• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Manager Ange Postecoglou

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Was sacking Ange a good idea?

  • Yes, I think it was a good idea.

    Votes: 73 64.6%

  • No, I think it was a bad idea.

    Votes: 40 35.4%
  • Total voters
    113
I will stand by the Ange is the right man for the club and the system does work. Our issue is that the players are not of consistent enough quality to execute it.

We should have been 3 up after 12 minutes. Udogie with a VERY poor miss.

- Sancho ran past 4 of our players completely unchallenged; and then Bissouma with the most pathetic attempt to block I have ever seen.

- Bissouma again with an absolutely stupid challenge in the box

- Sarr, again, stupid

- The Fernandes goal; we had overloaded the ball with 4 players attacking just Palmer. He manages to skip past all 4 of them link they are not there.

- At 67 mins we missed a clear chance for Son to score the winner.


Bissouma is TERRIBLE and Sarr is not ready. We are losing games because we don't have a capable midfield 2. Players are able to get into dangerous positions since our full backs aren't being helped out and our midfields positioning is all over the place.

If we want to improve, we don't need to ditch the manager - we need to sign the very best midfielder available - and quite simply we cannot because that player will be in demand by every club in Europe; and we will never compete on wages.
 
CarrieFi said:
GeUC0ISW4AAhxJW



View: https://x.com/thespursexpress/status/1865900719150125260?s=46
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

a) "the only two who have ambition" lolz wtf wut???

b) sack him (gfy cunti).
 
LEGO Boy said:
"We were in control of the game...." We were never in control of the fucking game! What planet does he live on?

Yes, we were two up at one stage, but not a single Spurs fan felt comfy and 'in control' at any stage of that match.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
He's a gaslighting narcissist.

He's toxic and needs to fuck off.

Faux humility, zero accountability, all about keeping his ego cozy and warm.

His tenure smelling like rotten eggs.

Need fresh air.
 
dudu said:
Whilst there is an element of truth to what you're saying, I don't think you've quite hit the nail on the head here.

How was today (i thought you werent going to watch it btw) absolutist all or nothing football?

At 2-0 we were still more playing on the counter than some kind of suicidal high line.

Sancho scored with pur entire defense in front of him.

Am I missing what happened here?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We were about as chaotic as you can get. We played at full octane the entire match.

Watch it back again and I'd be surprised if you disagreed. We had players charging round like headless chickens, vacating spaces, showing zero discipline constantly. We later gave away two penalties due to the clumsy/erratic nature of our play. It was like our entire team had snorted a line prior to the game.

That's absolutely fine and what you want early on in a derby but when we were 2-0 up we kept doing it ... we then kept doing it at 2-1 so it was constant chaos/turnovers in midfield to the point of dizziness. That was the game Chelsea wanted badly at this stage as it gives them the best chance to get back in to it.

We never start playing smart - drawing in fouls, frustrating the opponent, making the most of a lead .. just keep playing the same dice roll way until we conceded twice.
 
He could be great at the likes of City imo.

Like I said, his style of play is based on maximizing the variance factor and overcoming the opposition through sheer individual brilliance of his players. It doesn't matter how many chances you give, if you simply have much better players that would convert their chances at a higher rate. To formalize it:

1) Create no less xG (how this is calculated is irrelevant here) than opposition. Or at least not significantly less
2) Convert those xG into actual goals at a higher rate than opposition -thanks to much higher quality of players-
3) Profit

Isn't this the definition of being chequebook though? You know, the term people use in criticising the likes of Guardiola? Don't the same people argue that he would be a colossal failure without an absolutely stacked team ? Well we essentially got ourselves a budget Guardiola then. People optimistic about Ange seems to be making this point.

"Give him what Pep has, and watch him destroy anything coming his way!"

The obvious question is why? Why would he (and not anyone else) enjoy this kind of a privilege? Is it because he's already here? Is it because Celtic gave it to him once and it seemed to work in Scottish League? What's the argument here? You're essentially admitting that he's not capable of creating a whole bigger than the sum of its parts, he needs all stars to be aligned for his approach to work. That's the exact opposite of how this club operates though. That's the issue.
 
Last edited:
To Dare Is To Do. said:
Looks like I'm the only one left on here who is Ange in...

Happy to take abuse for this- but I think the risky style of play is not the problem, but the lack of investment in the squad. Too many mediocre players and not enough depth.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
mmmate -surely you;re joking/jesting

lack of investment -since 2022- we are (top) 3rd on the spending-list
the people who are not spending are Forest, brighton & Bmouth - as examples

* Risky angeball caused to many giveaways and hammies
* ange hand picked several of the 'mediocre' ones which you are alluding to

how much more investment do you want? 500M and 2 more seasons?
 
BJK said:
He could be great at the likes of City imo.

