bit of a difference managing United to us though.
-
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...
Tactics TFC's Tactical Autopsy Thread
- Thread starter bus-conductor
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
At least be original if nothing else.
Says the guy who actually came in here and said "huurrr durrr none of you are ACTUAL football managers so you can't talk about tactics hurrr durrr" as if that exact phrase hasn't been uttered by a million other morons just like you. All to cover for the fact that you're insecure you have nothing of any insight to add yourself.
Last edited:
Yeah they're really missing the point.
If discussing the tactical side enhances your appreciation of the football, or otherwise helps you cope, then it doesn't matter if you're a professional manager or assistant coach the local under 12 D's, you're welcome to join the conversation. Anyone who wants to throw rocks at that can just ignore this thread. Please.
Also the idea that anyone who understands the sport at a deeper level - a sport they spend hours each week watching and thinking about - simply must become a manager is just laughable.
Do people realise what bullshit it entails to get into the sport? Especially if you've not been lucky enough to be a pro footballer to begin with.
It usually means slaving away as an "analyst" in the lower leagues (aka, someone's personal assistant) for poverty wages hoping you get noticed (unless your dad is like, Ancelotti or, like AVB, you happen to be the next door neighbour of Bobby Robson).
Then somehow you've got to find thousands of pounds from those shit wages you've been on to fund your coaching badges.
Then you get the pleasure of seeing utter moron ex-pros like Tim Sherwood and Steven Gerrard parachuted into the big managerial jobs, or big cushy analyst jobs in the media, while you maybe get a chance as a coach at some shit side in the 8th tier.
Can't imagine anything more hellish.
No, no honestly and in good faith you didn't...but you did try to move the goal posts to argue against his point indirectly...your move...
No, no fucking no...his comparison was exactly apples to the fucking apples he established in the setup of his comparison. You do not get to dictate the conditions of his point. You just do not like that under his fair conditions, literally since your guy has been in the fucking league, things don't compare favorably to another coach that many folks now recognize as shit...we won't bring up exactly how long ago a certain someone said that the particular coach was shit only to be told they were wrong by the other certain someone.
That's it...changing the conditions so you can make a different fucking point is a cunt's move...especially without fairly and properly admitting the merits of his point...and that's without doing the BC two-step of "yeah, sure, BUT on to my point..."
Wrong, LITERALLY since the guy has been in the fucking league he has out pointed ETH.
And he has done this despite the other guy having a fuck ton more money to spend, choosing who it gets spent on and having and extra two years to coach his methods.
And this is the other cunt's move...disregard a whole series of posts until you can find 1 thing to sink your bad faithy grubby little teeth into...jeez, BC. The fact that he's being compared at all to ETH is a bad sign, let alone unfavorably...and this was my FULL quote, you bad faith merchant....Wrong, LITERALLY since the guy has been in the fucking league he has out pointed ETH.
And he has done this despite the other guy having a fuck ton more money to spend, choosing who it gets spent on and having and extra two years to coach his methods.
...notice I said nothing about points...as if that is the only criteria. It started on net spend but your typical goal post moving is sinking it's teeth into points...ATM an 8 point delta between your coaching lord and savior and another that EVERYONE realizes is shit and has a shit squad...and in that time Ange has had more money to spend (2nd only to Chelsea)...which was the initial point of contention.
You are getting very shrill Todd.
Fair conditions? Bullshit. What because judging ETH only on the players he’s bought in the last 12 months, ignoring that he’s had 4 extra windows and a ton of extra money, that Ange hasn’t had is a fair comparison?
I didn’t move any goalposts, I pointed out that the playing field wasn’t even.
You are never going to forgive Ange for out performing billion spending Poch are you?
Fuck off with this ad hom nonsense.
What came before, came before, BC. Why is that so hard for you to understand (you often have a hard time understanding that which runs counter to your narrative)? Comparison starting from time 0...even in that time Ange has 8 pts on ETH...as you were so eager to point out.
Who cares what was spent previous to that? It still led both teams to where they were at Time 0, Ange's start date with us. And Ange has spent more to get 8 pts more over subsequent 1.25 seasons than a coach that everyone now recognizes is out of his depth. There's a point in there.
The conditions were the conditions at Time 0...fair point of evaluation. Fair playing field FFS!
Hear we go again with the same canards...the BC bingo card! Got nothing to do with anything... What I won't forgive is Ange seemingly being a one-trick charlatan...and neither will Levy. But, like ETH before him, you were and continue to be beyond the point of reasonable recognition, in his corner! And on the Poch front (another attempt at the BC goalpost move), Chelsea got rid of the coach they felt underperformed. You're still out here licking Ange's balls...after years of tea-bagging ETH as the next Pep.
Fuck off off with the cunt move, canard, Apples oranges, ball licking bollocks.
I can only repeat this so many times. I did not dispute the original claim, I pointed out contextual facts that make the paramètres chosen selective and not fair in comparison.
I stand by what I said.
