• 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: 87 73.1%

  • Out

    Votes: 32 26.9%
  • Total voters
    119
Raziel said:
Funny, you have been one of his critics (so fair to that), but do you really think

- If he wins one out of the next 5 (very likely) that there is no damage done?

My big concern is he's going to injure one of Solanke, Deki, Son seriously (overplayed/worked), I also think Gray, Bergvall, Udogie aren't being helped in their development by being constantly hung out to dry ...

- I agree the answer isn't Mason (some other interim), but surely just dead man walking it to end of season is way more damaging than making a change?
Click to expand...
I disagree: every minute spent in a competitive match in your teenage years brings a wealth of precious experience. What isn't helped by the current situation is their market value: the more a youngster is exposed, the more people will question their ability (particularly if they're not decisive).

If you remember (and, more importantly, if I remember correctly), some time ago, we had a poster on here who explained that he played volleyball and was considered a decent prospect at youth level. Then he got promoted to the A team and the step up was so big that he couldn't make the grade. If you want to see if a kid has what it takes to make that step up, there's only one way: play him, play him as much as you can and see if there's any progress.

Of course, it's easier to shine in a winning team but I would expect that, at this level, we have the coaching tools to track an individual player's progression precisely. Even Jose Pekerman, who won a couple of youth World Cups with Argentina, used to say that there was no way to know whether a player would make it as a pro until they get thrown in at the deep end, no matter how well they did in the U-18 or U-21.
 
i'm struggling with it. I want Ange to do well of course but as per my previous comments, i need the Ange supporters to tell me why it will be ok because i dont see it. Case in point yesterday.

We had Solanke, Son, Johnson, Kulusevski, Sarr, Bentancur, and obvs Madders came on. That's our full strength attacking line up right? How much did we create? you cant tell me because we dont have Romero and Micky at the back we struggle to create up top.

Did we create almost anything of note yesterday because i didn't see it? Sure Forest are a good team but if our attacking football is all the vibes then why didn't we create more yesterday? Really poor.

Sorry but i'm starting to get to the point where i can't see Ange's methods working in this league. the failure to adapt, despite being lauded, at the moment appears to be stupidity at it's finest.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
We made huge, brave, possibly stupid calls this summer with the squad
Personally I loved it because I see the plan (maybe naively) but I also thought we couldn’t have injuries like last year (how wrong was I)
So as I’m on gardening leave I thought I’d see the numbers of the transfers (not values as they are always debateable)

Players in, and age and experience in games played at the time we signed them
Solanke 270 games at 26
Gray 44 games at 18
Odobert 66 games at 19
Bergvall 47 games at 18
Yang 38;games at 18
average is 93 games Age avg is 19.8

Players out, who played for Ange at least once and again, age and games played in senior football
Skipp 156 games at 23
Royal 231 games at 25
Rodon 170 games at 26
Lo Celso 313 games at 28
Dier 432 games at 30
Sessegnon 206 games at 24
NDombele 301 games at 26
Perisic 611 games at 35
Tanganga 68 games at 25
Hojbjerg - loan technically 434 games at 28
2922 games total and and average of 292 games per player Average age is 27

Loans out who played for Ange last season
Gil Veliz
Solomon Scarlett

Other notable loans as these are players who could theoretically play for Ange
Devine Philips
Donley Keeley
Vuskovic

We can debate all day who replaces who and the merits of loaning out certain players
What’s clear is we gambled and rolled the dice in on youth over experience when we need experience right now
That has to be addressed in the next 2 windows as we all know we are light in the depth but how do you do that and not make room for the younger guys to come in. I have this weird idea (I think I saw it on a football documentary) where every position in the team had names in it with their back and successor almost like chess pieces, and the transfer targets that fitted the role too. Sounds kinda bond villian esque

I don’t know how we fix it other than doing the buying and trading we need to do but that needs windows and time and money
Click to expand...
I’ve added this here as I wasn’t sure where else to put it
It’s not to be egoistical but just ti show the changes we’re trying to make as a club and what Ange is trying to juggle
I don’t know whose calls these are but he will of course be involved amongst others
 
Diamond Lights said:
i'm struggling with it. I want Ange to do well of course but as per my previous comments, i need the Ange supporters to tell me why it will be ok because i dont see it. Case in point yesterday.

We had Solanke, Son, Johnson, Kulusevski, Sarr, Bentancur, and obvs Madders came on. That's our full strength attacking line up right? How much did we create? you cant tell me because we dont have Romero and Micky at the back we struggle to create up top.

Did we create almost anything of note yesterday because i didn't see it? Sure Forest are a good team but if our attacking football is all the vibes then why didn't we create more yesterday? Really poor.

Sorry but i'm starting to get to the point where i can't see Ange's methods working in this league. the failure to adapt, despite being lauded, at the moment appears to be stupidity at it's finest.
Click to expand...
Not trying to create an argument but we created 3 chances that Johnson took and we’re all very good saves
And sonny missed the best chance early when he did t pass to a free man and instead pea rolled it to their keeper in a feeble shot
They had 3 shots on target including the gaol and I can only remember the goal TBH. Even MOTD didn’t show another shot on target from them. Not sure what the other two were
We didn’t create anywhere near enough but we played a low block and stared with a few players who are woeful against a low block in key roles and players who don’t like battles. It’s wasn’t the team I would have picked for sure
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I’ve added this here as I wasn’t sure where else to put it
It’s not to be egoistical but just ti show the changes we’re trying to make as a club and what Ange is trying to juggle
I don’t know whose calls these are but he will of course be involved amongst others
Click to expand...
Excellent!
Based on the above it would seem foolish to abandon the project when things get rough. Having said that, football is a special case where emotion and perception have disproportionate impacts. And sacking the current manager doesn’t necessarily mean the end of the project - assuming a suitable successor can be found, though I’ve no idea who.
 
Mcfee said:
Excellent!
Based on the above it would seem foolish to abandon the project when things get rough. Having said that, football is a special case where emotion and perception have disproportionate impacts. And sacking the current manager doesn’t necessarily mean the end of the project - assuming a suitable successor can be found, though I’ve no idea who.
Click to expand...
I would hope and anticipate that there is a list of replacement managers too on this chess board I’ve described
It’s what smart clubs do
Certainly what I’ve heard Brighton and Bournemouth do… succession planning for everyone
I do it at work which is why I’m on gardening leave
 
Baleforce said:
Another thing that’s dawned in n me, another tactical basic we completely ignore.

When you have the ball you make the pitch big, when you don’t you make it small, we don’t do that, which is why it’s so easy to turn us around quickly.
Click to expand...
That was always one of Bilk Nich's big mantras
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I would hope and anticipate that there is a list of replacement managers too on this chess board I’ve described
It’s what smart clubs do
Certainly what I’ve heard Brighton and Bournemouth do… succession planning for everyone
I do it at work which is why I’m on gardening leave
Click to expand...
The Paul Barber High Performance episode is really good on that.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I would hope and anticipate that there is a list of replacement managers too on this chess board I’ve described
It’s what smart clubs do
Certainly what I’ve heard Brighton and Bournemouth do… succession planning for everyone
I do it at work which is why I’m on gardening leave
Click to expand...
I think Iraola is the most similar to Ange- with- tweaks to make us less open. He wants to attack but also puts an emphasis on defending well without the ball.
 
watch the goal we conceded yesterday and the goal we conceded to lose 2-1 at Saudi Sportswashing Machine. Almost exactly the same in terms of style, outcome etc. Lose the ball, quick transition through middle, goal. 0 points.

"but we played well".
 
Diamond Lights said:
i'm struggling with it. I want Ange to do well of course but as per my previous comments, i need the Ange supporters to tell me why it will be ok because i dont see it. Case in point yesterday.

We had Solanke, Son, Johnson, Kulusevski, Sarr, Bentancur, and obvs Madders came on. That's our full strength attacking line up right? How much did we create? you cant tell me because we dont have Romero and Micky at the back we struggle to create up top.

Did we create almost anything of note yesterday because i didn't see it? Sure Forest are a good team but if our attacking football is all the vibes then why didn't we create more yesterday? Really poor.

Sorry but i'm starting to get to the point where i can't see Ange's methods working in this league. the failure to adapt, despite being lauded, at the moment appears to be stupidity at it's finest.
Click to expand...
What didn't help was that Son/Kulu & Johnson were all fudging abysmal
 
thfcsteff said:
Udogie would've tracked back faster IMO. Bentancur would've read the entire situation better, as Spence had gone on a forage (he lost the ball which led to the fast turnover). Had he been matchfit i.e. more aware, IMO he'd have been 5-10 yards deeper and in a better covering position. I'd also say it had something to do with how little he's played with Spence.

I'd like you to explain how Bentancur was operating as the inverted FB when Spence and Udogie were clearly the FB's/inverted. I saw Bentancur as our '6', which I admit is still not a 6 as we all feel is needed in this side.
Click to expand...

So have a little watch of the goal again. You could be right that Udogie could have got back quicker but he has still been trained to stop at the defensive line. If he goes deeper then he starts to work against our offside strategy. That's probably why he runs at the pace he did. He sees where his defenders are and paces himself to get back to that line. He even slows down as he gets close to the defensive line.

You'll also see that Bentancur and Udogie have total symmetry in the start positions. Kulu is high and wide the right wing, Spence is in the 8/10 position and Johnson is in the middle so Bentancur knows what he has to do. He drops into that inverted full back role and makes the exact same sprint back into the RB area as Udogie does. That is off the training ground.

At least that is what I saw after watching it over and over.

I'd also say it was a great carry and sublime slide rule pass by MGW. We wouldn't even be having this conversation without that class from him.
 
Baleforce said:
Another thing that’s dawned in n me, another tactical basic we completely ignore.

When you have the ball you make the pitch big, when you don’t you make it small, we don’t do that, which is why it’s so easy to turn us around quickly.
Click to expand...
Sadly this is true. Yesterday, as you noted in the match thread, we had our CBs defending high up the pitch and wide. Mad stuff. Dragusin got a booking in that area of the pitch and Gray lost it there and conceded a decent chance.

F**k me, when I was coaching kids, I was always telling the CBs, you do not get wider than the width of the box unless absolutely necessary and if you do, someone has to fill in for you. The shape of the team is a real worry at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back