Redknapp

[mick cooper]

........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.......

You're all individuals..........

"Yes, we're all individuals"

you've all got to work it out for yourselves............

 

[mick cooper]

........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.......

oi!

 

[elltrev]

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?

Mate, I have to wonder sometimes if you're just a wind-up merchant or troll... Harry has decimated the club? Are you fudging serious? Are you this miserable and melodramatic in your everyday life?

 

[a spur from swansea]

oi!

.......certain people i don't mind having a discussion with.....lol.....

 

[Pirate55]

Mate, I have to wonder sometimes if you're just a wind-up merchant or troll... Harry has decimated the club? Are you fudging serious? Are you this miserable and melodramatic in your everyday life?

Do you not agree that a massive rebuilding has to take place - whoever is the manager? Then the question is, who is best placed to do it? For me, it isnt Harry.

 

[mick cooper]

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?

Noooo, despite the clear evidence of an attack minded team that plays open and attractive football that pens teams back on the edge of their penalty area for the majority of the game, we have a tactically clueless manager who is too cautious.

What we have is a small section of fans who are too small minded to come to terms with the vagaries of fate and seeem to thing that life and football matches are simple things that can be worked out on paper. There are no such things as 4th/5th tier teams beating premier sides in cups, or players ever being affected by nerves, or even teams like Barcelona ever, ever losing to negative teams like Chelsea.

Doesn't happen. And if it happens, then some ****s to blame.

Right, who don't I like? Lets get some facts together that don't do him any favours and regardless of the evidence to the contrary - we'll start a massive and frankly boring smear campaign.

Remember lads, "Don't let the truth get in the way of a good lie!"

 

[DMac]

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?

Here's the stats I could find (I bolded the better numbers):

Livermore:
Min per Chance Created: 82
Pass completion %: 90.2
Min per Tackle: 31
Tackle Success %: 71%
Min per Loss of Possession: 147
Ground 50-50 % won: 53%
Aerial 50-50% won: 25%
Min per ball won (defensive 3rd): 39
Min per ball won (midfield 3rd): 24
Min per ball won (attacking 3rd): 367
Min per interception: 37

Parker:
Min per Chance Created: 114
Pass completion %: 89.4
Min per Tackle: 23
Tackle Success %: 71%
Min per Loss of Possession: 66
Ground 50-50 % won: 55%
Aerial 50-50% won: 19%
Min per ball won (defensive 3rd): 33
Min per ball won (midfield 3rd): 23
Min per ball won (attacking 3rd): 309
Min per interception: 28

So Jake is barely behind Parker in the defensive stats, but far ahead in the passing stats. In almost all the stats they are very close EXCEPT minutes per loss of possession, Parker loses possession almost 3 times more often.

 

[elltrev]

Do you not agree that a massive rebuilding has to take place - whoever is the manager? Then the question is, who is best placed to do it? For me, it isnt Harry.

Firstly, I certainly don't agree that Harry has decimated the club, which is what you said. And it is clearly a ridiculous thing to say.

I also don't think a massive rebuilding has to take place. Why do we need a massive rebuilding? Yes we need 2 or 3 strikers, and 1 (or maybe 2) wide midfielders, but that is hardly a massive rebuilding. Most of our first team is likely to still be intact from the previous season; all of it if we retain Modric and sign Ade permanently.

 

[Pirate55]

Firstly, I certainly don't agree that Harry has decimated the club, which is what you said. And it is clearly a ridiculous thing to say.

I also don't think a massive rebuilding has to take place. Why do we need a massive rebuilding? Yes we need 2 or 3 strikers, and 1 (or maybe 2) wide midfielders, but that is hardly a massive rebuilding. Most of our first team is likely to still be intact from the previous season; all of it if we retain Modric and sign Ade permanently.

and if the disaffected players all leave what then. goalkeeper, centre half, left back, wide players, forwards. If H stays, we could need about 6-8 new players just to stand still

 

[DMac]

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?

I don't think so, because at the end of the day we still only won 1 game, and lost 6 against the "top 4." That's not good enough anymore. There are a lot of 'stats' that can back me up on that but maybe it does come down to just opinion or perspective at the end of the day.

The main point is to look to the future. We couldn't do it this year, and next year is going to be far more difficult it looks like. To me that implies that we have to look at it as a risk/reward scenario. We don't have a lot to lose, but everything to gain if we can manage to land a manager who turns out to be really great. As I said, it's a risk, but it is simply something we have to do imo, because we can't compete with worse resources as well as a worse manager, we need to attempt to balance the scales and the only way we can do that is by attempting to get someone new who we think can really bring something special to the table. Otherwise, if you don't take the initiative to change the game, the outcome won't be different either. Same thing next season folks? Or would we actually like to be a little daring and try to push forward.

 

[Pirate55]

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?[/QUOTE]

That word "if" is the big difference between a winner and a loser imo. If h had beaten arse a, Manc h and a, villa a, norwich h, stoke h, chelsea h and a, you are right we wouldnt be having this discussion. The fact though is that we didnt and we let a 10 point gap evaporate. Do we want a winner in charge or someone who consigns us to be nearly men. I know what I want.

 

[parklane1]

Do you not agree that a massive rebuilding has to take place - whoever is the manager? Then the question is, who is best placed to do it? For me, it isn't Harry.

We do not need a massive rebuilding job no, what we do need though are a couple of players who are likely to be around for a few years , that means we have to long further then players players like Sasha, Nelsen. There is nothing wrong with having a few experienced players around we have a few ( Parker, Gallas, King, Brad) instead of adding more to that list we should look at younger alternatives.

Who knows just what the truth is over players like Cole, Rio,etc, but players like that are not what we should be looking at.

