Redknapp

[The Moonlit Knight]

I agree to an extent if this was an ideal world but it really isnt. I mean think about it, you buy ten players now - one maybe two may succeed into established players the other eight or nine you need to get rid. So you will have wasted three or four years waiting for them to prove themselves giving them an opportunity etc. In the meantime you are not succeeding cos these so call potentials are either not realising it or are actually a bit brick.

It will go in cycles but bare in mind that there will be good times and bad times and lets be honest us lot are an impatient lot because we have suffered relatively anyways quite a bit

I always said Hoddle's initial transfer strategy with us was the right one, and was inspired. Sheringham & Poyet were old, but instant impact on the team. Same with Ziege. Where Hoddle then went wrong (and I am not convinced this was down to him to be honest) was that he then relied on youth to replace them and I always found that strange. I had some massive arguments on this very forum about it at the time, and got called all sorts of names for daring to suggest (I say suggest, but it was fudging obvious to me at the time) that Gardner, Davies and Etherington were never going to be good enough for us to push on.

 

[elltrev]

Indeed. I can't believe after all these years that people STILL believe in building for the future is a viable strategy ](*,) Building for the future starts at academy level. It is impossible to build for the future in terms of the first team squad.

Walker, Dawson, King, Ekotto, Lennon, Sandro, Huddlestone, Bale - all players who were bought (or brought through the ranks) for the future more than for the present (at the time that we got them), and who have at various times played an important part in our recent success.

It seems ridiculous to use this false dichotomy of 'building for the present' or 'building for the future'. Most successful squads will need a mixture of players with potential, players at their peak, and older players with experience. I think our key signings under Harry have been a decent mixture - Walker, Naughton, Kaboul, Sandro (potential) ... Palacios, Crouch, Defoe, Kranjcar, VDV, Adebayor (peak) ... Friedel, Gallas, Parker (experience).

The only position where we have no medium-term plan IMO is goalkeeper, and striker at the moment (though I'm sure this will be sorted come the new season).

 

[thfcsteff]

And they haven't managed to replicate that, which suggests to me it was a fluke as much as anything else.

Those kids you just mentioned, aren't good enough. Carroll looked like a tidy player, but no great shakes. Livermore and Townsend in my opinion simply aren't good enough. Neither is Rose FWIW. Livermore may have a career in the Premiership, but I don't think it'll be with us.

And you certainly wouldn't want any of them "kids" (I use that term loosely, Livermore is 23 this year, Townsend will be 21 by the time the season starts again - hardly youngsters anymore) near the first team unless we had some serious injuries. Look at Norwich at home.

Disagree with United as they have consistently planned for the future with their mixture of signings and youth...agree on our youth, perhaps they aren't mostly up to it, and I suppose we must deduce that Harry concluded that in Dec when he decided not to integrate some of them...I remember when he came in and assembled his team there was agreement with the chairman that we must step up the ruth development side of things, which is why so much has gone into to the new academy. I still wish Harry would gamble on youth a bit more though TBH, though yes, experience is vital and if can get a player like Seedorf for a season or two (like we had Gallas) then I'm all for it so long as there's long-term signings too...

 

[DMac]

Actually the facts show that we finished above Chelsea (and drew with them twice), that we were ahead of Arsenal for most of the season and finished just 1 point behind them (and beat them once and lost to them once), and were challenging City and United for over half the season. In the end we finished miles behind those two, but a) their teams and squads are better than ours, and b) it seems fair and logical to believe that the harry-to-England situation played a big part in our slump.

So the facts show that we have challenged Arsenal and Chelsea, and that we beat them (and City) to get to the Champions League for the first time ever 2 seasons ago, in which we then beat Inter Milan and AC Milan over 2 games - 2 more big teams.

It's great to have high aims, but to sack the manager because we're not challenging City and United for the title is deluded IMO.

Well the facts show that we're not in the CL next season, and that we blew a 10 point lead to lose it.

Finishing above Chelsea in the league doesn't mean a lot - AVB set them on the path to oblivion but they came back and beat Napoli, Benfica, Barcelona, and Bayern Munich to get in next season. We wouldn't have done that in a million years under Redknapp.

So Chelsea knew what they had to do and did it - a mighty uphill task. We knew what we had to do as well. The day we went to Villa Park we knew a win would put us 3rd (and thus in CL places). And we yet again failed. So Chelsea beat the best teams in the world in their own grounds, and we couldn't go to fudging 16th place, brick on a stick Aston Villa and get the win we needed to get into the CL next season. We would have faced tougher teams in the CL qualifying matches.

I'll probably be tinkled off about that Villa match for the rest of my life. Maybe that influences my judgment in an illogical way, but the capitulation this season just makes me think that Redknapp cannot take us further. It's not going to be easier next season, in fact it will be a lot fudging tougher, with Chelsea getting Hazard and it looks like Hulk as well. Plus they've already bought De Bruyne and Marin.

Arsenal will have Wheelchair and Sagna back, plus have already bought Podolski and it looks like they may keep RVP.

So it's going to require a titanic effort next season. If you think Redknapp is the man for that then fine, but I would disagree, and I think we may as well take a risk because we are out of the CL anyway and we don't have as much to lose as we would have to gain, if we took a chance with say Rodgers and he turned out to be a really great manager. That's the only way into the top 4. Redknapp cannot do it imho.

 

[thfcsteff]

Well the facts show that we're not in the CL next season, and that we blew a 10 point lead to lose it.

Finishing above Chelsea in the league doesn't mean a lot - AVB set them on the path to oblivion but they came back and beat Napoli, Benfica, Barcelona, and Bayern Munich to get in next season. We wouldn't have done that in a million years under Redknapp.

So Chelsea knew what they had to do and did it - a mighty uphill task. We knew what we had to do as well. The day we went to Villa Park we knew a win would put us 3rd (and thus in CL places). And we yet again failed. So Chelsea beat the best teams in the world in their own grounds, and we couldn't go to fudging 16th place, brick on a stick Aston Villa and get the win we needed to get into the CL next season. We would have faced tougher teams in the CL qualifying matches.

I'll probably be tinkled off about that Villa match for the rest of my life. Maybe that influences my judgment in an illogical way, but the capitulation this season just makes me think that Redknapp cannot take us further. It's not going to be easier next season, in fact it will be a lot fudging tougher, with Chelsea getting Hazard and it looks like Hulk as well. Plus they've already bought De Bruyne and Marin.

Arsenal will have Wheelchair and Sagna back, plus have already bought Podolski and it looks like they may keep RVP.

So it's going to require a titanic effort next season. If you think Redknapp is the man for that then fine, but I would disagree, and I think we may as well take a risk because we are out of the CL anyway and we don't have as much to lose as we would have to gain, if we took a chance with say Rodgers and he turned out to be a really great manager. That's the only way into the top 4. Redknapp cannot do it imho.

Excellently put.
Many of us who suffered that performance were aghast at the way in which we sauntered through the first-half completely bereft of incisive pace or verve desire the fact Villa were fudging dire. Seriously, I said at the time I could not see any way Villa would score unless we either gifted them a goal or they flaked one.
Danny Rose let the entire club down in the second-half, but I will never forget watching Parker, a half-fit Parker, cul-de-sac in the left-hand far corner of the pitch from us as he single-handedly took the life out of any momentum we had built up.
An unmitigated disaster which I refused to acknowledge at the time...

 

[ArnieArdiles]

27th May 2012, 15:42..... post #716 elltrev wrote:

has anyone really changed their mind based on another poster's argument?


I've read lots on Harry and I can say I've shifted my position due to reading the debates .

