The Overlap | Ange Postecoglou’s Immediate Reaction to Spurs Sacking Thomas Frank | Stick to Football EP 116

Alex99 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Your point was this (But do they have more draw for players already at, and key to Bournemouth, Brentford and Palace?) - Bissouma, Richarlison, Johnson, Solanke, Kudus, Maddison.

I think that's a pretty conclusive yes. All were key players for the clubs they left and of arguable similar level. Leicester admittedly had a catastrophic season to go down when they signed Maddison but that can happen to those types of clubs.

Again, the point is could they have signed better and more ready players than Gray/Bergvall/Odobert to take the step from 5th to CL football. I'd be surprised if many, if any, people would argue no.

He was shit at the end for Spurs but he can be shit and still be right about how Spurs will be stuck in this cycle until they change something as a club.
 
Last edited:
Maluco said:
They were never as bad as he had them. If anyone started them on this trajectory, it was him.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't go as far as that. If you go into a shop and given just a pound, you can't expect a top class dinner. They being stingy with transfers forces you to either depend on scouts to source under the radar talent, or buy at best average players.

Spurs have plenty of players that have energy, but they lack a technical side to football. You look at their midfield against Newcastle, their only creative player is Simons who played left wing. Their midfield are full of work horses with no technical ability. Their RW isn't really setting the world alight. Pedro Porro is injured and next in line is Archie Gray???

In the summer of when he got sacked, Ange signed Solanke (over paid but he came off the back of a strong season), Archie Gray at 18, Wilson Odobert at 19, Lucas Bergvall at 18, a goalkeeper at 21.
Then January, Tel at 19, some Korean lad at 18.

That doesn't look a team trying to build on 5th place after losing the best the striker in the league after Harry Kane left.

Arrivals: *in Euros

Solanke - 64.3
Gray - 41.25
Odobert - 29.3
Bergvall - 20
Kinksy - 16.5
Tel (Loan fee) - 10
Yang - 4

Total: 185mill (approximately £155-160 million back in 2024)

What that tells me is, they preferred to sign young talent who aren't ready, who will be on low wages and run it back with the same squad as last year. Their star player was 32 in Son. With Solanke, Richarlison and Timo Werner, 2 out of the 3 are woeful in terms of finishing on a consistent basis. Where were the goals going to come?

Injuries decimated that squad last year, Romero, Richarlson, Micky Van De Ven and James Madison were out for lengthy periods. Your two best center backs missing for a chunk of the season, how do you stop the leak?

Madison missed 11 premier league games alone, excluding all other competitions. Their best creative player. 41 injuries hit Spurs last season. 2nd worst club for injures.

So when you look at the money spent, yeah you could accuse him of wasting the money, but I feel he wasn't the one behind the thoughts of who to sign. It seemed like the board wanted to buy for the future without improving the squad or its depth. I think Ange gets unfair criticism too much. At it was clear as day he went all out for the Europa League as a last roll of the dice. His squad was battered by trying to get results in the league all season. The board got away with minimal blame.
 
Keano can't accept that it's possible to have a decent draw away at an in form Premier League side but is happy to sit and listen to someone talking about what a good job they did when they finished 17th. Because they "weren't in a relegation battle".

Not a peep, odd that
 
So basically all he said was.

"I won a trophy, they wouldn't spend money what more do you expect from me, it's just Spursy mate"
 
SilentWitness said:
Your point was this (But do they have more draw for players already at, and key to Bournemouth, Brentford and Palace?) - Bissouma, Richarlison, Johnson, Solanke, Kudus, Maddison.

I think that's a pretty conclusive yes. All were key players for the clubs they left and of arguable similar level. Leicester admittedly had a catastrophic season to go down when they signed Maddison but that can happen to those types of clubs.

Again, the point is could they have signed better and more ready players than Gray/Bergvall/Odobert to take the step from 5th to CL football. I'd be surprised if many, if any, people would argue no.
Click to expand...

Leicester were literally relegated, and West Ham, Everton and Forest were what I would describe as "relegation-adjacent" when those players left, and literally no one gave a shite about Bissouma or Solanke (the latter of which, as discussed, had already had a shot at both Chelsea and Liverpool).

You are really stretching it to compare signing those players to potentially signing Mbeumo, Gehui and Semenyo, who were all, as evidenced, on the radars of the actual top clubs.

I've also not disputed that they could have done better with the money available. I'm just casting doubt on the idea that they'd have had a free run at the players mentioned. Literally the only way any were going there is if Spurs immediately went in with a daft bid of £80 million +, because anything semi-sensible pricks the ears of the actual top clubs.

My main point was also that it's a distraction from the big problem, which was Ange's tactics. As mentioned in another comment, they were 7th top scorers but 5th for goals conceded. They lost twice as many matches as they won. Saying "we spent £40 million on Archie Gray" doesn't really explain or excuse that level of failure.
 
Alex99 said:
Leicester were literally relegated, and West Ham, Everton and Forest were what I would describe as "relegation-adjacent" when those players left, and literally no one gave a shite about Bissouma or Solanke (the latter of which, as discussed, had already had a shot at both Chelsea and Liverpool).

You are really stretching it to compare signing those players to potentially signing Mbeumo, Gehui and Semenyo, who were all, as evidenced, on the radars of the actual top clubs.

I've also not disputed that they could have done better with the money available. I'm just casting doubt on the idea that they'd have had a free run at the players mentioned. Literally the only way any were going there is if Spurs immediately went in with a daft bid of £80 million +, because anything semi-sensible pricks the ears of the actual top clubs.

My main point was also that it's a distraction from the big problem, which was Ange's tactics. As mentioned in another comment, they were 7th top scorers but 5th for goals conceded. They lost twice as many matches as they won. Saying "we spent £40 million on Archie Gray" doesn't really explain or excuse that level of failure.
Click to expand...
I'm not stretching anything. I'm framing it in the context of what you said. Key players for clubs of that ilk.
 
SilentWitness said:
I'm not stretching anything. I'm framing it in the context of what you said. Key players for clubs of that ilk.
Click to expand...

Are a host of relegation threatened clubs (or indeed, a club that literally got relegated) "established PL sides"? Or is it a bit more understandable when a player might seek a move from one of them, given their position in the league is a lot closer to "precarious" than it is to "established"?

Never mind stretching, it is outright false to describe Leicester as one of those sides. A West Ham side that was 17th with three games left (and is currently 18th) is a stretch. Same goes for a newly promoted Forest that only escaped the relegation zone with three games left. Same goes for an Everton side that was in the relegation zone with five games left.

Again, no one cared about Bissouma. You are also absolutely stretching it to describe him as "key" when he'd been playing alongside Mac Allister and Caicedo in his final year at Brighton. He barely stood out from Gross. Again, no one but Spurs was in for Solanke (at least not at £65 million).

Again, I'm not saying they can't and don't sign players from those clubs. I'm saying they're always getting the ones that United/City/Liverpool/Chelsea/Arsenal aren't interested in, which says a lot.

Spurs' problem is simply that top players don't want to go there. The fact you're using Brennan Johnson as an example of such a player, when he's already been fecked off to Palace, says it all.
 
Alex99 said:
Are a host of relegation threatened clubs (or indeed, a club that literally got relegated) "established PL sides"? Or is it a bit more understandable when a player might seek a move from one of them, given their position in the league is a lot closer to "precarious" than it is to "established"?

Never mind stretching, it is outright false to describe Leicester as one of those sides. A West Ham side that was 17th with three games left (and is currently 18th) is a stretch. Same goes for a newly promoted Forest that only escaped the relegation zone with three games left. Same goes for an Everton side that was in the relegation zone with five games left.

Again, no one cared about Bissouma. You are also absolutely stretching it to describe him as "key" when he'd been playing alongside Mac Allister and Caicedo in his final year at Brighton. He barely stood out from Gross. Again, no one but Spurs was in for Solanke (at least not at £65 million).

Again, I'm not saying they can't and don't sign players from those clubs. I'm saying they're always getting the ones that United/City/Liverpool/Chelsea/Arsenal aren't interested in, which says a lot.

