• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Ange in or out?

Ange in or out?

  • In

    Votes: 73 42.2%

  • Out

    Votes: 100 57.8%
  • Total voters
    173
Poch until the end of season can't be worse than this awful football. We looked dreadful tonight with an almost first choice team. Playing this way we have zero hope against EF
 
Want to clarify 2 things though

Firstly, Ange's protest on the goal was that everyone has been told that VAR's perspective should be when there is a clear and obvious mistake. When the review takes that long, it shows that it wasn't a clear and obvious error. So by the laws of the game, it was a foul by Sarr. By the guidance of how VAR is used, the goal should have been given because it wasn't therefore clear and obvious. I've talked about this anomaly from day 1 implementation of VAR. They simply have to make VAR about the laws of the game and drop this "clear and obvious" corruption.

Secondly, Ange seemed to be implying that his hand went to his ear because the fans haven't had much to celebrate recently. It wasn't dissent towards them because of his substitutions. It was him trying to enjoy a moment with them.

That all being said, he was rude and obnoxious towards "Pat" the Sky interviewer after the game. There was no need.
 
Muttley said:
Want to clarify 2 things though

Firstly, Ange's protest on the goal was that everyone has been told that VAR's perspective should be when there is a clear and obvious mistake. When the review takes that long, it shows that it wasn't a clear and obvious error. So by the laws of the game, it was a foul by Sarr. By the guidance of how VAR is used, the goal should have been given because it wasn't therefore clear and obvious. I've talked about this anomaly from day 1 implementation of VAR. They simply have to make VAR about the laws of the game and drop this "clear and obvious" corruption.

Secondly, Ange seemed to be implying that his hand went to his ear because the fans haven't had much to celebrate recently. It wasn't dissent towards them because of his substitutions. It was him trying to enjoy a moment with them.

That all being said, he was rude and obnoxious towards "Pat" the Sky interviewer after the game. There was no need.
Click to expand...
It was obvious it was a foul after 30 secs of replays, it shouldn't have taken so long to come to that decision.
 
DubSpur said:
It was obvious it was a foul after 30 secs of replays, it shouldn't have taken so long to come to that decision.
Click to expand...

Yes, but by it taking so long to decipher it is implied it cannot be clear and obvious. I don't blame Ange at all for following that line of scrutiny on these refs.

I took one look at it and saw the foul. I didn't see it in real time though.
 
Muttley said:
Want to clarify 2 things though

Firstly, Ange's protest on the goal was that everyone has been told that VAR's perspective should be when there is a clear and obvious mistake. When the review takes that long, it shows that it wasn't a clear and obvious error. So by the laws of the game, it was a foul by Sarr. By the guidance of how VAR is used, the goal should have been given because it wasn't therefore clear and obvious. I've talked about this anomaly from day 1 implementation of VAR. They simply have to make VAR about the laws of the game and drop this "clear and obvious" corruption.

Secondly, Ange seemed to be implying that his hand went to his ear because the fans haven't had much to celebrate recently. It wasn't dissent towards them because of his substitutions. It was him trying to enjoy a moment with them.

That all being said, he was rude and obnoxious towards "Pat" the Sky interviewer after the game. There was no need.
Click to expand...
A whole host of journos including spurs friendly ones say it was a cup to the fans - the video footage doesn't look good either

It's a believable excuse if he hasn't had numerous incidents with fans before tonight
 
DTA said:
Haha how’s it on Levy. The Levy out crew wanted him away from the football side of the club.

Here’s what it looks like.
Click to expand...

It is now

- As CEO you let people do their work (Munn)
- You have regular updates, those people need to explain the mitigations/reasoning for staying the course when data indicates otherwise
- You as CEO inevitably have to advise first, but eventually make the call.

In my experience at this type of decisioning making, Munn is in trouble as well, may not be the end of him but his creditability is significantly damaged at this point. I'm sure there was a conversation in December, pre Jan Window of stick or not, the stick position looks very bad now.
 
i am now beginning to think Levy is wanting us to be relegated. I just cannot fathom what the thought process is.
I also know he doesn't want to lose money but this brick show is making the brand look bad
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back