• 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

Ange in or out?

Ange in or out?

  • In

    Votes: 73 42.2%

  • Out

    Votes: 100 57.8%
  • Total voters
    173
Legohamster said:
I've actually changed my mind as I want him to completely own this mess of the season

I want him to go down as the manager that got our worst PL record

His ego deserves it.
Click to expand...

I guess that’s one silver lining if he doesn’t get fired, he can prove without any excuse how brick he is.

I’d genuinely prefer Sherwood, motivationally and tactically better…Jesus lol
 
Raziel said:
It is now

- As CEO you let people do their work (Munn)
- You have regular updates, those people need to explain the mitigations/reasoning for staying the course when data indicates otherwise
- You as CEO inevitably have to advise first, but eventually make the call.

In my experience at this type of decisioning making, Munn is in trouble as well, may not be the end of him but his creditability is significantly damaged at this point. I'm sure there was a conversation in December, pre Jan Window of stick or not, the stick position looks very bad now.
Click to expand...

Munn's leadership mantra is about creating the conditions for his reports to be successful. By the end of the Jan window, closely followed by the end of Feb when we had a fit squad those conditions were mostly in place.

Ange is now totally in that zone where Munn can judge him. He has the clear path to succeed. I don't think he will and Munn will take action.

I'm sort of happy that for once Spurs aren't being knee jerk.
 
Muttley said:
Yes, but by it taking so long to decipher it is implied it cannot be clear and obvious. I don't blame Ange at all for following that line of scrutiny on these refs.

I took one look at it and saw the foul. I didn't see it in real time though.
Click to expand...

must have been clear and obvious to the lad with the stud mark on his knee, and the VAR tech who told the ref to take a look

it's the stupidest phrase in football and should be removed from the wording forthwith
 
Muttley said:
Yes, but by it taking so long to decipher it is implied it cannot be clear and obvious. I don't blame Ange at all for following that line of scrutiny on these refs.

I took one look at it and saw the foul. I didn't see it in real time though.
Click to expand...
First point is it took a minute and a half not six minutes like Ange claims.

Second point is, no it shouldn’t have taken that long. However, from some angles it wasn’t clear and obvious but from one angle in particular it was very clear and obvious. The fact the ref booked him too means he was in absolutely no doubt it was a foul.

It took too long but I can understand why.
 
Baleforce said:
must have been clear and obvious to the lad with the stud mark on his knee, and the VAR tech who told the ref to take a look

it's the stupidest phrase in football and should be removed from the wording forthwith
Click to expand...

The only thing VAR should do is baseline any incident against the laws of the game and advise the on-pitch referee what decision to make.

These guys make out like 80-90% of football decisions are subjective. As we've seen with pretty much all of them tonight, they really are simple decisions if you're only using the laws of the game.
 
DeanoAustin said:
First point is it took a minute and a half not six minutes like Ange claims.

Second point is, no it shouldn’t have taken that long. However, from some angles it wasn’t clear and obvious but from one angle in particular it was very clear and obvious. The fact the ref booked him too means he was in absolutely no doubt it was a foul.

It took too long but I can’t understand why.
Click to expand...

whats the rush, it was on prime time, were Sky going to cut away to Kabaddi or something?
 
DeanoAustin said:
First point is it took a minute and a half not six minutes like Ange claims.

Second point is, no it shouldn’t have taken that long. However, from some angles it wasn’t clear and obvious but from one angle in particular it was very clear and obvious. The fact the ref booked him too means he was in absolutely no doubt it was a foul.

It took too long but I can understand why.
Click to expand...
I think anges 6 minutes includes the var for the offside
 
Muttley said:
The only thing VAR should do is baseline any incident against the laws of the game and advise the on-pitch referee what decision to make.

These guys make out like 80-90% of football decisions are subjective. As we've seen with pretty much all of them tonight, they really are simple decisions if you're only using the laws of the game.
Click to expand...

agreed, most are objective, the rest should be made that way
 
Muttley said:
Yes, but by it taking so long to decipher it is implied it cannot be clear and obvious. I don't blame Ange at all for following that line of scrutiny on these refs.

I took one look at it and saw the foul. I didn't see it in real time though.
Click to expand...

You can make these arguments when you are in a better position - if you are struggling then it rightly or wrongly just comes across as though you are looking for excuses - idk how i would fare in the hot seat but I wish in these instances struggling managers would avoid giving that impression
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back