Welcome Ange: To Dare is to Didgeridoo

[harr1984]

I really want someone to post a rebuttal to this post...

It's simple really, if people want to take snippets of quotes from him without context then you can create any argument you want to. I would love to find where he has specifically said he doesn't think you have to be able to defend? There's quite a reach between that and just having an attack minded approach. Sure 'if they score one, we will score two' will be the attitude, but that doesn't mean he doesn't care about us conceding sloppy goals in the first place.

He has clearly made tactical changes (subtle or not so subtle) in certain games previously when he has felt the need, my memory isn't good enough to list them all but one that sticks out is the game at home to Emirates Marketing Project last season when the Goons wanted us to win and we played really well despite losing.

If certain people a) Don't agree with this style of play and/or b) Can't handle the fact it's going to take longer than a season to get the squad of players he wants for this system and to perfect the system itself then that's cool, perfectly entitled to feel whatever you feel. But don't come out with nonsense about the guy just to suit such an agenda.....

 

[Muttley]

He will tweak his tactics, as he already has. He probably will never change in a way some people seemingly want to see.

I agree Mason and Wells did well enough for shorter stints. Then again you could say the same about Ange and his first period here (and some later shorter periods).

I think the biggest issues we're currently running into aren't tactical. Brighton second half, Palace game, Ipswich. For sure some tactical stuff that could be changed. But I think whoever our manager was at this point we'd be running into issues like this at some point. Even with the most flexible, change happy manager we could find.

Complacency and a lack of composure will make any tactical approach look insufficient. With a young squad, lacking some options, facing injuries, being back in Europe and a bit of bad luck (imo). These issues would arise with just about everyone. And with just about everyone would take time to sort out.

Giving him time or not to me depends not on tactical stuff, but on if we believe he's the kind of leader to help these young players develop in these key areas. For me he seems the right kind of character. I would like to give him time. But a poor run now would make that increasingly difficult as pressure will increase.

It's not single root cause stuff at the moment. As BedfordSpurs keeps sharing, players not marking in key moments could be the players themselves or part of the tactical setup. It is statistically relevant though to our league position. It's definitely all the items you share on age, injuries, leadership etc and they should normalise over time. Now we're back to last season where we can add suspended players to that list as well with Rodrigo.

What will always be there though is Ange's choice on tactical setup regardless who is on that pitch. I could be completely wrong and it might bring us the glory. I'm just leaning more to Ange having to adapt. Just taking BFS's theme. Ange needs to make sure the centre halves and wide players (both FB's and wingers) are stopping more crosses at source and defending them better in the box. Having centre mids caught ahead of play, having full-backs caught 2 or 3 on 1 and centre halves not marking is tactics to me. It's also an implied lack of attention to detail, a theme that has surfaced a few times e.g. our set piece defending.

Let's see how quickly this all can change.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

It's simple really, if people want to take snippets of quotes from him without context then you can create any argument you want to. I would love to find where he has specifically said he doesn't think you have to be able to defend? There's quite a reach between that and just having an attack minded approach. Sure 'if they score one, we will score two' will be the attitude, but that doesn't mean he doesn't care about us conceding sloppy goals in the first place.

He has clearly made tactical changes (subtle or not so subtle) in certain games previously when he has felt the need, my memory isn't good enough to list them all but one that sticks out is the game at home to Emirates Marketing Project last season when the Goons wanted us to win and we played really well despite losing.

If certain people a) Don't agree with this style of play and/or b) Can't handle the fact it's going to take longer than a season to get the squad of players he wants for this system and to perfect the system itself then that's cool, perfectly entitled to feel whatever you feel. But don't come out with nonsense about the guy just to suit such an agenda.....

Yeah
It’s not even people quoting quotes
They are just saying what they think
That’s fine
But it does also highlight their predetermined thoughts

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Just like every manager his statements shouldn't all be taken at face value. And like all people in like his comments should be interpreted in context.

We have adjusted. We're defending set pieces better, we're defending against counter attacks better. Look at the City game. Look at starting Kulusevski and Maddison vs Sarr and a DM. He does adapt, but within certain principles.

I think he's well aware of the challenges ahead. I think he's well aware he doesn't have most of the best players in the league. Look where he's come from, look at how far he's come. You don't come that far by being naive.

He has never made those statements
At least not from what I can see

 

[braineclipse]

It's not single root cause stuff at the moment. As BedfordSpurs keeps sharing, players not marking in key moments could be the players themselves or part of the tactical setup. It is statistically relevant though to our league position. It's definitely all the items you share on age, injuries, leadership etc and they should normalise over time. Now we're back to last season where we can add suspended players to that list as well with Rodrigo.

