Ange in or out?

[RigorMortis]

Seems to be being widely reported over the past 24 hours. Munn allegedly to go too.

Lots of supposition, of course, but not hard to see it as true. If Ange does go, hopefully it’s with a trophy in the bag.

Ange Postecoglou heading for Tottenham exit

Exclusive: Australian manager likely to leave club regardless of whether they win Europa League and qualify for Champions League

www.telegraph.co.uk

If there is a truth in this then it’s better off confirming it earlier so he isn’t constantly questioned about it and we can move on.

I used to actually live on the same road as Matt law before I left the England, although he wasn’t very forthcoming with much itk unfortunately, he was quite inciteful and knowledgable about Spurs

 

[Bedfordspurs]

You don't get everything you want, no squad is perfect, sometimes you have to make do and as a make do option it's not the worst and frankly as an excuse it's scraping the barrel

I agree. It’s not an excuse either
As I said Ange was party to the decisions to create this squad as is
But the original post talked about quantity in each position is daft if they aren’t of the right basic quality

 

[Legohamster]

If only we got another lb our season would have been great?

Considering he ignored Spence for the first 1/3 of the season.....

 

[Mr Gogolak]

Bergvall has been brilliant; his ascension when at one point he looked so far from ready is miraculous. We can be grateful he had to have his development tested, here's hooping second season syndrome doesn't whack him.

On a side note, this proves my point: there's only way to know if a youngster has what it takes to make it at the highest level - play him, play him regularly and for a prolonged period of time. All this bs about 'managing minutes' and 'gradually introducing players' is just that, bs. The truth is, most managers won't take the chance on a kid. They'd rather someone else did it for them and that's why those who do should be commended.

 

[billyiddo]

I agree. It’s not an excuse either
As I said Ange was party to the decisions to create this squad as is
But the original post talked about quantity in each position is daft if they aren’t of the right basic quality

In terms of quantity we had cover, the argument is over quality. Like I have said elsewhere- City have no CF cover or adequate cover for Rodri and that's the richest spendiest team n the country - it happens

 

[Muttley]

I would have thought it’s far too early to pat anyone on the back yet re the success of the medical staff overhaul. Plus I’m sure we have had similar “overhauls” in the past.

Yes, I was reacting to the opposite when people want to find reasons to sack Munn for the sake of it.

 

[Muttley]

I find it amusing that so many are citing Reggie as 'proper back up' when Conte binned him off and we tried to move him on several times.

Conte's first choice was Perisic who got slaughtered in that wing back position in the PL. I'll say no more.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

In terms of quantity we had cover, the argument is over quality. Like I have said elsewhere- City have no CF cover or adequate cover for Rodri and that's the richest spendiest team n the country - it happens

Yep
And it’s why I said Ange made some choices along with others
They were daft
I’ve not made excuses and done the opposite

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Conte's first choice was Perisic who got slaughtered in that wing back position in the PL. I'll say no more.

Conte made his own decisions too
Like Ange has
That’s management
They live and die by it hence why Ange will be off soon

 

[Muttley]

I've enjoyed the debate but I have to call you on something before I step back a little...



you say here that a new manager would have given a higher chance of saving the season, with absolutely no way of knowing. I know you are a subscriber to the "ange injured the players" motif, but beyond that how on earth can you say a new manager would have given us a higher chance of saving the season? Do you not remember the raft of managers rejecting us, that lead to Ange being appointed? How do you think this would have manifested itself mid season? Do you think A listers would have been queuing up for a job which had no pre-season, no real opportunity to add to the squad, swathe of injuries which were getting worse weekly, and the track record of our chairman in sacking managers?

Sorry but of all the stuff you have written on this subject, much of which can be seen as one side of a good debate, this is the fictional bit for me.

I'm still a subscriber that if Ange could get past himself and address his defensive tactics he could still be a good Spurs manager. It is mostly to do with 3 things:

The offside line - Ange has massively over-rotated on his reliance on the "line" rather than let defenders follow runners, mark players and do the things that come naturally to them. He is making his defenders do unnatural acts with his obsession with the offside trap.

The number 6 - whether it's one player or two players, we need that midfield secured. Perhaps it's even a better team ethic and more taking responsibility. Any team can easily counter against us. We need to be stronger in the middle of the park.

The full-backs / wide players - just finding that balance between when the full-backs are narrow and the wide players are wide, and vice versa, would make a huge difference. We get exposed on the outside and crosses come in too easy against us.

Can you imagine Ange solving these 3 aspects and what that would propel us to with the players we have. I had my sympathies with prior managers for squad deficiencies. I don't with Ange. He's had very decent money thrown at this problem and has a fantastic squad. It is him that is not optimising the resources, and the reason he'll probably fall on his sword. If he could just admit that some of his go-to tactics aren't working in the PL, he could actually be really good. The big reason I'm Ange out is that I don't think he will adapt.

 

[Mr Gogolak]

Can you imagine Ange solving these 3 aspects and what that would propel us to with the players we have. I had my sympathies with prior managers for squad deficiencies. I don't with Ange. He's had very decent money thrown at this problem and has a fantastic squad. It is him that is not optimising the resources, and the reason he'll probably fall on his sword. If he could just admit that some of his go-to tactics aren't working in the PL, he could actually be really good. The big reason I'm Ange out is that I don't think he will adapt.

I can't because it would expose the fact that his attacking strategy rely mostly on getting the ball back as close as possible to the opposite goal. For a long, long time now we've seen attackers getting in each other's way, massed in a very small area or without any solution. I'd go so far as to say that his attacking game isn't that great, but since he goes all in on the attack, it gets the job done.

Playing deeper and taking three players (a DM and two FB) out of the equation would force him to completely rethink his plans. I can't be bothered to check his birthday but nobody in their late 50s/early 60s is that flexible. That's what he came up with and until now, it worked well for him. I'm pretty sure it will work again, albeit not at this level.

 

[scaramanga]

True, but Ange has had 2 seasons to prove hes out of his depth. Dont think even Tim wouldve had us on course for 17th at this stage, but we ll never know.

We'll never know - at least until Timmeh learns to count to 17.

 

[Baleforce]

Cover that wasn’t wanted
Hence why even Tahoe two teams didn’t take him back
Technically you could say that we had cover in every position because we had a quantity of players

Yes, yes you could, which is the point.

It’s the managers job to use what they have in the most effective way.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Seems to be being widely reported over the past 24 hours. Munn allegedly to go too.

Lots of supposition, of course, but not hard to see it as true. If Ange does go, hopefully it’s with a trophy in the bag.

Ange Postecoglou heading for Tottenham exit

Exclusive: Australian manager likely to leave club regardless of whether they win Europa League and qualify for Champions League

www.telegraph.co.uk

YESSSSS!!!!! Result!

 

[Finney Is Back]

On a side note, this proves my point: there's only way to know if a youngster has what it takes to make it at the highest level - play him, play him regularly and for a prolonged period of time. All this bs about 'managing minutes' and 'gradually introducing players' is just that, bs. The truth is, most managers won't take the chance on a kid. They'd rather someone else did it for them and that's why those who do should be commended.

Its because kids tend to cost you points. I watch Bergval and see lots of potential and a future great player who does some briliant things now, but he costs us a hell of a lot of chances to the opposition due to his naiveity.

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

The player that has created the 5th most chances in the league isn't particularly creative?

I think i explained what i was getting at in my post. It depends what you mean by creativity. For me, the most important element of *creativity* in any team is the switch of tempo and switch of play. Maddison makes my pants sticky in a way Kulu doesn't. I.e. we've generally only played well under Ange when Maddison is in the team and on form, as Maddison is the only player in the squad that can drop deep and change the entire picture on the pitch in a split second on a consistent basis. Kulu often gets on the ball in the final 3rd and puts that last pass or touch in which is great, but its often the pass before that final pass that is the key one. Kulu himself operates best (as do all our forward players) when he gets on the ball around the box against a back peddling or unsettled defence. Maddison is the key creator of such situations for us. Nobody else can really do that IMO. It's why Kane started dropping deep when Eriksen/Dembele left/went off the ball

 

[DubSpur]

I think i explained what i was getting at in my post. It depends what you mean by creativity. For me, the most important element of *creativity* in any team is the switch of tempo and switch of play. Maddison makes my pants sticky in a way Kulu doesn't. I.e. we've generally only played well under Ange when Maddison is in the team and on form, as Maddison is the only player in the squad that can drop deep and change the entire picture on the pitch in a split second on a consistent basis. Kulu often gets on the ball in the final 3rd and puts that last pass or touch in which is great, but its often the pass before that final pass that is the key one. Kulu himself operates best (as do all our forward players) when he gets on the ball around the box against a back peddling or unsettled defence. Maddison is the key creator of such situations for us. Nobody else can really do that IMO. It's why Kane started dropping deep when Eriksen/Dembele left/went off the ball

Disagree. Kulu can get on the ball from deep, progress the ball, and deliver a pass every bit as good as Maddison. The difference is that Kulu does it on a consistent basis and will always put in a shift.

