-
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 Ange Postecoglou
- Thread starter The Fighting Cock
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
No in fact he's safe from the sack because he's completed his metrics of saying the word Mate which has evidently bought him enough time in his job, fair play I say
Ryan Mason was a Prem ex player and worked under Jose and Conte, whats stopping us from giving in time and him going on to be the next best thing?
That is it! It’s because of who and where he’s managed before that he doesn’t get the same energy!! He doesn’t have the same margin for error especially in the realm of looking naive.
It’d be one thing if the team was getting beat in games due to a lack of quality but when it’s because a rookie manager at this level keeps playing the exact same way no matter the opposition or even injuries and keeps running into the same problems, when he faces a reoccurring issue like set pieces that are costing goals and claims there’s bigger things he’s worried about and that it’s the job of mile Jedinak and Ryan Mason to sort that, alarm bells go and the margin for error is used up in many peoples opinion.
He doesn't have the same margin of error as Arteta? You're gonna have to explain that one to me seeing as Woolwich are a bigger club than us and we are coming off the back of one of our worst seasons in the Premier League?
We're back on the playing the same way and not adapting argument again, it's been done to death, just going round in circles now.
Maybe he should have changed his system and tactics like Ten Haag has this season, how did that work out for him I wonder...
Because look at their results even under Arteta early doors. One 3 nil defeat the rest were tight defeats, maybe one or two nil at most. I can't be bothered to check but from my recollection, Woolwich under Arteta never looked as shambolic as we do, and the system never looked pathetic and clueless. They weren't getting battered 3 or 4 nil down routinely like we are. Their identity and way of playing was quite clear early on, but as you point out, he didn't have good players so eventually when they did, the system and tactics he was implementing flourished.
Again, it's going back a few years, but the data pretty much always indicated improvement under Arteta despite the results and leage positions.
Under Ange there is none of that. Can anyone seriously say since November they have witnessed a system being implemented, a clear identity? First 10 games yes, since then it's been awful stuff. We looked wildly open at the back, teams make 2 passes and are in on goal, our attack has looked impotent, we've still scored but there hasn't been any indication of improvement, we concede loads of goals, worryingly the work rate and attitude of some of the players actually look like they've thrown the towel in on Ange, again none of that really happened under Arteta.
Again though I think it's pointless because under Klopp, Arteta and whoever else you wish to pick as successful managers given time, none of thier systems looked as pathetic, and none looked to actually get worse with time not better, but Ange's has.
I'll be amazed if suddently we turn it on and start looking a great team next season. Our tactics don't look well balanced at all. I watch Newcastle, Villa, Woolwich, City, Liverpool to a lesser extent now Klopp is off but still, they all looked well balanced sides, on their day tought to beat. We simply don't. Even Chelsea are starting to look dangerous under Poch, actual improvement as time goes on. Ange is getting worse.
Another thing, under Ange, for such a revered attacking coach, not a single attacking player has floruished in his system. Son often played out of position, he's looked lacklustre for the most part. Kulu shocking, Johnson looked way overpriced at 50 million, yes he has got a few g/a but he just doesn't look a great fit for the system and is often played out of position on the left.
There just isn't anything to get behind with Ange other than just give him time in blind hope he will get it right, and because he's a nice bloke.
Yet there are currently 15 Premiership managers sat below him!
His record at Celtic stacks well against Rodger’s and O’Neills, both managers that had long stints in the Premiership.
I said it, because Arteta was literally at his first job as manager, he had 0 previous experience, no matter how much he “learned” under Guardiola, things tend to be massively different when you’re the guy in charge. So if you hire a newbie manager like Arteta, you wouldn’t expect him to seamlessly and quickly steady the ship, especially a sinking one that was Woolwich after Wenger (or so that’s what they fans say).
Postecoglou on the other hand has 2 decades of managing football clubs and Australia national team, the expectations are going to be higher in every aspect simply because he had to deal with “rebuilds”, different types of oppositions, different tactical setups and different player personalities before. If you don’t understand and accept that simple concept, then there’s nothing else to discuss.
You can’t just compare Arteta and Postecoglou and moan that Arteta was given 3 years or whatever and Postecoglou isn’t given that time as if they have the same amount of experience, but then when people question why should Postecoglou be given a lot more time than a complete newbie when things don’t look much better than last season, the answer is something that ironically involves his previous experience.
Last edited:
You sure about that?
Six times Arteta's Arsenal lost by three or more and what happened next
Woolwich's hopes of qualifying for next season's Champions League were dealt a huge blow by their 3-0 defeat to Crystal Palace in April 2022 - but it wasn't the first time Woolwich have suffered a heavy defeat under Mikel Arteta.
tinyurl.com
Asked if the 37-year-old could step into his shoes, he said: “I’m pretty sure, yes. He will have success, yes.
“Sooner or later it’s going to happen. He’s a young, young manager, he’s 37, 38, he's so young, he has experience already to handle big players and teams and when it’s going to happen, it’s going to happen.”
“He has incredible work ethic, and he has a special talent to analyse what happens, and to find the solutions. We talk a lot about what he believes and feels. He helped me a lot.
When we see Conte or Mourinho talking about Mason in such glowing terms then we can talk, until then he’s another under qualified hire.
You articulate yourself well, but I don't agree.
Chopping and changing our manager every season has not worked, isn't working, and will not work in the future.
Sometimes you have to stick with things unless they're an unmitigated disaster (which this season has not been). If we're seeing no improvement mid-way next season, then absolutely fine, but I 100% stand by giving Ange more than one season.
Last edited:
I think after the 86 point season as well was the time to strike, the team was in its prime with hungry players had just reeled off an incredible run to end the season etc, don’t even want to think about it. Made business sense as well to invest.
And yet he was still raw and undercooked going into that job, this is just proving my point even further, he improved with the benefit of time and backing, I keep mentioning that graphic I posted up earlier of that run because he would have been toast because the fans wouldn't have put up with those results.
For the record I was being sarcastic about Mason
I absolutely agree with this post. It was absolutely the perfect time to invest heavily, and Levy/Enic royally fucked up (and fucked us) by not doing so.
I said it, because Arteta was literally at his first job as manager, he had 0 previous experience, no matter how much he “learned” under Guardiola, things tend to be massively different when you’re the guy in charge. So if you hire a newbie manager like Arteta, you wouldn’t expect him to seamlessly and quickly steady the ship, especially a sinking one that was Woolwich after Wenger (or so that’s what they fans say).
Postecoglou on the other hand has 2 decades of managing football clubs and Australia national team, the expectations are going to be higher in every aspect simply because he had to deal with “rebuilds”, different types of oppositions, different tactical setups and different player personalities before. If you don’t understand and accept that simple concept, then there’s nothing else to discuss.
You can’t just compare Arteta and Postecoglou and moan that Arteta was given 3 years or whatever and Postecoglou isn’t given that time as if they have the same amount of experience, but then when people question why should Postecoglou be given a lot more time than a complete newbie when things don’t look much better than last season, the answer is something that ironically involves his previous experience.
I don't expect Ange to be given the same amount of time aa Arteta because the situations are entirely different but I do expect the club to give him time because he's earnt that already. Arteta got what 2/3 years to get it right with 2 8th place finishes, obviously that wouldn't happen here but Ange's first season he's done enough to warrant at least another year and two transfer windows.
Also if you're will to die on the hill of Arteta joining a sinking ship then once again why aren't you keeping the same energy for Ange? We weren't exactly pulling up any trees last season we're we?...
I don’t agree with this narrative of yours, mate. Let’s take a look back at our managers.
Redknapp - came in, steered us away from relegation and finished top half. Spent a few seasons at Spurs before he was linked with England job and we bottled 3rd place. At the end of that season he got sacked. Was it harsh? Maybe.
AVB - finished 5th in his first season, but we played a lot of passive football, Bale saved our bacon time and time again. After Bale left, we were beaten left and right and AVB got sacked. He barely produced much as manager afterwards anyway. So was sack justified? Probably.
Sherwood - stop gap.
Pochettino - no need to discuss, just that was his sacking justified? I’d say at the time of it, I think it was because we weren’t getting results and our football was becoming sterile for a while. Maybe he should’ve been afforded the season as transition and see where we’d end up, after all he’s probably earned it after all he’s done for the club.
Mourinho - washed up imo, initial managerial bounce then shit. Sacking him before the League Cup final is seen as a capital sin, personally I think it wouldn’t have made a difference, we were trash under him.
Mason - stop gap.
Nuno - banter appointment. Most people knew it wasn’t going to work. Don’t know if Levy/Paratici thought it was a stop gap until Conte agreed to take over, but imo Nuno should’ve never been hired. It was a farce how long it took them to get us a manager and when they did, it was fucking Nuno.
Conte - very bright start of his Spurs stint, finished top 4, but in the second season people started to moan about the football and his rigid tactics. His post-Southampton press conference probably sealed his faith, I think he wouldn’t have been sacked if he didn’t criticize the players and the board in public. Who knows what might’ve happened after that, our fans said Conte never wanted to be here and he wanted the sack, so in a way he had to go?
Stellini + Mason - lol.
Postecoglou - came in, we started the season very well and although he’s had to deal with injuries, the football we played gradually became worse. We lost 4 in a row against two injury depleted sides where we played like shit. Doesn’t want to adjust his tactics to accomodate players. Needs money to make his system work. Sounds a bit like Conte, doesn’t it?
So overall, it’s not like we sacked managers simply because we hit a bumpy road and said fuck it, let’s give someone else in. Our managers didn’t look like they could turn it around. And on top of that, you could argue some appointments have been completely wrong to begin with.
So yeah, would we “sack” Postecoglou simply because we can’t handle some defeats? No, it’s because the progress under him has been minimal and the signs look like he’s hit a point where he might not be able to turn it around.
In fairness, a good post. Thanks for that.
Where we disagree is on Ange, because I genuinely think he should get another transfer window and pre-season. If there's no clear sign of progression by Christmas, then fair enough.
I don't think he'll be sacked yet anyway, regardless of what any of us think.
Problem I have is he has turned it round before and has changed his tactics before. The fact is I don't know why he cannot make adjustments now. Or is it that our front three and midfield are not technical enough.
I’m not, I’ve repeatedly said Arteta shouldn’t be used as benchmark, two different managers with two different situations. Yes there are similarities between them, yes a manager should be given time to implement his system and buy his players, but that has to come after you’ve rightly said the manager earned it.
Has Arteta earned the 2.5 years until he turned it around? By the looks of their progress after each of the first two seasons, probably not, but I’m not the one making decisions at Woolwich so they decided to stick with him for whatever reason. We don’t know the structure at Woolwich, we don’t know who is pulling the strings, what we do know is that he was backed in the transfer market and first and foremost, their scouting system found some really good players. Luckily for them, and yes I will say luckily because that’s what I think it was, luck, Arteta managed to improve Woolwich.
Now back on Postecoglou. Has he earned the right to oversee a rebuild? If you asked me this in 2023 I would say absolutely. Now I’m going to say no he hasn’t and I think everyone knows the reasons why. I don’t think people realize how low the bar was when Postecoglou joined, most of the fans wanted a top 6 finish (but didn’t care that much about it) and some good football. Has he delivered the former? Yes he has (so far, let’s hope we don’t fuck it up). But is the football good at the moment? No. Are the signs going forward encouraging? Based on what I’ve seen this year, no.
Last edited:
If he’s turned it around before, fair play to him. Maybe it’s the light at the end of the tunnel for the believers.
Apparently the difference between September-October and now is that teams recognized they shouldn’t give us space in central areas and they adjusted to keep their defensive lines narrow and compact and Postecoglou doesn’t seem to have an answer to that. Say we buy those attacking players he wants (that’s a big question mark at the minute, which type of player we need, have we identified them? Are we certain they are going to produce the end results? Are we certain we’re not going to be hit by another nasty round of injuries? Lots of variables to take into account). We’ll start playing good football again and get results. Then teams will continue to adjust to contain our system. And we’ll smash against the wall again. What will happen next? Will he stick to his tactics like he’s doing it now until he finds other players to buy to fix his problems? Or will he try to find solutions and adjust the system throughout the season like he should?