• 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
It's also to be as appealing to as wide an audience as possible.
Daniel Greedy must know that football is tribal, and that certain fans won't come to non football events at a rival teams ground.
Make it as neutral as possible and you widen the audience.
One day they'll drop "Hotspur" from the name and nobody will notice..

What a load of nonsense.

I know fans of every team who have gone to the NFL and concerts there.

Id say maybe 2% of football fans would give up the opportunity to go and enjoy life because a rival team plays at the stadium where an event is happening.

EDIT: And they would be fucking idiots.
 
Last edited:
It's also to be as appealing to as wide an audience as possible.
Daniel Greedy must know that football is tribal, and that certain fans won't come to non football events at a rival teams ground.
Make it as neutral as possible and you widen the audience.
One day they'll drop "Hotspur" from the name and nobody will notice..
the only sort of certain Woolwich or Spam fan that would refuse to step foot in the stadium would be pretty hardcore surely, and do you really think they'd be fooled by hiding a cockerel?

For that sort of fan who hates us so much you think they'd suddenly want to attend the "Tottenham Stadium" because "Hotspur" has been removed?

I think you're reaching with this one, sorry.
 
VDV was a bit of both. The medical advice was that he was ready to start but should be subbed on 70 mins as the extra 20 mins workload could be dangerous on his hamstring. Given the fact that Romero had already gone off injured and we had no proper centre back left on the bench, I think Ange might have ignored that advice and taken a gamble that VDV could finish out the game. He went down on 75 mins with a hamstring injury. If you want you can blame Ange for that but I can see his side to the story too.
What is your source for this?
 
the only sort of certain Woolwich or Spam fan that would refuse to step foot in the stadium would be pretty hardcore surely, and do you really think they'd be fooled by hiding a cockerel?

For that sort of fan who hates us so much you think they'd suddenly want to attend the "Tottenham Stadium" because "Hotspur" has been removed?

I think you're reaching with this one, sorry.
It is a reach. But it's not beyond believable with this lot.
 
I am only guessing here but I suspect our lack of investment in the team had nothing to do with not wanting to cheat and everything to do with not wanting to spend . Does anyone think an owner with insider trading history and living on a yacht to admittedly legally avoid tax is averse to cheating . IMHO he likes to cheat to save money , Abramovich spent money to cheat allegedly , there is the difference. Both morally bankrupt positions in my view , so I would sooner the cheat with a winning trophy agenda .

We spend money. Plenty of it. How it is spent is the issue
 
Eeeeuuuw

Go Away Reaction GIF by Cameo
 
It happened to Anges Squad at Celtic and its happening here -


The good news is it looks like he has realised maybe with the intensity of the PL and the way he plays \ trains some tweaks need to be made however from the big man himself -

"he acknowledged that given the intensity with which they train and play, injuries are unavoidable."

I think as well part of this comes from not having a Squad good enough but then look at the way Ange has played Porro into the ground and only now just started to give Spence a run out . I understand the Injuries are a part of the game but the Premier league is a long tough slog, made even worse by being in Europa and all the cups still, squad management needs to be better if we are to win anything!
Conte did this as well, he ran the whole squad into the ground - they are athletes, they have to be in prime physical condition.

He hasn't broken VDV for instance, the lad is one of the players who have this as a problem, IIRC didn't our last VDV also have repetitive hamstring issues?
 
Maybe he's not the guy to be at the helm at the end of the journey. But most of what he is doing is moving us in the right direction.
Defensively a massive improvement, all the while with injuries to VDV and Romero in particular.
61 conceded last campaign @ 1.60 per game. So far we're conceding 1.19 per game this season.

I'd give him more time, see if another summer can fix midfield and creativity issues so we convert more games into wins.
 
How long the festive fixtures take place over?

Actually I’m assuming they start this weekend

The games they are talking about are from the 21st of December to the 1st of January.

