Welcome Ange: To Dare is to Didgeridoo

[Muttley]

It's strange you say that, I find him to be arrogant and thoroughly unlikeable

As I said, it was an earlier argument. As others have mentioned, since this pressure has built he has been very gnarly with people. I said from the beginning I was interested in a football conversation, not a life coach and philosophy conversation. When he is asked football questions, he can be quite rude back.

 

[thfcsteff]

I think the club have been very fair with Ange. The hiring and firing question really comes down to questions like these:

1) Do the club feel that the squad will always be under a continuous state of injuries under Ange due to his methodologies?

Well, they are currently looking for new strength and conditioning plus rehab staff, so I'd assume they believe it is not all down to that at all.

2) Will Ange's tactics bring consistency on the pitch and eventually bring CL football and other trophies? Would Ange's tactics work even with a fully fit squad and more transfers?

I am beginning to seriously question whether they care about trophies. After two-plus decades, I think that's fair. I do think he could bring us CL football, in which case we are back in 'free card' land a la Poch. Let's hope iof this scenario plays out, they actually recognise the full scope of such achievements.

3) Is Ange adapting his management quick enough from his prior experiences to what is required in the PL?

A really valid question. I think he could really, really do with some work on the media side of things holistically. he's good value when things are good, but he should learn some more skills to deal with the tough times. It's a big ask as he is who he is, but boy, would it help his cause!

4) Is Ange capable of participating and leading some areas of the huge cultural shift required within the club.

I think he has already done some of that. Again, a good question as there's lots of angles to consider.

I can see why an earlier argument would have been about him playing good football and being so much nicer than the prior incumbents. For some, that was a reason not to fire the gun. What we needed was 2-3 years of consistency with the manager. Perhaps that is a factor.

This is at the crux of everything IMO. Do we believe that if we ride this out and accept a bricky season with some enormous contextual caveats that Ange is the man to continue the job? Personally, if they do not/did not, I think that decision should've been made before Xmas and his replacement already be here - providing we are going to continue with the philosophy we are trying to bed in with regards to style and culture. That they didn't suggest one of three things. Either they are using him to get to the next stage (summer) when the next one comes in to continue the build/philosophy. They will brick the bed and make a panic move in the coming weeks. Or they really do believe in him with all the information at their finger tips...oh, one more. Whenever Daniel's feet get too warm, when the fire is too close to him, then rest-assured something will change.

When I look at my own questions, I have huge concerns about Ange and 1. No smoke without fire there. No individual injury is down to the manager but there have been so many red zone injuries. I could also deep dive 2 and 3 and it wouldn't be that favourable for Ange on the defensive side. The goals for column is massively encouraging though. As for 4, I think this is where he is perhaps strongest. To me, he does talk absolute nonsense at times, but if I can even remember being in that 18-25 age range I'm sure I would see it differently and believe.

I think they are all really rational and valid concerns that truthfully we'll all be mulling over.

I do think he can save his job in the next couple of weeks, but that would mean punting some underlying faults with the guy down the road.

I think he also needs some luck. We really haven't had much.

 

[braineclipse]

Moyes would take all of those players into his squad I'm sure. However the likes of Pickford, Braithwaite, Tarkowski, Gueye, Calvert-Lewin, Mangala and Mykolenko would all likely have started for us yesterday.

Was Spence a better left back yesterday than Mykolenko? I don't think he was no. I think Spence would've been a better right back than O'Brien but we're forced into playing a really fatigued Porro on the right because we don't have anyone capable of playing in a similar way to Udogie on the left other than Spence (who is limited by being right footed).

Kulusevski - yes he would've started for Everton yesterday, though I'm not sure if you've noticed how he can now barely run due to playing so many minutes this season.

Maddison or Doucoure? Maddison.

The back-up GK? Lol, there is no way any manager in the premier league would pick him over Pickford.

The key for me is that pretty much throughout the spine of the two teams yesterday (where games tend to be won and lost) you'd typically be picking the players Everton had out over the ones that Spurs were playing. Ignore the future and how 'promising' players are just consider the here and now. We do not have a particularly impressive bunch to choose from right now and that is compounded by an incredible amount of fatigue in some of our experienced players.

I pretty much agree. Think discussions can be had on individual players and overall if we had the better players out there or not. But the main point is that because of injuries and fatigue this wasn't a team we should expect to just go out and beat Everton.