Oh jeez...
History shows us there is no practical limit...for evidence please see the previous Poch statement. The reservoir is deep.
"Yeah, sure, BUT look over here..." Sure you did and in a bad faithy manner i.e. not directly. You tried to argue a red herring in order to minimize your guy's foibles. No one cares who spent more money beforehand as it wasn't relevant.
It's like ETH has won 1 trophy since time 0 of comparison...he's won 2 but not while Ange has been here so they don't factor into the comparison. Get it?
Perfectly fair to judge based on the mgr's first day in the league...everyone spent money previously, there is no even playing field and never has been; Player's that score the most goals are on the best teams...coaches with the most wins also have the best and most expensive players...the most successful teams spend the most money...etc, etc, etc, man! Everyone knows this and everyone accepts this but you because at present it goes against you Ange narrative.
Hold on hold on, I'm not really interested in the rest of your argument but what??? You can't seriously be arguing this?
1) Poch spent 5 years at Spurs competing at the VERY TOP despite spending less than half the clubs in the Championship over that period. It was one of the greatest achievements in Prem history.
2) Chelsea is a poisoned chalice. Potter is a serious manager with a serious track record and had them in the bottom half. There are way too caveats at that club to properly judge any manager there since the Boehly experiment.
3) Despite that, Poch still had them finish 6th and were roaring up the table by the end.
4) And based on xPoints, which you Ange-in lot love to yap on about, Chelsea "deserved" to finish ahead of us by around 8 points. But I'm guessing the underlying stats don't matter now it doesn't suit the narrative.
5) If you're gonna start arguing that somehow Ange hasn't had a lot to spend you're really arguing yourself into a corner. He's spent the 2nd most in the league since on a net transfer spend basis since he joined Spurs and has openly said he is the most important and final say in all transfer decisions. If you've got a problem with our transfer decisions, fine, but that lies at the feet of Ange first and foremost. Complaining that Ange hasn't been given the players he wants or hasn't had piles of money spent on him is just delusional.
I don't know what Spurs do to managers.We broke some Jose record we broke a Conte record and we are going to break a Flange record even Nuno is doing ok now
The dig about Poch relates to prior banter between me and Todd.
I didn’t mention anything about Poch at spurs. And the notion that the Chelsea job last summer was any more of a poisoned chalice than the Spurs job is fucking nonsense. Only a fucking idiot would claim they’d choose Spurs over Chelsea and their £1bn of new players summer 2023.
And I’m on record as saying I think Chelsea were stupid to sack Poch when they did (for the reasons you mention, improved form and underlying metrics and it’s a project etc). I also think they were stupid to sack Potter when they did.
Last edited:
Your last point is fair, but it is also fair to say that for most clubs, especially those above and around us, their spending was much, much lower than many previous seasons, largely due to them being much further along in their projects than us.
That isn't to say Ange hasn't had money spent on him, but if your gonna judge him on his money spent it would also be fair to to take time into consideration.
Ooo, has he really said this? Because I've not heard it and that would be a deviation from what we've always done...and as you suggest, a damning little detail in his current plight. I'd love a source if you've got one.
Postecoglou says he will have 'strong control' over Spurs transfers despite Johan Lange's arrival - Spurs Web
"Ange Postecoglou says that he has always had the final say on transfers throughout his managerial career and it is no different at Tottenham, revealing that he got most of his first-choice targets in the summer.
The Spurs head coach told Football.London: “Wherever I’ve been, I’ve made sure that I have the biggest say over recruitment. I don’t do all the work but I really think it’s an important part of my function and particularly when I first go into clubs.
“When you first go into a club, there are two measures that people will always put up against you. One is the results, which tells its own tale, but as a manager, and I’ve certainly had that experience, you can’t always guarantee the results early on because you’re trying to build something and there’s going to be some ups and downs.
“The other thing you get measured on is the people you bring in. Not necessarily the ones you inherited, because people will say they weren’t his choices if they’re not working out.
“Everywhere I’ve been, the players I’ve recruited whether it was here, Celtic, Yokohama or my jobs in Australia, those first few players I’ve always put a lot of stock in that they have to be players who come in and have an impact straight away, because at least if the results aren’t there, then people will say OK, there’s something building here."
To be honest I think it's right that managers have the final say - there's no point buying someone the manager won't play. But what's important is the recruitment/data team and DOF are heavily involved, and draw up a suitable list of candidates for the manager based on a style of play and profile agreed in advance between all parties. No manager has the requisite bandwidth to both manage the team and be aware of all the potential players across the world that could improve the squad.
What I don't like is the argument that Ange "hasn't been backed with his preferred players" when it's quite clear from what Ange has said and everything come out of the club that he has. It's just a way of excusing Ange from any blame for our current predicament.
What I don't like is the argument that Ange "hasn't been backed with his preferred players" when it's quite clear from what Ange has said and everything come out of the club that he has. It's just a way of excusing Ange from any blame for our current predicament.