However, I were from the point of view that we should never had gone into the 2011-12 season with Harry at the helm after the collapse in form of the 2010-11 season. I actually viewed that collapse more due to tactics and players not performing than the season's just gone, where a tough run of tough fixtures and possible losses, ate away at the player's confidence. Goons (a) ManUre (h) Everton (a) allied to the Goon's good form and their catching up, the pressure told. Throw in the uncertainty of the England job which although was not really Harry's fault , his handling of the situation due to his ego, I feel definitely was also a contributing factor as to why our players could not get back on the winning trail much sooner than the Swansea game .

The situation as I see it now, is we finished 4th and that's no easy feat when looking at the squads of the teams around us , 10 point lead or not. And like, DMac's above post #863, I found Harry's handling of that Villa game appalling , near to unforgivable really , where he seemed out of his depth with the whole situation . Some say, although I've not seen the evidence to back this, Harry were only concerned with tying up 4th as that would give him the agreed financial bonus regardless if the Chav's edged us out by winning the CL final.


So now we have to deal with the current situation . Do we keep him on or do we try with another manager like Rodgers.

One thing I do know , if we retain the services of Harry Redknapp we have to do it on our terms and not his . We have to tear up his current contract and offer him a new one with new conditions!

For starters, he has to give up his Sun column. I would also state that he would be in breach of his contract if he talks to the media about other managerial jobs and if he turns on the supporters like he did at the end of the 2010-11 season. Levy sacked Graham for a lot less.

If Harry will not agree to these terms , then I suggest Levy pay him off the remaining year and prioritise Brenden Rodgers. I believe Rodgers to be a good manager who has taken on the good work that Martinez did at Swansea onto a new level. He will give us a system of play where we will beat the likes of the Goons with a possession game. Perhaps only then, will we be able to get ahead of the scummy Goons .

Many are asking the question , would Rodgers do any better with the Spurs squad than Harry is doing , well the same could be asked vice-versa . Would Harry have found a way to keep those players at Swansea in the premeirship and with games to spare too ? I'm not so sure.

Appointing Rodgers would not be the disaster many think it would be. I'm very confident that Rodgers would take on the good work, Harry has done for us, just as he did with Martinez's Swansea.

A change of manager doesn't have to always be made when we've hit a poor patch or we've kicked off our campaign badly and sometimes it's best to make the change whilst being in a decent position, which currently we're.

I dread going into next season as things stand and for me , it's down to Levy , he must either back Harry with a new contract, or sack him and get Rodgers in.

 

[ArcspacE]

Utd is probably the best example in building for the future.

Always buying young talent, blooding new players into the system and repeating thd cycle every 6-7 years

To suggest that is the wrong approach for any successful club in order to justify Redknapp's patchy transfer dealings is laughable. You pro-Arry bias is reaching new levels

 

[DMac]

Excellently put.
Many of us who suffered that performance were aghast at the way in which we sauntered through the first-half completely bereft of incisive pace or verve desire the fact Villa were fudging dire. Seriously, I said at the time I could not see any way Villa would score unless we either gifted them a goal or they flaked one.
Danny Rose let the entire club down in the second-half, but I will never forget watching Parker, a half-fit Parker, cul-de-sac in the left-hand far corner of the pitch from us as he single-handedly took the life out of any momentum we had built up.
An unmitigated disaster which I refused to acknowledge at the time...

Yep - he did the same for England against Norway the other day, barely ever did I see him pass it forward.

I know he's sort of a fan favorite, but I don't really rate Parker and I was tinkled that he seemed to be first choice ahead of Sandro. He passes backwards and sideways almost exclusively and if it weren't for the movement of Modric and VDV he would probably NEVER pass forward. Just sort of gets on my nerves because he also doesn't have the aerial presence to dominate the midfield like Sandro can. What Parker does extremely well is tackle and break up play but that isn't enough in a midfield today. For instance, I value a player like Livermore way above Parker. Livermore is an excellent passer of the ball and a lot better with it at his feet than Parker. If it was up to me, the order of preference assuming that Modric and VDV both start already would be Sandro --> Hudd/Jake -> Parker.

Sorry didn't mean to rant about Parker but it is just a problem with English coaches/English football mentality. Someone like Guardiola would see Livermore as a greater asset.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Utd is probably the best example in building for the future.

Always buying young talent, blooding new players into the system and repeating thd cycle every 6-7 years

To suggest that is the wrong approach for any successful club in order to justify Redknapp's patchy transfer dealings is laughable. You pro-Arry bias is reaching new levels

Utd buy players at their peak, or young players that are already better than most experienced pro's (and well out of our price range).

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Yep - he did the same for England against Norway the other day, barely ever did I see him pass it forward.

I know he's sort of a fan favorite, but I don't really rate Parker and I was tinkled that he seemed to be first choice ahead of Sandro. He passes backwards and sideways almost exclusively and if it weren't for the movement of Modric and VDV he would probably NEVER pass forward. Just sort of gets on my nerves because he also doesn't have the aerial presence to dominate the midfield like Sandro can. What Parker does extremely well is tackle and break up play but that isn't enough in a midfield today. For instance, I value a player like Livermore way above Parker. Livermore is an excellent passer of the ball and a lot better with it at his feet than Parker. If it was up to me, the order of preference assuming that Modric and VDV both start already would be Sandro --> Hudd/Jake -> Parker.

Sorry didn't mean to rant about Parker but it is just a problem with English coaches/English football mentality. Someone like Guardiola would see Livermore as a greater asset.

You have Livermore in front of Parker? Forgetting Norwich are we?

I think Sandro will be first choice next season (people forget that he was INJURED when Parker first arrived) but you do know that statistically he passes backwards more than Parker don't you?

 

[thfcsteff]

You have Livermore in front of Parker? Forgetting Norwich are we?

I think Sandro will be first choice next season (people forget that he was INJURED when Parker first arrived) but you do know that statistically he passes backwards more than Parker don't you?

I think Parker has been one of Harry's successes AND failures this season. An undoubted success as a signing (proved me wrong!) yet when he was tiring, when he needed to be rested a bit, rotated a bit, Harry couldn't find it in himself to give Livermore or Sandro the nod. When he DID I think it was clear that each player, although obviously very different, offered more in terms of directly distributing to other "flair" players than Parker, who I've observed becomes a cul-de-sac dribbler when tired or playing injured.

 

[DHSF]

I always said Hoddle's initial transfer strategy with us was the right one, and was inspired. Sheringham & Poyet were old, but instant impact on the team. Same with Ziege. Where Hoddle then went wrong (and I am not convinced this was down to him to be honest) was that he then relied on youth to replace them and I always found that strange. I had some massive arguments on this very forum about it at the time, and got called all sorts of names for daring to suggest (I say suggest, but it was fudging obvious to me at the time) that Gardner, Davies and Etherington were never going to be good enough for us to push on.

Look there is a right mix that has to be concocted. This mix has to involve old, young and players at their peak. You cannot just continuously buy 20 yr olds and expect to succeed - you need a blend. Our squad has a decent blend of these ingredients but it lacks quality - thats what we need to go for.

I would love us to bring in younger players but not at the expense of bringing in a few players who will help us to succeed NOW.

 

[ArcspacE]

Utd buy players at their peak, or young players that are already better than most experienced pro's (and well out of our price range).

Like Jones, Smalling, Rafael, Fabio and Hernandez? (just a few recent ones that come to mind)

EDIT

Just to add - even if they were better - it only indicates a long term strategy of buying younger talent with the prospect of long-term service. Fergie has done around 4-5 such cycles in the PL era and always seems to get it right eventhough the media always brand them inexperienced, 'worst-ever', etc.

I would have no problem with buying one good young prospect instead of 3 dying crocks who would cost more in wages anyway and contribute close to fudge all

 

[Rorschach]

I think Parker has been one of Harry's successes AND failures this season. An undoubted success as a signing (proved me wrong!) yet when he was tiring, when he needed to be rested a bit, rotated a bit, Harry couldn't find it in himself to give Livermore or Sandro the nod. When he DID I think it was clear that each player, although obviously very different, offered more in terms of directly distributing to other "flair" players than Parker, who I've observed becomes a cul-de-sac dribbler when tired or playing injured.

