Alright.
Apologize for falsly blaming you on constructive discussions
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...
Alright.
Apologize for falsly blaming you on constructive discussions- my mistake!
Yep it's more than people hiding behind the 'system' . He has made some frankly poor management decisions. He also needs to reflect on how he behaved in that post match interview because as a man it was also more than a bit cringe.I'm thinking that the major problem with Ange isn't even the tactics, but his decision making. He chooses the wrong players and his substitutins are even worst most of the time. Like Brennan, that was a player he wanted and we paid 50 fucking millions. Brennan isn't and will never be a player to play this system, that's 50 million just throwed away. Werner apparently was his choice too (the guy is a copy of Brennan). Solanke? Ok, too soon to judge, but we could have a far better player with that money. Then comes the fact of leaving Spence out of EL, the odd subs, playing Son and Johnson on the wings... it seems every decision he takes is wrong.
Come onRichard Arlison you have been quite constructive in the discussions, even though the topic is emotional and heated.
But you cannot seriously claim that options are - pragmatic meaning Jose Mourinho a'la 2024 and progressive meaning Ange or Pep a'la 2024. You have to understand that there is middle ground there.
I also wrote longer post just recently, but based on what I saw I'd mention good pragmatic managers - Ancellotti (edgeing out this "super progressive Pep just last year), Jupp Heynces, Hansi Flick - two managers who both side of Pep reign in Bayern won CL for the German team while Pep with same material never made to CL final.
It does not mean that either approaches would be dead. But presenting some turnover stats as some kind of win after our start to current campaign is mildly funny for me. Of course both approaches do exist and I can see both enjoying success too.
Much bigger question is - what type suits Spurs better in the long run.
I very much doubt that we can outPep Pep himself and buy better players with much less funds. We will be underdogs against them, and for underdog role, some more adjustable and pragmatic approach, I honestly believe, suits better. That does not mean ultra defensive football though.
What the fuck.
Do you have like 0 grasp on reality?
We faced injury and suspension crises - everyone admit that. I have not seen a fan who would have said that our post-Chelse-game run (where we had to play Davies-Dier and Davies-Royal CB partnership) would be something that they blame on Ange. But for like half the season we had almost everyone back.
By every possible metric (individual injuries, days missed, games missed due to injury) Newcastle situation is much worse.
And those numbers do not include Tonali's ban.
Thank you for proving my point.What the fuck.
Do you have like 0 grasp on reality?
We faced injury and suspension crises - everyone admit that. I have not seen a fan who would have said that our post-Chelse-game run (where we had to play Davies-Dier and Davies-Royal CB partnership) would be something that they blame on Ange. But for like half the season we had almost everyone back.
By every possible metric (individual injuries, days missed, games missed due to injury) Newcastle situation is much worse.
And those numbers do not include Tonali's ban.
Yeah you’ve missed the U21 and U18 injuries…
Had to read some shite there that ange is odds on to be sacked and replaced with that cnut Brendan Rogers.
What a load of shite.
What state did Rogers leave Leicester in?
What state did he leave Celtic in before Leicester?when at Leicester he bottled successive champions league places in the run in.
Media should just shut the fcuk up and leave him to get on with the job.
I get what you're saying but I honestly think he would leave no room for complaints tbh. There will always be some people unhappy but I truly believe this man would take the club to the next level.If it ever happens, and I would love to see it one day because he’s a GOAT, I will make a bet on arrival that in less than the usual 12 months there will be Spurs fans who want him out because the system is too rigid defensively and the attacking players aren’t a fit for his football.
Sure, but a) a lot of those wouldn't have started, b) a lot were for a game or 2, c) not all of them were at the same time.This is what I found after a single google search:
![]()
Premier League injuries table: Which club had the most injuries this season?
Man United, Newcastle, Liverpool, Chelsea all had major injury crises this season - who was worst affected?www.bbc.com
Tottenham had the most injured players in the league at 22.
Ange signed off on these players though mate and said he was happy with them so he is as much to blame as the recruitment imo.He really wouldn’t. Just look at the Everton debacle.
Ange is a good manager. He has a clear vision and, under the correct circumstances, that vision would work. Unfortunately, he’s setting us up as if we’re the best team in the league when, in terms of players, and certainly in terms of attacking players, we’re 6th or 7th.
No manager will overcome the fundamental fact that our recruitment is shit. A combination of incompetence, frugality and perhaps even bad luck means we’re always short.
I mean, look at Odobert. Nothing against the lad, he’s a teenager. But it feels like the club is genuinely taking the piss.
This is what I found after a single google search:
![]()
Premier League injuries table: Which club had the most injuries this season?
Man United, Newcastle, Liverpool, Chelsea all had major injury crises this season - who was worst affected?www.bbc.com
Tottenham had the most injured players in the league at 22.
It was sarcasm but it seems you missed it.
Sure, but a) a lot of those wouldn't have started, b) a lot were for a game or 2, c) not all of them were at the same time.
When we got tonked 4-0 by Newcastle, fans here were licking their lips at how we were getting to play them at their weakest.
Same for Chelsea away.
Those teams had half or more of their starting 11 missing for months.
There is no way Woolwich or Liverpool and other top teams are allowing us to have the fucking ball. For all the lack of results, defensive issues on set pieces and lack of creativity resulting in goals, the one thing Spurs are doing well is controlling the ball with possession. And that’s not because our opposition are “allowing” itThis is what baffles my mind that people are still 100% defending him.
Teams allowing us the ball, giving us the stats that look like progression. Our XG is crap as we don’t create clear-cut chances, while opponents just suck it up and score from a corner or a breakaway. 4 out of 12 points
It’s a rebuild “again” be patient![]()
It was sarcasm but it seems you missed it.
I find it hilarious that players like Perisic, Solomon or Sessegnon are included in the long term injuries list, as if they’d have any impact on the results.
The important thing is not the number of players injured itself, more like how many of those were first team players. And of course the length of their injuries.
2023-24 EPL Season Injury Review - Premier Injuries
Games missed due to injury
1) Newcastle 245
5) Chelsea - 214
6) Man United - 202
10) Spurs 168
See. Our players missed considerably less games than those teams.
Days lost to injury
1) Newcastle - 1,950
3) Chelsea - 1,745
6) Man United - 1,620
9) Spurs 1,402
See. Our players missed less days due to injury.
Newcastle, United and Chelsea (and a few other non-rivals) suffered more than us.
This is one of the best posts I have read on this forum since signing up and I am also absolutely tired of this hipster nonsense from people who are blinded by the magical possession based football ideology and how it guarantees success and has a higher ceiling when every objective metric suggests otherwise (as you highlighted.)WARNING - following post is bit of a rant.
TLDR: Ange style of play absolutely does not have higher ceiling than how Howe's team is playing. Examplified by number of examples in past 25 years (including from past year) in strongest football competition on the face of earth.
Post in full:
Uhm...
Sorry, I am not fully sure how to put this...
I think that it is blatantly obvious that Howe's way of playing is far higher ceiling.
There has literally only been ONE manager that has won the CL (which is the ultimate sign of quality and high ceiling) playing with this unlimited passing game with minimal directness. And this has been Pep Guardiola. Who had players like Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Busquests etc at his disposal in Barca. And then followed up with City who has superior resources to any other club in the world.
I have no idea how you claim that approach proven in such circumstances.
And please don't come out to claim that you can count Klopp's Liverpool to that pot. The attacking patterns of Klopp Liverpool are diametrically different to way Guardiolas teams attack (and how Ange seems to want to set up us too).
After 2000s what club has won how many CLs?
- Real - 7
- Barcelona - 4
- Bayern - 3
- Chelsea, Liverpool, Milan - 2
- Inter, Porto, ManU, Manchester City - 1
I go out on a limb and say that 5 out of 24 are won with this total possession based football.
Most successful manager in competition (who is also current champion) ? - Ancellotti. If you claim that his objective is to have 65% possession, playing high line and keep play in opposition half as much as it can be done, I have to say I don't agree with you.
You know, just last season City and Real met head to head in playoff.
In these games Real had 38% of possession at home and 33% in away game.
You know who progressed? Real. Who went on to win the whole thing. Again.
So despite having unlimited funds and being on job for 8 years, this "higher ceiling" system fell to very pragmatic approach of very pragmatic coach in charge of most successful club in the world.
I obviously do not remember all of the playing style of all of the coaches in past 24 years, but I very clearly remember Jupp Heynckes Bayern absolutely demolishing Barcelona in their run to 2012-2013 CL triumph. And then came on this "high ceiling football" manager Pep who had the same squad smashed by way more pragmatic Real Madrid.
Within one decade of Bayern history from list of permanent coaches of Louis van Gaal, Jupp Heynckes, Pep Guardiola, Carlo Ancellotti, Niko Kovac, Hansi Flick - do you know who of them reached CL finals and who did not?
Managers who did - Louis Van Gaal, Jupp Heynckes (2x), Hansi Flick. Managers who did not - Pep Guardiola (after taking over team that had reached two successive finals before his reign!), Carlo Ancellotti, Niko Kovac.
So - no - having 2/3 of possession and pushing play into one third of the pitch does not have "higher ceiling". And this simplistic narrative always pisses me off. You can say that you personally prefer to watch football where your team has very high share of possession - that is subjective preference and it is totally OK. Different people, different tastes. But there is no point of claiming like this hip, cool and progressive way of playing has higher ceiling or clearly more to show for it. It does not.