Like I said, his style of play is based on maximizing the variance factor and overcoming the opposition through sheer individual brilliance of his players. It doesn't matter how many chances you give, if you simply have much better players that would convert their chances at a higher rate than the opposition. To formalize it:

1) Create no less xG (how this is calculated is irrelevant here) than opposition
2) Convert those xG into actual goals at a higher rate than opposition -thanks to much higher quality of players-
3) Profit

Isn't this the definition of being chequebook though? You know, the term people use in criticising the likes of Guardiola? Don't the same people argue that he would be a colossal failure with a "normal" team ? Well we essentially got ourselves a budget Guardiola then. People optimistic about Ange seems to be making this point.

"Give him what Pep has, and watch him destroy anything coming his way!"

The obvious question is why? Why would he (and not anyone else) enjoy this kind of a privilege? Is it because he's already here? Is it because Celtic gave it to him once and it seemed to work in Scottish League? What's the argument here? You're essentially admitting that he's not capable of creating a whole bigger than the sum of its parts, he needs all stars to be aligned for his approach to work. That's the exact opposite of how this club operates though. That's the issue.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I don’t dislike Ange, but see where you’re coming from in that his approach actually suits a club like City. I know I’ve said this before (and I believe some others as well), Levy and ENIC are going nowhere, despite all our hopes and wishes, so we have to get a manager who can play smart and squeeze everything he can out of the squad we do spend on and assemble. It may not be the swashbuckling football Ange has promised, but I’m not sure we want moments of that football only to lose to Ipswich and be outplayed by Fulham at home, because we don’t have the squad to sustain the Ange way.
 
erlee said:
mmmate -surely you;re joking/jesting

lack of investment -since 2022- we are (top) 3rd on the spending-list
the people who are not spending are Forest, brighton & Bmouth - as examples

* Risky angeball caused to many giveaways and hammies
* ange hand picked several of the 'mediocre' ones which you are alluding to

how much more investment do you want? 500M and 2 more seasons?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Coaches have nothing to do with transfers. Sure, they may have the final yes/no decision, but they don't go out scouting players - there is an entire department doing this.

We have always had injury problems at the club. Mourinho's squad had lost all of our best players to injury. How many times did Kane break at the crucial moment?

Meanwhile, in Liverpool's best seasons Van Dyke, Alex Arnold, Salah and Robertson played almost every minute of every game, playing a similar high pace style.

My suspicion is that we are not pumping our players with the same *ahem* supplements some of the other clubs are using and we get more injuries because of it.
 
harry7 said:
Coaches have nothing to do with transfers. Sure, they may have the final yes/no decision, but they don't go out scouting players - there is an entire department doing this.

We have always had injury problems at the club. Mourinho's squad had lost all of our best players to injury. How many times did Kane break at the crucial moment?

Meanwhile, in Liverpool's best seasons Van Dyke, Alex Arnold, Salah and Robertson played almost every minute of every game, playing a similar high pace style.

My suspicion is that we are not pumping our players with the same *ahem* supplements some of the other clubs are using and we get more injuries because of it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


///Coaches have nothing to do with transfers. Sure, they may have the final yes/no decision, but they don't go out scouting players - there is an entire department doing this.
:ange-blow:
well you're wrong there- for ange any way.
I am sure he does his "scouting" at spurs - he also scouts watching live matches and videos.

Back in Celtic and Yokohama - he was already scouting. subsequently he targeted a few japanese players from his own club and rival clubs; His 'other department' is Levy - the cheque book dept.
 
To Dare Is To Do. said:
Looks like I'm the only one left on here who is Ange in...

Happy to take abuse for this- but I think the risky style of play is not the problem, but the lack of investment in the squad. Too many mediocre players and not enough depth.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm still with you mate.

Equal 2nd best attack in the league, 6th best defence in the league with a severely depleted squad.

Yes we still have players that make too many mistakes but when we play well we can beat anybody.
 
8andA1/2Peppers said:
Unrelated.. But if Pep leaves at the end of his contract in 2026. Are we still worried about them sniffing around Ange? We were told a lot about that a lot about a year or so ago by Neville and the brain trust at Talksport and such. I'm just wondering where we're all at with that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It could still be a possibility, City just need to be found guilty and relegated 6 divisions
 
Last edited:
erlee said:
mmmate -surely you;re joking/jesting

lack of investment -since 2022- we are (top) 3rd on the spending-list
the people who are not spending are Forest, brighton & Bmouth - as examples

* Risky angeball caused to many giveaways and hammies
* ange hand picked several of the 'mediocre' ones which you are alluding to

how much more investment do you want? 500M and 2 more seasons?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think the point might be that we spent a lot on transfers, but didn’t get top quality. Probably because we don’t spend a lot on transfers AND wages. It’s one or the other. We spent for the future. I quite like who we bought (biss is pissing me off), but our squad isn’t good enough yet.

Ange also hasn’t been top quality. But we’ll see how the season ends.
 
erlee said:
///Coaches have nothing to do with transfers. Sure, they may have the final yes/no decision, but they don't go out scouting players - there is an entire department doing this.
:ange-blow:
well you're wrong there- for ange any way.
I am sure he does his "scouting" at spurs - he also scouts watching live matches and videos.

Back in Celtic and Yokohama - he was already scouting. subsequently he targeted a few japanese players from his own club and rival clubs; His 'other department' is Levy - the cheque book dept.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Lol. Do you really think football coaches have the time to be watching tapes and Live games of other players matches? Every spare minute is spent working on the players he has and looking at opponents.

They are provided with a scouting report from our scouting department. This will include in depth analysis on their style and ability.
 
bus-conductor said:
Again, I acknowledge the deeply flawed, totally lacking depth squad that Ange is working with, and he can’t legislate for Bissouma and Sarr giving away idiotic penalties, Porro jumping out the way of Enzo’s shot etc, but he does pick the side, and going back to the failed experiment of Kulusevski (9 fucking passes in 78 minutes) in midfield - against Chelsea - whilst dropping Maddison, and starting Johnson again, was fucking tactically indefensible. We had no control of that game at any stage. And there was a huge flapping gash where the R8 should be.

I know we’ve had injuries to key players lately, and ones so young that we don’t even know if they could one day be key players but, as per the post of mine I’m quoting, which itself was quoting another, Ange may have been dealt a shit hand, but he’s not playing that hand well lately.

I liked what I saw for the first 10 or so games this year, we definitely seemed to have improved facets at each end and the underlying metrics confirmed that, even if results didn’t always go our way, but the last couple of months or so games it’s not just bad results, but shit performances, shit underlying metrics and most of those have featured poor selections, game management and subs, counter intuitive to tactics and opponents.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The decision to start both Romero and VDV also seems pretty questionable.
 
You can't blame the players for mistakes. The system you are using doesn't rate mistakes as a factor. It sees everything that isnt part of the core function of full attack as firstly weakness in the opponent and for you, time taken away from the slaughter you in theory should be inflicting. He doesn't care about corners, time management etc because that's the systems advantage. NOT caring!

That was part of the genius of it. When used the way it was designed it can be devastating. He has over looked all the critical factors that make it work. The allure of its simplicity (He thinks) is what has attracted to it. He only saw results. Adapted to football there's the massive bonus of being good watch.

He is turning advantages He never had in to massive disadvantages. He thought he found the code and it clouded his critical thinking. I'm 100% certain. He wished away the very key reason it will never work in this game at a high level. It's not really working at a low one either. Celtic results were not because of it, and likely much better would've been gained using something else.

It's a good watch if you like surprises around every corner. It's fatal even you are primarily concerned with winning shit.

Ipswitch is when it all went pop. You blokes had every single factor in your favour. Not one single mitigating factor to lose. You lost because any reasonably thought opponent that comes from a lesser place (happy to defend) can see the fatal flaw in the system, and the advantages that is giving them.

He needs to stop. He needs to be reasonable and see if the talent of the players can get you out. You go better against good teams because this shit system is allowed to be employed as much. Teams against you are much better off giving you the ball.
 
I’ve just watched the replay. Strewth what a roller coaster. Wtf is Sarr and Bisouma thinking with those penalties???? And if I recall correctly Dragusin had a lot to do with their opening goal by dropping off and losing his man. I must admit I was hoping Ange would have been more pragmatic at 2-0 up, but I knew he wouldn’t. It’s not looking good for him.
I still think we played well and with a bit of luck would have got the result. Also fuck me Chelsea cheated like no tomorrow to slow our transition with the faking of head injuries. The ref (or video ref) should’ve been pulling that up.
 
Last edited:
docomospur said:
I don’t dislike Ange, but see where you’re coming from in that his approach actually suits a club like City. I know I’ve said this before (and I believe some others as well), Levy and ENIC are going nowhere, despite all our hopes and wishes, so we have to get a manager who can play smart and squeeze everything he can out of the squad we do spend on and assemble. It may not be the swashbuckling football Ange has promised, but I’m not sure we want moments of that football only to lose to Ipswich and be outplayed by Fulham at home, because we don’t have the squad to sustain the Ange way.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Exactly my point. IMO Kompany can be an informative comparison.

He took over a Burnley team that was considered overpowered for Championship. Not remotely close to how OP Celtic is in Scotland but whatever.They comfortably won that slugfest known as Championship, with an appealing brand of football. The situation was the exact opposite in his second season. This time he was managing a big underdog booked for relegation. Again, Ange is having it much easier than Kompany had but let's go on. Kompany's second season was a failure to say the least. Burnley not only got relegated but the way they did was particularly alarming. Fannying around inside their own box only to give it away and concede silly goals. Massive gaps within and between their lines because teams easily play through their high press. Their campaign overall painted Kompany as a quite naive manager who struggled with adapting to his circumstances.

Despite all that, Bayern took a punt on him. Their fans were quite shocked as they were unhappy about how he handled the PL campaign and thought that they might have survived with a more savvy manager. I don't follow Bayern closely yet he seems to be doing alright. So maybe he's well suited to manage top teams despite struggling with underdogs. We don't know yet.

Even if what I said above also applies to Ange (let's assume for the sake of argument) , it's a moot point. It's no use to us. We don't operate that way. Ange may be the man for some of the biggest clubs in the world. Good for him. But it can't be an argument in favour of keeping him here. It's a waste of everybody's time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top