thfcsteff
George Hunt
Re: John Terry retires from England duty
You're smarter than this and I know you know it.
The two situations have the most tenuous of similarities, i.e., both were/are managers.
AVB MANAGED John Terry last season, specifically DURING THE GAME in which Terry had his verbal diarrohea. Terry was also supposedly one of the players who helped lead the 'coup' against AVB at Chelsea. Thus he's going to get asked about it. IF he ignores the question/fudges it off, he would be buried by the press. So he answered it.
Harry, when asked about Chelsea and Europe, was managing a club who could (at that time) have been potentially de-railed by a successful Chelsea Euro campaign (and didn't we just get de-railed?). He was also firmly in the running for the England job. The England team still included Terry and Lampard in it's squad, as well as Cole and Sturridge. Instead of brushing off the question with a bit of the humor and charm which Harry holds in spades (and has dealt in spades over the years) he chose to address questions about them whole-heartedly. Harry never managed Chelsea, so you have to wonder WHY he'd be asked about them, and even further, WHY he'd feel the need to say anything?
I don't want to get into this old history mate, but you keep bringing it up to try and find people guilty of some double-standard which, frankly in this case especially, is always best viewed in context.
Far more general than that. I am talking about the fact that everytime Redknapp dared to talk about another club or a player at a another club, for whatever reason, he was castigated by many on this board. When I put it to those people that at press conferences the press will often ask questions about other teams players they were pretty much universal in what the manager should do. Say no comment, or say I am here to talk about Spurs and Spurs players. Apparently any other response proved that Redknapp was a saggy faced ****.
You're smarter than this and I know you know it.
The two situations have the most tenuous of similarities, i.e., both were/are managers.
AVB MANAGED John Terry last season, specifically DURING THE GAME in which Terry had his verbal diarrohea. Terry was also supposedly one of the players who helped lead the 'coup' against AVB at Chelsea. Thus he's going to get asked about it. IF he ignores the question/fudges it off, he would be buried by the press. So he answered it.
Harry, when asked about Chelsea and Europe, was managing a club who could (at that time) have been potentially de-railed by a successful Chelsea Euro campaign (and didn't we just get de-railed?). He was also firmly in the running for the England job. The England team still included Terry and Lampard in it's squad, as well as Cole and Sturridge. Instead of brushing off the question with a bit of the humor and charm which Harry holds in spades (and has dealt in spades over the years) he chose to address questions about them whole-heartedly. Harry never managed Chelsea, so you have to wonder WHY he'd be asked about them, and even further, WHY he'd feel the need to say anything?
I don't want to get into this old history mate, but you keep bringing it up to try and find people guilty of some double-standard which, frankly in this case especially, is always best viewed in context.