Very out of place isn’t he (no racist, I just don’t know how else to word it)
Says things I’d expect a 9 year old to say when they’re learning about football
Do you want to elaborate?
Well I should first caveat that podcasts are subjective. What grates on one listener is probably appreciated by another.
My view of him is that he's always coming across like he knows more than most about tactical approaches in the game and actually doesn't. On the flip side he is the only journalist with the balls to ask tactical questions in the press conference so he deserves props for that. He's also not nearly as clueless and condescending as Micheal Cox, so he's probably not the worst but just frustrating to listen to when the chips are down.
I feel like he's got it wrong too many times, think on one occasion I heard him talk about a man mark system that we supposedly used and just recently ten hag said he categorically does not have us use a man marking system. He was also extremely novice in the Mourinho and Ole phase, when he would criticise Mourinho a lot and when Ole came he said "all you need is love, it's that simple". In the end, it wasn't and he then used hindsight to retrospectively change his views.
I also hate how he has an infliction (? Unsure if that's the right word to describe it) at the end of every sentence like it's a patronising question. This comes down to the podcasts being subjective on the listener bit. But he says a lot of things in a patronising tone, which is frustrating for a journalist often relying on hindsight to develop his own views.
Anka is refreshing in that he actually tries to look at things from a tactical perspective unlike most other football journalists that have a very limited and overly simplistic analysis that is reduced to things that cannot be proved such as effort. Perhaps Anka is a ‘tactical guru’ but he does trigger debate on tactical issues, which is something that this fan base needs.
As for the man-marking point, I wouldn’t take too much from Ten Hag’s words. With our eyes, it is clear to see that he employs a hybrid press which is still more man-oriented than a positional press a la Klopp. We have seen it time and time again this season - from the first game vs. Wolves - how our shape becomes disjointed by players following the opponent. The pattern is too consistent for us to rule out, at the very least, elements of man-marking. Either Ten Hag is unable to coach a functional press or he is unable to spot and rectify the issues in our pressing system. If it is truly down to the player’s inability to press in a hybrid system, surely a competent coach would adapt to this and change to a positional press or abandon the high-press altogether and play on
It was a good question for Anka to ask because Ten Hag is not pressed enough on tactical matters. I do not recall a single journalist asking him about the 3-1-6 and the repeated isolation our DM faces.
Moreover, Ten Hag contradicts himself too much for his words to be trusted. In one presser he tells us he can’t play the Ajax way as he must adapt to his players, and yet he persists with the same 3-1-6 and hybrid press as if he is ideologically wedded to it! And then he tells us that this is a good squad after a win, but after Bournemouth resoundingly beat us he implies the squad isn’t good enough. His words stink of desperation as they lack consistently both with his actions and previous things he said, which gives the impression that he is thinking on his feet rather than having the plan and principles he insists he has.
Last edited: