• 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
You don't think a new manager might need quality wingers?

Probably - but I’d wait to see which ones they specifically want before going out and spending huge on players for Ange.

I don’t see the point in giving him whoever he wants in Jan and then sacking in the summer. We may as well take the hit this season, it’s a write off with him in charge.
 
Speaking in his press conference after the game, Postecoglou said: “Yeah I could have. But… all these things… are totally irrelevant to me. Substitutions and all those kind of things. If you’re not competitive, it doesn’t matter what you do, you’re not going to get rewards, you don’t deserve to win.

“We didn’t deserve on our second-half performance, irrespective of subs or anything else, to get something out of the game. But I think if you do get something out of the game, you’re falsely rewarded and I don’t want to get falsely rewarded.”



And that’s when he lost me.
Lmao wtf

Genuinely curious about how bad it could get
 
I don’t think he’s saying here that the subs would have led us to being rewarded. I think he’s making two separate points: that the whole team was playing poorly in the second half so subs wouldn’t have saved us, and we didn’t deserve anything due to the second half performance.
Wrong.

But I think if you do get something out of the game, you’re falsely rewarded and I don’t want to get falsely rewarded.

Clear as day he is saying he would not have wanted the subs to have led to a positive outcome as it would have been a "false reward" in his warped mind. Mental thing for a PL manager to say.
 
I don’t think he’s saying here that the subs would have led us to being rewarded. I think he’s making two separate points: that the whole team was playing poorly in the second half so subs wouldn’t have saved us, and we didn’t deserve anything due to the second half performance.
Most other managers would try to both change the result and scrape something.

He’s saying quite clearly that he wasn’t even going to try. By all means say you didn’t deserve anything from the game after if you get anything but to not even try? Amateur.
 
Speaking in his press conference after the game, Postecoglou said: “Yeah I could have. But… all these things… are totally irrelevant to me. Substitutions and all those kind of things. If you’re not competitive, it doesn’t matter what you do, you’re not going to get rewards, you don’t deserve to win.

“We didn’t deserve on our second-half performance, irrespective of subs or anything else, to get something out of the game. But I think if you do get something out of the game, you’re falsely rewarded and I don’t want to get falsely rewarded.”



And that’s when he lost me.

So why make any subs at all then if he is not interested in turning the game round.
 
Been reading a couple of articles earlier the carabao semis are a benchmark for board decision. We should have vdv and romero back for them but key games for Ange. He is running out of time Ange. Need 3 points tomorrow. Even everton rejected pereira for lampard.
 
Probably - but I’d wait to see which ones they specifically want before going out and spending huge on players for Ange.

I don’t see the point in giving him whoever he wants in Jan and then sacking in the summer. We may as well take the hit this season, it’s a write off with him in charge.
Surely any players bought would be bought with the very high possibility of Postecoglou no longer being manager?

I'm not sure requisite quality is available in a January window but it does seem like there's a "cutting nose off to spite face" thing gong on here.
 
This goal wasn’t a structural or tactical issue imo, it was a decision making issue.

Udogie has Elanga covered and for what reason I don’t know, he checks his run to play offside? I’m not really sure why he checked his run but that’s the reason the goal happened.
Udogie never had Elanga covered on the goal
Was a good yard or two off Elanga at all times
Also never has eye on ball and man till Elanga receives ball and too late….
Poor defending and repeat offender…
 
Speaking in his press conference after the game, Postecoglou said: “Yeah I could have. But… all these things… are totally irrelevant to me. Substitutions and all those kind of things. If you’re not competitive, it doesn’t matter what you do, you’re not going to get rewards, you don’t deserve to win.

“We didn’t deserve on our second-half performance, irrespective of subs or anything else, to get something out of the game. But I think if you do get something out of the game, you’re falsely rewarded and I don’t want to get falsely rewarded.”



And that’s when he lost me.
Ridiculous comments, if you want to play football like that, go write it in a boys football comic or something.
 
So why make any subs at all then if he is not interested in turning the game round.
He was pissed off because his entire back 4 and Bents managed to throw away a two goal lead in 15 minutes through ridiculous individual errors.

So he said the stupid thing instead of digging them out in the presser when what he really meant was "I expected my best players to make up for their stupid fucking mistakes"
 
Back
Top