Harry Redknapp: The Aftermath

[Armchair Expert]

My point was "Bringing on a defensive midfielder is not the same as settling for the current result" I then gave an example. More strikers doesn't equal more goals. "Harry settling" That seems to be the entire point of this thread and those complaining.

It not only allowed Bale more freedom it also allowed Lennon and Modric more freedom. If you actually think, if you really think, that the idea was to bring on Parker so that Gallas could stay up front you need to stop, breathe, relax and think a bit before you start typing.

I'm sorry, but a mild change of formation in the 89th minute isn't world beating management.

Why bring Defoe on at 0 - 1 then, and not still at 1 - 1?

Was Harry happy with a draw the whole time? Why is a substitution valid one minute and not the next.

I cant believe people are defending bringing Parker on in the 89th minute of a gmae you need to win as a sound tactical decision.

Did Mancini bring De Jing on in the 89th minute? Of course he fudging didn't!

If Harry's master plan of Modric right, Lennon left was going to be the grand saviour today, it would have at least need longer than the 89th minute to take effect.

 

[Richie]

My point was "Bringing on a defensive midfielder is not the same as settling for the current result" I then gave an example. More strikers doesn't equal more goals. "Harry settling" That seems to be the entire point of this thread and those complaining.

It not only allowed Bale more freedom it also allowed Lennon and Modric more freedom. If you actually think, if you really think, that the idea was to bring on Parker so that Gallas could stay up front you need to stop, breathe, relax and think a bit before you start typing.

I don't think that was the intention, but that is what happened and is something a coach should forsee. IMO all the sub achieved was to put worse attacking players in forward positions where Defoe would have been better suited.

I don't think Harry 'settled' for the draw, but I don't think he did everything he could to win it. At about 70 minutes in the commentator said how he thought van der Vaart looked tired, and it took Harry until the 88th minute to bring him off.

Again I'll say it, bringing on Defoe for VdV would have left us in exactly the same position defensively as we had been for the entire second half, during which Bale, Lennon etc... had no trouble getting on the ball in forward positions. Bringing on Parker simply gave us one less attacker or one worse attacker when we went forward

 

[Naughton16]

I reckon Harry got simply got the maths wrong.

 

[Spaceman]

probably because of danny fudging rose. that red screwed us up proper, get rid of him in summer

 

[chancer]

Another consideration in the debate on whether a loss mattered: Chelsea still have 2 matches to go.

4 points from those games would have them on 65, which is what we'd have had if we'd lost today. A loss to Fulham would therefore mean Chelsea finish above us. The point at Villa point I think makes it harder for them to pass us.

 

[diego_maradona]

Another consideration in the debate on whether a loss mattered: Chelsea still have 2 matches to go.

4 points from those games would have them on 65, which is what we'd have had if we'd lost today. A loss to Fulham would therefore mean Chelsea finish above us. The point at Villa point I think makes it harder for them to pass us.

But Chelseas GD could be better than ours no?

 

[braineclipse]

They are all not natural goal scorers,Defoe is.We needed a goal,Defoe was the most likely person to score one

Defoe needs to get the ball in or around the box to score. Other players offer more in buildup play, there needs to be a balance between out and out strikers and those that provide the creativity.

I'm sorry, but a mild change of formation in the 89th minute isn't world beating management.

Why bring Defoe on at 0 - 1 then, and not still at 1 - 1?

Was Harry happy with a draw the whole time? Why is a substitution valid one minute and not the next.

I cant believe people are defending bringing Parker on in the 89th minute of a gmae you need to win as a sound tactical decision.

Did Mancini bring De Jing on in the 89th minute? Of course he fudging didn't!

If Harry's master plan of Modric right, Lennon left was going to be the grand saviour today, it would have at least need longer than the 89th minute to take effect.

You don't think 0-1 and 1-1 are different situations requiring different approaches? Really? This is up there with "A draw is the same as a loss" and makes me think that I should probably stay away from this discussion until people have calmed down a bit.

We were doing very well with 10 men up until the 89th minute. If it's not broken, don't fix it?

Then as we were running out of steam (and again, VdV might have felt a slight injury) he made a change to allow our tired, but creative players to stay forward and not have to chase back as much.

 

[Hotshot-Tottenham]

I honestly cannot answer that one. He must have known that City had won? if so it did not matter if we lost or drew as we was still above Saudi Sportswashing Machine. We needed Defoe's long range boots today. If there is one thing Villa are pretty good at is sitting back on a lead and wasting time. They have the most draws in the whole league.

it does matter.

if we'd have lost today, Saudi Sportswashing Machine could go above us next week with a draw if we lost against Fulham. now they'd have to win.

 

[ringo]

I couldn't get a river to work and listened to the game on the radio. It soudned to me like Modric was running the show from the centre of midfield when we had 10 vs 11. Bringing on Parker changed that dynamic, and shifted Modric out of the area where he was having the most influence. There was then a spell straight after the substitution where we lost momentum, befoe picking it back up again right at the end. That was momentum we couldn't afford to loose at that point.

When you are dominating a team in midfield 10 vs 11, you don't change it unless the Cms are knackered. Our problem was not winning or keeping possession in midfield, but making and converting chances into goals. That is why bringing Parker on was a mistake. It actually had a negative impact on our performance.

 

[Hotshot-Tottenham]

Or we could allow Modric, Lennon, Bale AND Defoe further up field? A draw is the same as a loss, if we had gone for it and conceded it would have made no difference whatsoever

no it's not, and yes it would.

 

[Armchair Expert]

Defoe needs to get the ball in or around the box to score. Other players offer more in buildup play, there needs to be a balance between out and out strikers and those that provide the creativity.



