Merse today.
He speaks like even he's confused by what comes out.
He speaks like even he's confused by what comes out.
The Overlap | Ange Postecoglou’s Immediate Reaction to Spurs Sacking Thomas Frank | Stick to Football EP 116
- Thread starter Buchan
- Start date
A little bit but I quite like him. Was a decent enough ep.The guy admits early in the episode his dyslexia means he struggles with words. He admits he took so much drugs his nose was caving in, and then admits he was drinking everyday, including putting vodka in his bottle while managing Walsall. He should be dribbling his words to be fair. But he is likeable and honest, and I chuckled when he was talking about Amorim at the airport.
Seems like he just says whatever comes into his head without even thinking about it most of the time. Sometimes he can be quite funny.
I also like how open he is about his dislike Spurs, there's not many ex pros on football who would just say that outright.
Ange tomorrow
He won't say anything to controversial. Maybe that the club has a loser mentality top/down (that's not controversial), and that will be it.
Surely not, he'll never say that
They're building it up as if Ange had something to do with it. "Next week on X Files ..."
Rolls off the tongue
Could you imagine
Take a shot of jäger everytime he says "mate"
Did he forget he finished 17th with Spurs or something?
Talking about changing the culture and prattling as if he did something miraculous there.
Talking about changing the culture and prattling as if he did something miraculous there.
Roy's "that's his job" shtick is getting a bit old hat by now.
To be fair, he won them a trophy which is pretty big for them. And he is right about them not being a big club. Can't get 5th and then not build on it by being stingy in the transfer market. Their small club mentality was hidden behind Kane and Son.
Also not helped by Levy either
They were never as bad as he had them. If anyone started them on this trajectory, it was him.
Yeah. I think he's a chancer and his inability to be pragmatic can seriously damage a club (which is perhaps highlighted with Spurs and Forest rot this season), but he also made fair points regarding Spurs and how they view themselves. You can't act like you're a big club but then not back it up. To finish 5th and then spend 90m Euros on three unproven teenagers instead of bolstering the squad with players that are ready to go and arguably would have signed for Spurs at that point and helped them compete for CL football (Semenyo, Mbeumo, Guehi etc. that he wanted) is just stupid. We don't hear both sides of the story but I believe him when he says that Spurs told him they wanted him to come in because he played good football because there is no overall plan for the club. There is no synergy between one manager to the next.
Harry Kane masked a lot towards the end and then less Son otherwise what would they have
That's not being stingy though.
It's not great transfer business, sure, but he basically said it himself there that the top players simply didn't want to join them because, despite all their posturing, Spurs aren't a top club.
They finished 5th and dropped £130 million on Solanke, Gray and Odobert (and more on others).
He's writing off half of that as "for the future" because he had a shite season and lost his job, and also ignoring that they went fairly big the season before, with the Kulusevski and Porro loans becoming permanent, alongside the signings of Vicario, Maddison, van de Ven, Johnson and Dragusin, and the loan of Werner.
Not saying it's stingy, but stupid and not big club mentality despite their posturing. They could have invested that 90m Euros spent on Gray, Odobert and Bergvall on players that were ready there and then to help them take the next step. He should have done better but I'm viewing his point more in the wider view that Spurs posture about being a big club but they aren't. They sell big players, they don't buy them. They're a London based club and have money. They could buy big players if they change their model slightly but they seemingly don't want to. You won't get every top player but if you wangle enough money at some you'll get them. I think they were in a position after finishing 5th to get Mbeumo, Semenyo or Guehi at that point if they really wanted to.
Well they would have a relegation battle without them apparently.
Would they be in a relegation battle with Kane and Son in their prime? No way. Kane even with an average team around him is worth 15-20 goals a season, an actual competent team 20-30. And they replaced Son with Gil and Odobert, which is laughable, they have already sold Gil, Odobert is ok sure, not on Sons level though.
I'm slightly suspicious that those 3 names were thrown out. Not saying he's talking bollocks but they're all very much on the signings of the season list. Semenyo certainly wasn't the player he is now back then and I don't remember much hype about Guehi either. Mbeumo was definitely looking like a player though.
Guehi had just played at the WC and was definitely on the radar for PL clubs. Palace also rejected a 70m bid for him from Spurs in the 24/25 Jan window so they probably could have tried to move for him in the earlier summer window. Semenyo scored 8 in the league in 23/24 which is only 3 less than he managed in 24/25.
I think Spurs thought they'd get away with signing the teenagers because they think they'd done well with Ange with the squad they had.
Won the Europa.
The Europa is ass. The PL money disparity is ridiculous now and that showed by having such poor two teams in the final.
He was awful in the league bar his first 10 games. A long period of absolute garbage which did more than anything to instill a losing culture.
17th is embarrassing for Spurs.