What will always be there though is Ange's choice on tactical setup regardless who is on that pitch. I could be completely wrong and it might bring us the glory. I'm just leaning more to Ange having to adapt. Just taking BFS's theme. Ange needs to make sure the centre halves and wide players (both FB's and wingers) are stopping more crosses at source and defending them better in the box. Having centre mids caught ahead of play, having full-backs caught 2 or 3 on 1 and centre halves not marking is tactics to me. It's also an implied lack of attention to detail, a theme that has surfaced a few times e.g. our set piece defending.

Let's see how quickly this all can change.

I agree there's not a single root cause. And most likely even if we are successful to the level we want to be we'll still have issues that need fixing.

Right now inconsistency is for me the biggest one. And mentality in various situations a key part of solving that imo.

Some of it is tactical, but I also think some of those goals can be prevented without changing the system. All systems will have vulnerabilities, but how much those hurt you depends on the execution.

 

[Mrs Vert]

Fellow Aussie, Mile Jedinak is the defensive coach - why isn't Ange sacking him?

Also:

• Ryan Mason: Assistant manager
• Nick Montgomery: Assistant manager
• Sérgio Raimundo: Assistant manager
• Rob Burch: Goalkeeping coach
• Michael Cooper: First team physical performance coach

Are these guys really any good?

I do think Mason needs to move on and experience something else. We really do hold on to people far too long.

I have no idea on the others but judging by our output, thinking we could do better?

 

[Bullet]

I don't have the stats to hand, but I've heard commentators saying things SIMILAR to:
Pep has lost 4 in a row
Arteta has lost 4 in a row
Emery has lost 4 in a row
Ange has won 8 out of the last 10

And the outcome to that, according to some 'fans' is erm.....Ange out!!

If someone has the stats for all comps, feel free to correct me with the real stats.

 

[Mikey10]

I don't have the stats to hand, but I've heard commentators saying things SIMILAR to:
Pep has lost 4 in a row
Arteta has lost 4 in a row
Emery has lost 4 in a row
Ange has won 8 out of the last 10

And the outcome to that, according to some 'fans' is erm.....Ange out!!

If someone has the stats for all comps, feel free to correct me with the real stats.

We’ve won 5 and lost 5 of our last 10.

I suppose Pep and Arteta might have a bit more credit in the bank. Emery has got the Villa project further along the line than us too, although he’s obviously had longer.

 

[mudshark]

Just like every manager his statements shouldn't all be taken at face value. And like all people in like his comments should be interpreted in context.

We have adjusted. We're defending set pieces better, we're defending against counter attacks better. Look at the City game. Look at starting Kulusevski and Maddison vs Sarr and a DM. He does adapt, but within certain principles.

I think he's well aware of the challenges ahead. I think he's well aware he doesn't have most of the best players in the league. Look where he's come from, look at how far he's come. You don't come that far by being naive.

Which of his statements can we take at face value, and which can we not?

I would agree there has been some evidence of pigeon steps toward a sort of compromise. I regret calling him a mοron; he's not that, and I withdraw the word, but I do believe he is still utterly out of his depth. For my money, he will need to [the Irish would be 'brú ar a phrionsabail' (literally, pressure his own principles)]. I personally don't yet believe him quite capable of it, and even if I am wrong, it may be too little, too late.

 

[Bullet]

Which of his statements can we take at face value, and which can we not?

Which? Like many leaders, he is projecting an unwavering belief.
E.g. if you are leading a team up Everest or to the South Pole you project unwavering belief to keep pushing onwards, even as your comrades die and food disappears and just as all hope is lost, you push ever forwards to reach the goal.
Privately I assume he is weighing up pros and cons and options. And he has shown some adaptation.
But I do take your point.
Personally I have SOME issues with his approach BUT also admire his steadfast belief to try something different and really smash up the status quo, like Rick Parfitt on roller blades in a mini skirt.

 

[mudshark]

Which? Like many leaders, he is projecting an unwavering belief.
E.g. if you are leading a team up Everest or to the South Pole you project unwavering belief to keep pushing onwards, even as your comrades die and food disappears and just as all hope is lost, you push ever forwards to reach the goal.
Privately I assume he is weighing up pros and cons and options. And he has shown some adaptation.
But I do take your point.
Personally I have SOME issues with his approach BUT also admire his steadfast belief to try something different and really smash up the status quo, like Rick Parfitt on roller blades in a mini skirt.

I admire that too, as long as no-one is then allowed to get away with quoting anybody in evidence of anything on here (and I include myself in that.)

