You say all this; but Ange's passed the test in Season 1.
Season 2 was the disaster.
-
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...
Management So (hypothetically) who replaces Ange then?
- Thread starter Shadydan
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
You say all this; but Ange's passed the test in Season 1.
Season 2 was the disaster.
Also he needed to realise that with all the injuries the other players that came in needed the set up changed to support the fact it was only our best players who could operate this system effectively and look a top 5 side.
Laughable that you want to use selective context to aid your argument yet you want to ignore context because it also destroys your argument.
You're not serious
I'm not buying this guy...... It's a FastShow character; not a real world footy manager.
Ange not back from Hols until the weekend?
He might have forgotten Levy’s postcard
Care to use any evidence, facts, or specifics to actually formulate an argument?Laughable that you want to use selective context to aid your argument yet you want to ignore context because it also destroys your argument.
You're not serious
I figure you won't because you're not serious.
I literally did, I already said we got progressively worse because we suffered key injuries...perhaps try reading?
Maddison and VdV were out for 3 months, Romero got suspended immediately after that Chelsea match, Udogie went down injured, Richy was in and out the team with injuries...even Peresic and Solomon couldn't contribute because they were hurt.
Our record after the first 10 (8-2-0) was 11-20 (4-1-5) 21-30 (5-2-3) 31-38 (4-1-4)
Saying we ended up 5th because of our first 10 matches is not only objectively incorrect, it's a pretty stupid way to analyse a season, you don't discount part of the season purely because it fits in with your desperate narrative.
Correct. That’s like saying City never deserved to win the title a couple of seasons ago because they went unbeaten since Xmas!!
If it was some middle of the season, or his second (or further) seasons, I could see that argument. But the first games of a new manager, in a league that's never seen him, using an idealogy never before used in that league, points to it being a "novel" effect. That you discount a novel effect being possible here is either silly or selective bias. Either way, you're simply wrong.
He's had 66 games after that first 10 to prove any form of longevity. He simply has failed. That is a long long time in modern football.
Why?
What does that have to do with anything? Why does it matter where an unbeaten run is in the season?
Implying that Ange somehow blindsided managers like Klopp, Arteta and Iraola in the league and those managers had no idea of how to deal with Ange ball and then suddenly everyone clocked how to play against it is just silly and it's a fundamental misunderstanding of football, that's not how it works...what do you think scouts are for? Do you not think professional football clubs in the Premier League plan for a team and how they play before the play them or something?
And once again you don't finish in a position because of the first ten matches, the season doesn't start in October - you finish where you deserve to finish at the end of the season on merit.
It’s an amazing example to study the power of narratives
The 10 games thing is genuine anti-logic insanity but somehow it’s become some kind of established fact for people
It’s the same as Ange being individually responsible for the ridiculous injury crisis this season because he wants to play intense football and the players have to sprint
The way these things take hold in a large population of people until they becoming established facts is really something.
Shadydan
, you are not only stupid (I wish that was the extent of it), but you are also an arsehole who can't be bothered to have a serious discussion about serious matters. I am happy you're just an internet warrior troll and nowhere near serious decisions for this club. I do hope, for the sake of society, you are in no serious position of decision making or managerial duties, since you'd surely wreak disaster and misery wherever you are to those around you.I'm done trying to have a civilized discussion with you, someone who clearly cannot (and refuses) to acknowledge basic facts, reality, or civil discourse.
I'm done trying to have a civilized discussion with you, someone who clearly cannot (and refuses) to acknowledge basic facts, reality, or civil discourse.
I mean you could have just said okay fine agree to disagree without the waffle but ok.
Umm.. you forgot to mention 38 points in 38 games. 22 losses. 17th place in his 2nd year.
I don't think anyone's ever mentioned this in here, good job you did - thanks homie.
I'm done trying to have a civilized discussion with you, someone who clearly cannot (and refuses) to acknowledge basic facts, reality, or civil discourse.
You’ve done your best and you’re not the only one
Remove your nose from his bumcrack ffs
Yeah, those ten matches didn’t count. Of course. Yet somehow we managed to get another 40 points or so, on top of those first 10 games. Go figure. That would have got us CL this season.
I don’t give a fuck what Ange would do with Brentford, I care what Frank would do with Spurs, and there is fuck all evidence to suggest he’s spunkbread.