Xavi Simons

[parklane1]

Of course he has not done it in everygame and i understand that some fans have doubts about him. However he is 22 and still growing into a much faster game [ premership]then he is used to.

But IMO the talent is there and if we use him the right way i really believe there is a top player there. We shall see.

 

[parklane1]

Gibbs - White is 26 and been playing in the PL for seasons.

Simons is an exciting talented player making his debut season in the PL at 22 years old and quite frankly is about the only attacking player that gets me the least bit excited. Its a shame that Madders has been out all this time as they will link up well - I hope we get to see it beyond this season....

Amen to that.

 

[Muttley]

Nah, we’re about to get relegated. 23/24 was no where near as bad as people are making out in the second half of that season. 24/25 was no where near as bad in the first half. We then suffered horrific injuries and still won a trophy.

What we’re seeing now is on a whole other level.

I get that people can look at the trend and be happy with their assessment that this was likely to happen. But I just don’t agree. It requires having to think that our players are not good players, that they are actually 17th / 18th players. And that’s just not true. They’re much better than that.

My personal opinion is that by 1, deciding to play players in a system that most of them aren’t suited to and 2, deciding to basically say last season meant nothing and actually this is a 17th placed, poor side, (when actually those players likely looked upon last season as one of the best moments of their careers and a huge achievement) that it destroyed the confidence and culture of the squad. This season was not inevitable, but only a club that has failed to win a trophy for almost 20 years, finally does it and then sacks the manager that did it anyway could create these circumstances.

It was just so dumb. We broke the psychology of the team, from an absolute peak moment of togetherness. All to ‘reset the culture’ and ‘turn the tanker around’ with a manager who has no business managing the likes of Xavi Simons.

Anyway, that’s what I think the core reason for this season is. A breaking of the psychology. I respect anyone who says this is just a trend and actually these players are that bad, but I don’t think that argument stands up to scrutiny.

Respectfully, I still think you're missing the elephant in the room and that is about THFC culture. From the very top, Lewis and Tavistock has made a clear statement for a very long time that winning football matches is not the be all and end all of their corporation. That permeated through ENIC and Levy who defined success as something different than what happened on the pitch. Ange walks into the club and basically says "play my way and when it doesn't work, it will be solely on me". Season 2 he then turns around and makes losing a PL match absolutely OK because we were going for gold in the EL. Then Frank basically comes into the club and does a very similar thing. He says "Keep doing what I ask you and eventually it will click". It's the "trust me, I'm a doctor" scenario from both these clowns. All Frank did was load onto the rubbish psychology that Ange had allowed within the player camp.

So when I watched Simons yesterday at final whistle, I saw a player that was in absolute pain about losing. I saw a player that didn't care a jot in a culture of "losing is OK" from Ange and Frank. He looked genuinely distressed. I can imagine De Zerbi has been like a bear with a sore head all weekend unlike Ange who was more pre-occupied about whether he "owned the journo's" in the pressers rather than whether we picked up 3 points. Ange's psychology was pretty poor when it came to creating a winning culture and Frank was exactly the same.

As you and I were talking about yesterday, there are a lof of dirty hands as to why we finds ourselves in this mess, Levy, Vinai and Lange need to take some bullets. Ange and Frank also deserve their fair share. Can't help feeling sorry for Xavi if he's taking more than those 5. He's a victim of circumstance in this plot to me. Xavi isn't the problem.

 

[thfcsteff]

Xavi isn't a player that you play through, like Maddison or Eriksen. We didn't play through him yesterday and he was used similarly to how he has been used off the left previously, right now he's a moments player - he may develop in to a Maddison or Eriksen type but he's got a lot of developing in his game to get to that point.