 

[metalgear]

Just like every manager his statements shouldn't all be taken at face value. And like all people in like his comments should be interpreted in context.

We have adjusted. We're defending set pieces better, we're defending against counter attacks better. Look at the City game. Look at starting Kulusevski and Maddison vs Sarr and a DM. He does adapt, but within certain principles.

I think he's well aware of the challenges ahead. I think he's well aware he doesn't have most of the best players in the league. Look where he's come from, look at how far he's come. You don't come that far by being naive.

ange's experience has always being about the bigger fish in a small pond: celtic in the scottish league and the various nations in the 2nd tier internationals. so while he has lots of experience, he is naive at the top level, by the standards required by CL level and EPL top 5 coaches.

at this level, you must build from the back otherwise will always risk leaking goals, even against bottom table teams. which explains why mourinho and conte played conservatively with even worse players then. also player availabilty, fitness and rotation is a must. as is mastering the sly tactics to get the refs favour in 50-50 decisions. there's a lot for ange to catch up on.

he also had the second half of last season to learn that angeball had been found out. but alas started the season with the same tactics as last season - which shows a lot about his thinking.

well, recently he's changed things a bit and lets hope he is open to learning and quick to implement changes while keeping the morale of the boys. its really up to ange now and like someone said above "change tactics or change jobs". he's asked his players to "step up" and now he must do so himself.

 

[braineclipse]

ange's experience has always being about the bigger fish in a small pond: celtic in the scottish league and the various nations in the 2nd tier internationals. so while he has lots of experience, he is naive at the top level, by the standards required by CL level and EPL top 5 coaches.

at this level, you must build from the back otherwise will always risk leaking goals, even against bottom table teams. which explains why mourinho and conte played conservatively with even worse players then. also player availabilty, fitness and rotation is a must. as is mastering the sly tactics to get the refs favour in 50-50 decisions. there's a lot for ange to catch up on.

he also had the second half of last season to learn that angeball had been found out. but alas started the season with the same tactics as last season - which shows a lot about his thinking.

well, recently he's changed things a bit and lets hope he is open to learning and quick to implement changes while keeping the morale of the boys. its really up to ange now and like someone said above "change tactics or change jobs". he's asked his players to "step up" and now he must do so himself.

Australia wasn't the bigger fish in a small pond. Small pond part, sure. I don't think Yokohama are a particularly dominant team in Japan, not like Celtic in Scotland at least.

From what I've heard from his time in Japan and Australia (I've heard more about that, but not knowledgeable) quite a bit of the criticism when things were difficult was similar to what he's facing here now. And his approach was similar.

I may be wrong, but I think he's a good leader. I think I have a half decent understanding of tactical stuff, I don't think that's where our biggest issues are right now. The being a good leader part is really important. I think he's adjusting well to the added scrutiny, competition and working with much bigger names.

I like that he's both taking responsibility and demanding that the players take responsibility. From what I've heard of his approach to leadership and developing both a tactical system and developing a team to be a cohesive unit with a good mentality I really like his approach. I think he's a good fit for where we are as a club.

But, it's now entering what will probably be a crucial time. Fans, players, and ultimately the board will have to be happy enough with what's going on for him to get the chance to prove my faith in him warranted or unwarranted. He and the players will have to earn that faith and time I think he needs to take the next step.

 

[braineclipse]

Which of his statements can we take at face value, and which can we not?

I would agree there has been some evidence of pigeon steps toward a sort of compromise. I regret calling him a mοron; he's not that, and I withdraw the word, but I do believe he is still utterly out of his depth. For my money, he will need to [the Irish would be 'brú ar a phrionsabail' (literally, pressure his own principles)]. I personally don't yet believe him quite capable of it, and even if I am wrong, it may be too little, too late.

We at least shouldn't take statements which are directly in contradiction with what we can see happening and are open to interpretation at face value.

I think we've seen managers who are utterly out of their depth in the PL from time to time. To me it doesn't look like this when that's happened.

Interesting saying. Not sure I fully understand it. Feel free to expand on it.

I think he mostly needs to stick to his principles, but adjust within them. As we imo have seen him do. He needs to raise our floor, I think that's very much possible within those principles.

 

[billyiddo]

Australia wasn't the bigger fish in a small pond. Small pond part, sure. I don't think Yokohama are a particularly dominant team in Japan, not like Celtic in Scotland at least.

From what I've heard from his time in Japan and Australia (I've heard more about that, but not knowledgeable) quite a bit of the criticism when things were difficult was similar to what he's facing here now. And his approach was similar.

