Tottenham board finally sacks Frank, but still has no succession plan

Tottenham Hotspur’s board belatedly pulled the plug on the Thomas Frank era on Wednesday morning, yet the club that prides itself on state-of-the-art infrastructure appears to have drawn up no blueprint for what happens next. The 2-1 home defeat to Newcastle on Tuesday, which left Spurs only four points above the relegation places, prompted chief executive Vinai Venkatesham and sporting director Johan Lange to recommend termination to owners the Lewis family. Non-executive chairman Peter Charrington endorsed the move late on Tuesday night, ending a reign that had long since lost both dressing-room confidence and any discernible on-field identity.

While the decision itself has been greeted with relief by supporters who have watched their side register just two Premier League victories since October, the absence of an immediate successor has intensified scrutiny of a hierarchy that dithered for months. Club statements indicate an “interim appointment process” will now begin, with a permanent hire not expected until after this summer’s World Cup. That timeline leaves whoever walks out against Arsenal in 11 days scrambling to stave off what would be a financially ruinous relegation.

According to a detailed report by Football.London’s Alasdair Gold, Frank’s authority had eroded weeks ago. Players outside a tight leadership clique often went days without individual feedback, and the squad’s collective belief in the tactical direction evaporated as performances deteriorated. The article also questions why the Dane was granted an extended grace period when predecessor Ange Postecoglou was dismissed far sooner despite evidence of a coherent playing style.

The broader context is equally damning. Since Mauricio Pochettino’s 2019 sacking—six months after a Champions League final—Tottenham have cycled through managers without ever breaking the reactive cycle of panic and patch-work solutions. Frank, like those before him, was offered patience predicated on injuries and fixture congestion, yet never produced football compelling enough to justify the faith. With Champions League results briefly masking league form, the board postponed tough decisions until the threat of relegation became existential.

Responsibility, however, does not stop with the departed head coach. Venkatesham, Lange and Charrington now face accusations of strategic negligence: no contingency list, no interim coach waiting in the wings, and only vague pledges to “explore internal and external options.” For a club boasting England’s most lucrative stadium, the failure to anticipate managerial volatility is being branded inexcusable.

Tottenham’s next appointment will carry one immediate remit—secure survival. Beyond that, supporters and analysts alike question whether the current executive structure possesses either the vision or competence to return Spurs to trophy contention. The coming days will reveal whether the same decision-makers who allowed the crisis to deepen can now orchestrate a rescue mission without a roadmap.