-
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?
- Thread starter SUIYHA
- Start date
Kingdawson
Banned
anymore? you didn't respond in the first place.
Btw even if you did mean it the way you're claiming (which you didn't but lets just play this weirdo game) then it pretty much sums up your irrational dislike for Redknapp.
You ignored the
* signings generally playing well and contributing
* the teams overall success
*the signings being sold for a profit (think you call that the Levy way of thinking right?)
and instead judged his signings based on what he could have signed...eh?
ok so if Dempsey scores 15 goals, gets 10 assists, and plays well i will expect you to criticise AVB at the end of the season if Michu scores 16 goals, gets 11 assists and plays very well being that clint cost 6m and we COULD HAVE got Michu for 2m. I don't care if we reach the champions league and Clint gets sold for double the amount the next season...AVB didn't spend well in terms of value for money from a "Levy way of looking at things" (that clint and michu comparison was shamelessly stolen from AS btw).
glorygloryeze
Tom Huddlestone
I am a poster who enjoyed the highs of Harry’s time here and I am appreciative of the heights that Harry took us to.
But I’m also of the opinion that it was the right time to move Harry on; in fact I believe he thought the same thing as he effectively sacked himself by openly challenging the chairman with his ‘all the players need stability so gimme my contract’ quotes. Some might think him stupid but he clearly knew what he was doing: he wanted out as well, perhaps because he knew the size of the job that was coming post us finishing 4th and still not getting CL.
Let’s face it, Harry blew it. Comfortably 3rd with a ten point gap with 4th in mid-February is the sort of position of all our dreams; no matter how good the run Arsenal had, that was an immense flop.
Whilst being very annoying you could maybe say ah well, we’ll just try again next year, which was the good attitude that was created in the summer of 2011. However, it was going to be much harder this time as we knew Modric would be off and Harry would have had to have done a relatively big rebuild; also don’t forget the other squad players who also left (Niko, Pienaar, Corluka etc), plus The King's retirement.
Questions for those who are still lamenting Harry’s sacking:
1. How do you think he would have coped with then loss of Modric? Who do you think he would bought to compensate for the loss (a BIG loss for Redknapp)? How would he have changed the style/formation? Personally I’m not sure he would have had an answer to this
2. Obviously we want to improve as a team/squad; as a team like ours gets more successful, we play more games and need a bigger squad – where the drop in quality from the first choice to the subs needs to get less and less – how do you think Redknapp would have addressed this? Bear in mind the history of how fringe players who he himself brought in were used (i.e. Bassong, Pienaar, Niko) fared and then think about how easy it would have been to attract players of the sufficient quality to boost the squad. Basically do you think he would have been able to adequately and organically build the squad (not first team, the SQUAD)?
3. Do you think missing out of CL would have severely impacted on Redknapp’s ability to convince Levy to sign the type of ‘tried-and-tested’ players we signed in the summer of 2011 AND also convince said players to actually sign for us?
4. Was Redknapp’s model of transfers and squadbuilding sustainable over the years to come, especially if CL was not guaranteed?
My feeling on the last question is no, and I suspect that was the feeling of Levy and the board. I also think the media circus that often surrounded Harry made his model not worth persisting with as well, and that’s why I think a change at that point was natural. As I say, I think Harry agreed as well.
Appointing AVB was potentially a big gamble, and the jury is still out on that one. But due to the reputation that AVB has in terms of talent-spotting (especially overseas), his links with South American football via Porto, the record he had with Porto, the issues he had at Chelsea, the rep his has for attention to detail, it can be seen how it was felt by the board that taking a chance on him was worth it in the transitional situation we found ourselves in post Chelsea’s CL triumph.
It is my opinion that sacking Harry at the time that it was done was a natural change that had to happen. We couldn't continue with his model imo.
If you don’t feel this then I would suspect you have some detailed answers to the questions I have posted above.
But I’m also of the opinion that it was the right time to move Harry on; in fact I believe he thought the same thing as he effectively sacked himself by openly challenging the chairman with his ‘all the players need stability so gimme my contract’ quotes. Some might think him stupid but he clearly knew what he was doing: he wanted out as well, perhaps because he knew the size of the job that was coming post us finishing 4th and still not getting CL.
Let’s face it, Harry blew it. Comfortably 3rd with a ten point gap with 4th in mid-February is the sort of position of all our dreams; no matter how good the run Arsenal had, that was an immense flop.
Whilst being very annoying you could maybe say ah well, we’ll just try again next year, which was the good attitude that was created in the summer of 2011. However, it was going to be much harder this time as we knew Modric would be off and Harry would have had to have done a relatively big rebuild; also don’t forget the other squad players who also left (Niko, Pienaar, Corluka etc), plus The King's retirement.
Questions for those who are still lamenting Harry’s sacking:
1. How do you think he would have coped with then loss of Modric? Who do you think he would bought to compensate for the loss (a BIG loss for Redknapp)? How would he have changed the style/formation? Personally I’m not sure he would have had an answer to this
2. Obviously we want to improve as a team/squad; as a team like ours gets more successful, we play more games and need a bigger squad – where the drop in quality from the first choice to the subs needs to get less and less – how do you think Redknapp would have addressed this? Bear in mind the history of how fringe players who he himself brought in were used (i.e. Bassong, Pienaar, Niko) fared and then think about how easy it would have been to attract players of the sufficient quality to boost the squad. Basically do you think he would have been able to adequately and organically build the squad (not first team, the SQUAD)?
3. Do you think missing out of CL would have severely impacted on Redknapp’s ability to convince Levy to sign the type of ‘tried-and-tested’ players we signed in the summer of 2011 AND also convince said players to actually sign for us?
4. Was Redknapp’s model of transfers and squadbuilding sustainable over the years to come, especially if CL was not guaranteed?
My feeling on the last question is no, and I suspect that was the feeling of Levy and the board. I also think the media circus that often surrounded Harry made his model not worth persisting with as well, and that’s why I think a change at that point was natural. As I say, I think Harry agreed as well.
Appointing AVB was potentially a big gamble, and the jury is still out on that one. But due to the reputation that AVB has in terms of talent-spotting (especially overseas), his links with South American football via Porto, the record he had with Porto, the issues he had at Chelsea, the rep his has for attention to detail, it can be seen how it was felt by the board that taking a chance on him was worth it in the transitional situation we found ourselves in post Chelsea’s CL triumph.
It is my opinion that sacking Harry at the time that it was done was a natural change that had to happen. We couldn't continue with his model imo.
If you don’t feel this then I would suspect you have some detailed answers to the questions I have posted above.
^ fella these are MANY of the same points/doubts that plenty of us have raised in the past which nobody ever seemed to want to address - rather than accept the valid arguments/fears we put forward the majority of the 'opposition' chose to focus solely on what he achieved above all else and by doing so they just reinforce their belief that it's crazy for anyone to question his role at the club. since the argument has worn on peoples opinions have become more and more polarized as each side digs their heels in - but im sure there are very few that were in favor of his sacking that were not appreciative of what he achieved, just that with a little more focus he could (and should) have done a little better and primarily, in my case at least, there were huge doubts over his ability to over see the transition we find our selves in now due to his patchy transfer record and poor use of squad players, not to mention our alarming final run in collapse in not one but two of his three seasons here.