I have to agree with this. Parker did far better than I thought but when Spurs needed something different he wasn't the man to deliver it. For some reason he loses his cool when in the final third which is in some ways at odds with his cool calm demeanour in the middle third. I think Sandro has crept ahead of him in the pecking order and I hope Harry's sees that.

It was disappointing Hudd wasn't available more last season as I am a firm believer in horses for courses. When we came up against park the bus style teams then the DM really should be sacrificed for someone more forward thinking, at least for 20-30 mins anyway.

 

[Pirate55]

Well the facts show that we're not in the CL next season, and that we blew a 10 point lead to lose it.

Finishing above Chelsea in the league doesn't mean a lot - AVB set them on the path to oblivion but they came back and beat Napoli, Benfica, Barcelona, and Bayern Munich to get in next season. We wouldn't have done that in a million years under Redknapp.

So Chelsea knew what they had to do and did it - a mighty uphill task. We knew what we had to do as well. The day we went to Villa Park we knew a win would put us 3rd (and thus in CL places). And we yet again failed. So Chelsea beat the best teams in the world in their own grounds, and we couldn't go to fudging 16th place, brick on a stick Aston Villa and get the win we needed to get into the CL next season. We would have faced tougher teams in the CL qualifying matches.

I'll probably be tinkled off about that Villa match for the rest of my life. Maybe that influences my judgment in an illogical way, but the capitulation this season just makes me think that Redknapp cannot take us further. It's not going to be easier next season, in fact it will be a lot fudging tougher, with Chelsea getting Hazard and it looks like Hulk as well. Plus they've already bought De Bruyne and Marin.

Arsenal will have Wheelchair and Sagna back, plus have already bought Podolski and it looks like they may keep RVP.

So it's going to require a titanic effort next season. If you think Redknapp is the man for that then fine, but I would disagree, and I think we may as well take a risk because we are out of the CL anyway and we don't have as much to lose as we would have to gain, if we took a chance with say Rodgers and he turned out to be a really great manager. That's the only way into the top 4. Redknapp cannot do it imho.

Once again DMac and Steff have nailed it. Spot on.

The villa game was the real test. The most important game of the season. It was absolutely crucial that we win it. Yet, along with virtually every other vital game under Harry, we didnt win. Against a dire Villa side, shorn of their best attackers (Bent and Agbonlahor) and therefore virtually toothless, we were frankly brick. We started the game in second gear and though hampered by the loss of the stupid Rose, we didnt really create a clear opening the whole game. For a side that had to win to get third place, that is appalling and stems directley from the manager - team selection, motivation, substitutions, inspiration, well drilled corner taking etc. The Parker substitution was a joke - too late, Parker was clearly injured and he had an England striker on the bench when we desperately needed a goal. Unbelieveable.

Harry now has a squad in disarray. Three wins in 12 PL matches means a dispirited team, 8 players marginalised and disaffected means a decimated squad, only one (want-away) striker remaining means a decimated strike force. How much longer before people realise that Harry has decimated the club?

 

[mick cooper]

Once again DMac and Steff have nailed it. Spot on.

The villa game was the real test. The most important game of the season. It was absolutely crucial that we win it. Yet, along with virtually every other vital game under Harry, we didnt win. Against a dire Villa side, shorn of their best attackers (Bent and Agbonlahor) and therefore virtually toothless, we were frankly brick. We started the game in second gear and though hampered by the loss of the stupid Rose, we didnt really create a clear opening the whole game. For a side that had to win to get third place, that is appalling and stems directley from the manager - team selection, motivation, substitutions, inspiration, well drilled corner taking etc. The Parker substitution was a joke - too late, Parker was clearly injured and he had an England striker on the bench when we desperately needed a goal. Unbelieveable.