Ange also got it wrong imo in that first half.

 

[thfcsteff]

I agree that it's a difficult situation. By now Levy would have realised that Ange is totally useless, however he would struggle to find a decent manager that would join us, and he surely remembers the flack he got when he sacked Jose before a cup final. I therefore suspect he is safe until Liverpool trounce us in a few weeks.

I have to say, despite us disagreeing on the route, I think we're both ending up in the proverbial 'Saudi Sportswashing Machine' if you will (i.e. the destination seems increasingly inevitable whatever the methods or reasons. If he sacks him, does he also sack the people who brought him here and find replacements for them too?

 

[braineclipse]

Either that or he'll wring him dry and stumble to a bottom half finish, and when he sacks him, say they did all they could to let him work through it. Levy's in a relative win win right now; if Ange turns it around, Daniel stuck by him. If Ange largely fails, Daniel gave him every chance. I am not saying he planned it this way, however the cards have fallen that way..:

If Levy's main concern is how he looks if/when he sacks Ange he's in a bit of a win win.

I doubt that's his main concern and he's actually in a pretty difficult situation here with imo no obvious right solution other than trusting Lange and Munn.

 

[Muttley]

I think he also needs some luck. We really haven't had much.

lol - I'm a golfer. You make your own luck apparently. If your drive hits a branch and gets dragged into the trees it's because you're not good enough to hit the outer part of the branch where it bounces it back out onto the fairway.

 

[thfcsteff]

If Levy's main concern is how he looks if/when he sacks Ange he's in a bit of a win win.

I doubt that's his main concern and he's actually in a pretty difficult situation here with imo no obvious right solution other than trusting Lange and Munn.

I agree it is a difficult situation in one sense, unless everyone involved knew that Munn and Lange would supply a layer or two of protection from any issues with the plan. Of course, it is getting hard to have conversations about Ange without questioning Lange and Munn. They would certainly be part of the discussion. You theoretically cannot sack both of them as it would be a disaster -besides they are meant to be the continuity with the coach replaceable, however we'd have to ask questions about their judgement surely?

 

[braineclipse]

I dont know. Nobody does. I was nervous at the time, in fact my personal theory back then was that he felt under-pressure and so jumped on any good news he could get. But yes, nobody knows.

I think he's been feeling the pressure for quite a while and probably also back then.

If that influenced his decisions then is difficult to say, but maybe.

I think it is influencing his decisions now and has been for a while. He hasn't had a lot of options to rotate, but he's had options he hasn't used that may have helped with the fatigue even if for any one individual game it would have left us somewhat worse off because of that rotation.

It's all looking a bit desperate and short term focused to me.

I think he can get through this, but probably needs a bit of luck short term, with results, with not getting more new injuries and with players returning actually staying fit and returning to good form quickly. And a bit of help in the transfer market.

 

[Muttley]

I agree it is a difficult situation in one sense, unless everyone involved knew that Munn and Lange would supply a layer or two of protection from any issues with the plan. Of course, it is getting hard to have conversations about Ange without questioning Lange and Munn. They would certainly be part of the discussion. You theoretically cannot sack both of them as it would be a disaster -besides they are meant to be the continuity with the coach replaceable, however we'd have to ask questions about their judgement surely?

Not sure I'm with you in putting Munn and Lange as 2-in-a-box.

Munn is the chief football officer and runs the show. Ange and Lange report to him. (my understanding)

Does Lange's role as Technical Director have any remit over Ange? I don't believe so. They are peers. Lange could be feeling his own pressure though because of this transfer window. That is surely how he comes into the equation.

I think it is risky believing Lange is culpable for Ange's failures, other than when they relate to transfers and squad development. Munn is the guy running football operations.

 

[braineclipse]

I agree it is a difficult situation in one sense, unless everyone involved knew that Munn and Lange would supply a layer or two of protection from any issues with the plan. Of course, it is getting hard to have conversations about Ange without questioning Lange and Munn. They would certainly be part of the discussion. You theoretically cannot sack both of them as it would be a disaster -besides they are meant to be the continuity with the coach replaceable, however we'd have to ask questions about their judgement surely?

I'm not sure you have to question their judgement, but you can of course.

I like the overall plan for squad building and development. I like the transfer business. I like the overall attacking philosophy. I would be asking questions about judgement if we sacked Ange and replaced him with a more defensive manager.

