• 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?

i will reply in more detail to the rest of this post but i have to drop this in quickly for the above :

:ross:

hahahahaaaaa LOL :lol: :ross:

i know...thats the true meaning of desperation...i cant explain what was going on. it could have been levy selling those guys

it was stupid , it happened, i have no explanation for us butchering our squad
 
4 months was to cover myself ;) - February till the end of the season is 3 and a bit months? hell you can even use January actually as a time where he let Pienaar and Corluka leave on loan which eventually caused us problems - so yea - the poor results may have only been 2.5 months or whatever but the cracks were forming earlier. anyway the time frame isn't really the issue here is it ?

as for the first part of your post - Villa Boas will be judged by the same standards as Harry - but as Nayim has said, judging Villa Boas now based on how we judged Harry after 4 seasons and several transfer windows is not an even way to go about it - which i am assuming is what you would like to see?

nah, am just saying that if injuries wont be taken into consideration for harry , then why should it for AVB...stuff like that. little niggly things that gets used to say that harry was brick or a bad manager. when we hit bad form and defoe misses from 5 yards..thats on AVB too.

i know it sounds stupid but its the only way to show how people are act.
 
right so its the length thats the primary issue, not the resources.

okay , i see where you're coming from. i dont agree though but i see what you are telling me

No its not. It is a big factor, but it is context that frames other points - not the only point in itself.

For example. Manager X doesnt have able reserves for key positions. And doesnt have a reliable way of coping without key players.

1) Manager X has been in the job 6 months. Its a shame, its something you want addressed but he hasnt had sufficient time to build the squad he needs. So its not something to hold against him.

2) Manager X has been in the job for 6 years. It is unacceptable that a manager has not established a more sensible squad and compensation methods.

i personally feel if we had someone like redmond then lennons injury wouldnt have hurt so bad for us or if we had an ade back up or if we had someone able to step in for parker

Which is EXACTLY my point. Right now AVB has had a matter of weeks to assess his squad, and buy/sell in an effort to establish a base line for what he needs. I do not expect at this point for it to be the finished article.

Redknapp had 4 years (7 windows) and hadnt yet done that, which for me is a very bad thing (for any manager of that tenure)

And you illustrate the point nicely, Redmond would have been well within Harrys grasp, even if Levy was some tight fisted overlord who wouldnt back him in the market with big money.
 
nah, am just saying that if injuries wont be taken into consideration for harry , then why should it for AVB...stuff like that. little niggly things that gets used to say that harry was brick or a bad manager. when we hit bad form and defoe misses from 5 yards..thats on AVB too.

i know it sounds stupid but its the only way to show how people are act.

but it hasn't happened yet - you seem to be assuming that this is how we will react further down the line if the same issues occur with Villa Boas that happened with HR.

at this point in time 3 games in to our new managers reign i don't see where you are coming from with this kind of comparison - it's an entirely different set of circumstances : a new manager with new ideas and a new way of playing with a whole new bunch of players for him to assess and get a feel for and work out who fits and who doesn't - totally incomparable to a manager who was here for 4 years and had the squad pretty much to his own design - who should have known what players will need resting, what players are likely to tire and what players will be needed to come in and act as cover. do you not see how right now an injury to a key player, for example, for the new manager is different to an injury for a manger of a settled squad ?


give it time and you will see AVB will be judged to the same standards that Redknapp was by us evil harry haters, ;) - it's just a new manager needs time, whoever he is, in order to get himself to the point where we start to expect certain things from him
 
Last edited:
African, I agree with a lot of your points in a sense, but specifically, on England: Harry could have done more to dampen the speculation. It was in his interest to let the media tout him, for the public to think he was the right man for the job, to create a pressure that the FA wouldn't dare go against. In the end, he mis-analysed who the FA were looking for and their willingness to go for public opinion. But his son was writing articles basically telling them to hurry up and appoint his dad. He made no effort himself to even kill the speculation a little bit.

yeah, he played that bit wrong.


Why not deny it, say your challenging for the title with Tottenham and have the opportunity to do something amazing here, which is a chance he would never get with England? If he wants to then let the FA know privately and away from the public eye that if an appropriate offer was made, he would consider it and was only saying he wasn't interested to protect the club's interests because he is contracted to them right now, then all would have been fine. It was negligence, I'm 100% convinced that if he steered us into third then he could have left with the club's blessing, the fans would recognise he would have done his duty and we would have got a nice compensation pay out. He didn't for one second consider that he wouldn't get that job and it fudged us.

cant really deny anything here. i would just ask that people stop shooting me on something i know if bad. On this point i surrender

On rotation, you say who was he supposed to drop to fit Niko, Pienaar, Corluka in etc, who was he supposed to play to rest Parker? Livermore? Yes! 100% yes. There were plenty of games where Parker played and Sandro was on the bench for example. If he planned his rotation better, he could have worked it so against certain teams, where certain players qualities could be used other than the usual first 11, he could give some of the established guys a breather. If he then kept the rest of the team strong, but gave Parker a break one game, Walker a break another, Lennon a break another, he would have absolutely gotten away with it. But he didn't rotate.