Spurs' problem is simply that top players don't want to go there. The fact you're using Brennan Johnson as an example of such a player, when he's already been fecked off to Palace, says it all.
Click to expand...
I was just responding to the point that you made. I disagree with it. I think clubs like Leicester/West Ham/Everton/Brentford/Bournemouth/Brighton/Forest/Palace are fairly similar, yes. In a really good year they can end up finishing in Europe and in a really bad year they can be fighting relegation or in the case of Leicester, get relegated. They are all pretty up and down in that sense as clubs.

Bissouma had interest from Liverpool/Arsenal while at Brighton. Richarlison/Kudus had interest from Chelsea and Newcastle.

I'm not using Johnson as an example of a top player. I'm using him as an example for a key player for his club - "But do they have more draw for players already at, and key to Bournemouth, Brentford and Palace?" - in relation to this point you made which I've stated several times now as it is my opinion that Forest are of a similar level as a club to the ones which were stated.

I think Ange was crap at the end and finishing that low with Spurs is embarassing, but could the club have done more and are they capable of attracting better players than they signed that summer? Definitely.
 
Last edited:
SungSam7 said:
I wouldn't go as far as that. If you go into a shop and given just a pound, you can't expect a top class dinner. They being stingy with transfers forces you to either depend on scouts to source under the radar talent, or buy at best average players.

Spurs have plenty of players that have energy, but they lack a technical side to football. You look at their midfield against Newcastle, their only creative player is Simons who played left wing. Their midfield are full of work horses with no technical ability. Their RW isn't really setting the world alight. Pedro Porro is injured and next in line is Archie Gray???

In the summer of when he got sacked, Ange signed Solanke (over paid but he came off the back of a strong season), Archie Gray at 18, Wilson Odobert at 19, Lucas Bergvall at 18, a goalkeeper at 21.
Then January, Tel at 19, some Korean lad at 18.

That doesn't look a team trying to build on 5th place after losing the best the striker in the league after Harry Kane left.

Arrivals: *in Euros

Solanke - 64.3
Gray - 41.25
Odobert - 29.3
Bergvall - 20
Kinksy - 16.5
Tel (Loan fee) - 10
Yang - 4

Total: 185mill (approximately £155-160 million back in 2024)

What that tells me is, they preferred to sign young talent who aren't ready, who will be on low wages and run it back with the same squad as last year. Their star player was 32 in Son. With Solanke, Richarlison and Timo Werner, 2 out of the 3 are woeful in terms of finishing on a consistent basis. Where were the goals going to come?

Injuries decimated that squad last year, Romero, Richarlson, Micky Van De Ven and James Madison were out for lengthy periods. Your two best center backs missing for a chunk of the season, how do you stop the leak?

Madison missed 11 premier league games alone, excluding all other competitions. Their best creative player. 41 injuries hit Spurs last season. 2nd worst club for injures.

So when you look at the money spent, yeah you could accuse him of wasting the money, but I feel he wasn't the one behind the thoughts of who to sign. It seemed like the board wanted to buy for the future without improving the squad or its depth. I think Ange gets unfair criticism too much. At it was clear as day he went all out for the Europa League as a last roll of the dice. His squad was battered by trying to get results in the league all season. The board got away with minimal blame.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is a good post and I understand what you are saying, but there is still quality and potential there. That season is the worst points per game return that Spurs have ever recorded in the top flight…as a club. Not just PL, in their entire history.

You can talk about injuries and focusing on the Europa, but it is well beyond the realms of that. Literally, an unprecedented low.
 
SilentWitness said:
I was just responding to the point that you made.
Click to expand...

But you didn't. You responded to points I'd not actually made with the points you wanted to make by twisting and stretching arguments.

You ignored the word "typically" to make out that I'd said they never sign key players from established clubs (and even then, only served up Solanke as an example), tried to include clubs with precarious futures in the league (and one that was literally relegated) under the umbrella of "established PL clubs", and tried to include dross like Johnson as an example of Spurs' ability to sign "top" players.

More importantly, you've also got stuck on this "Spurs can't sign top players" thing when I've repeatedly said that my main point was that the transfer-talk serves as nothing more than a convenient distraction for Ange from his terrible tactics and win-loss record.

