-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Harry Redknapp: The Aftermath
- Thread starter mick cooper
- Start date
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
I thought that was more due to the fact we wanted a Southampton player, and Rupert Lowe had an absolute hatred of all things Spurs so wanted to screw us?
BrainOfLevy
Michael Carrick
I kind of see what Harry is trying to do when he plays the more 'congested' midfield. If he knows teams sit back against us and our wingers are nullified (certainly Bale is crap against a deep defence...Lennon may be a bit better but it's still more difficult for his pace to be recognised) then he wants as many incisive passers in the team as possible to try and break them down. Especially with Defoe as our only striker, playing wingers and hoping he would get on the end of the ball when QPR had ten men behind the ball for 70 minutes just wasn't going to happen. We did create some chances, we never carved them open but as I said, Barca couldn't carve ten-man Chelsea open when their only ambition was to defend. I even understand the idea between swapping Bale and Lennon, because they aren't going to put in crosses that only Defoe can get on the end of, so you want them to beat men one on one and create opportunities through the middle.
We've had some bad luck. Everton took their one good chance against us. United took all their chances against the run of play. Stoke get the luck of a set-piece goal while we miss all our chances. Sunderland make literally no effort to score a goal. QPR score from a free kick and create nothing else. In all those games our finishing was poor and that isn't Harry's fault.
One thing I wish he would have tried was Bale at left back, because I think he is getting found out that he isn't the complete player he was hyped up to be. Against a deep defence he isn't creative, incisive and isn't good in tight spaces. For that reason he also isn't good coming in from the right - Lennon is much better coming in from the left. The only time his wandering has really worked was against Norwich away, and that was because they gave him space in behind to score. If he was at left back maybe he could start his runs from deeper and draw the defence out a bit...but BAE is a good incisive passer and is capable of picking out a team-mate in a tight space so I can understand why he is included. Maybe something like Bale at left back, Lennon on the left and Gio on the right could work though...but that's all with hindsight.
I definitely want Harry gone at the end of the season but I do think we have had terrible luck, and he's also not had a transfer budget to really do what he would like to do, he's had to reduce the wage bill as much as possible and that's hindered him. He's always been good at getting good players to perform but now we need to make that step up further while working on a more limited budget so I don't think he's the right man for us. I feel he can definitely still be defended though.
liquid_football
Jamie Redknapp
True,Pienaar would have been a fine replacement for Lennon in the tougher matches,but people forget also that with Kranjcar we looked great in 4-5 games.Saudi Sportswashing Machine,Wigan,Bolton at home and Liverpool away were all very good matches with NK playing on the right,but then he played in the Arsenal match the first half which ended 2-2 and somehow got the most blame here and we never saw him again.
Pienaar is a hard worker,but still has very good skill on the ball and dribbling skills,I would much prefer to see him in the team on the right wing than us playing 433 ever again(with Sandro and Parker in the same team)
liquid_football
Jamie Redknapp
It was tough on Pienaar,he was bought in January and was injured for a while and when he returned our bad form started and none of our strikers scored(in the league).It didnt help his cause that he was played ahead of Kranjcar who won us 2 games in a row and people were calling for his head very quickly
parklane1
Tony Galvin
Spreading the play wide is the best way of breaking down a team that parks the bus, its so obvious that you wonder why some managers struggle to see it.
a spur from swansea
Naybet
Piennnar was played out of position with us,he's no winger,for a start he's not quick enough,plus he's 30..........it would have been interesting if he'd been fit from the start and if modric had a long term injury if harry would have played him in modric position.......everytime i see him for everton he's always linking play up with the front man and his goal on sunday was from a player who we lacked in the last few months in doing similar,i can't remember modric even come close in doing something the same,he did in the past but not now.......... i think up there he knows he's the big fish in the small pond down here he wasn't.
I would keep him i would but if he's happier where he is get our money back asap.
I would keep him i would but if he's happier where he is get our money back asap.
Rorschach
Sonny Walters
All of that is true but in my hazy recollection of those games he didn't play very well and didn't work very hard either. I can see he's not a bad player but for the reasons you have outlined it didn't happen for him here. He probably needs to be playing regularly to find form, like at Everton, and he was never going to get that at Spurs.
Wriggly
Banned
He knows he is sacked if he doesnt get the England job so its a pay day for him, and if he already knows he's got the job he wont give a toss about what he is saying.
He just doesnt care anymore either way. It's sad to see that the only difference from the whoring idiot being in a job or not is down to ?ú.
He just doesnt care anymore either way. It's sad to see that the only difference from the whoring idiot being in a job or not is down to ?ú.
I don't mind people criticising Redknapp but a lot of assumptions are being made unfairly about him by a lot.
And I don't believe for one second he doesn't care about Spurs, whether he's interested in the England job (or indeed already knows he's got it) or not.....
And I don't believe for one second he doesn't care about Spurs, whether he's interested in the England job (or indeed already knows he's got it) or not.....
I
indianspur
Guest
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Senility really taking hold? His 4-4-2 fetish suggests similar.
I
indianspur
Guest
:ross:
DanishWhite
Jason Dozzell
Whatever we can hear out of the interview and whatever we further more assume:
There can be no doubt, that the football system is sick; Redknapp ifwanted explicitly by England (or any FA or competing club) has a direct interest in doing as poor as possible, because if he is sacked, he 1) gets a pay-off and 2) gets a better negotiating leverage with the new FA/club, who don't have to buy out his contract with Spurs first.
That's not about Redknapp, it's the whole incitement structure being wrong.
For the record, I don't think he doesn't care and does nothing. But he has very little if any incitement to innovate and get "dirty" (e.g. get in conflict with underperforming players), if he can just rabble excuses and get himself sacked eventually through a sort of passiveness in his managment.
Therefore alone it has to be a point of debate.
There can be no doubt, that the football system is sick; Redknapp ifwanted explicitly by England (or any FA or competing club) has a direct interest in doing as poor as possible, because if he is sacked, he 1) gets a pay-off and 2) gets a better negotiating leverage with the new FA/club, who don't have to buy out his contract with Spurs first.
That's not about Redknapp, it's the whole incitement structure being wrong.
For the record, I don't think he doesn't care and does nothing. But he has very little if any incitement to innovate and get "dirty" (e.g. get in conflict with underperforming players), if he can just rabble excuses and get himself sacked eventually through a sort of passiveness in his managment.
Therefore alone it has to be a point of debate.