• 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

Andre Villas-Boas - Head Coach

And there I was thinking you'd leave it as a difference of opinion! No such luck ;)

A lot to respond to...I will bold-face within...


You are entitled to your opinion - but I dont agree with any of those points. We have been completely useless down the right hand side all season. Walker and Lennon have no partnership or understanding between them at all. Lennon has been nullified as an attacking threat. Many of the opponents major threats come down that flank too.


The pair of them have not linked like they used to, and have both suffered more than most from the loss of Modric as a connection point. I disagree re: Lennon as an attacking threat BTW. I agree that the channel between Walker and his CB on any given matchday has been a constant seam of trouble, but we appear to have got far tighter with this in recent matches.





Bale has been top class for at least two seasons. He is no different this time.


And the sun still shines brightly. I agree he has been top class for two seasons, but I would say he is becoming even better.



His productivity is imv worse than last season. I would like to see a like for like comparison.

So far he has scored more than last season but assisted less. His productivity appears to be different. I will offer the mitigating circumstance that Ekotto is a very very important part of his ability to do what he does in terms of assists, as Benny himself offers an overlapping threat and as such, requires attention too. Again, our entire model of play has shifted from that quick incisive out-ball from, say, Modders, to a more possession-based situation. Again, interested to see how much 'quicker' our play gets when we have Ekotto back. I cannot make you see what I see in Bale, but he is becoming a smarter more measured player who can also now play with his right foot, something he most certainly wasn't as comfortable with until this season.



I dont see the improvement in Dawson you do.

I see is a CB who absolutely does not long-ball it nearly as much as he used to. He looks to keep the ball and make every ball count. That is 100% undeniable. I call that 'improvement' in the football sense.


I think you are seeing things that frankly arent there. Our home performances this season have been dire in the most part. We dont attack teams but play patter cake patter cake football for most of the first half. We start slowly and never really get going. Playing two defensive cms was largely responsible for our dismal showing earlier in the season.


First of all, given the absolutely RAMPANT criticism the bloke has had from day 1, I would agree that his first priority was to make sure we didn't give way much at all, and we have certainly set up like that. It's easy to want swashbuckling rampaging football, but you know the players we haven't had for much of the season, you know it's his first 6 months in charge, you know the level of criticism he has received from the get-go and you know that he has had to find a whole new way of making the team move forward and play. Undeniable facts. I would agree that recently, especially at home, his caution could've been relaxed a bit, but we are making chances we're just not putting them away (sound familiar?)...as for two defensive CMs early season, what would you have had him do given what he has available?



Name me one aspect tactically that you think we have improved. Corners? Should be easy for a top coach to get a couple of ideas across - no? Free-kicks - it seems to me there is a discussion every time about who is going to take it - surely this should be sorted out before.

Corners have improved. At least we score from the odd one or two now. Free-kicks remain off-target. Are you seriously going to blame AVB for the on-pitch 'discussion' that every club in the Prem have before a free-kick of potential danger? Please.




Too many players are playing well under their potential.

Not really, they've been adapting to a higher line and a new system.



Who do you blame that on? Who is responsible for the shape of the team and getting players to run off the ball? The coaching staff.

And what are you not seeing? You may not LIKE what he is doing, but don't for one moment pretend he doesn't have a 'shape' for his sides and that players don't run off the ball for each other, that's just total nonsense.



Why are we going negative after going a goal up?


It's been getting a lot better on this front IMO, but yes, early doors this season there was a certain amount of fear. Take into account that particularly against West Brom, we battered them first-half and should've been 3 up at HT, so when we finally did get a lead, I think a certain fear did creep in. But it's got better IMO.




Why do we concede possession and eventually goals in the last 10 minutes?

Acknowledge, please, that we have seen a pretty big improvement in this problem.


Why do we never turn round games in that period ourselves? Is it fitness, is it tactics, is it direction - whatever it is - surely it is down to the coaching staff and therefore AVB.

Yes it is. And unlike you, I see a lot of things happening, changing and progressing. Maybe I am simply more patient than you are.


I am desperately trying to give him time, but I am really not enjoying the way we play at home at the moment.


If you are really, 'desperately' trying to 'give him time' then honestly, I'd suggest taking a step back, gauging the whole picture context of what he's dealt with, see where the improvements have been made and move forward from there. One of the most interesting things of late, was reading the Guardian's match report of the Stoke home match this season and immediately reading the report from the Stoke home match last season...what's most interesting to me not just from you, but some other people, is the ANGER towards anyone who wants to give AVB any time. It's really something. You all seem very bitter and upset. I don't really get it...
 
is that one game? or do you mean around that time of the season...if thats the case have you ever of the terminology called form? that qpr game was neck deep in the worst form / confidence the team has had for a while...it LITERALLY affects people's thinking AND their executions....thats why when things like that happen players are taught to compose themselves, breathe and just 'let things come naturally' to get them back on course
so your.....long time...i basically a 2 month blip then. at which point we had the summer and then bale is back to his old self again...i.e prior to the two month blip and majority of two seasons ago...


i'm confused....have you even factored in the QPR at the lane? you talk about proper coaching in that one game AWAY... but what about that game against QPR at the lane when we were nothing short of amazing......? or are you not going to give that feather to redknapp , epsecially seeing that you put it at his feet when we did badly...

so bad performance from an individual = bad caoching
good performance from said individual against SAME team = ???

I just felt that too often in the past couple of years, Bale was sent out and just told to 'do what you do' because he was so raw and effective, yet once he ran into double-teaming/problems, no-one was able to help him find ways around it. The lack of work seemingly done on his right-foot was exasperating, I'm delighted that has been addressed.
 
come on mate, that is absolutely not true. There have been several very detailed posts which have offered far more than that.

They haven't really. The criticisms come from me in this regard on an almost weekly basis, all that happens is I get referred to the fact that he's done well to get us challenging for 4th place with so many players from last year's squad not available again. I haven't seen anyone offer any justification about the tactical errors I pointed out in my previous post, nor most of the others I've taken the time to highlight on a regular basis this season.

Like I've said many times, I can forgive the manager for the team dropping points in games where we just have an off day, are unlucky with refereeing decisions, poor finishing, or if the opposition just plays better than us on the day. That happens to every manager, with teams who have far better players than we have. I never criticised AVB after the Saudi Sportswashing Machine or Everton games because he did nothing wrong on those days. But what I can't forgive is getting the tactical decisions wrong so often, and by my count that is now seven games out of nine we have dropped points in that have featured very poor tactical decisions from AVB.
 
They haven't really. The criticisms come from me in this regard on an almost weekly basis, all that happens is I get referred to the fact that he's done well to get us challenging for 4th place with so many players from last year's squad not available again. I haven't seen anyone offer any justification about the tactical errors I pointed out in my previous post, nor most of the others I've taken the time to highlight on a regular basis this season.

Like I've said many times, I can forgive the manager for the team dropping points in games where we just have an off day, are unlucky with refereeing decisions, poor finishing, or if the opposition just plays better than us on the day. That happens to every manager, with teams who have far better players than we have. I never criticised AVB after the Saudi Sportswashing Machine or Everton games because he did nothing wrong on those days. But what I can't forgive is getting the tactical decisions wrong so often, and by my count that is now seven games out of nine we have dropped points in that have featured very poor tactical decisions from AVB.

Weren't you one of those that critised him for not going 4-4-2 away at the Etihad? If we had gotten our ass-whipped 5-1, like we did when we last went gung-ho against City with only two in the middle of midfield, I wonder if you would have said he got his tactical decison wrong:-k
 
Weren't you one of those that critised him for not going 4-4-2 away at the Etihad? If we had gotten our ass-whipped 5-1, like we did when we last went gung-ho against City with only two in the middle of midfield, I wonder if you would have said he got his tactical decison wrong:-k

Nope. Here were my thoughts from the City game:

Me on November 11th said:
I have no problem with the way we set up in the first half today. The fact is, we're not going to beat teams like City away from home by overwhelming them for 90 minutes. The best way to get a result would be to contain them, frustrate their players and fans and nick a goal if the opportunity came.

It's the second half that I found unacceptable. For starters, it took AVB until the 78th minute to make his first substitution, and this was enforced. He demonstrated a complete lack of decisiveness in taking so long, by which point, our tactic of sitting back and trying to soak up all the pressure had failed because we were always going to crack eventually if we'd tried it for 90 minutes. But here's where things got fudging bonkers. Walker goes off, you have another right-back on the bench, and instead he brought on Dawson? To play Gallas at RB? I'm sorry but that's just plain fudging stupid - as bad as any of the crap tactical decisions we saw from Pleat or Ramos. Then he took off Adebayor, who's movement, pace and physical presence was causing City problems - again, ridiculous decision considering how many long balls we were hoofing up the pitch. Finally, Lennon came off. I didn't know Lennon was injured at the time, but nevertheless, why bring on a defender in place of him? Why didn't we have any more wingers on the bench? Where were Falque and Townsend? At the very least, he could have brought on Sigurdsson and played either him or Dempsey out wide. A simple lesson for you Andre which you still haven't learned - if you substitute all your best attacking players in the hope of holding on to what you've got, and then the opposition score, YOU HAVE NO ATTACKING PLAYERS TO GET A GOAL BACK! Not fudging rocket science. As soon as City scored the second I knew that was it, we wouldn't even create another chance for the rest of the match.