I probably used the phrase. Let me rephrase. Right now, all our play should be designed to bring Xavi into the game as much as possible, give him as much of the ball as possible, and allow him a free role to be the creator he is. Yesterday he essentially had a free role off the left, which allowed him to be central to anything of note we were creating. Yes, he was loose with his runners (something I believe you pointed out) but in a risk/reward/we have no other creativity moment, it is vital that we embrace what he can do...I think essentially he is absolutely who we have to make the centre of operations right now.

FWIW he had a lot of moments yesterday in that free drifting role, and had Attwell been less lenient on him getting thugged out, we might well have had several more chances too.

I stand by every criticism I have of Frank with regards to how he used Xavi/the team with him in it.

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

Respectfully, I still think you're missing the elephant in the room and that is about THFC culture. From the very top, Lewis and Tavistock has made a clear statement for a very long time that winning football matches is not the be all and end all of their corporation. That permeated through ENIC and Levy who defined success as something different than what happened on the pitch. Ange walks into the club and basically says "play my way and when it doesn't work, it will be solely on me". Season 2 he then turns around and makes losing a PL match absolutely OK because we were going for gold in the EL. Then Frank basically comes into the club and does a very similar thing. He says "Keep doing what I ask you and eventually it will click". It's the "trust me, I'm a doctor" scenario from both these clowns. All Frank did was load onto the rubbish psychology that Ange had allowed within the player camp.

So when I watched Simons yesterday at final whistle, I saw a player that was in absolute pain about losing. I saw a player that didn't care a jot in a culture of "losing is OK" from Ange and Frank. He looked genuinely distressed. I can imagine De Zerbi has been like a bear with a sore head all weekend unlike Ange who was more pre-occupied about whether he "owned the journo's" in the pressers rather than whether we picked up 3 points. Ange's psychology was pretty poor when it came to creating a winning culture and Frank was exactly the same.

As you and I were talking about yesterday, there are a lof of dirty hands as to why we finds ourselves in this mess, Levy, Vinai and Lange need to take some bullets. Ange and Frank also deserve their fair share. Can't help feeling sorry for Xavi if he's taking more than those 5. He's a victim of circumstance in this plot to me. Xavi isn't the problem.

I completely agree with what you’re saying on ENIC, I just don’t on Ange. I think he accepted there was a greater chance of losing games in the league because he wanted to give the players something to remember the season by after injuries ruined the league season. But if we think back to how he felt about losing to Emirates Marketing Project so Arsenal wouldn’t win the league…he hated that. He wanted to win. And I think he saw the value winning a trophy would do for the club.

To then bring it back to ENIC, they didn’t see that value, they didn’t think there was anything to be gained from what Ange left us with. And we are where we are

 

[thfcsteff]

Respectfully, I still think you're missing the elephant in the room and that is about THFC culture. From the very top, Lewis and Tavistock has made a clear statement for a very long time that winning football matches is not the be all and end all of their corporation. That permeated through ENIC and Levy who defined success as something different than what happened on the pitch. Ange walks into the club and basically says "play my way and when it doesn't work, it will be solely on me". Season 2 he then turns around and makes losing a PL match absolutely OK because we were going for gold in the EL. Then Frank basically comes into the club and does a very similar thing. He says "Keep doing what I ask you and eventually it will click". It's the "trust me, I'm a doctor" scenario from both these clowns. All Frank did was load onto the rubbish psychology that Ange had allowed within the player camp.

So when I watched Simons yesterday at final whistle, I saw a player that was in absolute pain about losing. I saw a player that didn't care a jot in a culture of "losing is OK" from Ange and Frank. He looked genuinely distressed. I can imagine De Zerbi has been like a bear with a sore head all weekend unlike Ange who was more pre-occupied about whether he "owned the journo's" in the pressers rather than whether we picked up 3 points. Ange's psychology was pretty poor when it came to creating a winning culture and Frank was exactly the same.

As you and I were talking about yesterday, there are a lof of dirty hands as to why we finds ourselves in this mess, Levy, Vinai and Lange need to take some bullets. Ange and Frank also deserve their fair share. Can't help feeling sorry for Xavi if he's taking more than those 5. He's a victim of circumstance in this plot to me. Xavi isn't the problem.