I don't even think we disagree with the general point that £70+ million on Gray, Odobert and Bergvall could have been better spent. I just think you've gone way off on a tangent trying to argue that Spurs are a more attractive prospect than they clearly, actually are, and completely forgotten about the original point in the process.

Chiefly, that splashing the cash on one good player (that may not have wanted to join them anyway, because they're Spurs), or even simply three better players, probably wouldn't have made a significant difference to their season. They didn't have trouble scoring goals, and the reason they couldn't keep them out was almost entirely down to their tactics. Again, the transfer-talk is just a distraction from Ange's tactics and record.
 
Alex99 said:
But you didn't. You responded to points I'd not actually made with the points you wanted to make by twisting and stretching arguments.

You ignored the word "typically" to make out that I'd said they never sign key players from established clubs (and even then, only served up Solanke as an example), tried to include clubs with precarious futures in the league (and one that was literally relegated) under the umbrella of "established PL clubs", and tried to include dross like Johnson as an example of Spurs' ability to sign "top" players.

More importantly, you've also got stuck on this "Spurs can't sign top players" thing when I've repeatedly said that my main point was that the transfer-talk serves as nothing more than a convenient distraction for Ange from his terrible tactics and win-loss record.

I don't even think we disagree with the general point that £70+ million on Gray, Odobert and Bergvall could have been better spent. I just think you've gone way off on a tangent trying to argue that Spurs are a more attractive prospect than they clearly, actually are, and completely forgotten about the original point in the process.

Chiefly, that splashing the cash on one good player (that may not have wanted to join them anyway, because they're Spurs), or even simply three better players, probably wouldn't have made a significant difference to their season. They didn't have trouble scoring goals, and the reason they couldn't keep them out was almost entirely down to their tactics. Again, the transfer-talk is just a distraction from Ange's tactics and record.
Click to expand...
Nope.
 
Maluco said:
Yeah, this is a good post and I understand what you are saying, but there is still quality and potential there. That season is the worst points per game return that Spurs have ever recorded in the top flight…as a club. Not just PL, in their entire history.

You can talk about injuries and focusing on the Europa, but it is well beyond the realms of that. Literally, an unprecedented low.
Click to expand...

Of course it was a massive low. But I feel also, his reputation didn't help. He's a manager, just come from the Scottish league. Questions are being asked if he was ever good enough for a team like Spurs. Would Spurs fans have had the same opinion of him if it he were Pep, Enrique, Tuchel or Hansi Flick?
Would they have made exceptions based on their previous success and turned to the board to blame. This is where the board got away with minimal blame. Spurs fans turned on the manager that hadn't elite success previous and his reputation had only been recognised at Celtic.

I would blame the board 80% of the reason why they were and are still failing, 20% on Ange, but a good chunk of that blame was down to injuries he had no control of. Could he have tried playing not to lose? Sure then Spurs would be hammering the nail deeper giving him more blame, "we have regressed", "his football is atrocious". His team still managed to score 64 goals in the Premier League last season. But conceded 65. What tells me is, he never did come away from his belief of wanting to win games but defensively, again injuries playing a part of that screwed him.

Was it a case he misused any of the transfers given to him? No, because none of the teenagers were CB players, and the only other option was Danso, who is a decent squad option. But hardly a CB you need to get you up the table on a regular basis.

But in regards to quality and potential, again, when key players are out injured, you can't win a derby with a donkey. If you can't get a consistent starting 11, you can't expect to see the implementation of what you want to happen, like it's magic.
 
Overlap is an awful show. Everyone now cariactures of themselves. Keane always angry. Wright always gurning. Neville always "to be fair, to be fair" with his arms up in the air. Carragher saying next to nothing. Jill always interrupting and saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. Yawn.
 
SungSam7 said:
Of course it was a massive low. But I feel also, his reputation didn't help. He's a manager, just come from the Scottish league. Questions are being asked if he was ever good enough for a team like Spurs. Would Spurs fans have had the same opinion of him if it he were Pep, Enrique, Tuchel or Hansi Flick?
Would they have made exceptions based on their previous success and turned to the board to blame. This is where the board got away with minimal blame. Spurs fans turned on the manager that hadn't elite success previous and his reputation had only been recognised at Celtic.

