-
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
O/T Manager Sack Watch
- Thread starter Jordinho
- Start date
spasm
Gudni Bergsson
i really feel sorry for him. top man. but very good championship manager at best?
raboner
Banned
to be fair, the squad he's managing is championship standard at best (in other words, total brick).. they've signed the likes of snodgrass and howson from leeds, i mean, not heaps of ambition there.
when he was in charge of a decent squad at Saudi Sportswashing Machine, he did very well.. you're only as good as what you have available and if he keeps norwich up, it will be something of a miracle in my opinion.
when he was in charge of a decent squad at Saudi Sportswashing Machine, he did very well.. you're only as good as what you have available and if he keeps norwich up, it will be something of a miracle in my opinion.
Robspur12
John Lacy
A little unfair guys, both have taken over hopelessly unbalanced squads which they need to reshape. Both imo are very good managers they just need to have the support to go out there and buy players in the positions required. AVB starts from a much better squad than those 2. Although I am warming to him I am cautious enough to say judge him at the end of the season as to whether he has been a sucess or a failure
true, but its not as if norwich have lost any key players in the summer and lambert managed to keep them fairly comfortable last season. however would have been interesting to see how he got on this season. presently doing a good job of trying to get villa relegated
I think Lambert was well aware of their situation, which is why he jumped at the chance to go to Villa. If he can keep them up this season, they have the resources to be a top half club and that would put him in a good position when a slightly bigger club need a new manager.
parklane1
Vic Buckingham
Its looking that way.
SUIYHA
Scott Parker
I don't think Rodgers and Lambert are doing all THAT badly. Liverpool's performances have been much improved this season, the affect Rodgers is having is huge in terms of how well they are keeping the ball. The problem is they have absolutely no cutting edge, with Suarez as their only real striker and we all know about how inconsistent his finishing is. Rodgers has made several PR gaffes since he's gone to Anfield but it wasn't his decision not to sign anyone else in attack and that's what's costing them now. Then you have Lambert, who is managing a team with a very poor squad. Better than Norwich's, but poor nonetheless, if he gets them above about 13th/14th he'll have performed above expectations IMO, and he's already won at the Etihad and got a point from St James Park this season.
Nevertheless, one thing that irritates me about the way people judge managers is based purely on how the club is doing, without considering what resources are available to them or (realistic) expectations. When Harry first took over here lots of people (myself included) wrote him off as a sub-standard manager who would be a short term stop gap as he was only good for getting teams that should be in relegation scraps up to mid-table. He turned out to be our longest serving manager since 1984 and led us to three successive top 5 finishes for the first time in almost 50 years. But apparently, he wasn't good enough for us because his CV was blank, there were practically no trophies on it. Unlike Juande Ramos, Jacques Santini, Christian Gross, George Graham...you get the picture.
Kenny Dalglish is about the same age as Harry, you will never ever convince me that he was a better manager. But he was given huge amounts of credit for the trophies he'd won in his time. Well I'm sure Harry would have won the league back in the day if he'd got to manage teams containing Ian Rush, John Barnes, Alan Hansen, Jan Molby etc, or if he'd been able to massively outspend all of his rivals to turn Blackburn into title winners. But, because Kenny had those resources available to him, he is a "winner" with "proven pedigree", whereas Redknapp is not. Look at Di Matteo now. Sacked from a relegation struggling West Brom side, he was cast onto the scrap heap. Then he lucked out and got the Chelsea job. He was widely written off at the start, yet he has won every trophy available to him so far including the Champions League. That was apparently a fluke, the luck wouldn't last into the new season and he wouldn't play nice enough football for Abramovic - he's now 4 points clear at the top of the league and playing some of the best football I've ever seen Chelsea play. Funny how a "brick" manager can suddenly turn good when they're given Eden Hazard instead of Giles Barnes isn't it?
Nevertheless, one thing that irritates me about the way people judge managers is based purely on how the club is doing, without considering what resources are available to them or (realistic) expectations. When Harry first took over here lots of people (myself included) wrote him off as a sub-standard manager who would be a short term stop gap as he was only good for getting teams that should be in relegation scraps up to mid-table. He turned out to be our longest serving manager since 1984 and led us to three successive top 5 finishes for the first time in almost 50 years. But apparently, he wasn't good enough for us because his CV was blank, there were practically no trophies on it. Unlike Juande Ramos, Jacques Santini, Christian Gross, George Graham...you get the picture.
