Harry Redknapp: The Aftermath

[Golfball]

Ole Gunnar Solskjaer disagrees

I mean irrelevant in this context.

Harry has said he wants 4 wins. The game had been level 20 minutes. But because he made a very late substitution it means he settled?

Had he wanted a draw, surely he would have made the change earlier? Straight after it went 1-1.

 

[shaney]

Hmmmm and what has he said wrong?

4th should'nt even have been an option when 3rd was there for the taking. All Harry wants is "top 4" on his CV..............I doubt he realy gives a toss wether Chelsea put us out of the CL. I can see the predictable quotes if Chelsea win the CL with Harry sprouting guff like "well we finished 4th which was what we set out to do so I've done my job, im a success lovely jubbly, it aint my fault we have lost out due to Chelsea, that is a million to one chance, we are so unlucky, when i came here this club was praying for top 4 and I got em there.......twice".

 

[AdamB]

But then you're doing the exact same thing with Gallas, and CB is one of the most important areas - the backbone of the team and we have been looking solid there with Gallas/Kaboul. I wouldn't want that changed against Fulham who will pose problems and I'm not sure I'd trust King I'm afraid.....

Play Adam Smith if you really want to.

The fact is that we dont have a natual LW apart from Bale nor a creative CM apart from Modric. We do have other CBs, in King. We shouldnt be moving Bale or Modric

 

[AdamB]

And who do we take off for Defoe with 20 to go? You can't take off Modric - everything goes through him. Take off vdV and half this board would be up in arms. Removing Lennon leaves the team unbalanced. Sandro was our main ball winner and back-tracker, so remove him and you aren't guaranteed possession, and he played the ball forward all day today.

Besides, your call for Defoe to come on with 20 to go is a different argument to the one others are making, which is that it should have been Defoe not Parker that came on...but that was on 89 minutes, not 70 minutes.

So we now have 2 different versions of the apparently obvious thing Harry should have done with Defoe, and neither of them fully explains what the team would look like after either change. There's a fundamental lack of clarity on what exactly the people complaining about today are saying.

I dont usually agree with Harry but, today, I agree with you that his options were limited. Removing VdV for Parker was stupid

 

[Golfball]

If it went well today we couldnt do worse than 3rd with a win next week

Yes. But we don't have a right to just roll teams over at their own ground with 10 men.

It's not a bad result and we certainly went looking for a win.

I mean Gallas stayed up front towards the end ffs. People just like to jump on everything Harry does, no matter how minor.

 

[harr1984]

Play Adam Smith if you really want to.

The fact is that we dont have a natual LW apart from Bale nor a creative CM apart from Modric. We do have other CBs, in King. We shouldnt be moving Bale or Modric

Against Fulham at home I'd play Bale LB personally he'd still be marauding down the wing and would be harder to mark - plus that way he would be forced to actually stay out wide. Dempsey is a handful and I'd much rather Gallas and Kaboul continue their partnership....

 

[Golfball]

I dont usually agree with Harry but, today, I agree with you that his options were limited. Removing VdV for Parker was stupid

Even if it was stupid, it was a minor incident which probably made little difference.

Harry probably did it to allow others to get forward. Vdv had to go off he was done. Defoe would have been an option but he didn't do it.

 

[AdamB]

Even if it was stupid, it was a minor incident which probably made little difference.

Harry probably did it to allow others to get forward. Vdv had to go off he was done. Defoe would have been an option but he didn't do it.

I dont buy that. Harry takes VdV off a ridiculous amount. Modric on the other hand has played every minute of our last 26 league games - that tells you that substitutions are more or less pre-meditated

 

[Spursalot]

Yes. But we don't have a right to just roll teams over at their own ground with 10 men.

It's not a bad result and we certainly went looking for a win.

I mean Gallas stayed up front towards the end ffs. People just like to jump on everything Harry does, no matter how minor.

Wait, So why didn't Harry just sub Gallas for defoe and VDV for Parker?

Surely that would have made the most sense..

 

[indianspur]

whenever Fergie is up bricks creek, he throws on every striker he has on his bench. If its good enough for him.........

 

[he_is_you_know]

whenever Fergie is up bricks creek, he throws on every striker he has on his bench. If its good enough for him.........

Last week against City Hern?índez & Berbatov both stayed on the bench. Throwing on more attackers doesn't automatically make a team more attacking. AC Milan eased home in the last ten minutes against Arsenal when Wenger brought on strikers for midfielders.