thfcsteff
George Hunt
For the sake of interest and further discussion, I thought I would add my own personal comments on the following list of players signed by Harry, and some comments about the differences between the two when it came to policy. Before doing so, I thought it would be interesting to consider Levy's previous appts. They were either younger managers or managers who worked with a DoF. I have already expressed my view that Arnesen's poaching by Chelski hurt Levy more than any other departure from the club. So we have to remember that due to a very unfortunate collision of circumstances with regards to Ramos (personal issue, loss of 40+ goals in Keane and Berbatov, increasing divisions with Poyet, the man's own rather poor inability to communicate clearly in English) Levy was forced into a corner with Harry, and that Kemsley had tried to foist Harry on Levy before. Look over his record over the years (and at West Ham, remember that he inherited some stunning academy talent for which he didn't share credit - before you bleat on about 'bias', do some research and see how many Spammers -as well as Brooking- have commented on this amongst other behaviors). Generally his signing policy at most of his clubs has been short-term, higher-wage players who can 'do a job' at short-notice. He has never been able to develop a talented side to become a trophy winning side. This isn't bias, this is FACT. Harry has a 'method' and a 'way' of working. It involves resources he is very familiar with and very comfortable with. Nothing wrong with that, plenty of managers are similar, Tony Pulis and Martin O'Neil to name two although even O'Neil has taken gambles. Anyway...
Friedel = Free.....can sell for nothing...a fine short-term signing on relatively high-wages but only necessary because Gomes got bombed out of the club despite Tony Parks repeatedly calling him the best keeper at the club
Kaboul = 6m ...can sell for £12m plus...a great signing who was already known to, and by, the club. I'm glad he came back.
walker = 4m...can sell for £12m plus...a strong signing
Naughton = 4m ....can sell for 5m plus...part of the package with Walker, but a decent enough squad player so yeah, OK, decent
Gallas = Free...can sell for nothing...short-term, high-wage signing who absolutely gave us the experience we needed
Nelsen = Free...sold for nothing...short-term, high-wage signing, the result of no-one being sure whether Harry was off to England job or not.*
Bassong = 8m...sold for 5m...great signing, should not have been sold.*
Chimbonda = 2.5m...sold for 2.5m...high-wage, older player, poor re-signing.*
Kranjcar = 2.5m....sold for 5.7m...a steal (would love to know how he got him for 2 mill, couldn't believe it) but ultimately short-term*
Pienaar = 2.5m ..sold for 4.5m...a great squad signing on high wages completely mis-used.*
Palacios = 12m ..sold for 10m...a vital signing at the time due to type. Was never the same after tragedy.*
Parker = 5m....can sell for 5m plus...absolute success. Older player with injury issues on high wages, short-term.
Sandro = 8m....can sell for 15m plus...not his discovery, was brought to him. A fine signing by the club.
VDV = 8M ....sold for 10m...a gift from Levy.
Defoe = 9m....can sell for 10m plus...love Jermain, was gutted when he was sold, safe purchase, as though he'd been on loan.
Keane = 12m ...sold for 3.5m...a very very necessary short-term, high-wage signing.*
Crouch = 10m ...sold for 10m...I love Crouchy, wish he was still here in the squad, but again, looks to have been a short-termer.*
Think about the Distins, Muntaris, Diarras and Bellamys he wanted to bring in on high wages, and think about how long they might have been with us? Levy certainly did, well he HAD to. We are trying to stay financially strong and make sure that if we splash it, it gets splashed on someone worthwhile (Bentley will have burnt him badly - of course NOT a Harry signing!)...
If you review the signings above, approximately half of them have come and gone (I did not include VdV's departure in fairness to Harry as it happened after he had gone). Again, it's a style, but it's not a style Levy likes. Have you factored in agent fees for example? The truth is Harry is about the short-term bang, the instant boom, and in all seriousness, the top whack he's good for before he reaches the top of the hill and starts going down is approx 3 seasons. He does not build sides for the future, he builds them for the now; we will never know whether his signing policy might've changed because he had already declared his intention to go for the England job a season prior to being out. Thus Levy wasn't going to give him all the 'short-term older signings he might have wanted, because Harry was going to be off and we'd be stuck with more older, high-wage earners that a future manager might not have wanted. Again, just look at his career. This isn't 'Harry hating' this is 'Harry observation'...
In essence, Levy always had an approach, circumstance forced him to change direction, and at the end of the day, he and Harry could never find middle ground on how to develop the squad. Levy gave him a lot of money in that first year. And BTW, the only reason we could 'perhaps' get 10 million for Defoe would because of his outstanding form this season; last season, no-one really wanted him, save a half-hearted bid from Liverpool.
As I have said many times before, Harry gave me one of the best nights of my recent Spurs-suporting life in Manchester. He also gave me some of the biggest heart-aches with his bewildering ability to switch off, become absorbed in 'self ahead of Spurs, and ultimately in not being able to put in the final 20-25% of effort and commitment it would've taken to win a trophy of significance and perhaps be the statue outside our forthcoming stadium.
I invite you to respond, but if all you're going to do is tell me what I'm doing wrong, what a hypocrite you think I am, how I don't understand, how I express 'fake-ass' opinions, how I am biased OR how I 'hide behind language (whatever the fudge that means) then perhaps you'd best not bother.
Again, here's a chance to debate without getting into one of your blind-alleys
thfcsteff
George Hunt
I said, both at the time and later, that I felt AVB got stitched up by Abramovich and the board. I said I felt he was told to come in, do what he wanted to do but to also make sweeping changes quickly (i.e get the Mourinho era cobwebs out - I've added that detail just here).
I did not suggest that player ego was the sole reason he was sacked, indeed, I don't remember ever having said this. My point was always clear.
thfcsteff
George Hunt
What are you basing your potential re-sale figures on in that list you put up? I never asked you that question, but now that the word 'factually' has come up, i think it's only fair that you deliver 'the facts' behind those numbers.
No worries at all if those are, in fact, PERSONAL PROJECTIONS, just say so. Nobody will jump on you. Just be decent and admit it if it's the case.
thfcsteff
George Hunt
You need to be careful with the words mate...'Levy-esque way of looking at things' could mean a coupe of things. It could mean 'always wanting re-sale value for money' or it could mean 'his general approach to the transfer market'...of course, I've offered my detailed view on that a few posts above (hope you took the time to read it properly). This is not 'hiding behind words' it' understanding how they can be used and the context in which they can be applied, something you actually know rather more about than you'll ever let on my friend...
Kingdawson
Banned
Mate you're a hypocrite that always....nah i'm joking lol..just wanted to annoy you for a second.
Ok that post is very hard to argue with generally. Harry's approach is generally a short term approach rather than a long term one but it's still an approach that has made us a profit on the players sold (including the ones we could potentially sale). Your argument is different to Jordinho's though so we're talking about 2 different things. He's already explained what he meant and that was that he feels the players that we did sign were not as good (value for money wise and ability wise) as the ones we could have signed. That's a totally different argument then the one you just put up.
Levy ok'd the Bellamy signing though and it was only down to us striking a bizarre deal with City that we didn't get him. He also probably ok'd the potential Diarra signing too but it didn't work out so i'm not entirley sure he's against these potential signings as you think.
Kingdawson
Banned
but you're doing the same thing Steff. Everyone does it but i just added the word "factual" to it tbh.
"increasing divisions with Poyet" = not fact but the way you've worded it seems it's a fact.
"and that Kemsley had tried to foist Harry on Levy before" = not fact but the way you've worded it seems it's a fact.
"Again, it's a style, but it's not a style Levy likes" = not fact but the way you've worded it seems it's a fact.
africanspurs
Justin Edinburgh
thats a fabulous start to this. i'm expecting a compliment sandwhich
dont agree with how you finished. agree with the beginning in that he sacked himself, but more for the way he tried to play the chairman , black mailing him into giving him an extension, not least because he tried to leave us for the england job when we were flying.
Now you're throwing in that he was scared because of the size of the task at hand? i find that very wrong of a manager that has taken some of the hardest jobs most would fail in and made a good go of things. from bottom to eigth then to 4th then to QF CL then to 4th again..you dont think that year on year that it wasnt getting harder? of course it was but he rose to the challenge even though every year many on here doubted him and even though he never spent big, outside of the relegation window.