Kenny Dalglish is about the same age as Harry, you will never ever convince me that he was a better manager. But he was given huge amounts of credit for the trophies he'd won in his time. Well I'm sure Harry would have won the league back in the day if he'd got to manage teams containing Ian Rush, John Barnes, Alan Hansen, Jan Molby etc, or if he'd been able to massively outspend all of his rivals to turn Blackburn into title winners. But, because Kenny had those resources available to him, he is a "winner" with "proven pedigree", whereas Redknapp is not. Look at Di Matteo now. Sacked from a relegation struggling West Brom side, he was cast onto the scrap heap. Then he lucked out and got the Chelsea job. He was widely written off at the start, yet he has won every trophy available to him so far including the Champions League. That was apparently a fluke, the luck wouldn't last into the new season and he wouldn't play nice enough football for Abramovic - he's now 4 points clear at the top of the league and playing some of the best football I've ever seen Chelsea play. Funny how a "brick" manager can suddenly turn good when they're given Eden Hazard instead of Giles Barnes isn't it?
Last edited:
milo
Jack L. Jones
A top post
Managers are either winners or losers. It is as simple as that.
Just read an article about Tyson. A monster in his day..now he is past it. Dalglish was a winner but he retired at the right time and should have stayed retired.
Last edited:
Rorschach
Sonny Walters
That's a good post but if I was to nit pick then I would say that Liverpool played pretty well under Kenny for the most part, often dominating matches too, and suffered from the same lack of cutting edge as they have now. Not a lot has changed except the manager in some respects, including the PR faux pas.
I would also say that Chelsea's CL run owed more to luck than anything else. It certainly was not tactical acumen or strength of spirit that won it. I defy anyone to argue that winning the CL for was more than a series of fortunate events from the semifinals on. I do agree though that Chelsea are playing very well now, but how could they not with the amount of oil money being thrown at it.
Good post though.
Sorry fella, but I don't think their situation is as rosy as you've painted it. First of all their transfer window (he admitted as much, remember) was a complete disaster so if they're lacking cutting edge - he should re-assess his targets and general approach, and above all - take massive responsibility for it. His treatment of Carroll was nothing short of despicable not only from a PR point of you but also hinted at potential severe limitations as a manager who is being able to at least try and incorporate a 35m (able) striker into his little formation. I would have been petrified if this 'one month' wonder took over our club and started speaking about our players in the unprofessional, in my view manner he has. You think Arry's Bent comments were bad!
Furthermore (as already pointed out by another poster) they have been performing to a similar level (quality of football-wise) under Dalglish who was vilified and released as ‘failure’.
The picture tells many stories - for every Harry Redknapp fairy-tale there are 50 horror-stories. Not every manager with a blank CV is guaranteed to succeed the same way previous trophies are not a pre-requisite for greatness. To me - it always comes down to the 'right man' at the right place at the right time' which is why I felt (and still do) AVB was the perfect option for us, especially on a contextual level.
There is considerable contradiction in the above analogy
- on the one hand you've rendered Dalglish's achievement void of virtually all merit purely based on the fact he had good players in his team and massive amounts of money to blow. I suppose Fergie should also be thrown in that pot?
- on the other hand you're portraying Di Matteo as some kind of tactical genius hidden-gem extraordinaire inspite their massive resources (even more so than Dalglish in the past) and having one of the best PL squads available.
Using the above logic those two are either both brick, both lucky or both very good managers
I won't even go into their CL run but dare I say it was the antithesis of what the game should be about.
Harry Redknapp is statistically our best manager in around 110 years (ignoring AVB's small number of games) in terms of points per game or something similar. You will never convince me he was the right man to take us forward to establish a long terms strategy for the club.
And at the end of the day, apart from all the statistics, trophies, and CVs – that’s what it comes down it
And since I can't edit my post for some bizzare reason - if we had a manager who achieved for us what Dalglish did and someone came along and discredited it all on the fact we had more money and better player than our opponents (supposedly) - what do you think the average Spurs' fan reaction would be?