Going long term with squad building imo was the right decision. It came with a significant short term risk, that seems to be factored in giving Ange time in a period of struggle other managers haven't gotten. Again imo solid decision making.

But sometimes managers get into situations they're not the right person to get the team out of. For several reasons.

That's the question for me. Can he get us out of this or not. I'm still on the let's see side, but there is a breaking point somewhere.

 

[thfcsteff]

I think he's been feeling the pressure for quite a while and probably also back then.

If that influenced his decisions then is difficult to say, but maybe.

I think it is influencing his decisions now and has been for a while. He hasn't had a lot of options to rotate, but he's had options he hasn't used that may have helped with the fatigue even if for any one individual game it would have left us somewhat worse off because of that rotation.

It's all looking a bit desperate and short term focused to me.

I think he can get through this, but probably needs a bit of luck short term, with results, with not getting more new injuries and with players returning actually staying fit and returning to good form quickly. And a bit of help in the transfer market.

Oh for sure. At the time I felt his immediate 'group' needed to show him more public support in the face of increasing narratives. I think the rotation/lack of is a bit of a red herring personally which doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. The Spence situation is the main one I think he could answer to, albeit Spence was also injured for a while.

I sadly think he's done. Circumstances appear to be mounting, and if the likes of Maddison and Sonny cannot step up and actually lead on and off the pitch, then he is in even deeper trouble. If he survives this and, indeed, prospers, it will be miraculous IMO. The signs are on the wall, and it's a bit like a crime scene where they have to use blu light to see the blood stains :-(

 

[thfcsteff]

I'm not sure you have to question their judgement, but you can of course.

I like the overall plan for squad building and development. I like the transfer business. I like the overall attacking philosophy. I would be asking questions about judgement if we sacked Ange and replaced him with a more defensive manager.

Going long term with squad building imo was the right decision. It came with a significant short term risk, that seems to be factored in giving Ange time in a period of struggle other managers haven't gotten. Again imo solid decision making.

But sometimes managers get into situations they're not the right person to get the team out of. For several reasons.

That's the question for me. Can he get us out of this or not. I'm still on the let's see side, but there is a breaking point somewhere.

I think you make some excellent points here. Well worth considering.

 

[thfcsteff]

Not sure I'm with you in putting Munn and Lange as 2-in-a-box.

Munn is the chief football officer and runs the show. Ange and Lange report to him. (my understanding)

Does Lange's role as Technical Director have any remit over Ange? I don't believe so. They are peers. Lange could be feeling his own pressure though because of this transfer window. That is surely how he comes into the equation.

I think it is risky believing Lange is culpable for Ange's failures, other than when they relate to transfers and squad development. Munn is the guy running football operations.

No, you're right, but Munn would've hired Lange no? And Lange is the one who was integral to the transfer work we did in the summer, both outs and ins? And anything we have been trying to do now? I think it would be fair to question both, however the truth is Munn is going nowhere (and probably shouldn't). Same with Lange. If we're going to see if this system works, then we at least need recruitment continuity, and I suppose we have to give Lange credit for Gray, Bergvall, and Kinsky.

 

[braineclipse]

Oh for sure. At the time I felt his immediate 'group' needed to show him more public support in the face of increasing narratives. I think the rotation/lack of is a bit of a red herring personally which doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. The Spence situation is the main one I think he could answer to, albeit Spence was also injured for a while.

I sadly think he's done. Circumstances appear to be mounting, and if the likes of Maddison and Sonny cannot step up and actually lead on and off the pitch, then he is in even deeper trouble. If he survives this and, indeed, prospers, it will be miraculous IMO. The signs are on the wall, and it's a bit like a crime scene where they have to use blu light to see the blood stains :-(

We're seeing him still here, despite our struggles and frustrations only continuing and escalating. Whatever wasn't said in public back then probably was said behind closed doors. If he is close to being sacked now he clearly wasn't then.

I don't think he felt the pressure then because he didn't have the backing or public backing of people higher up. I think he felt the pressure because we weren't getting good enough results and performances and he's a professional football manager so he feels that pressure, from himself more than anyone. I don't think a public backing would have changed that.

Not really thinking about Spence. I'm thinking of Werner, Lankshear, Reguilon for example. Probably inferior players. But Werner isn't that much worse than exhausted Son. Reguilon isn't that much worse than exhausted Porro (with Spence/Gray as the RB).

Short term rotation like that probably decreases the chance of a result in the games you rotate in. But over time not rotating and exhausting players decreases the chances of results as much, or more. Imo.

I don't think he's done yet. But he could be in the coming weeks. I don't think it requires a miracle, but probably requires a fair bit of luck.

 

[billyiddo]

I don't know what public backing is expected but recognised club mouth pieces have repeatedly put out the line that the club is backing Ange.

 

[thfcsteff]

We're seeing him still here, despite our struggles and frustrations only continuing and escalating. Whatever wasn't said in public back then probably was said behind closed doors. If he is close to being sacked now he clearly wasn't then.

I don't think he felt the pressure then because he didn't have the backing or public backing of people higher up. I think he felt the pressure because we weren't getting good enough results and performances and he's a professional football manager so he feels that pressure, from himself more than anyone. I don't think a public backing would have changed that.

Not really thinking about Spence. I'm thinking of Werner, Lankshear, Reguilon for example. Probably inferior players. But Werner isn't that much worse than exhausted Son. Reguilon isn't that much worse than exhausted Porro (with Spence/Gray as the RB).

Short term rotation like that probably decreases the chance of a result in the games you rotate in. But over time not rotating and exhausting players decreases the chances of results as much, or more. Imo.

I don't think he's done yet. But he could be in the coming weeks. I don't think it requires a miracle, but probably requires a fair bit of luck.

In fairness, the reason I think he is done are as much some of his recent actions as circumstances and so on. The somewhat baffling and ludicrous formation change for that first-half was a worrying sign. @Bedfordspurs called it right for me, it's a sign that he is in tailspin. I look at him, the players around him -especially the seniors- and I really am not convinced he can generate the necessary traction to get us out of where we are. The discussion as to how we got here is (as we're witnessing) getting both fraught and divisive. I think the truth lies somewhere between all our opinions. But for me, this present vortex requires an incredible personality and buy -in from tired players, and honestly, I just don't see where he can pull it from as his tank seems pretty empty.

 

[thfcsteff]

I don't know what public backing is expected but recognised club mouth pieces have repeatedly put out the line that the club is backing Ange.

They have. It's intriguing. I am not sure what that backing actually means though. I am sure we will all find out soon enough.

 

[Legohamster]

First real leak about same of the players being unhappy with training

https://twitter.com/x/status/1881545755711947170

 

[LutonSpurs]

I'm assuming the dislike of his perceived arrogance is driven by people thinking he has not earned that right. An interesting but subjective argument. He may not have earned it. Fine. Doesn't matter. Is it a flaw to have a stubborn idealist in post? Some would say that is what we wanted after we failed with 3 pragmatists in a row. Ange doesn't budge. He bites a bit with the media (Good).

The issue is really whether his method (or lack of beyond attack with 8 players) works for the PL with the squad we have. Right now. Clearly not.

Can the club see it being sustainable or do they need to revisit strategy?

But I don't think his personality is a problem personally.

 

[glasgowspur]

This is at the crux of everything IMO. Do we believe that if we ride this out and accept a bricky season with some enormous contextual caveats that Ange is the man to continue the job? Personally, if they do not/did not, I think that decision should've been made before Xmas and his replacement already be here - providing we are going to continue with the philosophy we are trying to bed in with regards to style and culture. That they didn't suggest one of three things. Either they are using him to get to the next stage (summer) when the next one comes in to continue the build/philosophy. They will brick the bed and make a panic move in the coming weeks. Or they really do believe in him with all the information at their finger tips...oh, one more. Whenever Daniel's feet get too warm, when the fire is too close to him, then rest-assured something will change.

I've lifted this bit Steff,
Could it be that by sticking with ange in circumstances that the club have helped to create we are sending a message to the next prospective manager.
We've needed a rebuild since our season at Wembley, not everyone is admitting but everybody knows it.
Except for the odd highlight here and there we've been in a slide since then.
That's on the club, as is our transfer policy.
When DL hired ange the message was that that had to stop, we had to return to our DNA and be patient in doing so.
Sacking a manager 18 months into a project isn't being patient, it's not going to encourage the next manager to sign on the line.
Just like nuno I'm not convinced ange was first choice, did we come to the conclusion that actions are going to speak louder than words.
Whoever we brought in had to be seen to be given every chance.
That statement becomes empty words.
If we wait to the end of season and part ways "in mutual agreement" it's a much better optic.