yeah this is dicey ground right here. parker is the easiest one to pick on cause of his ankle issue and his work rate but i remember when sandro was on the bench, he wasnt actually fully fit. Livermore? i cant believe anyone would have been okay for parker who was playing 90 good consistent minutes games in game out to get dropped for livermore when we needed him. but thats an opinion of mine in particular...hindsight is 20/20 and and maybe he should have rested parker. but AT THE ACTUAL TIME...who said that

"we MUST drop parker for LIvermore!!!"

and again, you're talking about a once in life time thing here....we had a chance to really cook last season..and you want him to drop his best players? actually you've said that he should drop X and Y and Z...so far you've mention livermore for parker. what about the rest of them? and more importantly ..when would you have dropped them?

another question , at the time..did you want them dropped..were you desperate and adamant that we drop lennon, bale, vdv , adebayor, parker etc at any time...not all at once obviously

Although I have to ask, is there a top manager at a top club that has the same rotation policy as Harry? One of play the best 11 at all costs in any game that isn't the Carling/Europa cup? Because if there is, then it would show that Harry's policy can work. He would say injuries force his rotation for example, and if other managers do it, then we can say that is fair enough. But if no other top club manager does it, then it does just smack of a guy that has been a mid-table manager his whole career and just doesn't have the expertise and planning capabilities to rotate a squad as is needed. And that may ultimately show he would never be the man to establish us among the top tier of clubs.

I would say no...at a top club , they have options to keep a style going. they have the personell to do..and the deviation in quality between tier one and tier two is not significant enough for dropping and rotating to be an issue. For Harry though the drop is a lot more noticeable

case in point, how often did Wenger rest van persie in the league? How often did Ferguson rest rooney? how often did Mancini rest Yaya? these players have a significant drop in the 'next in line' personell...not to mention their squads are massive

as for the mis table manager thing and rotating...remember that Harry played alot of the fringe guys in europe and the carling cup..so the main guys were actually kept for the league games. is that not a bit of rotation to focus on whats important? the league.

and the year of the CL...he rotated well enough to fight on like 4 fronts. now is that a mid table manager mentality?
 
No its not. It is a big factor, but it is context that frames other points - not the only point in itself.

For example. Manager X doesnt have able reserves for key positions. And doesnt have a reliable way of coping without key players.

1) Manager X has been in the job 6 months. Its a shame, its something you want addressed but he hasnt had sufficient time to build the squad he needs. So its not something to hold against him.

2) Manager X has been in the job for 6 years. It is unacceptable that a manager has not established a more sensible squad and compensation methods.



Which is EXACTLY my point. Right now AVB has had a matter of weeks to assess his squad, and buy/sell in an effort to establish a base line for what he needs. I do not expect at this point for it to be the finished article.

Redknapp had 4 years (7 windows) and hadnt yet done that, which for me is a very bad thing (for any manager of that tenure)

And you illustrate the point nicely, Redmond would have been well within Harrys grasp, even if Levy was some tight fisted overlord who wouldnt back him in the market with big money.

Forgive me for bringing this down to one comment but i still am not sure where rdknapp is going to build a balanced team when it isnt even him buying the players and players arent coming in for the right money or the right quality. even in one window AVB got back alot more than Harry. we were going to break the 20 million mark ..24 million. 50% more than out previous record of 16.5...and that on top of a 15 million pound siging? AVB is getting backed..Harry didnt..your saying that he has X amount of years to sort things out..but people leave and people get bought (or dont get bought to specifications in this case) so how do you build a team when its not your money and you're relying on someone else?

its funny you mention the 4 years and 7 windows and then stick it to Harry that HE hadnt built the squad.

how much of that is Harry and how much of that is the board do you think? Infact actually say it..cause i know i can use this later on down the liine.

P.S AVB is truly brick at closing a deal....taking his time on moutinho? he should have closed that brick out time ago...tut tut tut. thats on him

as for redmond.....again i dont know..i can only speculate that levy wouldnt pay the money for him. i honestly dont know
 
Last edited:
but it hasn't happened yet - you seem to be assuming that this is how we will react further down the line if the same issues occur with Villa Boas that happened with HR.

at this point in time 3 games in to our new managers reign i don't see where you are coming from with this kind of comparison - it's an entirely different set of circumstances : a new manager with new ideas and a new way of playing with a whole new bunch of players for him to assess and get a feel for and work out who fits and who doesn't - totally incomparable to a manager who was here for 4 years and had the squad pretty much to his own design - who should have known what players will need resting, what players are likely to tire and what players will be needed to come in and act as cover. do you not see how right now an injury to a key player, for example, for the new manager is different to an injury for a manger of a settled squad ?


give it time and you will see AVB will be judged to the same standards that Redknapp was by us evil harry haters, ;) - it's just a new manager needs time, whoever he is, in order to get himself to the point where we start to expect certain things from him

LOL. nice post

btw i dont think you guys are evil harry haters..i just think your side have been unfair to him. The only way to show that is to apply the same standards to our new guy. its only fair

we didnt get moutinho..., wing cover, modric replacement....all this is on AVB...first window down and he did good but he could have done better (for example)

i'll tell you one thing. the reading game is shaping up to be a must win 6 pointer LOL
 
when would you have played , obviously started, these guys? and for whom?