I agree with most of this, except the puzzling line 'Ange's psychology was pretty poor when it came to creating a winning culture' and comparing him directly with Frank. Postecoglu had injuries everywhere and little support around him as that second season went into the New Year. He created a way to win. I don't know if it is fair to say he was 'poor' in creating a 'winning culture' because just as he won, we broke it up and went back to reset. Frank came in with a clean slate plus the trimmings of a side in the CL. By Xmas, he was telling us we weren't a real CL club because we didn't do it the 'right' way.

I think the Tavistock/Lewis observation is on point.

 

[BrentwoodSpur]

For me, Xavi is the epitome of a Tottenham player. Exciting, unpredictable, maverick. That celebration on Saturday and seeing the south stand (in particular) explode around him is exactly what I want from my club. We’ve always talked about “The Tottenham Way” and that in my eyes is exactly what we get from him. If we go down, I really hope we can hold onto him as I believe he could be the key to the start of a new culture that we as a club seem to have forgotten.

 

[thfcsteff]

For me, Xavi is the epitome of a Tottenham player. Exciting, unpredictable, maverick. That celebration on Saturday and seeing the south stand (in particular) explode around him is exactly what I want from my club. We’ve always talked about “The Tottenham Way” and that in my eyes is exactly what we get from him. If we go down, I really hope we can hold onto him as I believe he could be the key to the start of a new culture that we as a club seem to have forgotten.

This all day for me too.

 

[billyiddo]

I probably used the phrase. Let me rephrase. Right now, all our play should be designed to bring Xavi into the game as much as possible, give him as much of the ball as possible, and allow him a free role to be the creator he is. Yesterday he essentially had a free role off the left, which allowed him to be central to anything of note we were creating. Yes, he was loose with his runners (something I believe you pointed out) but in a risk/reward/we have no other creativity moment, it is vital that we embrace what he can do...I think essentially he is absolutely who we have to make the centre of operations right now.

FWIW he had a lot of moments yesterday in that free drifting role, and had Attwell been less lenient on him getting thugged out, we might well have had several more chances too.

I stand by every criticism I have of Frank with regards to how he used Xavi/the team with him in it.

It seems to me there is little allowance from you here for Xavi naturally taking time to settle in a tough new league which as we all know is very common. I'm not sure what you mean by a free role? He didn't have a free role yesterday, he had duties off the ball and positions he had to occupy, RDZ spoke in his presser that Xavi has to work hard off the ball - maybe not clear from the TV but very noticeable at the stadium. If you mean he was free to drift in to the middle from the left when we were in possession then yes, same as the role he had earlier in the sesson when played off the left.

 

[thfcsteff]

It seems to me there is little allowance from you here for Xavi naturally taking time to settle in a tough new league which as we all know is very common. I'm not sure what you mean by a free role? He didn't have a free role yesterday, he had duties off the ball and positions he had to occupy, RDZ spoke in his presser that Xavi has to work hard off the ball - maybe not clear from the TV but very noticeable at the stadium. If you mean he was free to drift in to the middle from the left when we were in possession then yes, same as the role he had earlier in the sesson when played off the left.

I agree there's been a necessary break-in period for him to find his feet, and I think the best of him will come in time if he has the comfort of regular play as a starter/important player. But I firmly believe that had we committed to making him a foical point of what we were doing this season from the start, he'd have settled much quicker and he'd have affected more games. As it is, I still maintain Frank was not the right manager for him.

Free role. Drift from the left. Yes, that's what I mean.
Similar in some aspects to the position he had earlier in the season, except De Zerbi has us playing harder as a team, pressing far more effectively, and supporting each other better. Surely you can acknowledge that the way the players are playing under DeZerbi is significantly different than Frank? DeZerbi has these players getting closer to fully believing they deserve to want the ball and enjoy playing with it. Frank was risk-averse. That's an observation as much as a criticism.

I have never had an issue with his work rate (or toughness for that matter - I think refs are missing a lot of fouls on him) and did not suggest otherwise. He does lose his man fairly often, but this is IMO because he is first and foremost thinking of how to influence our game going forwards. Of course he has duties off the ball - 10 attack 10 defend in that regard, and there are places and stations and zones to cover, but DeZerbi appears to coach from a perspective of dare and joy rather than damage limitation. For a player like Xavi, that will make all the difference IMO.

 

[billyiddo]

I agree there's been a necessary break-in period for him to find his feet, and I think the best of him will come in time if he has the comfort of regular play as a starter/important player. But I firmly believe that had we committed to making him a foical point of what we were doing this season from the start, he'd have settled much quicker and he'd have affected more games. As it is, I still maintain Frank was not the right manager for him.

Free role. Drift from the left. Yes, that's what I mean.
Similar in some aspects to the position he had earlier in the season, except De Zerbi has us playing harder as a team, pressing far more effectively, and supporting each other better. Surely you can acknowledge that the way the players are playing under DeZerbi is significantly different than Frank? DeZerbi has these players getting closer to fully believing they deserve to want the ball and enjoy playing with it. Frank was risk-averse. That's an observation as much as a criticism.

I have never had an issue with his work rate (or toughness for that matter - I think refs are missing a lot of fouls on him) and did not suggest otherwise. He does lose his man fairly often, but this is IMO because he is first and foremost thinking of how to influence our game going forwards. Of course he has duties off the ball - 10 attack 10 defend in that regard, and there are places and stations and zones to cover, but DeZerbi appears to coach from a perspective of dare and joy rather than damage limitation. For a player like Xavi, that will make all the difference IMO.

Free role usually implies a lack of responsibilities off the ball hence me bringing up his duties there.

 

[thfcsteff]

Free role usually implies a lack of responsibilities off the ball hence me bringing up his lack of duties there.

I am not sure that definition of 'free role' applies anywhere in the modern game?

I use the term for very creative players who need to be given the license and structure around them to roam and create. Defensively, in 2026 no-one gets away without responsibilities.
So I meant it in terms of Xavi is a player who when we are on the ball/attacking, has the license to go wherever he needs to in order to make things happen as he feels it. He is not, for example, under instruction to stay wide and keep 'balance' if he feels something is on inside, and he is thankfully not restricted from long-range shooting.

With regards to the defensive side of the game, I think if we talk about his adaptation (which I know was your main point), then this is precisely what we're talking about - the fact that this league demands more stringent work off the ball than any other league. That's what he will still be adjusting to, however in the meantime, do you pick up and give him license for what he can do (accepting that he is not always great in defensive duties and others will need to be ready to cover while he learns) or do you play him off the bench and wait two years for him to learn (not my choice but appeared to be whart Frank wanted to do).

I think we'll see that for these final 5 games, De Zerbi has gone with what he needs versus what he wants, with the caveat that should we survive, I think he would absolutely work on those areas of Simons game. The player has tons of passion and effort.

 

[billyiddo]

I am not sure that definition of 'free role' applies anywhere in the modern game?

I use the term for very creative players who need to be given the license and structure around them to roam and create. Defensively, in 2026 no-one gets away without responsibilities.
So I meant it in terms of Xavi is a player who when we are on the ball/attacking, has the license to go wherever he needs to in order to make things happen as he feels it. He is not, for example, under instruction to stay wide and keep 'balance' if he feels something is on inside, and he is thankfully not restricted from long-range shooting.

With regards to the defensive side of the game, I think if we talk about his adaptation (which I know was your main point), then this is precisely what we're talking about - the fact that this league demands more stringent work off the ball than any other league. That's what he will still be adjusting to, however in the meantime, do you pick up and give him license for what he can do (accepting that he is not always great in defensive duties and others will need to be ready to cover while he learns) or do you play him off the bench and wait two years for him to learn (not my choice but appeared to be whart Frank wanted to do).

I think we'll see that for these final 5 games, De Zerbi has gone with what he needs versus what he wants, with the caveat that should we survive, I think he would absolutely work on those areas of Simons game. The player has tons of passion and effort.

I wasn't really passing comment on what he did or didn't do off the ball, I was just clearing up the/my confusion regarding what was meant by free role in your post.

Frank started Xavi in 17 league games, he wasn't here for the first few as he was signed late and he missed 3(?) for a red card so I'm not sure i agree with nor see the grounds to believe in your conclusion that he wanted to play him off the bench (for 2 years) he wanted him in the team and tried a couple of different setups with him off the left or through the middle to try and find a way that works.

 

[Muttley]

I completely agree with what you’re saying on ENIC, I just don’t on Ange. I think he accepted there was a greater chance of losing games in the league because he wanted to give the players something to remember the season by after injuries ruined the league season. But if we think back to how he felt about losing to Emirates Marketing Project so Arsenal wouldn’t win the league…he hated that. He wanted to win. And I think he saw the value winning a trophy would do for the club.

To then bring it back to ENIC, they didn’t see that value, they didn’t think there was anything to be gained from what Ange left us with. And we are where we are

I agree with most of this, except the puzzling line 'Ange's psychology was pretty poor when it came to creating a winning culture' and comparing him directly with Frank. Postecoglu had injuries everywhere and little support around him as that second season went into the New Year. He created a way to win. I don't know if it is fair to say he was 'poor' in creating a 'winning culture' because just as he won, we broke it up and went back to reset. Frank came in with a clean slate plus the trimmings of a side in the CL. By Xmas, he was telling us we weren't a real CL club because we didn't do it the 'right' way.

I think the Tavistock/Lewis observation is on point.

I think you have to go back to the last third of last season. When Ange got his players back from injury he came up with a game plan to win the EL. If he had implemented that across the league setup then I'd be with you guys to a certain extent. He was stubborn and he knew that his league strategy wasn't yielding results. He knew that he could have got it all a bit more pragmatic and got a lower block and more of a counter into that setup. That would have yielded better results. So the changed team (for the league) would take to the field, go all gung-ho, go a couple of goals down and then quit on the games. Classic losing culture from Ange, made worse by him putting an arm round their shoulders and telling them everything would be OK. Then he'd go and pick a fight with the journo's in the pressers as we went into free-fall in the league.

As we saw from Xavi, if you're a winner it has to hurt badly when you lose in football. You need to be able to learn lessons and improve from losing football matches. None of that happened under Ange in the league last season. He was even getting his players to expend more energy by playing the way they did in the league. It didn't need to be one or the other, and the league hangover clearly impacted this season.

Spurs need to get rid of this losing culture once and for all. It is not acceptable at any level of a winning football club.

 

[mjc23]

It's about the sponsors. They pay big money to have their name on the shirt. When a goal goes in the cameras zoom in and it will be shown on highlights and in newspapers. They want their name shown.
As with everything these days it's about money. The players like their fat paychecks so have to play their part.

They introduced the rule because of Diego Forlan. He scored for Man U and took off his shirt to celebrate. But for some reason that season, their shirt had a sewn in mesh vest which meant Forlan couldn't get his shirt back on before the game restarted. So he spent the next few minutes playing the game with his shirt more resembling a toga.
So I'd say it was introduced due to the delay of game. Which is crazy as some of these pre-rehearsed celebrations take much longer.
Booking players for celebrating is madness though. Although I can appreciate why Adebayor may have got booked when he score for Emirates Marketing Project, but that was beautiful!

 

[Lemonade Money]

Even free roles aren't free anymore.

