaits someone to say, but Liverpool weren't in Europe this year, they only played 40 games etc etc etc etc

Which would probably be a fair enough point don't think you think? I'd be interested to see if they stick with the 'blow them out of the water in the first 20 minutes' strategy next season when they have CL games to try and win. Interestingly they may beat City to the title who had a similar strategy but many more cup games to participate in.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

could be said he isn't here because he didn't achieve his perfect result very often. He like Mourinho are of the philosophy of if you don't concede/lose, you have a better chance of winning, not exciting but in fact true.

Re Pool and attacking, my view is regardless of if you attack/defend, it's how hard you make the opponent work (chasing shadows, covering other players, having to get people back) for the duration of the game that influences who runs out of gas first.

I think AVB likes a bit more of a nicer style of football than Mourinho. It's a similar philosophy but their means of achieving what they want are a little different.

 

[chancer]

He like Mourinho are of the philosophy of if you don't concede/lose, you have a better chance of winning, not exciting but in fact true.

This also puts me in mind of all the times AVB looked right in our eyes and said he understood the footballing traditions of Spurs and wanted to continue them. I happen to think that was a flat-out lie, except insofar as "attacking football" meant to him giving the ball to the likes of Hulk and Bale and when they do something magic calling it "exciting". Meh, it's not the same thing at all. I think when AVB said all that stuff he was being totally sociopathic and inside his mind had no intention of doing anything other than executing his 2-0 vision.

 

[Kingdawson]

Ahh come on man. Just nonsense.

Of course the job of football is to score more than the others. AVB said the perfect score is 2-0. It's about winning that game and retaining enough energy in the bank to have a good advantage over future opponents too. Mourinho is largely the same.

What is nonsense about Chancer's post? it's quite frankly a brilliant post.

 

[Millsy_Yiddo]

Which would probably be a fair enough point don't think you think? I'd be interested to see if they stick with the 'blow them out of the water in the first 20 minutes' strategy next season when they have CL games to try and win. Interestingly they may beat City to the title who had a similar strategy but many more cup games to participate in.

:lol: It is a totally fair point, although people go on as if it's the only reason Liverpool are where they are which is not the case at all.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

What is nonsense about Chancer's post? it's quite frankly a brilliant post.

AVB needed a system that had 12 players in it. Just nonsense.

 

[Raziel]

This also puts me in mind of all the times AVB looked right in our eyes and said he understood the footballing traditions of Spurs and wanted to continue them. I happen to think that was a flat-out lie, except insofar as "attacking football" meant to him giving the ball to the likes of Hulk and Bale and when they do something magic calling it "exciting". Meh, it's not the same thing at all. I think when AVB said all that stuff he was being totally sociopathic and inside his mind had no intention of doing anything other than executing his 2-0 vision.

Well it's the dilemma of would you take Mourinho? results vs. style.

The challenge for AVB is, without consistent results, he will always get measured harshly because there is no style to back it up.

 

[chancer]

Well it's the dilemma of would you take Mourinho? results vs. style.

The challenge for AVB is, without consistent results, he will always get measured harshly because there is no style to back it up.

Actually, my point wasn't so much about that as it was about honesty. I don't think AVB was honest with Spurs. I think he said what people wanted to hear without any serious intention or action to follow through.

Fwiw, I have no problem with pragmatism > style. I'm not a snob about that.

 

[Baleforce]

I think that if any manager is in a job long enough the football will get better as systems get entrenched, confidence builds and players have more scope to express themselves

when Redknapp joined the first thing he did was make us hard to beat, there was a big difference between the side that scraped that 1-0 over Liverpool early in his tenure and the one that murdered inter Milan in the CL

you can't build a Ferrari without a solid chassis

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Actually, my point wasn't so much about that as it was about honesty. I don't think AVB was honest with Spurs. I think he said what people wanted to hear without any serious intention or action to follow through.

Fwiw, I have no problem with pragmatism > style. I'm not a snob about that.

If you remember Graham Roberts was a massive vocal critic of AVB's. Was always on his case criticising the football style. Then one day he got invited to the training ground to sit down with AVB, who went through his plans. After that, Roberts was full of praise and said 'the football will come'. He had clearly been shown something that impressed him, and understood the reasons why things were as they were to get there.

 

[Lily White]

If you remember Graham Roberts was a massive vocal critic of AVB's. Was always on his case criticising the football style. Then one day he got invited to the training ground to sit down with AVB, who went through his plans. After that, Roberts was full of praise and said 'the football will come'. He had clearly been shown something that impressed him, and understood the reasons why things were as they were to get there.

Did he show GR his powerpoint presentation?

 

[Baleforce]

i don't believe for a second AVB had a powerpoint, he's a man of style and class, he'd use keynote surely

 

[chancer]

If you remember Graham Roberts was a massive vocal critic of AVB's. Was always on his case criticising the football style. Then one day he got invited to the training ground to sit down with AVB, who went through his plans. After that, Roberts was full of praise and said 'the football will come'. He had clearly been shown something that impressed him, and understood the reasons why things were as they were to get there.

I could tell you how I'd liberate India and it wouldn't make me Gandhi.

 

[Raziel]

I could tell you how I'd liberate India and it wouldn't make me Gandhi.

That is the point of inexperience though, isn't it?

I think AVB did have a plan, but executing it in less than ideal circumstances (no Falcao/Hulk/Moutinho), with the bumps that happen in the real world, with the pressure that is Spurs, proved too much for him.