• 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

OT: What next for Harry?

braineclipse said:
Because despite what some people say a season isn't a massive sample size and although it is a bit of a cliche I think it is harder to defend a title.

I'm just pointing out that even if what you say happens it wouldn't be any different from what people say about other managers. You seemed to imply some anti Redknapp bias.
Click to expand...

My impression is that there are certain posters on this forum who are completely anti-Redknapp. Were they like this even when he was at the club? They seem to be so bitter about him and use every possible chance, even in non-related threads, to get in a cheap shot or a dig.
 
ArcspacE said:
It's gonna be Guardiola - 98% guaranteed

Long term vision - establishing a clear football/development strategy going into the FFP era

Arry's abilities lie elsewhere which is why, I think he should have been at QPR a month ago already.
Click to expand...

Makes sense - it's why they (and we) went for AVB.

I think they've missed the boat on Guardiola, and he's now City bound.
 
Last edited:
Push and Run said:
My impression is that there are certain posters on this forum who are completely anti-Redknapp. Were they like this even when he was at the club? They seem to be so bitter about him and use every possible chance, even in non-related threads, to get in a cheap shot or a dig.
Click to expand...

If anyone would know, it would be you. ;)
 
I can see that as why Chelsea would want Guardiola, but why would he consider Chelsea if he wants to develop something?
 
braineclipse said:
Because despite what some people say a season isn't a massive sample size and although it is a bit of a cliche I think it is harder to defend a title.

I'm just pointing out that even if what you say happens it wouldn't be any different from what people say about other managers. You seemed to imply some anti Redknapp bias.
Click to expand...

imply? you're telling me you don't see some anti Redknapp bias on GG?
 
Kingdawson said:
imply? you're telling me you don't see some anti Redknapp bias on GG?
Click to expand...

There's lots of bias both ways and people are allowed to have opinions, but personally I'm getting bored of everything having to be one extreme or the other and the constant talk about camps. I'm both pro and anti, what should I do?
 
africanspurs said:
never understand comments like this. when harry has options does he behave like this ? no. so why do people keep bringing stuff like that up?
Click to expand...

Do you not remember when Redknapp told us that he was blocked by Levy when he wanted to get Campbell back at spurs. Redknapp likes a lot of these older players as he and his son know them well; which is why he was always going on about getting P Nev, Joey Cole and Craig Bellamy in at spurs. He genuinely thinks that they will add to the team.
 
Jordinho said:
There's lots of bias both ways and people are allowed to have opinions, but personally I'm getting bored of everything having to be one extreme or the other and the constant talk about camps. I'm both pro and anti, what should I do?
Click to expand...

Actually I don't think there's pro bias for redknapp at all. I believe there's people that thought he was a good manager and were probably sad he left and there are people who rate him above AVB but pro bias I don't see. Pro bias would be to state he's a honest man( when it's obvious he isn't)or he's trustworthy etc etc. something that's blatantly not the case thus showing favouritism. That's how I see it anyway and the I haven't seen many posts that have stated they like Redknapp as a person( some simply differentiate between his liability factor and whether he's a good manager)
 
Jordinho said:
There's lots of bias both ways and people are allowed to have opinions, but personally I'm getting bored of everything having to be one extreme or the other and the constant talk about camps. I'm both pro and anti, what should I do?
Click to expand...

It will be years before the wum-like comments (from either side) subside, imv

It's the nature of the forum, I suppose
 
punk_is_back` said:
Do you not remember when Redknapp told us that he was blocked by Levy when he wanted to get Campbell back at spurs. Redknapp likes a lot of these older players as he and his son know them well; which is why he was always going on about getting P Nev, Joey Cole and Craig Bellamy in at spurs. He genuinely thinks that they will add to the team.
Click to expand...

Surely that's a step too far even for him!

Link?
 
Kingdawson said:
Actually I don't think there's pro bias for redknapp at all. I believe there's people that thought he was a good manager and were probably sad he left and there are people who rate him above AVB but pro bias I don't see. Pro bias would be to state he's a honest man( when it's obvious he isn't)or he's trustworthy etc etc. something that's blatantly not the case thus showing favouritism. That's how I see it anyway and the I haven't seen many posts that have stated they like Redknapp as a person( some simply differentiate between his liability factor and whether he's a good manager)
Click to expand...

I do think there are some that only see the positives in Redknapp's reign and either won't acknowledge the mistakes or just ignore them.
 
Jordinho said:
There's lots of bias both ways and people are allowed to have opinions, but personally I'm getting bored of everything having to be one extreme or the other and the constant talk about camps. I'm both pro and anti, what should I do?
Click to expand...


I don't think there is. I think the bias is heavily on the the anti Harry side. If you look at their arguments they are without any foundation and often totally dumb. It's rare you see those who defend Harry do so by using baseless opinions to support their argument. I think the main gripe those of us who defend Harry have is that we are constantly having to correct or object to totally biased and unfounded criticism. To suggest both sides are biased is unfair as it makes it sound as if they are equally biased. The anti Harry phalanx seem to be are opposed to Redknapp than they are in favour of success for Spurs. Those who defend Redknapp do so as a response to what he did for this club and a frustration of having his positive influence on the club removed. Those hate him, tend to do so for the damage he's done to their egos.
 
Kingdawson said:
imply? you're telling me you don't see some anti Redknapp bias on GG?
Click to expand...

I used the wording "seemed to imply" because I didn't want to put words in your mouth.

I think some posters are and have been biased against Redknapp, but I don't think that's something exclusive for Redknapp. I think it's the same for a lot of our players and our current manager as well as of course other players and managers in the world of football. Only natural when it comes to football.

My point remains that I think what you said would only be said because of an anti Redknapp bias would also be said about others and I think to some extent at least is a valid opinion when it comes to managers who have only won the league once with a very strong team.
 
joey55 said:
Things like Redknapp wanted to fill the team with old players or that he didn't do tactics.
Click to expand...

He did like an 'experienced player' as his transfer history with us suggested

Won't go into the tactics debate as that's largerly subjective, granted.
 
ArcspacE said:
He did like an 'experienced player' as his transfer history with us suggested

Won't go into the tactics debate as that's largerly subjective, granted.
Click to expand...

But that is very different to the accusation that he wanted to fill the team with older players. It's a totally biased argument and relies on quoting Redknapp when he talks about older players he wanted to sign and totally ignore that times he spoke about us missing out on younger players. It's biased and without foundation. It's one of many ridiculous criticisms we see on a regular basis and compel his defenders to respond. The defense put forward is very rarely biased and without foundation, but usually fair and objective.

The other day Scaramanga made an absurd list of criticisms, which I ignored. If you want I'll find them, list them here and respond in a totally fair and objective way. Then you'll see exactly what I mean. It would be unfair to single Scaramanga out though, as there are many posters whoa re just as guilty and often you are one of them.
 
Some of the pro bias often comes out as anti AVB IMO. When he was hired it was 'Harry was sacked for getting 4th, nothing less is acceptable this season'. I agree we haven't been performing that well this season, but that has much more to do with our squad than the manager. We have lost 5 games in the league, 3 of them away at City, Arsenal and Saudi Sportswashing Machine and it's not like we never struggled at home against inferior opponents before. Our squad is thin in midfield and we've been without Dembele every game we've lost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back