Harry now has a squad in disarray. Three wins in 12 PL matches means a dispirited team, 8 players marginalised and disaffected means a decimated squad, only one (want-away) striker remaining means a decimated strike force. How much longer before people realise that Harry has decimated the club?

We're doomed Cap'n Mainwaring, doomed!
We're all going to die............

 

[a spur from swansea]

We're doomed Cap'n Mainwaring, doomed!
We're all going to die............

......don't tell him your name Pike..........ahhhhh

 

[Gazza Dazzla]

We're doomed Cap'n Mainwaring, doomed!
We're all going to die............

Agree with this bit...

 

[a spur from swansea]

........if people on yer can tell me where are they going on holidays soo i can avoid them..........you know the type,you bump into them by the breakfast bar and moan about everything and everything,even if it rains......feck sake..........top 4 club and still going on on on on.........and on.......

 

[elltrev]

Well the facts show that we're not in the CL next season, and that we blew a 10 point lead to lose it.

Finishing above Chelsea in the league doesn't mean a lot - AVB set them on the path to oblivion but they came back and beat Napoli, Benfica, Barcelona, and Bayern Munich to get in next season. We wouldn't have done that in a million years under Redknapp.

So Chelsea knew what they had to do and did it - a mighty uphill task. We knew what we had to do as well. The day we went to Villa Park we knew a win would put us 3rd (and thus in CL places). And we yet again failed. So Chelsea beat the best teams in the world in their own grounds, and we couldn't go to fudging 16th place, brick on a stick Aston Villa and get the win we needed to get into the CL next season. We would have faced tougher teams in the CL qualifying matches.

I'll probably be tinkled off about that Villa match for the rest of my life. Maybe that influences my judgment in an illogical way, but the capitulation this season just makes me think that Redknapp cannot take us further. It's not going to be easier next season, in fact it will be a lot fudging tougher, with Chelsea getting Hazard and it looks like Hulk as well. Plus they've already bought De Bruyne and Marin.

Arsenal will have Wheelchair and Sagna back, plus have already bought Podolski and it looks like they may keep RVP.

So it's going to require a titanic effort next season. If you think Redknapp is the man for that then fine, but I would disagree, and I think we may as well take a risk because we are out of the CL anyway and we don't have as much to lose as we would have to gain, if we took a chance with say Rodgers and he turned out to be a really great manager. That's the only way into the top 4. Redknapp cannot do it imho.

You said in your previous post that "The stats support the opinion that we cannot ... challenege the best teams ... under Redknapp". All I was saying is that the stats clearly show that we can, because we finished above Chelsea and finished effectively one goal behind Arsenal.

If you think that in the future we won't be able to challenge the best teams under Redknapp, then fair enough. I agree that it feels like we've missed a window of opportunity here, with Chelsea seemingly going to strengthen a lot this summer. Not sure about Arsenal yet; if RVP leaves they could be in trouble.

The thing is though, we're almost always going to be unable to challenge United, City and Chelsea, because they have way more money than us. We've done very well to build a squad that this season was arguably as good as Arsenal and Chelsea's, but Chelsea will always have the edge over us because of that **** Abramovich. Whichever manager we get, it's unlikely IMO that we'll be able to consistently challenge those rich fudgers.

Also, "So Chelsea beat the best teams in the world in their own grounds, and we couldn't go to fudging 16th place, brick on a stick Aston Villa and get the win we needed to get into the CL next season" - doesn't really tell the whole story. Chelsea rode huge amounts of luck against both Barca (in both legs) and Bayern, whilst we were unlucky with Villa's goal (one of their 4 shots). Don't get me wrong, I'm as disappointed as anyone with the Villa game, but to totally blame Harry that we didn't win is wrong IMO given that the lucky Villa goal and Rose's sending off really had nothing to do with him.

The margins are so small; if we had beaten Villa 1-0 and finished 3rd, and Chelsea had lost 6-2 on aggregate against Barcelona (totally feasible and 'fair' given the chances the teams had), would people's opinions on Harry differ?