I think we are going round in circles here but I will say only this, if you are going to use terms like “burden of proof” when it comes to the 10 games narrative, I’m not the one saying the 10 games were the only good period so I don’t need you prove anything. If you are making the claim it’s you that needs to prove it and you haven’t.Ok Rich look, you have clearly claimed that Ange’s system “worked” beyond the initial ten-game honeymoon period, but when pressed for specifics, your evidence boils down to anecdotes and selective examples. Saying “OK LOL” when challenged on this just avoids addressing the point.
The broader trend, as evidenced by our results and performances, shows stagnation and predictability, not progress. Cherry-picking ignores the systemic issues that have plagued us since those first ten games under him.
You’ve mentioned different systems, situations, and lineups, including the Europa League, but have yet to substantiate how any of these counter the argument of inconsistency or provide any evidence of it? Your argument boils down to “well what about that game in the Europa league or when we beat City” I am not talking about individual results, I am talking about a BROAD level of inconsistency.
If you’re going to assert a “16-game stretch of great results and decent performances,” then the burden of proof lies with you, notdudu Relying on him to provide evidence doesn’t strengthen your case—it undermines it. You’ve made the claim, so it’s your responsibility to back it up, especially when challenged mate, not saying this to be harsh but it’s just me being honest.
Your comparison between Ange’s and Pep’s stubbornness is misguided as well imo. Pep has earned the benefit of the doubt because his philosophy has been demonstrably adaptable and successful across multiple leagues and competitions. Ange’s philosophy, by contrast, is rigid and repeatedly exploited, with little to show in terms of results or adaptability, It’s not enough to point out that all elite sportspeople share a rigid belief in their philosophy; the difference lies in their ability to evolve when necessary, which many do.
As for my claim that this is “widely recognised,” Let’s not be obtuse—most ex-professionals with extensive experience, neutral fans, and even a significant portion of our own supporters can see it. You’d struggle to find many who would argue Ange’s inflexibility is the hallmark of an elite manager and that is just the truth.
Both “Ange in” and “Ange out” camps have acknowledged the rare occasions he’s deviated from his philosophy, and every time he has, he’s been praised. The real question is why he doesn’t do it more often. Pretending this isn’t the case is deliberately evasive and acting like it is simply down to me not noticing it more often is disingenuous.
I agree, it’s true we’ve scored a range of goals but it’s the predictability of our overall system—the lack of defensive solidity and the ease with which opponents exploit us—that”:
Is what defines one-dimensionality.
“Angeball” for its own sake isn’t progress when it consistently leads to the same vulnerabilities being exposed time and time again.
Also, you say a straw poll of Spurs fans would show over 90% find Ange’s football more entertaining than Conte, Jose, or Nuno, you’re probably correct but entertainment is subjective as well, Sport for many is ultimately about winning. I’d wager a large majority of Spurs fans would gladly take Conte’s pragmatism and a fourth-place finish over Ange’s style if it meant avoiding a 14th-place slump, which is probably what we are heading for if we keep this manager here.
Ange’s soundbites aren’t hollow? Mate…many of his statements contradict themselves. He’s criticised referees and players in public despite saying he wouldn’t etc, everything he says at this point rings hollow! These inconsistencies, coupled with poor results, ARE why his words ring hollow to many of us. Winning might mask these issues, but when results and statements don’t align, criticism is inevitable wouldn’t you agree?
You dismiss the ten-game point as if it’s an overused narrative. But unless you provide evidence to counter it, it remains valid does it not? Without substantial improvement beyond that period, what other conclusion can be drawn?
Ange has yet to demonstrate consistent success in this league, and the idea that the system has a “higher ceiling” is unproven. A great start followed by months of decline isn’t evidence of a higher ceiling; it’s evidence of a system that has been figured out and exploited.
You also bring up the club’s history of sacking managers, suggesting that frequent changes haven’t helped long-term. That’s debatable imo. In some instances, a managerial change has indeed improved results. Conte’s first season is a prime example but you could list countless others.
In our current situation, with one of the worst league positions in recent/long term memory, a change isn’t just warranted; it’s essential. The argument that sticking with something clearly broken will somehow yield different results is counterintuitive.
Finally, you claim that our best-ever start to a Premier League season last year proves a higher ceiling. But football is about consistency, again, I will keep coming back to this point. A strong start means little without the ability to maintain or build on it. That’s the crux of the issue: Ange’s system hasn’t delivered consistent results, and the evidence suggests it won’t either.
Rich, It’s not about wanting Ange to fail (many have fallen into the trap of picking sides like it’s a playground here) it’s about recognising when something isn’t working and having the courage to acknowledge that.
Hope isn’t enough now imo, I love this football club just like you do, we may not agree on everything and we may never agree on Ange but I just want the best for the club and I think he is dragging it down to the gutter.
Anyway, appreciate the debate and you responding at length to me.
The fact I’m referencing someone else’s, in this case
dudu
‘s, counter to that claim but neither of us really see the value in spending time typing it up again surely shows you we feel like it’s banging our heads against a brick wall?