I would blame the board 80% of the reason why they were and are still failing, 20% on Ange, but a good chunk of that blame was down to injuries he had no control of. Could he have tried playing not to lose? Sure then Spurs would be hammering the nail deeper giving him more blame, "we have regressed", "his football is atrocious". His team still managed to score 64 goals in the Premier League last season. But conceded 65. What tells me is, he never did come away from his belief of wanting to win games but defensively, again injuries playing a part of that screwed him.

Was it a case he misused any of the transfers given to him? No, because none of the teenagers were CB players, and the only other option was Danso, who is a decent squad option. But hardly a CB you need to get you up the table on a regular basis.

But in regards to quality and potential, again, when key players are out injured, you can't win a derby with a donkey. If you can't get a consistent starting 11, you can't expect to see the implementation of what you want to happen, like it's magic.
Click to expand...

I just think some of those players are better, and he had a lot more options than he would have you believe. He was also to blame for a lot of the defensive injuries and the strain his system put on the CBs in particular.

But I do agree with you that the board should be under fire. They are absolutely trending in the wrong direction. These appointments just helped accelerate the direction they were trending in. I just tend to believe that Ange really put the pedal to the floor in that sense.
 
Maluco said:
I just think some of those players are better, and he had a lot more options than he would have you believe. He was also to blame for a lot of the defensive injuries and the strain his system put on the CBs in particular.

But I do agree with you that the board should be under fire. They are absolutely trending in the wrong direction. These appointments just helped accelerate the direction they were trending in. I just tend to believe that Ange really put the pedal to the floor in that sense.
Click to expand...
Valid point made. But his defense could be, I started the season with 2 quality center backs and a decent squad option.

Could he have managed it better as you said his system put on them, possibly.
But then you could say that Spurs didn't back him and his system also.

Hes not entirely blameless whatsoever, but hes also another manager they didn't truly back. Spurs have this mentality now since Poch did the work, that they are top level club and the expectations is nothing less than Champions league. But their signings say otherwise.

Daniel Levy seemed to have set the standard of buy low, sell high. Trying to sign a Spurs player at any stage under Levy was like pulling teeth. We saw it with Kane a couple of years before he left. Which is an ok thing to do. By all means if that's your value, that's your value.

But then when it comes to the transfer window, if you're wanting to be that European mainstay, you can't just be buying a bunch of teens for 20mill a pop and expect to be going toe to toe with Real Madrid and Bayern Munich.

Conte had that outburst, he was right then, he's still right now.

And I do feel Ange is truthful in saying the club's goals was to be competitive in all competitions.

Be competitive or be stingy on signings. You can't be both
 
SungSam7 said:
Valid point made. But his defense could be, I started the season with 2 quality center backs and a decent squad option.

Could he have managed it better as you said his system put on them, possibly.
But then you could say that Spurs didn't back him and his system also.

Hes not entirely blameless whatsoever, but hes also another manager they didn't truly back. Spurs have this mentality now since Poch did the work, that they are top level club and the expectations is nothing less than Champions league. But their signings say otherwise.

Daniel Levy seemed to have set the standard of buy low, sell high. Trying to sign a Spurs player at any stage under Levy was like pulling teeth. We saw it with Kane a couple of years before he left. Which is an ok thing to do. By all means if that's your value, that's your value.

But then when it comes to the transfer window, if you're wanting to be that European mainstay, you can't just be buying a bunch of teens for 20mill a pop and expect to be going toe to toe with Real Madrid and Bayern Munich.

Conte had that outburst, he was right then, he's still right now.

And I do feel Ange is truthful in saying the club's goals was to be competitive in all competitions.

Be competitive or be stingy on signings. You can't be both
Click to expand...

This last line is very true, and where the board fall down. They have a CL stadium, but are buying Europa League talents consistently
 
Alex99 said:
So you'll stand by a relegated Leicester being "an established PL side"?

And stand by Brennan Johnson being an example of Spurs signing a "top player"?

Okay then.
Click to expand...

Who was the last truly marquee player Spurs signed? Like a statement signing they mean to compete at the top, I cant even think of one, I think Kudus is a good player, walks into Spurs starting 11, but a marquee signing? Not for me. A lot of their good-great players developed there, Kane, Son, Bale, Modric, Eriksen.

I'd have to go all the way back to someone like Van Der Vaart from RM to Spurs who you think 'ok top player' and came in and lit up the league.
 
Scroto Baggins said:
Who was the last truly marquee player Spurs signed? Like a statement signing they mean to compete at the top, I cant even think of one, I think Kudus is a good player, walks into Spurs starting 11, but a marquee signing? Not for me. A lot of their good-great players developed there, Kane, Son, Bale, Modric, Eriksen.

I'd have to go all the way back to someone like Van Der Vaart from RM to Spurs who you think 'ok top player' and came in and lit up the league.
Click to expand...

I feel like even that is stretching it. He was ultimately a Real Madrid reject, available on the cheap, with no serious interest (to my memory) from any of the clubs at the top. They spent more on Peter Crouch the summer before.

I honestly feel like you could be going all the way back to Lineker signing in 1989.
 
Didn't come across well at all. He was terrible for Spurs, and lasted only few games for Forest. No self awareness.
 
Alex99 said:
I feel like even that is stretching it. He was ultimately a Real Madrid reject, available on the cheap, with no serious interest (to my memory) from any of the clubs at the top. They spent more on Peter Crouch the summer before.

I honestly feel like you could be going all the way back to Lineker signing in 1989.
Click to expand...
Ah I wouldn't go as far as saying he was a reject. He was told he wouldn't have many opportunities to play since they had signed Kaka, and come on, there wasn't a player in the world that would be playing ahead of Kaka at that time.

The only reason he didn't leave when Kaka was signed was because his wife was battling cancer. He left in 2010, a year later.

It would have been like saying Ozil was a Real Madrid reject. He really wasn't either, Real Madrid had a new toy they preferred.

He also went for cheap because of his injury issues while at Madrid and Spurs took a leap of faith on it.
 
SungSam7 said:
Ah I wouldn't go as far as saying he was a reject. He was told he wouldn't have many opportunities to play since they had signed Kaka, and come on, there wasn't a player in the world that would be playing ahead of Kaka at that time.

The only reason he didn't leave when Kaka was signed was because his wife was battling cancer. He left in 2010, a year later.

It would have been like saying Ozil was a Real Madrid reject. He really wasn't either, Real Madrid had a new toy they preferred.

He also went for cheap because of his injury issues while at Madrid and Spurs took a leap of faith on it.
Click to expand...

van der Vaart signed for Real Madrid in 2008 and left in 2010. If you're going to argue they actually wanted rid a year earlier, you're only reinforcing the "reject" idea.

He pretty much never lived up the hype his move to Real Madrid brought, and he only spent two seasons at Spurs before he was back at Hamburg.

van der Vaart was considered a potentially shrewd signing, and that was about it. There was no one looking at van der Vaart signing for a Spurs side that had finished 4th and thinking "he's going to take them to the next level".
 
Alex99 said:
van der Vaart signed for Real Madrid in 2008 and left in 2010. If you're going to argue they actually wanted rid a year earlier, you're only reinforcing the "reject" idea.

He pretty much never lived up the hype his move to Real Madrid brought, and he only spent two seasons at Spurs before he was back at Hamburg.

van der Vaart was considered a potentially shrewd signing, and that was about it. There was no one looking at van der Vaart signing for a Spurs side that had finished 4th and thinking "he's going to take them to the next level".
Click to expand...

Calling a guy a Real Madrid reject makes it sounds like he wasn't a good enough player. This is the same team and fans that will boo the life out of you for putting butter on the wrong side of the bread. Royston Drenthe is a reject.

Sure that means Robben was a reject and he was one of the best right wingers in the world.

What didn't help Van Der Vaart was his injury history and his lack of stamina on a consistent basis.

But in 63 premier league appearances, he had 24 goals and 16 assists. Doesn't sound like a player that didn't offer much.