You don't think 0-1 and 1-1 are different situations requiring different approaches? Really? This is up there with "A draw is the same as a loss" and makes me think that I should probably stay away from this discussion until people have calmed down a bit.

We were doing very well with 10 men up until the 89th minute. If it's not broken, don't fix it?

Then as we were running out of steam (and again, VdV might have felt a slight injury) he made a change to allow our tired, but creative players to stay forward and not have to chase back as much.

I think we have a fundamental difference of opinions of how well we were doing in the second half. I thought, appart from the penalty, that we never looked like scoring. I thought Harry looked extremely indecisive stood on the touch line today and wasn't capable of making positive changes to influence the proceedings.

I think again, like on many occasoins this season, he stood back, watched and hoped.

 

[Naughton16]

it does matter.

if we'd have lost today, Saudi Sportswashing Machine could go above us next week with a draw if we lost against Fulham. now they'd have to win.

A swing in GD of 20 odd goals required for that scenerio. Not likely.

 

[chancer]

But Chelseas GD could be better than ours no?

They are at present 2 goals worse than us. 23/21.

6 points with 1-0 wins and us drawing Fulham would I think give us same points, same GD. Without the point today we'd have been one back.

At least I think that's right...but one way or the other, another point is that we're still debating these permutations here and Harry and his coaches had to work it out on the sidelines, with 10 men, in a game we're dominating. That's a tricky spot, and good luck to anyone who thinks it should be easy, or that even the best coaches in the world would get it right every time.

 

[Armchair Expert]

They are at present 2 goals worse than us. 23/21.

6 points with 1-0 wins and us drawing Fulham would I think give us same points, same GD. Without the point today we'd have been one back.

At least I think that's right...but one way or the other, another point is that we're still debating these permutations here and Harry and his coaches had to work it out on the sidelines, with 10 men, in a game we're dominating. That's a tricky spot, and good luck to anyone who thinks it should be easy, or that even the best coaches in the world would get it that right every time.

it is tricky, but thats why he gets paid his money, and thats why you have professional football managers, to manage the team.

 

[DHSF]

I think we have a fundamental difference of opinions of how well we were doing in the second half. I thought, appart from the penalty, that we never looked like scoring. I thought Harry looked extremely indecisive stood on the touch line today and wasn't capable of making positive changes to influence the proceedings.

I think again, like on many occasoins this season, he stood back, watched and hoped.

Armchair - I agree that we didnt look likely to score but thats because of two things. You have villa the most defensive team in the world playing with ten men in the penalty box. Aand you have Villa with a result to protect.

What really was the biggest turning point was their FLUKEY goal. Had we scored first, which we looked likely too, we would have found more space and created more.

The first goal was always going to be important in a game against a defensive unambitious unit such as Villa. I would have accepted a great goal but it hurt to have gone 1-0 with such a dreadful goal

 

[braineclipse]

I think we have a fundamental difference of opinions of how well we were doing in the second half. I thought, appart from the penalty, that we never looked like scoring. I thought Harry looked extremely indecisive stood on the touch line today and wasn't capable of making positive changes to influence the proceedings.

I think again, like on many occasoins this season, he stood back, watched and hoped.

I think we have different opinions on how easy it is to break down a hard working defensive premier league side away from home with 10 men.

A swing in GD of 20 odd goals required for that scenerio. Not likely.

I would suggest you read the post you quoted once more, a bit more carefully this time.

 

[Armchair Expert]

I think we have different opinions on how easy it is to break down a hard working defensive premier league side away from home with 10 men.

I didn't say that it was easy, just that you have to try and have a positive influence as a manager.

It's definitely not an easy task, but that WAS the task unfortuntely, and in my opinion Harry was very passive again, as he has been on numerous occasions.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

BECAUSE

If we lost then Arsenal only need a draw at West Brom but now they need to win and at West Brom with Hodgson's last game; It's going to be tough for Arsenal.

Imo unless vdv was inj I would have kept it as it was for the sake of 8 mins.
He jiggled the formation massively just too introduce parker. Realistically villa were no threat but I can kind of understand hr thinking regarding the permitations of a draw versus a defeat (however unlikely)
As pointed out if we win arsenal have to win as well. Also it means newc have to win at everton even if we lose.
A loss today would have opened up many more option for the others.
Natrually a win would have been massive but it was when we had 11 that we let ourselves down. 10 men is risky but the 10 done well and deserved to get back in it.

Edit. I haven.t allowed 4 chelsea (lge place) in the calcs.

 

[SteveAWOL]

Another issue i have with redknapp during his whole time here he does not make changes quick enough.

This. Reminds me of the ManU game which we largely dominated but just couldn't score, well until he finally brought on Defoe with 10mins to go and we at least got a consolation goal.

 

[Armchair Expert]

Armchair - I agree that we didnt look likely to score but thats because of two things. You have villa the most defensive team in the world playing with ten men in the penalty box. Aand you have Villa with a result to protect.

What really was the biggest turning point was their FLUKEY goal. Had we scored first, which we looked likely too, we would have found more space and created more.

The first goal was always going to be important in a game against a defensive unambitious unit such as Villa. I would have accepted a great goal but it hurt to have gone 1-0 with such a dreadful goal

Theres no denying it was a big ask, but that was unfortunately the task in front of us.

Maybe if Bale played in his proper position from the get go, (and for the last 3-4 months) we may not have been in the position of having to claw the situation back.

I still think Harry was about as influential as the bloke the sells the beers at half time.

I think he's been found out time and time again. And today was another case.