As for today, I was aghast when I saw Defoe coming on at 0-1 because we were controlling the game. I was happy he left it as it was for most of the game because we were in control and were under no pressure. With five minutes to go though I probably would have rolled the dice and brought on Defoe because I think risking three points was more valuable than losing one.

 

[indianspur]

Last week against City Hern?índez & Berbatov both stayed on the bench. Throwing on more attackers doesn't automatically make a team more attacking. AC Milan eased home in the last ten minutes against Arsenal when Wenger brought on strikers for midfielders.

to be honest Fergie had a complete brain freeze last week.....he picked the wrong team, was too defensive, and made the wrong subs.

 

[liquid_football]

You guys are comparing Milan and City with Aston fudging Villa.They couldnt keep the ball for longer than 5 seconds today.If we had all 3 strikers on the field,we would still have dominated the match.

 

[indianspur]

You guys are comparing Milan and City with Aston fudging Villa.They couldnt keep the ball for longer than 5 seconds today.If we had all 3 strikers on the field,we would still have dominated the match.

exactly, this is Aston Villa we are talking about, who this season have a record like this against the top teams at home

Man U - L
Emirates Marketing Project -L
Arse - L
Chelsea - L
Liverpool - L

Tottenham - D.....of course

 

[he_is_you_know]

You guys are comparing Milan and City with Aston fudging Villa.They couldnt keep the ball for longer than 5 seconds today.If we had all 3 strikers on the field,we would still have dominated the match.

Villa are a terrible team, and were terrible today in the second half. But having even two strikers on in place of someone capable of supplying a dangerous ball to them just makes it easier for them to defend, as all they have to do is get bodies in the way.

It's like wanting to have a toss and looking down at which of your two penises to use, only to realise that you've got no hands.

 

[liquid_football]

Villa are a terrible team, and were terrible today in the second half. But having even two strikers on in place of someone capable of supplying a dangerous ball to them just makes it easier for them to defend, as all they have to do is get bodies in the way.

It's like wanting to have a toss and looking down at which of your two penises to use, only to realise that you've got no hands.

You can't supply a dangerous ball against a team that sits so deep as Villa did today.All you can do is crowd the box with as many people as possible,put in as many balls in the box as possible and hope for a goal.

You cant come through the middle,its obviously too crowded and every time we tried going through the wings,they blocked our crosses and we got a corner kick instead.We didnt create a single clear cut chance in the second half.In 90% of cases I agree,posession is great,but in a must win game against such a Villa side,I would have used all my strikers for the last 15-20 minutes and hoped for a scrappy goal.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

whenever Fergie is up bricks creek, he throws on every striker he has on his bench. If its good enough for him.........

Simply not true.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Thought Redknapp's subs (all one of them!) was poor today, but being down to 10 men limited his options. VDV having the injury didn't help, and maybe he should have come off sooner, but I can understand why Redknapp left VDV out there.

Personally I was hoping he was going to take Lennon off, put Defoe on and play with wing backs and two centre halves and keep VDV just behind the front two. But that would have been risky considering we were down to 10 men.

In isolation, down to 10 men away from home and pull it back from a losing position is a good result. In context of what a win would've brought, it was more than frustrating.

 

[Kingdawson]

Saudi Sportswashing Machine vs Emirates Marketing Project

How was the game going = 0-0. City having lots of possession but not looking likely to score.

What does manager do = Take off attacking midfielder and replace him with a defensive midfielder.

what happens = City create more, look more threatening and eventually win

Result = 0-2 win and Mancini is a genius.

















imo you don't understand football if you don't get the logic for taking off vdv for Parker. I'm not saying you have to agree with it but if you don't understand what Redknapp was thinking then you don't understand football imho.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Saudi Sportswashing Machine vs Emirates Marketing Project

How was the game going = 0-0. City having lots of possession but not looking likely to score.

What does manager do = Take off attacking midfielder and replace him with a defensive midfielder.

what happens = City create more, look more threatening and eventually win

Result = 0-2 win and Mancini is a genius.

















imo you don't understand football if you don't get the logic for taking off vdv for Parker. I'm not saying you have to agree with it but if you don't understand what Redknapp was thinking then you don't understand football imho.

A lot of people don't understand that if you play a DM then you stabilise the whole shape of the team and can play further forward. This was an argument that raged long and hard on here during the Carrick days, especially when he left and so many regulars on here were saying we didn't even need a DM.....