As a maelstrom of pressure engulfs yet another Tottenham Hotspur manager, and another north London derby acts as the perfect prism for their unease, it’s worth reflecting on what the best-case scenario was on Sunday in Thomas Frank’s head. If that sounds a little sarcastic, it is intentional.
Tottenham weren’t just defensive as means to an end but emphatically one-dimensional. They had four touches in Arsenal’s penalty area – two from a central defender and two from a substitute. So what was the ideal version of this strategy working? Gutsy 0-0? Inexplicable late win thanks to a set piece against the best set-piece team?
Again hypothetically, say one of those two scenarios had implausibly played out. Would Spurs fans be heralding Frank as a defensive master? Would this joy vacuum-ball be deemed sustainable at a big club? I don’t think so.
That’s the point that now swirls around Frank. We know that he excels most as a builder of clubs, not a firefighter who saves them. But the potential upsides to Sunday’s approach were not only far less likely than the negatives; they were almost useless outside of the specific context of the match. You defended well, great – now what’s next?
Frank will not work here for long if this is the big-game strategy, even if it works occasionally. He is misguided if he believes otherwise. Supporters can accept dourness by necessity when it is successful. When it isn’t, especially against that lot, you succeed only in making the world of possibilities feel smaller while still forcing it to contain all of the pain.
— Sky Sports News (@SkySportsNews) November 24, 2025
"I can only apologise to the fans"
Spurs boss Thomas Frank takes full responsibility for Sunday's North London derby defeatpic.twitter.com/qq4GdQLdCi
And it didn’t work on Sunday. The strategy was flawed from the start and floored thereafter because the players seemed uncommitted and unsuited to it. There were lots of defenders but little structure. There were two defensive midfielders but the run of the midfield was ceded by design anyway.
The only minutes of heart and energy – and this is particularly damning – came in the aftermath of a Richarlison goal that was a freak anyway. If it takes something divergent to the plan to spark improvement, your plan was probably wrong in the first place.
Derbies do funny things to supporters. It isn’t just another game because it never has been and because everyone inside the club knows it isn’t. As such, everything within its confines becomes magnified and stretched like a blanket across your opinions.
Frank apologised afterwards; its message didn’t alter its meaninglessness. Supporters want solutions, not explanations. They have watched their team enter a high-profile London derby, be embarrassingly defensive, concede in the 34th minute and then create virtually nothing afterwards. The only difference between Chelsea and Arsenal is that Arsenal scored in the 36th minute.
The irony is that resolutely doing the same thing showed some guts. Tactical cowardice was itself an act of bravery because it was so risky for his reputation amongst supporters. But when it produces the same result for a fanbase that watched Jose Mourinho, Antonio Conte and Nuno Espirito Santo unstick themselves through similar principles, courage becomes foolishness. See the empty away end before full-time for evidence.
That fanbase’s greatest gripe is the extremes in approach to produce equal underachievement. They spent the last league campaign wondering what might happen if they appointed someone a little more pragmatic. Some will spend this week wondering what might happen if they appointed someone a little less pragmatic.
Their critics will point to the table and accuse entitlement, but we have eyes. If you are known as a guy who builds something over time, you need emotional investment in the foundations or you’re in trouble.
Your next read
That middle ground is hardly out of reach. It shouldn’t look this hard. Spurs possess good central defenders who have largely stayed fit. They have attacking full-backs and central midfielders beyond the Rodrigo Bentancur-Joao Palhinha axis of slow possession. They have a multitude of attacking midfielders and attackers who were presumably not bought to be used only against weaker opponents at home when the manager dares to attack.
And there was logic to making this team more organised after what came before. But there was far less logic in defensive organisation being the whole of the law because that only amplifies the pressure upon results at a club whose modern identity is defined by an inability to cope with it.
So the questions will not get any less awkward. Either Frank thinks this is the right way and is wrong, or must change his approach, release the handbrake and compromise on what he is – presumably – trying to achieve. For some, patience is already running lower than their block on Sunday. Frank won’t get away with many more of these.
from Football - The i Paper https://ift.tt/WQAqXgd
Post a Comment