Do you think anyone cares we finished 4th ahead of Everton and Newcaslte last season becasue we had more money/better players (in terms of Arry's achievements)?
Do you think anyone cares we finished 4th ahead of Everton and Newcaslte last season becasue we had more money/better players (in terms of Arry's achievements)?
Last edited:
jts1882
Dean Richards
Excellent post. I agree with most of it, but a few quibbles:
1. Rodgers is only doing a decent job when compared to Dalglish.
2. If you take money spent on transfers and wages and players available as the guide, the only team Redknapp has clearly bettered over his reign is Liverpool. He did better than teams with less money spent and weaker squads and finished behind the teams spending more (except Liverpool and City once) or with better squads (except Chelsea when they were winning the CL and negating the effort). So from that outlook, both Rodgers and Redknapp did well compared to an underperforming Liverpool.
3. While 'Arry now is clearly a better manager than Dalglish (better football, better results, less money spent on transfers and wages), you can't dismiss Dalglish's record as manager at Liverpool (first spell) and Blackburn. He did win titles then and its only speculation that 'Arry could have. Perhaps 'Arry has developed and become a better manager in that time, just as Dalglish has lost it.
However, I agree with your general point that you need to evaluate a manager in broader context, on more than short term results or pedigree and trophies or money spent. 'Arry, unquestionably, did well with us because he took over an underperforming squad and created a team that played very good football and got the best league results we've see in years. He should be judged on that rather than the more critical approach in point 2 above. Di Matteo won the Champions League and has had a good start to the season, but he lucked out in the CL - there is no other way to look at the penalty misses by Messi, Robben and Sweinstegger (sp?) - and the season is young. Its too early to say whether he become a good or great manager rather than just a lucky one.
.
.
Tottenham coach Sherwood wants Blackburn talks
By Andrew Tuft
Wednesday 17 October 2012
Tim Sherwood is eager to meet with the owners of Blackburn Rovers as the Tottenham Hotspur technical co-ordinator warms to the idea of filling the vacant managerial position at Ewood Park, the Daily Mirror has reported.
The newspaper adds that Sherwood wants to sit down with the Venky’s hierarchy in charge of running the club to get further insight into the budget he would have available, as well as listen to the owners’ plans for the future of the club.
Blackburn are said to have wanted to speak with Sherwood last weekend but did not receive permission for the meeting from Tottenham. But if Spurs do give their consent then Sherwood will travel to Switzerland to meet with Balaji and Venkatesh Rao.
Sherwood was the Blackburn captain when Rovers won the Premier League title in 1995, under the management of Kenny Dalglish. The former England midfielder left Blackburn for Tottenham in 1999, having spent seven years at the club.
Ian Holloway is also a contender to replace Steve Kean at Blackburn, with the Mirror claiming the current Blackpool boss would actually represent a cheaper alternative than Sherwood.
http://www.adifferentleague.co.uk/p6_0_17148_tottenham-coach-sherwood-wants-blackburn-talks.html
.
Tottenham coach Sherwood wants Blackburn talks
By Andrew Tuft
Wednesday 17 October 2012
Tim Sherwood is eager to meet with the owners of Blackburn Rovers as the Tottenham Hotspur technical co-ordinator warms to the idea of filling the vacant managerial position at Ewood Park, the Daily Mirror has reported.
The newspaper adds that Sherwood wants to sit down with the Venky’s hierarchy in charge of running the club to get further insight into the budget he would have available, as well as listen to the owners’ plans for the future of the club.
Blackburn are said to have wanted to speak with Sherwood last weekend but did not receive permission for the meeting from Tottenham. But if Spurs do give their consent then Sherwood will travel to Switzerland to meet with Balaji and Venkatesh Rao.
Sherwood was the Blackburn captain when Rovers won the Premier League title in 1995, under the management of Kenny Dalglish. The former England midfielder left Blackburn for Tottenham in 1999, having spent seven years at the club.
Ian Holloway is also a contender to replace Steve Kean at Blackburn, with the Mirror claiming the current Blackpool boss would actually represent a cheaper alternative than Sherwood.
http://www.adifferentleague.co.uk/p6_0_17148_tottenham-coach-sherwood-wants-blackburn-talks.html