Last edited:
Watched it, he doesn't hold back but he's also in major self defence mode. It's only a 15-minute section on Spurs, the rest of his interview is next week.
I'm not having that with Semenyo. He had potential sure but many were doubting if he could step up and move to a bigger club. He was criticised quite heavily for being greedy and wasteful with his finishing.
He really put in work last summer though and it immediately showed when he looked like a different player from the start of this season and caught the attention of all of the top 6.
Last edited:
I don't think he's outright lying. I just think he's selectively presenting stuff to mask the obvious issue that was his suicidal tactics.
I also don't really buy that they deliberately avoided pursuing a quality player to instead spend the exact same amount on three, unproven youngsters. They simply aren't an attractive prospect for players wanting to make a "step up" as they're basically a sideways move. Newcastle are facing the same problem now.
Fair enough. Some of it may be with hindsight but we have seen it before where players have one good season and then snapped up. Semenyo might not have become the player he is if he moves to Spurs but I think have have been on their radar along with Nero and Mbeumo so don't necessarily think he's lying.
I disagree. I think at that point if the money was right - Mbeumo, Semenyo and Guehi would have all considered moving to Spurs. Guehi probably would have went to Newcastle if they were able to agree a fee with Palace.
Spurs aren't a big club but they have/had more draw than Bournemouth, Brentford and Palace at that point.
The point though is that Spurs could have signed better and more ready players than those teenagers. They chose not to and it was poor decision making on the recruitment side. Is it overall to blame for how shite they were and how Ange can't be pragmatic? No, but I think it would have dug them out more in games.
Both he and club are to blame for last season and for how Spurs are.
But do they have more draw for players already at, and key to Bournemouth, Brentford and Palace?
It's all well and good saying "if the money was right" but as I said, Newcastle are facing similar problems. Spurs (and Newcastle) can't go particularly big on wages, even if they can on the odd fee, and players at established PL sides are typically not that interested in moving unless it's to make the step up to an established CL-level side.
You can argue United (and maybe Chelsea) are an exception there, but they can go big on wages, if needed.
Saying "we needed better" players is a nothing argument. Any manager that's ever been sacked can say that, even if the club's transfer strategy could have been better. Ultimately, they've got to make do with what they've got.
Yes. They signed Solanke in the same window from Bournemouth. They signed Richarlison from us and we are/were of a similar level to those clubs. They do it plenty.
I think Spurs can squeeze more out for wages, they just choose not to.
He is a remnant from a bygone age, the only thing worth listening to him from is his blunt takes on personal issues elite mentality and or character. Everything else he has about as relevant knowledge on as humpty dumpty.
Thanks mate, I'm dead.
They weren't necessarily stingy, should have done better in the market, but they still should not have been finishing 17th. I hate that Europa League final, because it paints me out as a biased United fan that their win came against the most cowardly Manchester United performance I had ever seen in a cup final. I think they lose to pretty much anyone else if they had played like that.
The Kane and Son points are cop outs. Because it was impossible to replace them. And Spurs selling big and signing young players is nothing new. It's been their sustainable model since before Bale and Modric. Sign young talent, coupled with academy, let them become stars, sell to bigger teams. Holding onto Harry Kane for a bit longer doesn't change that. They've always been this club. They will always be this club.
It still doesn't change the fact that Ange played an incredibly suicidal brand of football that never was gonna work. Something like 10 out of 11 of Spurs' wins were high scoring results. The majority of his losses were shipping more than 2 goals. Everybody could see how insane the brand of football was.
I get managers have to do a bit of damage control for their reputations, but he's tried to make it out as if was some major difference maker in Spurs' fortunes.
I'm not saying it never happens. I'm saying a lot of players are very happy to stay where they are and hope for a move to one of Arsenal, City, Liverpool, United or Chelsea because CL football once every two or three seasons and a slightly improved chance at winning a cup isn't really enough to lure them over.
To look at your examples, firstly, they were signed two seasons apart, so it's hardly "plenty". Secondly, Solanke had already been at Chelsea and Liverpool, and Richarlison was never attracting interest (at least not serious) from any of those clubs, and was also signed from you while you were in your "desperately trying not to get relegated" phase. These weren't players really on the radar of any of the actual top sides.
I also think we're moving to an entirely different discussion about how Spurs operate. They could be more ambitious and take more risks with transfers, but they choose not to, presumably because the risks of it not paying off are them being hit with serious financial restraints and possible points deductions.
Only six teams scored more than them in the league last season (Liverpool, Arsenal, City, Newcastle, Brighton and Brentford - Chelsea scored the same). Only four teams conceded more (Southampton, Ipswich, Leicester and Wolves).
Of their 11 league wins, nine saw them score three or more. However, they lost 22 matches.