 

[Grays_1890]

Deki does things no one else does also, he eats up yards with the ball, only player to offer the defense a break, he was brilliant for us in Frankfurt for that reason

 

[nattenskonge]

Considering he ignored Spence for the first 1/3 of the season.....

Dont think he ignored him, I belive he should get some cred for getting Spence started… other managers did not rate him…

I like the idea Spurs had with Ange, get back the atacking Spurs game.
And I liked the way Ange looked at the way we should play.
But I belive Ange is wrong in alot too..
Set piece manager: ange dont see the need of this
Mental manager: I belive this is a post we need big change, Get the one from BodøGlimt.
Ange dont belive changes bring anything to the game.
And you cant play the same against every team.
The biggest problem is that Spurs dont play the way Ange want, with the ball moving fast, now the movement has stoped before the ball get past the midline. And players are afraid to make hard pases and go past defenders becouse you dont have a safety behind them.

I just hope we can find a manager that see the players and can make them work together again

 

[Raziel]

I've enjoyed the debate but I have to call you on something before I step back a little...



you say here that a new manager would have given a higher chance of saving the season, with absolutely no way of knowing. I know you are a subscriber to the "ange injured the players" motif, but beyond that how on earth can you say a new manager would have given us a higher chance of saving the season? Do you not remember the raft of managers rejecting us, that lead to Ange being appointed? How do you think this would have manifested itself mid season? Do you think A listers would have been queuing up for a job which had no pre-season, no real opportunity to add to the squad, swathe of injuries which were getting worse weekly, and the track record of our chairman in sacking managers?

Sorry but of all the stuff you have written on this subject, much of which can be seen as one side of a good debate, this is the fictional bit for me.

Let me preface this by saying, I currently and have (for more than 25 years) worked for much bigger companies than Spurs, in my experience this is how this plays out

- Team has a full year goal, in our case, highly likely to be primary goal of qualification for Europe via league, additional goal of good cup runs, stretch goal of cup win.
- Weekly/monthly/quarterly those goals are reviewed at a management level, the what (current result) the how (caveats, things like the injuries, the draw of cups/opponents) and outlook for next period (i.e. any corrective action) is looked at. Classic red/yellow/green stuff
- When things are red, which it would have been by Oct/Nov, you ask another set of questions, is this the continuation of a trend? (in our case, back end of last season), do we continue, change/adjust or completely reset? do we (at leadership level) still back the person who is accountable for the delivery of the goal (in this case Ange)

I'm 100% certain that two things happened
- Ange was asked about the situation/position and he would have said this was his plan, if it was needing the re-enforcements in January, or expectations of results once injured players were back, or some adjustment in coaching/tactics, we don't know, but we can safely assume it wasn't I'm going to barely avoid relegation but give you a good cup run.
- Without Ange, the senior leadership team would have had a meeting (or two or three) where the question would have been asked, do we stick, do we provide the manager additional tools or do we make a change now (to save season)

Somebody had to have advocated to stick with Ange, based on Levy's historical body of evidence, a decent guess is it wasn't him, that kind of leaves Munn as the only counter at high enough level for us to have stuck with it.

To your specific points

- Every high level business decision is a risk/reward decision, i.e. risks of season continuing to spiral, risk of new manager not being able to change things, reward of maybe new man does change things (look at Wolves). The baseline/status quo in this particular business is to make the change earlier.
- Your point about the raft of managers rejecting us is very typical fan answer (seriously not trying to be a dingdong). Let me be clear 100%, that literally is fudging Munn's job, his role is to 1/Have a succession plan for the current manager (regardless of current results), 2/Hire that manager when the time comes.

And that last point is why I'm saying (from an outsider point of view), a lot of the season failing appears to fall on Munn even more than Ange, specifically
- We made a decision to stick with Ange, in hindsight, it is a bad call. Likely at least supported by Munn
- We half assed the January window (Kinsky early, Danso & Tel late), Lange, Munn & Levy
- If we didn't/don't have a replacement lined up (in November, and now), again that is on Munn

So to summarize, it literally is someone's job in the club to have that set of managers lined up, they should have made the call to change (Dec/Jan for the latest) and they should have got that person. That person doesn't get to say "no one wants the job, or it's too hard to get the right replacement"

And yes, at this level, one mistake, one missed year of targets can cost you your job, that's why these people get paid well.