Supporters opinions are worthless
Spurs are 18 months into a 4-year rebuild
I'm listening to today's Ange Postecoglou press conference ahead of the Southampton game and you can tell by the questioning that these reporters simply don't understand the game.
Louis van Gaal was correct.
The kid who thinks his Ange's best mate, asks him what is the difference between criticism and feedback.
I have had the same argument with so-called supporters saying criticising is OK, they have a right to do it.
They do, but it isn't helpful, it doesn't help the side win, thus don't call yourself a supporter because you're not supporting, you're helping the club lose.
CONSTRUCTIVE criticism is OK, not negative.
If there is a problem, you suggest a solution.
You DON'T just yell for change without knowing exactly what you want to change it for.
Telling me you want Daniel Levy is fine if you tell what and who should take his place.
He doesn't need to go by the way, the problems lie elsewhere, as I have identified on multiple occasions.
Yelling Levy out is destructive and NO GENUINE SUPPORTER should use destructive criticism.
Equally, you have to embrace the 'project', the vision and judge against that, not your own criteria.
Some examples of the negative, totally unhelpful things you see on social media from people who profess to be supporters who believe they have a winning mentality.
The difference is stark to a positive mindset success orientated approach.
| Positive Feedback Approach | |
|---|---|
| "Postecoglou is clueless and doesn't know what he's doing!" | "I'm concerned about our tactical approach. Could we discuss how the team might better utilize our attacking players and maintain defensive stability?" |
| "These players are absolute garbage and should be sold immediately!" | "I think we have some performance issues. Which players do you believe could benefit from targeted coaching or could potentially improve with a change in position?" |
| "We're a complete embarrassment to the club's history!" | "Our current form isn't meeting the club's historical standards. What specific areas do you see as priorities for improvement in our playing style and team development?" |
| "Brennan Johnson is the worst signing we've ever made!" | "I'm struggling to see how Brennan Johnson fits into our current system. What are the coaching staff's plans for helping him adapt and maximize his potential?" |
| "This team has no heart, no passion!" | "I'm observing a lack of cohesion and energy in our performances. What strategies might help boost team morale and on-field connectivity?" |
| "Postecoglou should be fired immediately!" | "I'm worried about our current trajectory. What specific metrics or improvements would demonstrate progress and justify continued support for the current management?" |
The key differences highlight how:
- Negative statements are emotionally charged and offer no constructive path forward
- Positive feedback seeks understanding, offers specific observations and invites dialogue
- Constructive feedback focuses on solutions rather than blame
- Effective communication creates space for improvement rather than shutting down discussion
Sack him offers nothing constructive, it is just hope someone else will achieve better results.
You must have reasoning a an idea of the way forward to cry sack him.
Solutions rather than blame, whereas Spurs supporters adopt the opposite, blame rather than solutions, hence why their opinions aren't worth the paper used to make them.
In response to Postecoglou telling reporters he isn't interested in a player's ego, this same reporter is telling a fully licenced and experienced coach that players like to have a pat on the back and smoke blown up their arse and don'y like to be told what they are not good at.
Says who?
Dejan Kulusevski wants to be the best player in the world.
Do you think he wants everyone to ignore his weaknesses and not tell him what they are?
It's total claptrap.
This guy hasn't a clue.
They want CONSTRUCTIVE feedback.
They DO want to be told what they are not good at,...
BUT in a CONSTRUCTIVE way, not the way a reporter, interviewer or fan puts it.
He is talking about getting a response.
Well, a response is temporary and a coach wants something permanent otherwise you are just papering over the cracks for the short-term.
What then?
WINNING MINDSETS LOVE CHALLENGES, they rise to them.
This reporter doesn't understand that because he doesn't have a winning mindset himself, he looks at things from his standard mindset, which I call a losing mindset.
So he can only see how fellow losing mindset think.
You take a traditional husband and put him in a kitchen when his wife is away and ask him to bake a cake, he won't have a clue, it's an alien world.
A winning mindset is an alien world to a losing mindset.
As you could see, Ange is getting frustrated by the lack of understanding in the room.
This is why you shouldn't be listening to these guys.
They are discussing their hobby with a professional.
Journalists are professional writers, they are trained to write, they are not football experts or anywhere near it.
Ange keeps answering but his basic message is: Winning mindsets rise to a challenge. Spurs are in a big challenge so if you are not rising to this then you have the wrong mindset.
Boy, that's the message I have been pummelling over and over again and why I advocate doing something about it and not leaving it to chance because I say, teach them how to handle a challenge rather than just throw them in the pond and see who swims.
Ange reminds the idiots conducting a phone protest in his pre-Liverpool game press conference that they are entitled to an opinion, but are clueless how success is achieved.
He pointed out that it is easier if everyone is pulling in the same direction, these people are not and thus making success more difficult.
They can not therefore be classed as supporters, because well they are not supporting, they're doing the opposite, but called followers and backs up this post made a few days earlier.
COYS
Post a Comment