The old board isn't here any more so I can't dig up my thoughts from the City game last season, but for the record, Harry got things badly wrong that day. Parker hadn't signed yet and Sandro was injured, he claimed apparently that Livermore was only fit enough for the bench. In which case, Kaboul should have started in midfield and he should have picked Bassong to start in defence. Because you do not play against a team like City without a defensive midfielder. I was horrified as soon as I heard the starting line-up and wasn't surprised in the slightest to see them running through acres of space through the centre of the pitch to keep us under heavy pressure. I heavily criticised Harry for it at the time, but the reason I still backed him as manager was because this wasn't a regular occurrence, the next major tactical fudge-up wasn't for another 6 months, until we played at the Emirates.
 
Nope. Here were my thoughts from the City game:





The old board isn't here any more so I can't dig up my thoughts from the City game last season, but for the record, Harry got things badly wrong that day. Parker hadn't signed yet and Sandro was injured, he claimed apparently that Livermore was only fit enough for the bench. In which case, Kaboul should have started in midfield and he should have picked Bassong to start in defence. Because you do not play against a team like City without a defensive midfielder. I was horrified as soon as I heard the starting line-up and wasn't surprised in the slightest to see them running through acres of space through the centre of the pitch to keep us under heavy pressure. I heavily criticised Harry for it at the time, but the reason I still backed him as manager was because this wasn't a regular occurrence, the next major tactical fudge-up wasn't for another 6 months, until we played at the Emirates.

Hmmm..fair enough. I think I have confused you with another poister; perhaps Indianspurs.

Tbf, we can all say 'we should have started x as this was obviously the thing to do because of y'. I myself do it. But often those are just gambles that can come off or not. A second when a players switches off/on leading to a goal scored/conceded changes the whole feel of the message board.

For example, if Siggy had scored his header near the end, do you honestly think you would have bemoaned AVB's tactical decison making then?

Another thing is that you seem to give detailed posts on what AVB 'should obviously have done' but it's mostly after the fact. You don't seem to post pre-game in the omt stating the 'obvious selections that AVB should clearly make' (I haven't found any in the SToke OMT: by all means correcr me if i'm wrong) and this seems to be unfair to me.

So, in the interest of consistency and foresight, can you tell what our starting line-up, formation and subs should be against Villa on Boxing day?
I am intrigued to read what your views are on how we should approach the game; then we can havbe a discussion afterwards about how things went right/wrong/diabolical.

Cheers
 
A few questions for you:

Do you agree with some/any of the points that myself, Kingdawson, Golfball or any other have made regarding AVB?
What have you made of AVB's tactical decisions so far?
What have you made of his substitutions?
What do you think of our home performances this season?
Where do you think we should finish this season?
Where will we finish in the table when it's all said and done?

I am interested to see what your response is to the last two questions especially so we can get on record what you expect from AVB and the team this season, and your reactions will be if we do not hit those targets.

The last two questions, esp the last one, are not answerable until we see what happen during the Jan transfer window. By most reports, Liverpool is going to spend big again (about 20m, more than our net transfer spending over the last two seasons).

Based on our current team, I don't think we should expect us finish anything higher than 4th, but we do face lots of competition for 4th. Scum, Liverpool (my personal view, who is our closet rival this season) and there's always bound to have one or two surprise package every season.

So, if based on the existing situation, we will finish anything from 7th to 4th. If we do not spend during the Jan transfer window, anything above 6th is a good achievement, and may actually have something to do with the manager.
 
Nope. Here were my thoughts from the City game:

The old board isn't here any more so I can't dig up my thoughts from the City game last season, but for the record, Harry got things badly wrong that day. Parker hadn't signed yet and Sandro was injured, he claimed apparently that Livermore was only fit enough for the bench. In which case, Kaboul should have started in midfield and he should have picked Bassong to start in defence. Because you do not play against a team like City without a defensive midfielder. I was horrified as soon as I heard the starting line-up and wasn't surprised in the slightest to see them running through acres of space through the centre of the pitch to keep us under heavy pressure. I heavily criticised Harry for it at the time, but the reason I still backed him as manager was because this wasn't a regular occurrence, the next major tactical fudge-up wasn't for another 6 months, until we played at the Emirates.

ARMCHAIR for you.
 
I'd love to hear a few posters answers to those. For me:

Substitutions are shocking on the whole (Not every one you understand)
We SHOULD finish 4/5th. We WILL finish 5/6th.

Why is AVB immune from critiscm from some?

I just think when people criticise, they are doing it in the wrong areas. They are stating things as fact after something has happened, rather than doing it with foresight before the occurrence that they would not be happy with. (I believe this point was mentioned just before me)

Also, I think to criticise one thing ignores the actual attempt of what he was trying to do. For instance, I can criticise and say the Norwich game was one of the worst games of football I have ever had the pleasure of going to WHL and watching. It was dog poor. Completely dreadful. To play the way we did that game, for a team hoping to finish top 4, was utterly utterly shocking. But...just because I've said that, it doesn't mean my criticism is in the right ball park. Because it doesn't consider what AVB was trying to do. He could have told the players in his match preparations to play exactly like Harry told them to do last season, no alterations, no added patience, no added tactical discipline. Just pure Harry-esque performances thank you very much. And we probably would have won that game and played a lot better. But would it have achieved as much in the long run? No.

To try and change a style of play, you need to have the bad games before you can get the good ones. You need to make the mistakes, and you need to fail in order to know what actually needs to be done. People say we haven't changed our style of play because we are playing the same formation, but I think we clearly have. It is more patient, the wide players are tucking in a bit more, and all of it requires a different way of thinking and a different way of moving, receiving the ball, knowing what to do with it when you get it etc etc. So yeah, to criticise is fine. I can say that Norwich game was some of the worst crap I've ever seen. I can even say it was purely to having AVB as our manager that it happened. But I won't be getting all hysterical because that would mean I'm failing to look at why exactly he was doing what he did, and what the objective actually was.

To answer the specific points of JTG...

I've been fine with his tactical decisions. But I don't know enough about football tactics to really comment. What I can see is that the players are really behind him, and most of all impressed by the serious level of detail he gives them tactically. So that's good. In terms of his approach, I think I would have liked to see a more obvious pattern of play developing a bit sooner, but I'm happy to trust that because he's decided to smoothly transition the squad in terms of players he will use, that this will take a bit more time.

By this I mean using Friedel even though he likes to stay on his line. Using Gallas because he wants his experience at the back and to give a veteran an important role in the squad to play, because of the benefits that brings as opposed to having an influential guy around the club with nothing to do, which could drag people down. Using Livermore in the first few games because in terms of ranking he had the shirt last season ahead of Huddlestone and others, even though he would hardly be an ideal midfielder in an AVB system. Using a double defensive pivot even though it isn't his ideal because he didn't have any other choice. Using Defoe upfront even when Ade has been available because he's been in form even though he doesn't lend himself to the ideal AVB style that he has spoken about previously. Making Lennon an important player even though he doesn't score enough goals. Because of all of this, I believe he has decided to hold off on implementing a particular brand of football that he would like, because too many important and influential members of the squad are suited to playing a different way. So he's gone for small changes rather than big.

Substitutions - absolutely fine. Even Defoe off for Ade against Wigan I completely saw the rationale behind.

Home performances - tackled above but there has been obvious improvement as the season has gone on and I see no reason why that upward curve won't continue until May. Also tied in to the tactics paragraph but I believe our home performances will really improve once he gets the players to really play his style of football. A Moutinho in the middle. A Willian up front. Earlier in the season we struggled to impose our style, understandably because it was trying to implement new ideas within an existing framework. No surprise we have been better on the road where the onus is more on countering the home team.

Where should we finish? With an outstanding run we could finish 3rd, with a very poor run we could go 7th. 5th or 6th I would be happy with and 4th would be a realistic, but very good achievement. We can do it, we are capable, but Everton and Arsenal are also no mugs and football is a game where luck can go against you and you may not get what you want. So anywhere between 3rd and 7th, with 4th, 5th or 6th being realistic. And as long we are in the conversation for 4th towards the end of the season then I think we have done well.
 
They haven't really. The criticisms come from me in this regard on an almost weekly basis, all that happens is I get referred to the fact that he's done well to get us challenging for 4th place with so many players from last year's squad not available again. I haven't seen anyone offer any justification about the tactical errors I pointed out in my previous post, nor most of the others I've taken the time to highlight on a regular basis this season.

Like I've said many times, I can forgive the manager for the team dropping points in games where we just have an off day, are unlucky with refereeing decisions, poor finishing, or if the opposition just plays better than us on the day. That happens to every manager, with teams who have far better players than we have. I never criticised AVB after the Saudi Sportswashing Machine or Everton games because he did nothing wrong on those days. But what I can't forgive is getting the tactical decisions wrong so often, and by my count that is now seven games out of nine we have dropped points in that have featured very poor tactical decisions from AVB.

To be honest, the only response I have basically leads me to conclude that nothing he does will get you off his back. You are obviously someone who expects a certain thing to be done in a certain situation, and if it doesn't happen then it's wrong. There's no discussing that simply because any tactical observations made in previous replies have been rendered as 'not reallys' by you here, and as such, you have a very 'set' POV when it comes to tactics. I only hope that at some point (far sooner than later) you are able to enjoy some (or all) aspects of THFC and our manager's work.
 
SUIYHAI said - was at Villa Park last season and couldn't believe it when Parker came on instead of Defoe...but I did at least figure out the rationale behind the decision. The fact is, we were down to 10 men at the time, and since Danny Rose had gone off we had moved Bale to left-back.
The decision to bring on Parker was an attempt to get our best attacking player further up the pitch, like when Emirates Marketing Project sometimes bring on a defensive midfielder when they want to attack more, because Yaya Toure can then push further up.

I'm sorry, I was there too and there is no way Gareth Bale 'played at left-back' for the second-half. We pressed more, and with greater urgency, when down to 10 men than we ever had in a brick, lack-lustre first-off saunter around the gaff. But this sub has been analysed to death recently elsewhere, so onwards...


Back onto AVB, Saturday was a big opportunity for him to show some real ingenuity and tactical nous. The starting line-up was one that most people expected. But if he'd been REALLY smart, he would have expected Stoke to play with 10 men behind the ball for much of the game, not give us much space and make it difficult to create chances. In that situation, he'd have looked at his squad and thought he needed to make sure he had somebody capable of either playing a good pass to players who HAVE managed to find some space, or at least be able to shoot from distance seeing as getting time and space in the box won't be easy. As Huddlestone and Carroll were injured I think (I am VERY concerned if they were available and he went for Livermore on the bench instead), the obvious person in this mould was surely Sigurdsson.

I am a massive Tom Carroll fan, and as an option from the bench, I agree. Nothing else in this match. As for Hudd, I am at a loss to understand what you're saying; that he could thread great, quick long passes into our attacking quartet and around a deep-defending side? Sorry, I fail to see where Hudd would've made the slightest bit of difference.

If he'd been really tactically smart, he would have rewarded Gylfi's good recent performances with a position in the starting line-up, on the basis that he'd not only been playing well but was also the right player for the occasion. There were a number of options as to who he could start ahead of, perhaps Defoe who has played a huge amount of football this season and with Stoke defending well with so many players back he'd probably struggle to get into the positions that have seen him get so high in the goalscoring charts. Or perhaps Adebayor who hasn't really hit form yet this season. But I probably would have started him in place of Lennon, as he could not only switch places from the wing and in the middle with Dembele as the game progressed to keep our play unpredictable, but also Lennon's own form has been a bit rusty and it could give him the kick up the backside he needs, also his pace is a great thing to be able to bring on against tired legs in the second half.


So you would want Sig to start out wide on the right, when his best position is in the hole? Wow. Some would call that an, err, tactical gamble.


But he didn't take that opportunity. Oh well. I guess a lot of managers would stick to the established first XI that has been getting results recently. But we were brick in the first half. So something had to change. AVB's response was to switch Bale and Lennon over, you know, that thing that annoyed the fudge out of so many people last season when Harry did it. It worked reasonably well, but...we were still struggling to create chances. 10 minutes into the second half I was getting frustrated, why wasn't he bringing on Sigurdsson? 20 minutes in, still no Gylfi. 30 minutes in, STILL no Gylfi. We had to wait until the 78th minute to see Sigurdsson appear. And instantly, we looked better. We forced more saves from Begovic in the 12 minutes he was on the pitch than in the 78 he was on the bench. So why the fudge did he wait so long? Did he hope we'd just magically find a way past this very strong defence who up to that point hadn't given us a sniff at goal yet? Einstein once said that the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, well AVB was insane for 78 minutes.

I agree that it would've been nice to see him on 10 mins earlier. However, your claim of 78 mins of insanity is ludicrous.