This is a guy that wants the england job in a tournament year.
Honestly i feel sometimes that people that just wanted him out for reasons that go beyond a certain point of logic just start to throw out stuff that comes from their gut. and it needs to be looked at some. how is redknapp trying to sack himself from a lucrative job when he has just one year left and no other opportunities lined up? this scheming man is looking for a way out with no second option?
i guess i just dont get the rationale...and i think its more of an extension of your doubt in him and lack of belief in his abilities than anything substantial
yes the run of arsenal should count for something. Harry did blow it, but he did create the possibility of such a big drop. but this is one of the corner stones of both sides of this thing. You focus on the drop...i'm focusing on the overall season , not least of which contains the good bits. he did blow it, but i wouldnt say it was just him. The players could take some of the blame as well...if you even want to call it blame which it isnt. form and confidence dropped most likely due to Harry looking like he wanted to leave and rumours of him neglecting his duties and not being as invested
i dont know why this is a problem for Harry and not a problem for anyone. it would have been hard but at what point has he failed us over the course of an entire seasons projection. in the time he has been here he hasnt.
yeah it would have been difficult. very and yet harry has made a success of things without bale at all, or at least the bale we know now and without modric for a large chunk of a season in the past. infact it was the year we made 4th for the first time. and we played great football too. redknapp has played a wonky system...a flat 442, a 4411 and a 451. he's played a passing possesion style and he has played a direct one, and he has played a counter attacking set up. so he has options, just down to personell who executes it. not to mention he said on MOTD that he actually wanted to sign dembele in the past. not saying thats who he would have gotten but its not like harry has bought badly in the past no matter what JOrdinho says. And harry gets the best out of Thudd in a system that suits him...who knows he could have made a better come back than under avb
i'm not sure why it needs to be organic but i'll play along. with modric and vdv gone.....the drop in quality from first to subs would actually get shorter. not in a good way.
i do get what you are saying but the question needs raising....how was he able to build the squad in the first place if he was perennially bad at rotating? our squad last season was actually very good..unfortunately it was an international cup year and a lot of bench player the two seasons prior has established themselves as capable deputies and so wanted first team action. this happens all the time in a good team.
sure he could have given the odd game or two to other people but the fact is that we were winning and we hada winning formula....i dont blame him for sticking with what vworks.
but you do have a point. i dont know how it would have worked to get people in when it takes a big situation for someone to get a chance in harry's team. harry had his favourites clearly and it shifted with results.
i dont know, but he did manage to do it every year
Yes for first and no for the second. coming 4th and missing out on CL through chelsea winning it would have been a dent but we could still convince players to come. we would have missed out on primary targets....which we actually wouldnt have signed due to wages and fees and fees anyway. but we could have gotten decent players
yes for the first in that levy would not want to spend money to push us into CL. but more to give a good speculation of getting in there. if we made CL then thing would have been different. yes
probably not. but i dont know why people think harry was 100% in control or why he wouldnt buy a good young player if the opportunity arose. sandro?
agree with most of that except the last bit
Appointing AVB was potentially a big gamble, and the jury is still out on that one. But due to the reputation that AVB has in terms of talent-spotting (especially overseas), his links with South American football via Porto, the record he had with Porto, the issues he had at Chelsea, the rep his has for attention to detail, it can be seen how it was felt by the board that taking a chance on him was worth it in the transitional situation we found ourselves in post Chelsea’s CL triumph.
talent spotting? south american links?
where did you get all that from
porto record means little in THIS league, i have to say. have you seen the squad he had?
he failed at chelsea..simlpe as that.
having said that i think the board made a good decision. i feel they have someone that will play ball with whatever they want and who can make a good go with the resources they provide without too much drama. also if the Dof system comes back, which i dont mind at all..i think he'll fit in well with that
his model wasnt levy's model. thats where the problem really arose. redknapps model would win at Emirates Marketing Project for instance. or even chelsea. but for a business model that levy has in conjunction with the success needed to make tottenham an attractive proposition? i dont think we could continue
again this model thing is also speculation , even though i would more likely agree with it. it is speculation influenced heavily by levy, his policy, the money he would give, the squad needs and personel etc etc
we just dont know what would have happened
parklane1
Tony Galvin
Sense and sensibility at last=D> i suppose now we will be accused of being a LEVY fanboy or even worse a Redknapp hater, i wonder if that is worse then being a Redknapp kiss arse. :-k
Lemonade Money
Les Medley
Am I the only one that thinks this was a good signing? We were in the brick and absolutely could not risk injuries compromising our defence, so we bought a tried and tested PL player as back up, who could play anywhere across the back four. The fact that those injuries didn't materialise, and that he was a resigning that didn't play, obviously makes it look like a bad one.
The Moonlit Knight
Banned
I thought he was a good purchase the second time around. I was actually disappointed when we had let him go.
The Moonlit Knight
Banned
The basic fact is Redknapp left us in a stronger position than he found us. He left us with a stronger squad, a better first XI and with a very young squad with a couple of very experienced pros that even the new Manager is still utilising.
Regardless of people's thoughts on the man I am struggling to understand the concept that any Spurs fan cannot appreciate this from a pure cold analytical footballing point of view. Even the so called collapses are overplayed. Last 16 games from last season we got only 3pts less than we have managed the first 16 games of this season. If 3pts is the difference between a disasterous collapse and a great start to the season I can see why we turn on our Managers so quickly!
Lost Mango
Pascal Chimbonda
Why 16 games? Because it gives a nice comparison?
I'll take your cherry pick and cherry pick 13 instead - based on that being from the Saudi Sportswashing Machine win post the court case (so a meaningful event perhaps rather than a pick at will date) in which case it is only 19 points vs 34 from the first 13 games ....... 15 point difference over 13 games ...... slightly more significant I would say ( in a 'statistics can be picked to support whichever argument you want' way).
Generally I can't believe people are still arguing the toss on this still as it is all history now. I'm just bored cos I'm on holiday and have a sick kid asleep. Harry took his eye off the spurs ball. It cost us CL, it cost him his job.
The Moonlit Knight
Banned
Like for like basically. I don't actually like any sort of comparison to be fair unless it's over a full season. Judging a run of results over even half a season isn't accurate due to many factors. But if one must judge a run of results during the course of a season I think it has to be done from halfway point to halfway point rather than even just 16 games.
Jurgen the German
Erik Thorstvedt
^
The collapse that people mention will be the 10-11 game period (whatever it was) where we were bang in the relegation places of the form table and which saw us surrender 3rd place and with it Champions League football. The 'last 16 games' you keep mentioning doesn't have much relevence.
And as i said, i think most people on this side of the fence are more than aware of the good things Redknapp done during his time here - but looking towards the following seasons there was, in some of our opinions, enough to cast doubt over whether he was the best man to take us forwards.
It's all been said before, shame you only registered recently as im sure there would have been plenty for you to get involved with on the debate - but basically there are very few posters who don't appreciate his time here, no matter how many people will try and say otherwise, it's just some felt he wasn't the right man to carry on the job
The collapse that people mention will be the 10-11 game period (whatever it was) where we were bang in the relegation places of the form table and which saw us surrender 3rd place and with it Champions League football. The 'last 16 games' you keep mentioning doesn't have much relevence.
And as i said, i think most people on this side of the fence are more than aware of the good things Redknapp done during his time here - but looking towards the following seasons there was, in some of our opinions, enough to cast doubt over whether he was the best man to take us forwards.
It's all been said before, shame you only registered recently as im sure there would have been plenty for you to get involved with on the debate - but basically there are very few posters who don't appreciate his time here, no matter how many people will try and say otherwise, it's just some felt he wasn't the right man to carry on the job