100% Angeball, or adapt during the game? Which are you?

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

What's your preferred style of play?

  • Total voters
    234
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
mummy

mummy

Okay, so we're dead...
As a result of last night's magnificent defeat, are you with "We'll play this way even if we go down to 5 men" Ange, or would you revert to Conterinho stylee when needed - and hope we can cling on to a desperately dull 1-1.

Either way is stressful, but what is your preferred style of stress?

There's no room for 'don't knows' in this poll.

EDIT: Someone needed the 'don't know' option! Alright, Sir Keir?
 
Last edited:
We won fuck all playing Joseball and Conteball while suffering from dreadful football.

If we ain’t winning Jack shit as the club isn’t yet ready to get the squad to compete with the likes of City we might as well play to our traditions of being the team with the biggest balls in the league going back to Hoddle, Bill Nic and even before.
 
Don't know.... (You asked for that!)

Of COURSE I'd rather adapt to a situation during a game, same as I'd expect/want us to set up differently depending on what opposition/tactics we're playing against (ie: ultra defensive, low block bollocks, or all out attack!)

There's sticking to principles, and there's cutting off your nose to spite your face...

...and then there's losing 4-1 at home to arguably the worst Chelsea team in a generation, managed by arguably the best Spurs manager in decades (before Ange)!! ..so yes, there's that!
 
Ange plays exactly how I believe football should be played. On the front foot and chasing goals. When you're on the ball, the point of the possession is to put it on the other net, every single time. It's not to hold on to the ball passing forever.

There's always times you need to manage during the game and be pragmatic, but momentum is the number 1 thing that wins football matches.

He has shut up shop a couple of times when we were ahead this year it's not just attacking for the sake of it, but when you're behind in a match, the more chances you have the more likely you are to score.
 
If the idea is you should train as you play and play as you train then it has to be Angeball because that's why we hired him. If we sat back and parked the bus with a CB making his first appearance of the season and a CM having to play CB while only having 9 men we'd probably still lose. It was only 2-1 after 93 minutes. The experience will only embed Angeball further into the players because if you can show that much spirit in a makeshift 9 vs 11 game against a rival then as we get better at this style of play with our best team in an 11 vs 11 game we'll be flying.
 
1882 said:
Don't know.... (You asked for that!)

Of COURSE I'd rather adapt to a situation during a game, same as I'd expect/want us to set up differently depending on what opposition/tactics we're playing against (ie: ultra defensive, low block bollocks, or all out attack!)

There's sticking to principles, and there's cutting off your nose to spite your face...

...and then there's losing 4-1 at home to arguably the worst Chelsea team in a generation, managed by arguably the best Spurs manager in decades (before Ange)!! ..so yes, there's that!
Click to expand...
I've added a DON'T KNOW option, specially for you LibDems.

:mourcheeks:
 
Love Angeball, but players need to be tested like they were last night to iron out some issues with discipline and squad depth. I think we will have a few more games similar to last night while we are in transition.
 
Ange already adjusts during the game. Many times already he has taken off forwards and put midfielders or defensive players on to close out the game.

Last night he (correctly) thought that Chelsea were so shit that we could still beat them with 9 men. If Bentancur and Son scored at the end then we would have.
 
I’ve seen some criticism of Ange for the high line but I think it’s BS TBH. Not sure how sitting back deep with 9 men and Dier / PEH CB gives us any better chance of getting a result than our approach yesterday did. The Liverpool comparison is silly considering:-

A) They lost too
B) Their defence wasn’t decimated
C) They have Salah who has the ability to be a one- man outlet with his pace and strength. Much more so than Son…

We had 2 brilliant chances to equalise at 2-1 and a goal chalked off for offside by about 3 inches. We kept super competitive until about the 92nd min.

This is all very fucking odd as the coach and remaining players did us proud last night. There’s likely no tactic we could have employed to get a point after going down to 9, so it’s all a little moot.
 
In my honest opinion, you have to get specific players to play a certain type of football.

If the idea is to adapt the game plan on the single opponent team, you need more ductile players (who have to be able to adapt their style of play on different modules) than we actually have.

Looking the standings and the amazing performances of the past games, I think we can say that we have the roster to play this Angeball we're talking about and not the other types of play style.

By the way, it could be not a bad idea to adapt a bit of our style in particular moment of the games. For example, playing with the high line was not a great idea considering the absence of Romero and the fact that players as Sterling e Nico Jackson are very good in running and very mediocre in playing the ball. But I want to think that this is a kind of mistakes which can be very useful for the future.
 
Laying my own cards on the table - We're willing participants in an experiment which could go either way. The one thing we don't do is quit at the first setback. Do we 'learn' from it and change the system? Ange say no. I'm sticking with him.
 
Billy Hunt said:
Laying my own cards on the table - We're willing participants in an experiment which could go either way. The one thing we don't do is quit at the first setback. Do we 'learn' from it and change the system? Ange say no. I'm sticking with him.
Click to expand...
It’s too early for criticism.

What happened to “this season is all about bedding the players into the right system and seeing short of positivity”. If we’re 3 years into the Ange experiment and consistently falling short because of naive tactics feel free to chime in.

People jumping on him because we lost with 9 men even though his tactics came very close to us getting an equaliser late in the game is weird.
 
There have been plenty of times we've adapted our game play this season which have seen us win games. Luton and Palace the recent two big ones that stand out.

But the principles remain the same. Last night showed, if it hadn't already, that the players and the management are all in on their beliefs. It showed that those principles and way of playing were alot more important to them than any one result and that was key for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom