Megson, MacLeish, Calderwood, Atkinson, Houghton, Dour Doug

mao tse tung said:
No, the focus has the be on the league; that is where the bulk of the income comes from.

He can put the stiffs out in the Europa games as far as I am concerned.

But you can guarantee that the opposite will happen.

Its interesting reading what the cognoscenti think about Ange's management.

Some of these people were calling for Nuno to be replaced by Iraola at this time last season; Iraola started his carrer at Bournemouth with 1 win, three draws and 8 defeats in his first 12 games - it took to game 10 to get his first league win - in that period Bournemouth scored 9 and conceded 27.

And that was with a full pre season to fashion his team.

Iraola must be thankful the cognoscenti's wishes did not come true
Click to expand...
Have you looked at the metrics like @Strett has? He reckons they are fantastic and proof that we are going to win the league…
 
LynxRed said:
Iraola was new to the league, figured things out and got better. As I've posted elsewhere, his losses were also to the big 6 plus Brighton. They held Chelsea to a draw and then had two disappointing losses which could have seen him go if it continues, except results turned. So it took him 10 games to find his feet in a new league.

Ange lit the league up, for 10 games. Then crashed, hard. That crash has never improved, never picked up, and actually he's slipped even lower. Consistently, over 66 premier league games he's failed to turn Spurs around from, let's face, the low point he put them in.

So what is it exactly that makes you think Ange can do better here? What makes you think he's the man for the job? That he can deliver wins and consistent results at a team with less resource, less stature, inferior squad, to the one he consistently failed at?

You can be condescending and clever talking about the cognoscenti and whatever else. It isn't a case of having no patience - it's that many of us believe a mistake has been made. If you make a mistake then the quicker you can rectify it the better. Just blithely continuing and trying to pretend the mistake was not a mistake, does not fix the mistake.
Click to expand...

Agree but we've got to give him more time now, too soon to be thinking of getting shot and I'm one of his biggest critics. I'd consider giving him till Nov international break so taking us up to Leeds at home.
 
LynxRed said:
Iraola was new to the league, figured things out and got better. As I've posted elsewhere, his losses were also to the big 6 plus Brighton. They held Chelsea to a draw and then had two disappointing losses which could have seen him go if it continues, except results turned. So it took him 10 games to find his feet in a new league.

Ange lit the league up, for 10 games. Then crashed, hard. That crash has never improved, never picked up, and actually he's slipped even lower. Consistently, over 66 premier league games he's failed to turn Spurs around from, let's face, the low point he put them in.

So what is it exactly that makes you think Ange can do better here? What makes you think he's the man for the job? That he can deliver wins and consistent results at a team with less resource, less stature, inferior squad, to the one he consistently failed at?

You can be condescending and clever talking about the cognoscenti and whatever else. It isn't a case of having no patience - it's that many of us believe a mistake has been made. If you make a mistake then the quicker you can rectify it the better. Just blithely continuing and trying to pretend the mistake was not a mistake, does not fix the mistake.
Click to expand...
He still deserves a solid chance. He had no preseason, which is huge. Ask Nuno.
 
Redchops said:
Agree but we've got to give him more time now, too soon to be thinking of getting shot and I'm one of his biggest critics.
Click to expand...
Whatever we as fans think, EM won’t tolerate us going backwards. If we are midtable and still in Europe come Christmas then Ange will be pretty safe but if not, I am not sure how long EM will stick with him.
 
CornishForest said:
That’s not enough to stop it from happening though?
He may not ‘allow’ it or be able to afford it, doesn’t makes us immune to it.
In fact that level of arrogance towards it makes it more likely in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Its not arrogant

It just can't happen

Consequences are too bad

EM has to make sure it doesn't happen with whatever decisions he makes if faced with no improvement

We arent there yet
 
weejockmcplop said:
He still deserves a solid chance. He had no preseason, which is huge.
Click to expand...

Based on his press conferences with us Ange will have promised immediate results to EM

To land the job

He will have backed himself big time

Meaning he will have less time than normal to deliver for EM i think

Before EM calls BS

Dont forget he promised things would be sorted from swansea onwards
 
weejockmcplop said:
He still deserves a solid chance. He had no preseason, which is huge. Ask Nuno.
Click to expand...
I'm not meaning to be argumentative, I just haven't seen anyone really put together a coherent argument to say WHY he deserves time, other than because he's already been appointed and it's the done thing to give a manager time.