 

[Rafa87]

I think you have to go back to the last third of last season. When Ange got his players back from injury he came up with a game plan to win the EL. If he had implemented that across the league setup then I'd be with you guys to a certain extent. He was stubborn and he knew that his league strategy wasn't yielding results. He knew that he could have got it all a bit more pragmatic and got a lower block and more of a counter into that setup. That would have yielded better results. So the changed team (for the league) would take to the field, go all gung-ho, go a couple of goals down and then quit on the games. Classic losing culture from Ange, made worse by him putting an arm round their shoulders and telling them everything would be OK. Then he'd go and pick a fight with the journo's in the pressers as we went into free-fall in the league.

As we saw from Xavi, if you're a winner it has to hurt badly when you lose in football. You need to be able to learn lessons and improve from losing football matches. None of that happened under Ange in the league last season. He was even getting his players to expend more energy by playing the way they did in the league. It didn't need to be one or the other, and the league hangover clearly impacted this season.

Spurs need to get rid of this losing culture once and for all. It is not acceptable at any level of a winning football club.

Reading this thread and some others it’s clear that people are taking the easy option of blaming Frank, almost solely, for where we are.

The stats, the trend, the performances has all been downhill for a while. It depends which data points you want to use but you could say it’s been on a downhill trend since Poch left but with the odd positive spike as the outlier - Conte qualifying for Champions league, Ange finishing 5th in his first season. Or, some would say that it’s been a downward trend over the last 3 seasons mostly. I don’t think either kind of thinking sends you far wrong.

This idea that we were in a good place, and nothing was Ange’s fault, it was all just injuries etc is nonsense to me. We’ve been tending downward for a while. Franks had injuries too, but it’s easier to blame him for us potentially going down because he was here the season it happened.

We won a trophy last season, it was fantastic. One of, if not my favourite moment ever in my lifetime. However when you look at it logically, and explain that, whilst it was a great achievement but not a true barometer of where we are as a club, you’re told you’re not a real fan and diminishing our achievements. Forest and Palace look like they might win European trophies as well this season. Frank had us, was it 4th? In the Champions league early stages, and bar Kinsky having a nightmare 15 minutes I think we would have gone past Atletico as well. It’s almost like there’s more to it than just piling it on the manager you don’t like and absolving the one you do like.

We finished 17th last season, we’re likely to finish this season 18th. The main difference isn’t injuries, it’s that last season the bottom three were so poor that no one else in the league were ever really in serious danger. If the bottom three this season were about last season there’s a good chance I’d wager we would have dropped then. There should have been huge action in the summer to pull us away from where we were headed. It was a warning.

Should we have sacked Ange after winning a trophy? Maybe not. However I think had we continued with him I have zero doubt we would be in the same place now, im not buying it would have all picked up again this year with players back. We would likely have still had injury issues, and would have likely been sat here saying we should ditch the league to focus on the CL whilst still sleepwalking into relegation.

Our problems aren’t because of any one manager, our problems are due to years of complete mismanagement at the very top, where we haven’t capitalised on our brief successes, we have made good money from the stadium which we have then invested poorly in numerous badly thought out systems and chopping and changing of managers resulting in a mismatched squad of players who have some, albeit limited, levels of quality meaning we just aren’t that great on the pitch. We have elevated a ‘leadership’ team who, whilst good players have shown very little to no skills in terms of actually being leaders.

Essentially what I’m saying is, whilst I was never sure Frank was the right fit. Pointing the finger at him and saying this is on him is unfair and probably a sign that people just don’t like him. The reality of it is that you learn very quickly at this club that if you’re truly pointing the finger of blame here, it’s right across the board, and you actually just need a lot more fingers.

(Sorry, Xavi thread, but still)

 

[thfcsteff]

I wasn't really passing comment on what he did or didn't do off the ball, I was just clearing up the/my confusion regarding what was meant by free role in your post.

Frank started Xavi in 17 league games, he wasn't here for the first few as he was signed late and he missed 3(?) for a red card so I'm not sure i agree with nor see the grounds to believe in your conclusion that he wanted to play him off the bench (for 2 years) he wanted him in the team and tried a couple of different setups with him off the left or through the middle to try and find a way that works.

