Ange Postecoglou warns Spurs against copying Arsenal’s ‘schoolyard’ dark arts
Ange Postecoglou says he would not want his Tottenham players to engage in the game’s darker arts on set pieces as Ben White did for Arsenal in Sunday’s north London derby. White was assigned to distract the Spurs goalkeeper, Guglielmo Vicario, taking a starting position behind him on corners and, just before the kick was taken, moving around, backing in and blocking him from reaching the ball.
The Arsenal defender performed the trick on both of his team’s first-half corners – no Spurs player was close to him – and each resulted in a goal: the first a Pierre-Emile Højbjerg own goal for 1-0, the second a Kai Havertz header for a 3-0 half-time lead. Before the first corner, White had grabbed at the cuff of one of Vicario’s gloves. None of his actions drew a whistle from the referee, Michael Oliver.
Spurs’ problems when defending set pieces have been increasingly clear. They have conceded from 14 of them in the Premier League this season (excluding penalties) – the joint-fifth worst record in the division – and let in six goals from corners in their past nine games.
It was noticeable that Postecoglou, who takes his team to Chelsea for another London derby on Thursday night, gave the half-time substitute Pape Sarr a man-marking job against White on each of Arsenal’s four secondhalf corners. Sarr tracked White stepfor-step, matched him physically and did not allow him to get at Vicario.
Arsenal did not capitalise further, although Postecoglou’s intervention appeared to be too little, too late. Arsenal ran out 3-2 winners. The Spurs manager has his principles and he indicated they did not include White-style blocking on set pieces.
“It’s a strategy,” Postecoglou said, when asked whether the moves were cheating or dark arts. “You can label it but it’s a strategy. I’m not casting judgment. If people are going to think that’s going to give them an advantage or whatever … I don’t worry about that stuff. I just try to focus on building teams that win things.
“If it’s not going to be that then it’s going to be something else. I know it’s great theatre. Whether he [White] is trying to undo his glove, tickle his armpit or whatever … I don’t care. I try to get my players not to focus on that stuff.
“If you want to go down that avenue … what’s he [Vicario] supposed to do? Throw a punch and knock him out? Or say: ‘Please don’t touch me?’ What does that do? Seriously, we’re not in the schoolyard. To be honest, if I saw one of my players do it, I’d be saying: ‘Mate, seriously? Get the ball and play some football.’”
There was an irony to Vicario’s actions in the final minute of stoppage time when Spurs won a corner. He went forward and stood next to the Arsenal
goalkeeper, David Raya, jostling with him. Pedro Porro’s delivery was poor and Arsenal cleared.
Postecoglou admitted he was bemused as to what constitutes a foul on the goalkeeper and revealed that Spurs had contacted the referees’ body in England to ask for clarity.
“I watched the Champions League tie between Bayern Munich and Real Madrid [on Tuesday] and there was a couple of times they went in on the keeper and it was a foul straight away,” Postecoglou said. “It is a weird one for me.
“You’re allowed to reach out [to the referees’ body]. We just wanted some clarity on what the actual position is on interference on the keeper. I’m ancient and I always thought that the keeper was a bit of a protected species. Maybe that’s shifted now and I missed the memo. Did I get clarity? No, not really.”
Postecoglou, who reported that Ben Davies and Timo Werner had sustained muscle injuries against Arsenal to end their seasons, is adamant that his team are on the right path. They have 60 points with a tough five-game run-in to come – after Chelsea, they go to Liverpool on Sunday and they must also play Manchester City at home. The club finished last season with 60 points.
“Absolutely yeah, absolutely,” Postecoglou said. “Clearly, clearly. As clear as you want it to be: 20-20. Definitely; 100%. What gives me my optimism? What I see. Playing our football, measuring ourselves against the best. The players have a real belief in what we’re doing. That’s all I need to see.”
Postecoglou has resolved defensive set-piece issues at his previous clubs, and most notably Celtic, and he is not remotely bothered about Spurs in this area, reacheding for a famous song lyric to reinforce his point.
“To quote Billy Joel: ‘You may be right, I may be crazy, but it’s maybe a lunatic you’re looking for,’” Postecoglou said. “Enough of you have done enough research on me to know this is not the first time I’ve been questioned about set pieces in my coaching career. Eventually I will create a team that has success and it won’t be because of working on set pieces.”
Larry Nassar following flaws in initial investigations.
Nassar was given an effective life sentence after pleading guilty to multiple charges after being initially charged with sexually assaulting at least 265 women and girls. The NCA and local child advocacy centers were not involved in the FBI’s initial investigations and interviews with survivors. As the Nassar investigation developed the FBI engaged specialist investigators and interviewers with specifically-trained CAC interviewers also brought into the investigation.
Later, the NCA agreed a series of memorandums of understanding with the FBI that provided a platform for the agency to work with local child advocacy centers and follow the CAC investigatory process in similar cases.