But it didn't stop there. Then, with the scores level at 0-0 but the momentum all with us, he took off Dembele to bring on Parker. I have theories as to why he did this, unfortunately none of them to do with beating Stoke. I think AVB is very cautious, after what happened at Chelsea, of tinkling off any of the big personalities in the squad. So one theory is that he'd told Parker beforehand that he'd get a run out, concerned about upsetting a big personality in the squad, brought him on instead of Townsend for the final few minutes. Or maybe Dembele was injured, in which case Parker wasn't the best replacement. If he'd really wanted to bring on Parker, he should have taken off Sandro IMO, even though he'd been playing well. Or maybe even bring off Walker and get an extra man in midfield. But...no.

...and in two of those circumstances maybe get caught out and concede that late winner...


Now this is only part of what he got wrong on Saturday. We are entering the busy Christmas period. After Stoke, we have two tricky away games this week, as well as another game on New Year's Day. We need to be resting and rotating players. So to go with our regular starting XI for this game and wait until the 78th minute before making the first sub, the 85th minute for the second and to not even make the third, shows a lack of understanding about managing the form and fitness of the squad, as well as serious continued issues of indecisiveness and hesitation.

This made me laugh. Frankly, your arrogance here is unbelievable. You genuinely believe you know more than this man about what's going on at our club. Madness.

In a nutshell, another poor tactical display. What do those of you who continue to deny AVB's lack of tactical nous consider to be a poor tactical performance, short of dropping all of your best players and putting a striker in goal? Because this, for me, was another poor tactical performance from our manager. I'm sure he's a lovely bloke when you get to know him, the players all seem to like him at Spurs. But what I am seeing from him is poor tactics on a regular basis and it makes it so hard for me to give him any credit for anything when he keeps doing this.

It's not about being an AVB "hater" or anything like that. I'd love for him to do well here. And seeing as he hasn't lost the dressing room, all he has to do is show some intelligence in his tactics and he'll win me over. But he keeps failing to do so. Not only does he fail to show real flair and creativity in his tactical decisions, he gets the simple things wrong too. Like I said earlier in the thread, in true Glory-Glory style, AVB...what does he do?

I just read 20 pages back through this thread to try and find more than one example of AVB's perceived tactical fudge-ups. I couldn't. And when pointed out 'what he does' as I,Raziel, Brain, Jordy and others have done repeatedly and with clarity, you aren't interested, instead going to sometimes-bizarre lengths to reinforce a point you hold and claim that no-one can explain anything to you about AVB, from his tactics onwards. Discussing him with you is a losing battle, thus see ya...
 
Happy Christmas to you all, fellow GG addicts. Our common New Year Resolution should be to spend less time on this board......I know it is highly unlikely but you have to try don't you?

I find the AVB debate a bit sterile in that the swings of fortune in football are sometimes inexplicable. Teams go on a bad run and a good run, with the same manager, and no-one really knows why. Add to that the fact that AVB is inexperienced and is learning on the job...and unfortunately the brick we have seen at times at the Lane this season is maybe all part of the package.

So let's all chill. Was it Moonlit Knight (come back Moonlit, come back) who said that last season was as good as it may get for us? In that pre-Christmas period last season we played the best football of any Spurs team for 25 years. It was glorious, but we won nothing. Who knows where 2013 will lead? Best relax and enjoy the ride!
 
And there I was thinking you'd leave it as a difference of opinion! No such luck ;)

A lot to respond to...I will bold-face within...

I am not going to respond to each point individually because I have already debunked them. We are clearly not going to agree.

The facts are that in our last 3 PL games, two of which were at home, we have scored just two goals.

Half term report on AVB - not good enough yet - must improve. Hopefully he will sign the players we need in the window.

Happy new year to one and all.

BTW I am not an AVB "hater" as I have been characerised. I really want him to do well for the club, its just that I havent seen anything yet that has given me cause for optimism. I am certainly NOT ideologically opposed to him.
 
Last edited:
AVB'S REPORT CARD
===============
Players "B" - managed dramatic transfer situation well and got them playing and winning, despite heavy injurie toll in the first half of season
Press "A" - overcame a very hostile initial press reception and now treated as one of the better coaches in the EPL - Pass
Club "A" - comes across as good corporate citizen, professional and principled, not personal and based on ones moods/whims - Pass
Results "A" - on track and still challenging for top 4 - Pass
Style "C" - pressing and passing game is nice to watch, but not as swashbuckling as before, but still not able to close of games convincingly and consistently

Overall B
 
Back