Fair point on the stats, I don't remember a lot of full 90 performances in terms of time but will look - I am intrigued.

Do you genuinely believe Frank trusted him or knew how to manage him? To my eyes, it is undeniable he did not.

 

[thfcsteff]

Reading this thread and some others it’s clear that people are taking the easy option of blaming Frank, almost solely, for where we are.

The stats, the trend, the performances has all been downhill for a while. It depends which data points you want to use but you could say it’s been on a downhill trend since Poch left but with the odd positive spike as the outlier - Conte qualifying for Champions league, Ange finishing 5th in his first season. Or, some would say that it’s been a downward trend over the last 3 seasons mostly. I don’t think either kind of thinking sends you far wrong.

This idea that we were in a good place, and nothing was Ange’s fault, it was all just injuries etc is nonsense to me. We’ve been tending downward for a while. Franks had injuries too, but it’s easier to blame him for us potentially going down because he was here the season it happened.

We won a trophy last season, it was fantastic. One of, if not my favourite moment ever in my lifetime. However when you look at it logically, and explain that, whilst it was a great achievement but not a true barometer of where we are as a club, you’re told you’re not a real fan and diminishing our achievements. Forest and Palace look like they might win European trophies as well this season. Frank had us, was it 4th? In the Champions league early stages, and bar Kinsky having a nightmare 15 minutes I think we would have gone past Atletico as well. It’s almost like there’s more to it than just piling it on the manager you don’t like and absolving the one you do like.

We finished 17th last season, we’re likely to finish this season 18th. The main difference isn’t injuries, it’s that last season the bottom three were so poor that no one else in the league were ever really in serious danger. If the bottom three this season were about last season there’s a good chance I’d wager we would have dropped then. There should have been huge action in the summer to pull us away from where we were headed. It was a warning.

Should we have sacked Ange after winning a trophy? Maybe not. However I think had we continued with him I have zero doubt we would be in the same place now, im not buying it would have all picked up again this year with players back. We would likely have still had injury issues, and would have likely been sat here saying we should ditch the league to focus on the CL whilst still sleepwalking into relegation.

Our problems aren’t because of any one manager, our problems are due to years of complete mismanagement at the very top, where we haven’t capitalised on our brief successes, we have made good money from the stadium which we have then invested poorly in numerous badly thought out systems and chopping and changing of managers resulting in a mismatched squad of players who have some, albeit limited, levels of quality meaning we just aren’t that great on the pitch. We have elevated a ‘leadership’ team who, whilst good players have shown very little to no skills in terms of actually being leaders.

Essentially what I’m saying is, whilst I was never sure Frank was the right fit. Pointing the finger at him and saying this is on him is unfair and probably a sign that people just don’t like him. The reality of it is that you learn very quickly at this club that if you’re truly pointing the finger of blame here, it’s right across the board, and you actually just need a lot more fingers.

(Sorry, Xavi thread, but still)

I don't think you'll find disagreement on the 'multi-points failure' of this club. In that sense, blaming Frank solely is unfair. I agree. In truth, VV should've swiftly moved him on in December when it was clear the fit was wrong; that was a huge opportunity.
Good discussion and forces me to double-check my own view (which as it happens still stands)...

 

[billyiddo]

Fair point on the stats, I don't remember a lot of full 90 performances in terms of time but will look - I am intrigued.

Do you genuinely believe Frank trusted him or knew how to manage him? To my eyes, it is undeniable he did not.

Yes, I think the issues with Xavi primarily are down to his adapting to the league and the general poor quality of our attacking players/creative midfielders around him. Frank has a proven track record of making his attacks work - he had a high turnover of attacking players at Brentford throughout his time there and with each rebuild he got them functioning, I think during his 5 or so years there he had 3 or 4 different attacking units and they were all effective - you don't do that by accident.