“Even some of the young adult victims of Nassar were interviewed by children’s advocacy centers,” says Huizar. “In the Nassar case there were hundreds of victims that needed to be interviewed which far outpaced the number of trained forensic interviewers that the FBI had.
“There are often good intentions with these third-party entities but there are deep flaws. Some of these flaws are very difficult to overcome the way things are currently structured even when you have people making some good faith efforts to do so. At least that is the case in the US.”
In a statement to the Guardian, which can be read in its entirety at the bottom of this story, Sport Complaints said: “The complaint process is confidential. As an Independent Third Party (ITP) to Hockey Canada, Sport Complaints is not permitted to provide any information regarding a specific complaint.”
It added: “We welcome further questions about the process, and will respond to the extent possible without compromising the integrity of the process and our obligations of confidentiality.”
Canadian member of parliament Kirsty Duncan, a former minister of sport under Justin Trudeau, said the government was lagging behind in a commitment to safe sport and needed to hold sports organizations to a higher level of accountability by threatening funding cuts.
“I made it clear to Sport Canada during my time as minister of sport that the system would only change if federal funding was tied to proven efforts on equity and ending abuse, discrimination, and harassment,” Duncan told the Guardian. “What’s needed as an immediate next step is a comprehensive, thorough, investigation of a national sport system that failed to protect athletes and young people for 50 years and continues to fall short.”
Speaking broadly as she is not permitted to comment on specific cases as a sitting member of parliament, Duncan said more transparency is needed of so-called “independent third parties” that manage investigations of abuse on behalf of sports organizations and called for a national enquiry into abuse in Canada’s sports system.
“How independent are third parties?” Duncan said. “Who are they accountable to and who is funding them? The national sports organizations and their collective power also need to be thoroughly investigated: Together, they are a formidable force that can shut down athletes, politics, and the media. An inquiry would absolutely have to look at independent third parties and putting new guardrails in place.”
• Sport Complaints issued the following statement in response to queries during the reporting of this story:
The complaint process is confidential. As an Independent Third Party (ITP) to Hockey Canada, Sport Complaints is not permitted to provide any information regarding a specific complaint.
The complaint process is governed by Hockey Canada’s Maltreatment Complaint Management Policy. Under the Policy, the ITP appoints investigators, adjudicators and/or mediators to perform their obligations under the Policy. The investigators, adjudicators and mediators are independent from and external to Sport Complaints and are selected for each complaint based on their experience, educational background and abilities - taking into consideration the nature of the complaint and the age of the participants. Investigators have background and experience that renders them qualified to address the complaint to which they are assigned.
Schedule A of the Policy stipulates the Investigation Procedure. The investigators comply with this Procedure and use their experience to determine the appropriate process within the requirements of the Policy, including who to interview and in what format.
Schedule A, article 9 of the Policy states that “Should the investigator find that there are possible instances of offence under the Criminal Code or behaviour which might constitute child abuse under the relevant provincial/territorial legislation, the investigator shall advise the Complainant and the ITP that it must refer the matter to the police.” Investigators are responsible for determining if the criteria for referring the matter to the police are met and advising the Complainant and ITP accordingly.
Once an investigator has completed their investigation, Schedule A, article 8 specifies that the investigator is to provide the investigation report to the ITP, who will disclose it to the adjudicative panel and may also disclose it, or a redacted version, to the Parties. Schedule A, article 10 of the Policy states that the adjudicator will take the facts as characterized by the investigation report as determinative, unless rebutted by the Parties. Meaning, the presumption will be that the investigation report is determinative of the facts; however, a party may rebut the presumption if they do not agree with the factual findings set out in the investigation report and if they can demonstrate that there was a significant flaw in the process followed by the investigator, or can establish that the report contains conclusions that are not consistent with the facts as found by the investigator. If the presumption is rebutted, the Adjudicator will determine to what extent the investigation report will be accepted as evidence and to what extent a witness or Party may be required to give fresh evidence at the hearing.
It appears to us as though there is an individual who is dissatisfied with the outcome of the complaint process, and is attempting to cast aspirations on Sports Complaints [sic], investigators and others as a result, and has found that they are able to use your news media organizations as a receptive avenue to do so. As noted at the outset, Sports Complaints’ [sic] ability to respond to any dissatisfaction with the complaint process is limited by the need to maintain confidentiality. In essence, this deprives our organization of any meaningful ability to respond to counter false, unfounded or misleading allegations about the conduct of any specific investigation. It is our view that, particularly where minors are involved, it should be abundantly clear that it is highly improper for any adult participant in the process to speak publicly about the process and involved minors, and equally irresponsible for the media to publish unverified allegations in this context.
We welcome further questions about the process, and will respond to the extent possible without compromising the integrity of the process and our obligations of confidentiality.