 

[elltrev]

and if the disaffected players all leave what then. goalkeeper, centre half, left back, wide players, forwards. If H stays, we could need about 6-8 new players just to stand still

Who are the disaffected first team players? Niko and Defoe are the only two I could think of who will probably want to leave.

We still have a first team of:

-----------------Friedel-------------------------

Walker--Kaboul--Gallas/Daws/Vertonghen---Ekotto

Lennon------Sandro---Modric------------Bale

------------------VDV-------------------------

-------------------?-------------------------

The only first-team player we're missing is a striker, and we're officially tring to bring Ade in permanently. Then we need some more depth up front and in wide midfield, that's it really.

 

[elltrev]

I don't think so, because at the end of the day we still only won 1 game, and lost 6 against the "top 4." That's not good enough anymore. There are a lot of 'stats' that can back me up on that but maybe it does come down to just opinion or perspective at the end of the day.

The main point is to look to the future. We couldn't do it this year, and next year is going to be far more difficult it looks like. To me that implies that we have to look at it as a risk/reward scenario. We don't have a lot to lose, but everything to gain if we can manage to land a manager who turns out to be really great. As I said, it's a risk, but it is simply something we have to do imo, because we can't compete with worse resources as well as a worse manager, we need to attempt to balance the scales and the only way we can do that is by attempting to get someone new who we think can really bring something special to the table. Otherwise, if you don't take the initiative to change the game, the outcome won't be different either. Same thing next season folks? Or would we actually like to be a little daring and try to push forward.

Good and fair post.

 

[elltrev]

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?[/QUOTE]

That word "if" is the big difference between a winner and a loser imo. If h had beaten arse a, Manc h and a, villa a, norwich h, stoke h, chelsea h and a, you are right we wouldnt be having this discussion. The fact though is that we didnt and we let a 10 point gap evaporate. Do we want a winner in charge or someone who consigns us to be nearly men. I know what I want.

My point is that the 'if' that I talked about was not under Redknapp's control, and therefore has nothing to do with him being a winner or a loser.

Still, if you think we can get a manager who will have us compete with United and City, then fair enough. I just think it's odd to act as if Harry has done nothing good for us, and is holding us back from challenging the top teams as if we always were before he got here.

 

[ArcspacE]

I don't think so, because at the end of the day we still only won 1 game, and lost 6 against the "top 4." That's not good enough anymore. There are a lot of 'stats' that can back me up on that but maybe it does come down to just opinion or perspective at the end of the day.

The main point is to look to the future. We couldn't do it this year, and next year is going to be far more difficult it looks like. To me that implies that we have to look at it as a risk/reward scenario. We don't have a lot to lose, but everything to gain if we can manage to land a manager who turns out to be really great. As I said, it's a risk, but it is simply something we have to do imo, because we can't compete with worse resources as well as a worse manager, we need to attempt to balance the scales and the only way we can do that is by attempting to get someone new who we think can really bring something special to the table. Otherwise, if you don't take the initiative to change the game, the outcome won't be different either. Same thing next season folks? Or would we actually like to be a little daring and try to push forward.

Top, top post, mate. =D>

 

[elltrev]

We do not need a massive rebuilding job no, what we do need though are a couple of players who are likely to be around for a few years , that means we have to long further then players players like Sasha, Nelsen. There is nothing wrong with having a few experienced players around we have a few ( Parker, Gallas, King, Brad) instead of adding more to that list we should look at younger alternatives.

Who knows just what the truth is over players like Cole, Rio,etc, but players like that are not what we should be looking at.

Please can people stop referring to Saha and Nelsen as if Harry brought them in as key long-term solutions for us?! Please?!

Still the general point is a fair one, though in a previous post I showed that (IMO) Harry's first-team signings have been a good mixture of players with potential, players at their peak, and players with experience. Likewise, our current squad has a nice mixture. All positions bar goalkeeper and striker have quality players the right side of 30.

 

[parklane1]

Please can people stop referring to Shah and Nelsen as if Harry brought them in as key long-term solutions for us?! Please?!

Still the general point is a fair one, though in a previous post I showed that (IMO) Harry's first-team signings have been a good mixture of players with potential, players at their peak, and players with experience. Likewise, our current squad has a nice mixture. All positions bar goalkeeper and striker have quality players the right side of 30.

I would be very surprised if anyone thought that Saha and Nelsen were going to be long term signings and planning for the future. We have enough experienced players we need to sign players who have several years in front of them, not behind them.

It will be interesting to see just who Redknapp sees as players who will take us up another level.

 

[Jordinho]

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

Agree with this bit...

ITK?

 

[a spur from swansea]

Originally Posted by DMac
I don't think so, because at the end of the day we still only won 1 game, and lost 6 against the "top 4." That's not good enough anymore. There are a lot of 'stats' that can back me up on that but maybe it does come down to just opinion or perspective at the end of the day.
The main point is to look to the future. We couldn't do it this year, and next year is going to be far more difficult it looks like. To me that implies that we have to look at it as a risk/reward scenario. We don't have a lot to lose, but everything to gain if we can manage to land a manager who turns out to be really great. As I said, it's a risk, but it is simply something we have to do imo, because we can't compete with worse resources as well as a worse manager, we need to attempt to balance the scales and the only way we can do that is by attempting to get someone new who we think can really bring something special to the table. Otherwise, if you don't take the initiative to change the game, the outcome won't be different either. Same thing next season folks? Or would we actually like to be a little daring and try to push forward.[/I

And everyone predicted we finish 6th this season after finishing 5th last year ,so where did we end up,a point away from third,isn't that progress,or dont league tables position mean anything now??