Sack Ange Postecoglou? What would be the point of that? The Mailbox almost moves on from Harry Kane…
Send your views to theeditor@football365.com
Sacking Ange would be ultimate Spurs move
Writing in to reply to Jim Sokol from yesterday’s mailbox.
Jim writes ‘Ange’s refusal to assess opponents and not change his (plan A, same as Plan B tactics) are getting found out in the top league, as I knew they would.’
Not really sure what Jim was expecting. Apparently after 50 PL games Pep won 36, Arteta and Klopp both won 26. Ange has won 25 from 49.
(Actually, Arteta won only 21 of his first 50 PL games – Ed)
All three managers started at clubs in similar positions really. We can argue about relative places, and IMO Liverpool and Arsenal were in slightly better shape as they hadn’t had the Jose and Conte messes before them.
Do I think Ange will go on and do a Klopp, or have Spurs as a clear second best in the league? Probably not (almost definitely not). But that would be Spurs punching miles above their weight, and even with Spurs thinking back to their dreamboat Poch – even he managed to finish third in a two horse race and absolutely turn to water in the Champions League final (as a Liverpool fan, thanks for that Poch).
For some context. Spurs have not won the league since 1961. The FA Cup since 1991. League Cup was the last trophy win in 2008.
Since Spurs last won a trophy, Leicester have won the Prem, the FA Cup and I will throw in the Charity Shield as well, just to make it 3-0. Spurs are not a trophy winning club over the last 60 years or so.
So Spurs fans. What do you want next after apparently wanting to sack Ange? A “serial winner” that plays pragmatic football? Great idea, that worked well the last two times.
A left field selection that is starting to pull a style of play together and build a squad out of the shambles that was there before? Yeah, you have that now and you want to bin him for basically not being Pep.
Sacking Ange now after just over a year in the gig and starting to change things would just be wonderfully Spursy. You could only top that by going and hiring Ten Hag or something.
Dixon Hunt
READ: Ruben Amorim already above Mikel Arteta in Premier League manager rankings
Dr Tottenham or Mr Hotspur?
Just reading the manager rankings and caught another reference to Dr Tottenham, I wonder if we are at the point when they have honed their skills and are now so perfectly precise and surgically excellent in their pursuit of perfection, that they should be promoted to, or have passed all the exams and are fully qualified and as such should now be referred to, as all surgeons should…. Mr Hotspur?
Just thought..
Why is no one seemingly talking about Antonee Robinson for a left back – Seems as good as anything I have seen for 2 seasons. Has he got a 5yr Fulham contract. I’d have him in a heartbeat!
Al – LFC (keep going Arne, I already think you can keep or replace Trent and Mo whichever you wish! Amazingly my trust levels after 11 games are insane)
(We are talking about Antonee Robinson – Ed)
Pep staying? Get in
Pep Guardiola extending his contract is fantastic news for all City fans. So so so happy to have him in charge for even longer, although I did think it was likely to happen as I wrote last week.
And I look forward to seeing him dominate League Two and showing your Barrows, your Newports, your Bromleys what’s up.
Andy D. Manchester. MCFC
Klopp as coach > Klopp as man
Nearly spat my coffee this morning when I’d read it and who knows if we take all reports as fact, but did Jurgen Klopp really see Antony fit to replace (the then possibly departing) Mo Salah? Blimey… our same beloved gaffer who wanted Julian Brandt over the Egyptian king before he’d come in, and wanted that heaving pile of Brazilian uselessness after, bless him.
Unlike David Coote I’ve nothing but love and a trunkful of fond memories for Klopp and his reign. Also don’t know what his new remit will be exactly, presiding over the Red Bull umbrella, but on our little patch thank god for the return of Michael Edwards (and the installment of Richard Hughes). While there’s little debate Klopp was an excellent leader and one consistently capable of doing the most with the least, he had massive blind spots when it came to recruitment. And we paid dearly at times with numerous opportunity costs.
As much as I enjoyed Thiago, he was an inarguably poor signing for us and one Edwards would’ve never sanctioned on his own. Same could be said of Darwin (and though the jury’s still out, it doesn’t look great). Naby Keita wasn’t necessarily poor recruitment, but he was woefully short in robustness and always lacked the fitness profile to geggenpress eight days weekly. There are more examples I’m sure, but just trying to get to what I’m saying…
Which is simply that I’m on board with Arne Slot and Michael Edwards. It’s the proper setup.
I’ll forever miss Klopp on the touchline and any Liverpool supporter will be ever grateful he came to us, but dare I say the club might be in better hands now going forward. More prudent, more sustainable hands. Less emotion. Klopp was the right man at the right time; I’m convinced nobody could’ve come in to wake the slumbering giant as he did. But from where we are now, where we could go, I think FSG have got it right once again… by putting the proper people in place to get it right, once again.
Eric, Los Angeles CA (Also just my opinion but I don’t think moving Kane into a roving 10 role for England is the answer. Kane should sit. Rooney shared many of Kane’s attributes while in decline and shifted back, but at that time England weren’t spoilt for choice in that position as they will be for 2026. Kane could be devastating off the bench from the 70th, as needed, and as a 9.)
Cars: A genius
Excellent analysis of Lee Carsley from Funster Andy. My only gripe is that he assumes it’s accidental, it’s not, the guy is more intelligent than we give him credit for.
As a player, Carsley in centre midfield for Everton was the driving force behind our run to fourth back in the day. He always knew where to be and when. It’s quite funny when you think Real Madrid bought Tommy Grav for defensive midfield when it should’ve been Cars all along (all bald white men look the same it appears)
So yes, I’d like to see Cars back again for the top job some day. Plus I’d like to thank him for improving our play immensely and hope that he’ll be back after the latest capitulation.
Fat Man (He also used Tommy Tuuuuuchels patented 4222 formation in the first match against Greece….)
Small data sets and marginal losses
Something that always fascinates me in the football media is how much weight is placed on the outcome of one game. Even a full league season is a small ‘data’ pool on which to make a call, so why would we base so much on one game?
For example, doing a ‘what-if’ around Watkins vs Kane, by implying that Watkins could never have made the pass to Bellingham Kane made, thus proving Kane is the better player.
There is no doubt Kane has been a great player, the question is whether he can continue to be and he was definitively found wanting at the last Euros, but the real point is that the game would not have unrolled the same way if Watkins had started. Who knows, perhaps England would have been 1-0 up earlier through a Watkins goal or the movement up front allowing a team mate space to score that Kane cannot do anymore. It’s a moot point.
It’s like the idea of marginal gains. We spend time talking about marginal gains and how one or more small improvements, in a highly professional and competitive sport, can create enough advantage to win.
But what about marginal losses? Surely the opposite must be true. While Kane has been a great asset for England and genuinely believes in showing up, at the last Euros he was definitely off his best. If he is only at 90% of his best, should he not be playing? Was he carrying an injury, not recovered from an injury or was it Father Time catching up? Either way, hadn’t he become a marginal loss that detracted from the overall team performance?
The idea that Watkins isn’t that much younger than Kane and there are no future forwards of Kane’s ilk is also moot. We only play one tournament at a time, so we’re only focussed on the next World Cup. We can worry about future forward talent later. Besides, few teams at international level have a forward of that level and many that do, either don’t qualify (Norway), or don’t have the team to supply the forward (Poland), etc, that it shows it is more important to have a balanced side with a focused strategy than think about how to use, let alone optimize, for one player.
Against Greece in Greece, England were balanced and played with freedom, which we never saw in any game at the Euros. Tuchel is pragmatic and knows he can’t and won’t rely on one player – as he won’t know who will be fit or available when the finals come around. He will want a balanced squad who can all play to a strategy.
Carsley has done well and provided Tuchel a lot of background he can leverage when thinking about how he wants to play. He must be stoked to have access to such a great pool of talent and, I dare say, not being English, won’t have the anxiety English managers have about losing. Plus, being only signed to one tournament won’t have to worry as much about the media in terms of calls to be sacked etc. Just look at the way the media essentially harassed Carsley – which I believe totally influenced his decision in wanting the role.
It’s just too bad we focus on the negatives, the can they all play together, who is better than Kane, is Kane any good, etc, than the fact we have an incredibly talented set of players, and the future looks positive.
Paul McDevitt
…The thing that I despise about social media, and the media in general these days is the fact that everything is black or white, there is no middle ground.
For example, the recent debate about Harry Kane seems to feature on whether he should play for England or not. Therefore, you can only think that he is either excellent or rubbish. There can be no in-between
Unfortunately, it is not that simple. Thomas Tuchel must weigh up his view on the team as a whole. What is the best side England can put out to give them a chance of winning the world cup? As was evidenced recently you cannot put all your best players on the field and expect them to gel together like its Football Manager circa 2008.
This takes me back to the Roy Keane argument about Ronaldo. Keane’s view was you should find a way of fitting Ronaldo into the team because he scored 25 goals last season, the opposing view was whilst Ronaldo may have scored 25 goals the team over the course of the season scored less and created fewer chances. You just can’t simply up the game of the other 10 players to accommodate one.
Tuchel has to weigh up is Kane playing at center forward going to be better than Watkins with Jude Bellingham in the number 10 space that Kane drops into. Also is Watkins more likely to score with two wingers hitting the touch line.
Is Harry Kane England’s best striker, undoubtedly yes. However, will the team play better without him?
I don’t know the answer to this, you don’t know the answer to this, and “white van man” who shouts down the phone to talksport presenters certainly doesn’t know the answer to this. No one does but that’s why Thomas Tuchel is getting paid a hell of a lot of money to try to figure this out.