• 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

Do you want QPR to get relegated?

QPR owe £44 million in fines don't they? I think it is for FFP. Could face demotion to the conference if not paid I heard. I think that is the worst case scenario, but they need the prem money by staying up
 
Robspur12 said:
Lot of truth in this I believe. He must have known about his knee surgery for a while. He could have resigned before the transfer window to allow his successor an opportunity to bring in some of his own players. Just like Harry to resign when he doesn't get what he wants. He did the same at Portmouth when Mandaric bought in Avram Grant as DoF. Fernandes has been an idiot to trust Harry with his money luckily Levy was more clued up. If QPR go down they'll be fudgeed thanks to Harry's overspending. Just like Portsmouth were after he left them.
Click to expand...

He did a brick job at QPR no doubt about it.

However, if the chairman, who is ultimately in charge of the money is stupid enough to give him all of that money then it is his fault. Arry looks after himself and obviously wants to spend all the money that is available to him without much thought for the future finances of the club, but surely it's the chairman/owner's responsibility to look after the money side of things and manage it accordingly?
 
Jurgen the German said:
He did a crud job at QPR no doubt about it.

However, if the chairman, who is ultimately in charge of the money is stupid enough to give him all of that money then it is his fault. Arry looks after himself and obviously wants to spend all the money that is available to him without much thought for the future finances of the club, but surely it's the chairman/owner's responsibility to look after the money side of things and manage it accordingly?
Click to expand...

I agree. I think that they should have got rid of him at the end of last season when they struggled to get promoted despite having the most expensive team in the division by some distance. In Redknapp's defence a lot of the damage with with their finances and signing expensive players with no resale value was done before he arrived.
 
I wonder if some will finally start to gauge the sort of man who tried to hold our club to ransom? I agree, Fernandes has to carry a large amount of the can as he had been given ample evidence of how Harry, errr, 'manages', however the first time he stands up to Harry with regards to not tossing cash at the problem and Harry decides it's time to go? I'm sorry, one word...begins with 'w'...
 
Jurgen the German said:
He did a crud job at QPR no doubt about it.

However, if the chairman, who is ultimately in charge of the money is stupid enough to give him all of that money then it is his fault. Arry looks after himself and obviously wants to spend all the money that is available to him without much thought for the future finances of the club, but surely it's the chairman/owner's responsibility to look after the money side of things and manage it accordingly?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Certain people will use any stick to beat Harry with (and will no doubt be beaming from ear to ear today), and by all means pull him up on his legitimate faults, but the myth that he is at fault for QPR, Portsmouth or any clubs over spending is, frankly, stupid.

Harry is no different to any other manager in the league (apart from Wenger). Any manager will spend as much money as the chairman will give them to make their team better. Its the managers job to have better players to make his team better so he stays in a job. Its the chairmans job to manage the clubs finances and let the manager spend only what they can afford. What dream world do some people live in where they expect ANY manager to be a martyr and say to the chairman "no thanks chairman, dont let me spend that £30 million as I worry about the clubs finances in the future (after you have sacked me for not being good enough with the players I did have)".
 
clownfoot said:
QPR owe £44 million in fines don't they? I think it is for FFP. Could face demotion to the conference if not paid I heard. I think that is the worst case scenario, but they need the prem money by staying up
Click to expand...

No surprise really, its a hell of a coincidence, Southampton, Portsmouth and now QPR.
 
Jurgen the German said:
But not Spurs. Funny how the clubs that are run well that he managed aren't in financial difficulty. It's the chairman's job to look after the finances.
Click to expand...

Levy kept him on a leash and did not fall for his flimflam. Redknapp is and always has been a fraud, one trophy in over 30 years and taken three clubs to relegation.
 
Jurgen the German said:
But not Spurs. Funny how the clubs that are run well that he managed aren't in financial difficulty. It's the chairman's job to look after the finances.
Click to expand...

Exactly. People blaming Harry for macaronic chairman spending money they did'nt have is scraping the barrel.
 
parklane1 said:
Levy kept him on a leash and did not fall for his hogwash. Redknapp is and always has been a fraud, one trophy in over 30 years and taken three clubs to relegation.
Click to expand...

So it proves my point that the chairman is ultimately in control of the money, not the manager.
 
Jurgen the German said:
So it proves my point that the chairman is ultimately in control of the money, not the manager.
Click to expand...

What it proves is that Redknapp could not give a brick about running a team into debt and he cares only about himself and the false reputation his mates in the press built up for him.

And when things start going south and he has used all the excuses he walks away and leave someone else to sort the brick he leaves behind.
 
parklane1 said:
What it proves is that Redknapp could not give a crud about running a team into debt and he cares only about himself and the false reputation his mates in the press built up for him.

And when things start going south and he has used all the excuses he walks away and leave someone else to sort the crud he leaves behind.
Click to expand...

And why should he? His job is to get the best out of the team with the money the chairman gives him, it is the chairman's job to worry about the finances. Name me one manager besides Wenger who would turn down funds from a chairman? I don't see Pelligrini, Mourinho, Mancini etc refusing transfer funding.
 
parklane1 said:
What it proves is that Redknapp could not give a crud about running a team into debt and he cares only about himself and the false reputation his mates in the press built up for him.

And when things start going south and he has used all the excuses he walks away and leave someone else to sort the crud he leaves behind.
Click to expand...

If Poch was given £300 million to spend even though he knew it would bankrupt us in a few years time do you think he would turn it down because he "cares" about the future of the club (after he has long gone) ?
 
Jurgen the German said:
And why should he? His job is to get the best out of the team with the money the chairman gives him, it is the chairman's job to worry about the finances. Name me one manager besides Wenger who would turn down funds from a chairman? I don't see Pelligrini, Mourinho, Mancini etc refusing transfer funding.
Click to expand...

We are going round in circles, how many managers have left three clubs in REAL money problems, go ask the Pompy, Saints supporters what they think of " good old rent a quote"

We are never going to agree so its best left there as you seem to be flogging a dead horse.
 
shaney said:
If Poch was given £300 million to spend even though he knew it would bankrupt us in a few years time do you think he would turn it down because he "cares" about the future of the club (after he has long gone) ?
Click to expand...

I have no idea ( and neither do you) what is true though is that Redknapp has left THREE clubs with REAL money problems.
 
parklane1 said:
We are going round in circles, how many managers have left three clubs in REAL money problems, go ask the Pompy, Saints supporters what they think of " good old rent a quote"

We are never going to agree so its best left there as you seem to be flogging a dead horse.
Click to expand...

Once again, it is the CHAIRMAN's job to run the club's finances. Just because you dislike him doesn't mean it's anything more than the people who ran those clubs a being very, very bad with money.
 
parklane1 said:
No surprise really, its a hell of a coincidence, Southampton, Portsmouth and now QPR.
Click to expand...

The damage at QPR was done before he got there. Warnock and Hughes spent a fortune on players on high wages with no resale value, many of them are still there. Redknapp certainly was not the man to turn that around and his signings have not addressed the obvious weaknesses in their squad but he is not solely to blame for their massive wage bill and falling foul of the Football League's FFP rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back