He's got a track record of failure in the premier league - so where in Ange's history is the shining nugget of potential that suggests the fullness of time will bring rewards?
 
LynxRed said:
Iraola was new to the league, figured things out and got better. As I've posted elsewhere, his losses were also to the big 6 plus Brighton. They held Chelsea to a draw and then had two disappointing losses which could have seen him go if it continues, except results turned. So it took him 10 games to find his feet in a new league.

Ange lit the league up, for 10 games. Then crashed, hard. That crash has never improved, never picked up, and actually he's slipped even lower. Consistently, over 66 premier league games he's failed to turn Spurs around from, let's face, the low point he put them in.

So what is it exactly that makes you think Ange can do better here? What makes you think he's the man for the job? That he can deliver wins and consistent results at a team with less resource, less stature, inferior squad, to the one he consistently failed at?

You can be condescending and clever talking about the cognoscenti and whatever else. It isn't a case of having no patience - it's that many of us believe a mistake has been made. If you make a mistake then the quicker you can rectify it the better. Just blithely continuing and trying to pretend the mistake was not a mistake, does not fix the mistake.
Click to expand...
I see the Spurs job as a bit of a poisoned chalice tbh Lynx - like Man Utd lite. They’ve had a succession of top name managers over the last 15-20 years who’ve won precisely nothing.

Yes, Ange’s record there was pretty dismal the first dozen games of his inaugural season aside but he had horrendous injuries to contend with last season and their squad wasn’t and still isn’t that fantastic despite them being part of the lauded ‘Big 6’. To illustrate that, ask yourself how many of the Spurs Squad would you honestly want to play for us - not many. Take out the injured players unavailable to Ange last season and you’d be hard pushed naming one.

I’m reading comments from many Spurs fans who see no discernible improvement on last season with the much heralded Thomas Frank at the helm. Maybe Ange wasn’t the real problem, maybe the Spurs squad just weren’t and aren’t that good???
 
LynxRed said:
I'm not meaning to be argumentative, I just haven't seen anyone really put together a coherent argument to say WHY he deserves time, other than because he's already been appointed and it's the done thing to give a manager time.

He's got a track record of failure in the premier league - so where in Ange's history is the shining nugget of potential that suggests the fullness of time will bring rewards?
Click to expand...
Because it is a total pointless waste of money to hire someone and then fire them before they have had a chance to do their job.

This is not about his history.

If I hired you right now to come and do my taxes and then by the time you had got around to looking at my taxes I had fired you you'd probably think i was a total idiot.
 
weejockmcplop said:
Because it is a total pointless waste of money to hire someone and then fire them before they have had a chance to do their job.

This is not about his history.

If I hired you right now to come and do my taxes and then by the time you had got around to looking at my taxes I had fired you you'd probably think i was a total idiot.
Click to expand...
But if you hired me to do your taxes and saw I'd been making a complete hash of it from the start, would you decided you need to continue my employment and hope I do a better job going forward, or sack my ass and get someone competent?

I know what your saying, but none of that makes Ange the right man for the job. WHY is he the right man for the job? As far as I can tell for posters wanting him given time, it's simply because he's the guy who's got it and sacking him would be embarrasing.
 
LynxRed said:
But if you hired me to do your taxes and saw I'd been making a complete hash of it from the start, would you decided you need to continue my employment and hope I do a better job going forward, or sack my ass and get someone competent?

I know what your saying, but none of that makes Ange the right man for the job. WHY is he the right man for the job? As far as I can tell for posters wanting him given time, it's simply because he's the guy who's got it and sacking him would be embarrasing.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he is necessarily the right man for the job.
I'm just saying we should wait until we know whether he is or not before firing him.

If you're going to fire him after a few games, you may as well just hire the next guy on the basis that as soon as he loses a game he's fired.
 
LynxRed said:
I'm not meaning to be argumentative, I just haven't seen anyone really put together a coherent argument to say WHY he deserves time, other than because he's already been appointed and it's the done thing to give a manager time.

He's got a track record of failure in the premier league - so where in Ange's history is the shining nugget of potential that suggests the fullness of time will bring rewards?
Click to expand...
So do you think he's had enough time and should be gone?
 
JC21 said:
So do you think he's had enough time and should be gone?
Click to expand...
It's a double-edged question really. No, I don't believe Ange has had the time that should be afforded a new manager. If we had appointed Ange straight from Celtic and this was his first rodeo in the PL then I'd be calling for calm, saying give him time too.

However, the crux of my opinion is that he never should have been hired. Based on that opinion, yes I want him gone because I don't believe that whatever time you give him will result in success. If we kept him until Raganarok he wouldn't be succesfull here. It's not a case of giving him enough time, it's a case of the wrong man in the wrong job at the wrong club in the wrong league. He's shown consistently for 2 years he's not cut out for the Premier League. Giving him time just kicks the can down the road, takes us further into the mire, and makes it harder for someone else to get us back out.

I'd invite you to answer the question I posed originally - what is it about Ange that makes you think time will see him make a succesful manager at this club?
 
LynxRed said:
I'm not meaning to be argumentative, I just haven't seen anyone really put together a coherent argument to say WHY he deserves time, other than because he's already been appointed and it's the done thing to give a manager time.

He's got a track record of failure in the premier league - so where in Ange's history is the shining nugget of potential that suggests the fullness of time will bring rewards?
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you've been saying.

The thing that is not being recognised by the ardent Ange supporters is that for those of us who had concerns at his appointment he needs to win us over with results. That hasn't happened yet in the slightest and with every further loss of points it becomes harder for us to agree with those whom seemingly had no concerns at his appointment.

Tonight I am again resetting and fully behind us delivering a result. Something I've done every time since Swansea. If we win great it's hopefully the start of some kind of recovery and building confidence but a loss and (luck or not) it just further cements the concerns. Likewise lose at the weekend following a win tonight would just feel one step forward and two back. He needs a solid run of form just to claim back his starting position for those concerned on day 1.
 
You didn't ask that question; you asked why he should be given time. I have no clue whether he will be successful or not (nobody does). Some managers work when not expected to and fail when they are expected to succeed. He should be "given time" because every manager at every club should be afforded some time. We've had one 'bad' result as we are transitioning from a fucking boring team for 80 minutes out of the 90 to one that wants to play exciting/attacking football.

Arsenal (away) - first game, no time with the team, and don't be surprised if the likes of Liverpool and Man City go there and get beaten 3-0.

Swansea (away) - A game we should've put to bed before half-time with an experimental side. Yeah, you can blame Ange for the team selection, but what we put out should have been enough, barring missed chances. This was always going to be a tricky game in the cup.

Burnley (away) - good point away from home. Again, should have won.

Real Betis (away) - good point away from home in Europe, after 30 years, against a strong side.

Sunderland (home) - Yeah, we expect to win these kinds of games and again should have done. These results happen, though, no 3 points are guaranteed.

Ange certainly wasn't my first choice as manager, but he is our manager and will get my full support until he's had a fair crack at the whip.
 
LynxRed said:
It's a double-edged question really. No, I don't believe Ange has had the time that should be afforded a new manager. If we had appointed Ange straight from Celtic and this was his first rodeo in the PL then I'd be calling for calm, saying give him time too.

However, the crux of my opinion is that he never should have been hired. Based on that opinion, yes I want him gone because I don't believe that whatever time you give him will result in success. If we kept him until Raganarok he wouldn't be succesfull here. It's not a case of giving him enough time, it's a case of the wrong man in the wrong job at the wrong club in the wrong league. He's shown consistently for 2 years he's not cut out for the Premier League. Giving him time just kicks the can down the road, takes us further into the mire, and makes it harder for someone else to get us back out.

I'd invite you to answer the question I posed originally - what is it about Ange that makes you think time will see him make a succesful manager at this club?
Click to expand...
Fair play. If you don't want him near the club, I can respect that. We all know that with that starting point, no argument will suffice.

Marinakis' starting point is different though. He believed Ange to be the best choice when hiring. It'll be interesting to see how much time he will afford Ange.

We might all be surprised.
By how fast a change comes?
By how much time Ange gets?
By the results Ange gets?
By the manager that eventually replaces Ange?

Time will tell.

Up the Reds!
 
JC21 said:
You didn't ask that question; you asked why he should be given time.
Click to expand...
You quoted the post where I asked;
LynxRed said:
He's got a track record of failure in the premier league - so where in Ange's history is the shining nugget of potential that suggests the fullness of time will bring rewards?
Click to expand...
So why do you think giving Ange time will be worthwhile? Either you think doing so will see him be succesful, or you simply feel bad sacking him now and would rather sack him in 3 weeks, 5 weeks, 10 weeks time when it will feel less mean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.