Jamie O’Hara has never been afraid to speak his mind, and his latest comments about former Tottenham manager Ange Postecoglou show exactly that. Even though Postecoglou delivered a historic Europa League triumph last season, O’Hara insists he still does not rate the Australian’s time in charge.
His criticism is as direct as it is brutal, describing the former Spurs boss as nothing short of a “fraud” and dismissing the idea that Tottenham should have stuck with him.
Postecoglou’s second season at Spurs was anything but ordinary. Against all expectations, he guided Tottenham to their first major trophy in 17 years. Winning the Europa League in dramatic fashion instantly carved his name into the club’s history and made him only the third Spurs manager ever to lift a European trophy.
His European campaign was nearly flawless, with Spurs unbeaten at home throughout the tournament and growing in confidence with every match.
However, the domestic story told a very different tale. Tottenham’s Premier League form collapsed as the season went on, especially when Postecoglou shifted his full attention toward Europe. The gamble produced glory, but it also dragged Spurs to a 17th-place finish, with 22 league defeats exposing the cost of prioritising silverware.
Despite the Europa League success, Postecoglou’s future at Tottenham was decided in a matter of days. Daniel Levy made it clear that the club could not tolerate such poor Premier League results, regardless of European achievements.
As a result, Postecoglou was dismissed shortly after the final, and Brentford’s Thomas Frank was appointed early in the summer.
The decision split opinion among fans, with many feeling the club should have rewarded the manager who finally ended the long trophy drought. But others believed the board acted responsibly, choosing stability over sentiment.
Jamie O’Hara belongs firmly in the latter group. Reflecting on Postecoglou’s time at the club, especially as Thomas Frank now faces pressure of his own, O’Hara criticised both the results and the style of play.
Speaking on talkSPORT, he argued that any suggestion Spurs should have remained loyal to Postecoglou is “ridiculous.” He pointed out the 17th-place finish, the 22 league losses, and what he described as football that was difficult to watch.
For him, the European success cannot overshadow what he considers a disastrous domestic season. He accused those calling for Postecoglou’s return of misunderstanding what the club needs and ignoring the realities of the Premier League.
While O’Hara’s comments are strong, the full picture of Spurs’ struggles is more nuanced. Postecoglou dealt with a severe injury crisis that forced him to rely on a thin squad for long periods of the season.
Key players were missing at crucial times, and rotation became almost impossible as the Europa League knockout rounds demanded full strength. From the start of the campaign, the Australian made it clear that his priority was delivering a trophy, something Spurs had not achieved in nearly two decades. His ambition paid off in Europe but came at a significant domestic cost.
Postecoglou’s departure closes a dramatic chapter in Tottenham’s modern history. Some fans still believe he deserved more time to build on his European success.
Others, like O’Hara, feel his league record left the club with no choice. Regardless of opinion, his time at Spurs will always be remembered for that unforgettable night in Bilbao.
Yet it is clear that the debate over his legacy continues to divide supporters, and with Thomas Frank now facing scrutiny of his own, the conversation around what Tottenham truly need in a manager is far from settled.