And Brentford play Woolwich on the 1st. The only game that day.
As they play that day their previous games are not on Boxing Day so they both play on the Friday 27th instead.

What they omit on that tweet (for the clicks) is that the next league game - game 4 so to speak - is on Saturday the 4th January.
So spurs will get a full 5 days with no matches between Monday 30th and Friday the 3rd. So 120 hours “rest”, while Woolwich and Brentford only get 2 days “rest”.
Also we have 3 home matches out of those 4 fixtures.

Swings and roundabouts my good man.


No idea why only 1 game is on the telly on NYD. Just don’t show any matches at all. Bloody tv companies.
 
This is the crux. Bournemouth spent £19m on Solanke. English CF with premier league experience. Supposedly the players you pay a premium for.

And Liverpool paid £3m for him.

We paid £65m. And Liverpool got £10m of that!

:levyeyes::levywtf:

We bought him because he scored a decent amount of goals last season and wasn't on/asking for £250k a week.
Apparently he's "only" on £90k a week at Spurs on 5 years. (I think)
£65m fee + £5.4m salary = £70.4m
Compared to say Haaland with £375,000 a week and a £50m fee = £50m + £22.5m £72.5m

Optics make it look as though we spend more than City, but they spent more than us and a larger chunk of their spend goes on the wages.
This example would have been much better 2 months ago when he and City scored goals and won games :roflmao:
 
ENIC have been cheating the fans for years with promises that the stadium and training ground would be the catalysts for our progress.
And yet here we are, fully functional, and still buying players on the lowest wages as possible, and barely enough of them to make up a half decent 11, let alone a squad.

We have been lied to for a quarter of a century. Now they have what they want, they're going to fuck us, the fans, over.
Change owners and nothing will change. We'll still be the club finishing 4th-7th and exiting cup competitions after 2-3 ties.
A new owner will not propel us past the likes of City and Chelsea who have financially doped the league, nor will it take us past Liverpool and United (if they ever were to be run as they should be again).
 
Defensively a massive improvement, all the while with injuries to VDV and Romero in particular.
61 conceded last campaign @ 1.60 per game. So far we're conceding 1.19 per game this season.

I'd give him more time, see if another summer can fix midfield and creativity issues so we convert more games into wins.
We've conceded 4 less goals than the same stage last season.
Game for game it's better apart from Chelsea where we have played the same fixture.
I don't see our defending as better to the eye though. It's still utter choas. It just feels like it hits the back if the net less.
Also feels like Forster may (don't say it too loudly) save more shots than Vicario would like for like.
 
Change owners and nothing will change. We'll still be the club finishing 4th-7th and exiting cup competitions after 2-3 ties.
A new owner will not propel us past the likes of City and Chelsea who have financially doped the league, nor will it take us past Liverpool and United (if they ever were to be run as they should be again).
Says who?

We have a massive income and the ability to spend, unlike Newcastle. Had a super rich state like their owners bought us, we could have gone nuts.

What is absolutely certain is absolutely nothing will ever change under this mob. They're more than happy for us not to be successful, just to be in the league and make up the numbers in the top half.
 
Says who?

We have a massive income and the ability to spend, unlike Newcastle. Had a super rich state like their owners bought us, we could have gone nuts.

What is absolutely certain is absolutely nothing will ever change under this mob. They're more than happy for us not to be successful, just to be in the league and make up the numbers in the top half.
Me. It is my opinion, and one I feel time will look back on as being accurate.

And I am not for one second coming from a 'grass greener... be careful what you wish for' speech angle. ENIC should have been ousted the moment they tweeted we'd joined Super League.

But IMO this is who we are, and who we will remain.
New owners with a new approach might win us a cup here or there, and that makes them instantly better than ENIC.

But we will not for the foreseeable future get anywhere near being consistent title challengers, regardless of ownership.
Klopp won just 1 because we have a club that cheats, and if they get off in March or get a soft penalty they'll be able to continue destroying the premier league for years to come.
 
Back
Top