Monday morning saw one of the most anticipated events in the Premier League this year as Andre Villas-Boas was relieved of his duties as Tottenham Hotspur boss. Many Spurs fans had been calling for the Portuguese coach's head for some time following a heavy 6-0 defeat to Manchester City at the Etihad Stadium, and the 5-0 thrashing at home to Liverpool at the weekend turned out to be the last straw for Spurs chairman Daniel Levy. The owner has proved ruthless since he took over at the club, with former manager Harry Redknapp sacked despite leading the club to the Champions League. AVB was brought in to take the club forward, but following the sale of Gareth Bale in the summer, the former Porto boss struggled to make his host of new signings gel in time to save him from the chop. The news was greeted mainly with agreement as fans appeared to lay all the blame for the club's troubles fairly and squarely at AVB's door. But are they right to? Should Spurs have got rid of one of the best young managers in the game effectively because of three bad results this season against City, Liverpool and West Ham? (Games against Newcastle and Arsenal were also disappointing but Spurs were unlucky not to get something from those games.) If Spurs had beaten Liverpool they would have gone level on points with the Reds and would now occupy one of the Europa League spots. As it happened, they now sit in seventh place just five points from the Champions League slots. By no means a disaster then. So with that in mind, here are five reasons why AVB should not have been sacked by Spurs.
Began writing about football aged 16, I've previously worked for Goal and I'm currently writing for Inside Spanish Football. Specialise in anything linked, connected with or involving football!