At Madrid, in 2865 La Liga minutes, 23 g/a. Thats one every 125 minutes. Kaka had 164 minutes per g/a . Even Modric had less goal contributions with 1 every 299 minutes.

He also left due to issues with Andreas Villas Boas. Not surprised considering that clown managed to turn the whole of the Chelsea squad against him too. He wasn't sold because he wasn't good enough, it was his choice to move on.
 
Last edited:
Vault Dweller said:
I'm so bored of Keane's miserable stances on anything affiliated with United.
Click to expand...
His takes are horrific too.

Good interview by Ange, seems a decent guy - terrible manager.
 
Last edited:
PeteManic said:
Overlap is an awful show. Everyone now cariactures of themselves. Keane always angry. Wright always gurning. Neville always "to be fair, to be fair" with his arms up in the air. Carragher saying next to nothing. Jill always interrupting and saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. Yawn.
Click to expand...

They got inspired by Arse fam TV. Everyone's playing a 'character' across all weeks.
 
Keane is becoming a bit unbearable now with his United takes. Amongst other things, emphatically says Gyokeres is a hit; then goes on to say alongside number of goals, the importance of the goal matters whether its a winning goal, opening goal, etc; and then implies (don't think he answered) that Sesko is a miss. Has Gyokeres even scored a single winning goal or an opening goal for Arsenal in the PL?
 
Last edited:
Shane88 said:
Keane is pitiful now. That Ryanair bit was practically rehearsed.
Click to expand...

There isn't a single episode where Keane doesn't make himself look like a dipshit. Bloke loves the attention he gets when he talks nonsense about United.
 
Are people still taking The Overlap seriously?

It's a content generating device, little else.

Keane is spouting off daft remarks, devoid of reason or common sense, to get attention.
 
Amarsdd said:
Keane is becoming a bit unbearable now with his United takes. Amongst other things, emphatically says Gyokeres is a hit; then goes on to say alongside number of goals, the importance of the goal matters whether its a winning goal, opening goal, etc; and then implies (don't think he answered) that Sesko is a miss. Has Gyokeres even scored a single winning goal or an opening goal for Arsenal in the PL?
Click to expand...
Gyokeres has two more goals than Sesko having played a third more football. He's five years older and playing for the team top of the table. I know which of the two I'd rather have on my books.

There is no love of football in Roy Keane's heart.
 
SungSam7 said:
Calling a guy a Real Madrid reject makes it sounds like he wasn't a good enough player. This is the same team and fans that will boo the life out of you for putting butter on the wrong side of the bread. Royston Drenthe is a reject.

Sure that means Robben was a reject and he was one of the best right wingers in the world.

What didn't help Van Der Vaart was his injury history and his lack of stamina on a consistent basis.

But in 63 premier league appearances, he had 24 goals and 16 assists. Doesn't sound like a player that didn't offer much.

At Madrid, in 2865 La Liga minutes, 23 g/a. Thats one every 125 minutes. Kaka had 164 minutes per g/a . Even Modric had less goal contributions with 1 every 299 minutes.

He also left due to issues with Andreas Villas Boas. Not surprised considering that clown managed to turn the whole of the Chelsea squad against him too. He wasn't sold because he wasn't good enough, it was his choice to move on.
Click to expand...

Sorry for offending you, Rafael.
 
SungSam7 said:
Arrivals: *in Euros

Solanke - 64.3
Gray - 41.25
Odobert - 29.3
Bergvall - 20
Kinksy - 16.5
Tel (Loan fee) - 10
Yang - 4

Total: 185mill (approximately £155-160 million back in 2024)
Click to expand...
Kinda like how they spent the Bale money on a bunch of average players and went nowhere for a couple of years before Poch came in.

They were lucky in the sense that their budget transfers turned out to be world class (Or close to) in that period and they had a manager who knew how to get the best out of them. Don't think they'd be lucky again this time.
 
Shane88 said:
Keane is pitiful now. That Ryanair bit was practically rehearsed.
Click to expand...
Fun part is that celebration part is not true at all. After we scored our players basically didn't celebrate at all. They started running on our half to resume the game soon as possible.

Anyway, overlap run its course. It was fun show but now it is just washed up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.