The departure of a manager is often a period of quiet reflection and public diplomacy for football players, and Micky van de Ven’s recent comments regarding Thomas Frank are no exception.
Following the dismissal of the Danish coach, the towering Dutch defender has broken his silence, providing a window into a dressing room that has been through a significant amount of upheaval in a very short span of time.
For a club like Tottenham Hotspur, instability has unfortunately become a recurring theme. Frank’s exit was notably the first major decision made since the departure of long-term chairman Daniel Levy, yet it marked a staggering sixteenth managerial sacking in just twenty-five years. While the faces in the boardroom might change, the volatility in the dugout remains a constant feature of life in North London.
The decision to part ways with Frank was ultimately driven by the harsh reality of the league table. Results had taken a disastrous turn, with the team managing a dismal run of only two victories in seventeen matches.
This slump left the club languishing in sixteenth place, hovering dangerously close to a relegation battle that would have been unthinkable at the start of the campaign. As the supporters grew increasingly frustrated with the turgid style of play and the lack of tactical direction, the pressure became insurmountable. The hierarchy eventually pulled the trigger, appointing Igor Tudor as the interim manager to steer the ship back toward calmer waters.
In an interview with Sky Sports, Van de Ven was candid about the emotional toll these changes take on the playing staff. He noted that it is always difficult to see a manager leave, especially when you have spent the last six months working together with such intensity.
For many of the younger players in the squad, this was their second time seeing a coach fired in a year, following the departure of Ange Postecoglou last season. Van de Ven highlighted that when you see someone every single day and build a professional routine with them, their sudden absence creates a void that is never easy to celebrate, regardless of the results on the pitch.
Beyond the professional obligation, there was clearly a personal bond between the defender and his former boss. Van de Ven explained that his relationship with Frank was built on a foundation of constant communication.
They frequently discussed tactical details and off-the-pitch matters, developing a connection that helped the defender navigate the pressures of the Premier League. This goes against some of the rumors that had been circulating toward the end of Frank’s tenure, which suggested that the manager had lost the respect or the ear of the dressing room. According to Van de Ven, those claims do not reflect the reality he experienced.
When asked about the general atmosphere during those final weeks, the Dutchman was quick to defend Frank’s character. He described the coach’s personality as “top,” praising his kindness toward everyone in the building, from the playing staff to the support workers.
This suggests that while the tactical plan may have faltered and the results disappeared, the human element of Frank’s management remained intact. He was a man who communicated well with the group and treated people with a level of decency that left a positive impression on the squad.
As Tottenham looks to the future under Igor Tudor, the focus now shifts to whether this “togetherness” that Van de Ven mentioned can be translated into points. The talent in the squad is undeniable, but the psychological baggage of repeated managerial failures can be heavy. Van de Ven’s comments serve as a reminder that football is a human business.
While fans and pundits look at stats and league positions, the players are dealing with the loss of a mentor and a friend. The challenge for the new coaching staff will be to harness that sense of unity and direct it toward a common goal: climbing away from the bottom of the table and restoring a sense of pride to the white shirt.