I may be wrong, but I think he's a good leader. I think I have a half decent understanding of tactical stuff, I don't think that's where our biggest issues are right now. The being a good leader part is really important. I think he's adjusting well to the added scrutiny, competition and working with much bigger names.

I like that he's both taking responsibility and demanding that the players take responsibility. From what I've heard of his approach to leadership and developing both a tactical system and developing a team to be a cohesive unit with a good mentality I really like his approach. I think he's a good fit for where we are as a club.

But, it's now entering what will probably be a crucial time. Fans, players, and ultimately the board will have to be happy enough with what's going on for him to get the chance to prove my faith in him warranted or unwarranted. He and the players will have to earn that faith and time I think he needs to take the next step.

I think you can make bigger strides in weaker leagues with less than what is required to progress/do well in the strong leagues - let's say you're working in a 3 or 4 out of 10 standard league but are bringing 6 or 7 out of 10 ideas/tactics/methods/signings/whatever - you'll rip those leagues up, but be found lacking if you then move to an 8 or 9 out of ten league off the back of it.

Is that the case for Ange? Not necessarily, of course it could be that he is the level of manager required to succeed at this level - but there's a huge sliding scale between being good enough to do very well in Scotland/Japan/Australia and being good enough to do well in the PL - and there's a lot of room on that scale below what we need that he could be on.

 

[braineclipse]

I think you can make bigger strides in weaker leagues with less than what is required to progress/do well in the strong leagues - let's say you're working in a 3 or 4 out of 10 standard league but are bringing 6 or 7 out of 10 ideas/tactics/methods/signings/whatever - you'll rip those leagues up, but be found lacking if you then move to an 8 or 9 out of ten league off the back of it.

Is that the case for Ange? Not necessarily, of course it could be that he is the level of manager required to succeed at this level - but there's a huge sliding scale between being good enough to do very well in Scotland/Japan/Australia and being good enough to do well in the PL - and there's a lot of room on that scale below what we need that he could be on.

For sure. Success, even repeated success in smaller leagues does not always translate. In the PL in recent years there's been a really impressive number of really good managers.

But there will be questions like those over almost every manager we could hire. Perhaps bigger questions for Ange than some others in terms of top level experience, but he has perhaps more experience actually winning things.

Time will give the only real answers to these questions. But even then there will be uncertainties. Poch thought that Kane goal saved his job. We all "know" Ferguson could have been sacked early on, perhaps would have been these days at least. Sometimes small margins that go one way or another that can make the difference.

Judging from the outside I think Ange seems like a good fit and a good manager also at this level. If he can go beyond that is an open question imo.

 

[glorygloryeze]

just a thought - how do people compare Ange to Roberto Martinez?

 

[billyiddo]

just a thought - how do people compare Ange to Roberto Martinez?

Not sure why you are picking Martinez as a comparison but I was thinking earlier of making a comparison with AVB - a manager who has had a lot success in other leagues but ultimately couldn't translate that to the PL

 

[FatBloke]

I think you can make bigger strides in weaker leagues with less than what is required to progress/do well in the strong leagues - let's say you're working in a 3 or 4 out of 10 standard league but are bringing 6 or 7 out of 10 ideas/tactics/methods/signings/whatever - you'll rip those leagues up, but be found lacking if you then move to an 8 or 9 out of ten league off the back of it.

Is that the case for Ange? Not necessarily, of course it could be that he is the level of manager required to succeed at this level - but there's a huge sliding scale between being good enough to do very well in Scotland/Japan/Australia and being good enough to do well in the PL - and there's a lot of room on that scale below what we need that he could be on.

This is absolutely my worry. That Angeball is a brilliant system in lesser leagues, but has weaknesses that PL-quality teams can exploit. By that I include the higher quality of player (e.g. able to press more effectively or to break our line with a killer pass), management (e.g. having a team of analysts looking at each game), and data available (e.g. Opta recording ALL THE STATS).

Every time it looks like we've made a step forward, something changes and back we go. Will the eventual ceiling of our system be good enough?

I'm not sure I necessarily buy the comparison with other small-league managers. For every AVB there's a Mourinho, for every Gross a Wenger.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Not sure why you are picking Martinez as a comparison but I was thinking earlier of making a comparison with AVB - a manager who has had a lot success in other leagues but ultimately couldn't translate that to the PL

I chose Martinez because i felt they were seen as having similar tactical approaches.

A comparison with AVB might be apt in that they came from other leagues that could be seen as being at similar levels and from clubs within those leagues that would be seen to similarly dominate it.
However, i think they are the antithesis of each other: AVB being the mirror image of Ange, i.e. he was very defence-first coach

So, how would you compare Ange to Roberto Martinez?