• 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: 83 77.6%

  • Out

    Votes: 24 22.4%
  • Total voters
    107
Great point above.

Jose and Conte were lambasted for needing a certain type of player for their system to work. They were called inflexible and dinosaurs and chequebook managers.

Now it's Ange however and it's a 'philosophy' and he needs time and backing and it's not he's fault. What's the difference that at times it looks attractive?

I didn't want them sacked and I don't want him sacked but it's interesting how these things are framed depending on the individual. The football we're playing now is consistently worse than anything those two served up but now it's acceptable and not the managers fault.
 
Bishop said:
Why even go for short term? That's just wasting money and time that a real solution could be getting properly integrated.
Click to expand...
Because they also went long term with odebert and moore
The mistake was assuming Richy would stay fit which is never ever happening here
 
fernadez said:
Great point above.

Jose and Conte were lambasted for needing a certain type of player for their system to work. They were called inflexible and dinosaurs and chequebook managers.

Now it's Ange however and it's a 'philosophy' and he needs time and backing and it's not he's fault. What's the difference that at times it looks attractive?

I didn't want them sacked and I don't want him sacked but it's interesting how these things are framed depending on the individual. The football we're playing now is consistently worse than anything those two served up but now it's acceptable and not the managers fault.
Click to expand...
The issue is players brought for those managers can’t play this football
And as most were players for now we had more issues forming in our HG and club trained numbers . That’s a Paratici oversight, massiviy
It’s why the club need an ethos and philosophy and to stick with it
If it’s conte and Jose then it’s defensive counter attacking… and fans have to accept that
If it’s Ange then it’s attacking football
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Because they also went long term with odebert and moore
The mistake was assuming Richy would stay fit which is never ever happening here
Click to expand...
We needed long term on the right as well. Even accepting you rate Johnson there (I don't) that leaves only one player for the right hand side. When really Johnson should be the sub coming on not the starter.
 
Bishop said:
We needed long term on the right as well. Even accepting you rate Johnson there (I don't) that leaves only one player for the right hand side. When really Johnson should be the sub coming on not the starter.
Click to expand...
Maybe that’s the Korean lad who plays there
Maybe the idea was to share minutes with odebert
Have Richy and son play left with Moore and na shave Werner as stop gap
That’s how the squad was picked when more players were fit
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Maybe that’s the Korean lad who plays there
Maybe the idea was to share minutes with odebert
Have Richy and son play left with Moore and na shave Werner as stop gap
That’s how the squad was picked when more players were fit
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced Odobert will be effective on the right. He looks like the now classic right footed who cuts in from the left. I know it was a very brief showing but he looked very blunt when we played him on the right. The left is going to be where he shines for us.

Which still leaves the right hand side very thin in terms of numbers and very thin on quality.
 
Last edited:
Bishop said:
I'm not convinced Odobert will be effective on the right. He looks like the now classic right footed who cuts in from the right. I know it was a very brief showing but he looked very blunt when we played him on the right. The left is going to be where he shines for us.

Which still leaves the right hand side very thin in terms of numbers and very thin on quality.
Click to expand...

Yep
I don’t see it either
The right side is scarily weak
One option who is knackered
Or shunting out our current best midfielder over there
Got to hope that Yang hits the ground running but that’s me being massively optimistic
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Yep
I don’t see it either
The right side is scarily weak
One option who is knackered
Or shunting out our current best midfielder over there
Got to hope that Yang hits the ground running but that’s me being massively optimistic
Click to expand...
Indeed, Yang is just 18 with a single season in the South Korean league. It would be complex stupidity for us to have to rely on him. Bad squad building. We should also have signed a higher quality player.
 
Again, I'm still IN. But if we can't put Soton to the sword with their single win after gifting Ipswich their single win halfway through the season, questions must be asked about delaying the inevitable.
 
NaijaSpurs said:
Indeed, Yang is just 18 with a single season in the South Korean league. It would be complex stupidity for us to have to rely on him. Bad squad building. We should also have signed a higher quality player.
Click to expand...
Or we anticipated Richy and Sonny being able to play
And odebert
And moore
And wernrer
And maybe even Kulu at the time
 
Bishop said:
I'm not convinced Odobert will be effective on the right. He looks like the now classic right footed who cuts in from the left. I know it was a very brief showing but he looked very blunt when we played him on the right. The left is going to be where he shines for us.

Which still leaves the right hand side very thin in terms of numbers and very thin on quality.
Click to expand...
Agree on Odobert. Didn’t look right on the right - even though he had some fair time there for Burnley. It’s rare that a right footer on the right or a left footer on the left actually works nowadays. Johnson is actually a bit of an outlier because he attacks the back post so well. The actual all round game isn’t that threatening.
 
fernadez said:
Great point above.

Jose and Conte were lambasted for needing a certain type of player for their system to work. They were called inflexible and dinosaurs and chequebook managers.

Now it's Ange however and it's a 'philosophy' and he needs time and backing and it's not he's fault. What's the difference that at times it looks attractive?

I didn't want them sacked and I don't want him sacked but it's interesting how these things are framed depending on the individual. The football we're playing now is consistently worse than anything those two served up but now it's acceptable and not the managers fault.
Click to expand...
It's a detail but while Mourinho undoubtedly needs quality players and is a chequebook manager, he's by far the more flexible of the three. He used an asymetric 4-2-3-1 in order to accomodate Aurier and also tried various solutions in order to bring Dele in (until he decided he was brick and threw him under the bus). He's very rigid when it comes to the defensive side of the game but I was suprised to notice that he allows his attacking players a lot of freedom. So much so that he was accused of not coaching the players at all, by the end of his tenure.

By the way, it's a shame Ndombele couldn't be bothered to try harder because he had the kind of talent that could have flourished under Mourinho.
 
Kandi1977 said:
Why should they get 5 years, but not Ange?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that Ange has been manager for 5 years in any of his previous jobs. It's usually his second season where his success peaks hence his "I always win something in my second season" comments. This is his second season. If this season isn't the one where we are competitive, then his career stats suggest it is unlikely to happen.
 
fernadez said:
Great point above.

Jose and Conte were lambasted for needing a certain type of player for their system to work. They were called inflexible and dinosaurs and chequebook managers.

Now it's Ange however and it's a 'philosophy' and he needs time and backing and it's not he's fault. What's the difference that at times it looks attractive?

I didn't want them sacked and I don't want him sacked but it's interesting how these things are framed depending on the individual. The football we're playing now is consistently worse than anything those two served up but now it's acceptable and not the managers fault.
Click to expand...

In my case, absolutely untrue.
Mourinho got my ire because he essentially courted Levy for the job, telling him he could do better with the squad Poch had in Autumn 2020; he lied. In fact, we fudged it in that season alone. Conte got my ire because I genuinely believed that he only finally agreed to come to us because he had 'broken' Daniel and was going to get exactly what he wanted; I thought he would down tools and walk the moment he felt he was not getting exactly what he needed. Instead he stuck around and then ended up claming the club and players out at the end.

The football is absolutely not 'consistently worse' if you like attacking football. It certainly lacks the pragmatic nature of those two.

Final thought. Both Mourinho and Conte had the benefit of Kane and Son.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back