they were a part of the squad and direct cover for - Walker (Corluka), Bale (Krancjar) and VdV/Lennon/the center (Pienaar) Im not suggesting that they should have been starting games in place of the better players that they cover but AS cover they had important roles to play - the second half the season is when your first team players will tire/pick up knocks and miss games, especially for us as we more often than tried to stick to our strongest XI - so the second half of the season was always going to be the time that these players will have been called upon/required - so as long as we kept them match fit by playing them in the reserves/the cups that is all what was required - maybe there were opportunities to bring them on a substitutes in league games also but i cannot really start throwing around examples of specific games - to not use them - and even worse to sell/loan important squad players is criminal IMHO


right , so what you're saying is that pienaar who isnt actually naturally a left winger or right winger, had nothing but average performances for us except for like 2 games....is the guy that would have made the significant difference over VDV playing instead? okay then, its a matter or opinion and i dont share that. i think VDV on the right playing in a wonky is better than pienaar playing on his less favoured side in a position he has rarely ever played in his entire career. VDV on the other hand thats the most talented player on our team (though defensive work rate issues i'll admit)..its him that cant make a difference out there in lennons absence .

Redknapp not being able to settle on a consistent fix is him looking, actually trying to make something work

maybe my memory of last season isn't so good but i seem to remember we mostly stuck to the same kind of set up in the first half of the season ?

Lennon Parker Modric Bale
__________VdV
________Adebayor

with Lennon out we tried to switch it around playing VdV out right and then seemingly also using Modric out left and bringing Bale more advanced central - which in my eyes is 3 players out of position just to accommodate one (Lennon) being absent - i was under the impression that Pienaar can fill in on the right - so bringing in Pienaar to replace Lennon means still being able to keep VdV/Bale and Modric in their usual positions and would benefit the team more as there would be more continuity in our play - it'd even resemble your infamous Wonky formation quite well . . . .




and you suffer from the amnesia thing that all of us do , so it not just limited to you..but modric over his career has played on the left about as much as he has in the middle ..plus in our 2nd best season of all time he played out on the left..infact when he went out injured that season...people were thankful we had a 'like for like replacement' for the left sided wonky cause we played a wide playmaker there in Niko.

now i wonder...why would people be happy to have a wide playmaker on the left? i'm going to take a wild stab in the dark and say that it cause modric did a great job there. so him on the left was not meant to be a bad thing

again for who...who are you dropping? when are you dropping them and why?

I remember very well our dear little Luka playing very well out on the left of midfield almost 3 seasons a go - last season when played there he was often ineffectual and almost incomparable to the influential player he was for us in the middle, it coincided with our inability to break teams down and when coupled with playing VdV and Bale out of their usual positions it took away the flow we had built up from almost half the season of playing in a particular way - as i mention above being able to switch in Pienaar for Lennon causes minimal disruption to the structure of our team, it was when we started moving players out of position to accommodate for injuries, when there were options available that we suffered.
 
Last edited:
Okay starting here. I am not sure why Harry should have distanced himself from the Job of his dreams. The whole world and their dog knew he wanted that job. He's a professional with aspirations. There is nothing wrong with wanting something and going for it. As long as you are prepared to deal with the consequences and fall out. Harry was prepared for both.

My problem is the way he went about it. Turning down a new contract at Spurs, constantly in the media saying he would love to manage England. Would it have been so hard to just commit himself to Spurs? If not in writing, at least make some public statement saying he's at Tottenham now and if England happens, let's deal with it then.

Now you say he flat out denied that it had any influence? what did you expect him to say? to come out there and say it ruined our season? Are you serious? EVERYONE knew it disrupted our season, there isnt any need for harry to go stoking the flames there. If honesty is trait that's against Harry then you need to look to our current manager Allegedly lieing on a few front

N.B speaking of which Milo is going to chew your ass in a bit cause you insinuated Harry to be a fibber

When the speculation was at its highest he said the players were professionals, they could handle the uncertainty. Season over and no England job, suddenly he needs a long term contract for the sake of the players, they need that certainty.

He had to move his players around cause the CL was a once in a life time experience. He had to use the squad more and he did it well.

When forced to by injuries, Redknapp would throw in someone new. If it worked he would stick with, if not he would try something different next match. My main gripe was that we let the league slide a bit because everyone were so focused on those few big matches in the CL. IMO we should have been resting players more proactively, rather than wait for an injury. Work on a system with one out an out winger (Lennon/Bale) and one wide midfielder (Pienaar/Kranjcar), at least enough to make us comfortable playing that way. Keep more players match fit and it automatically gives you more and perhaps better options.

Again if you're going to sit there and type away saying that Injuries doesnt even factor into the plus column for him then i dont want to hear anything you have to say about players getting injured for AVB (kaboul) or people getting sold or him not getting his players. These things happen..deal with it AVB . after all wenger sold all his players and replaced them with significantly less..no? AVB better start winning some games , cant be relying on injuries and lack of personell as reasons..nah nah nah...that kind of thing doesnt wash around here apparently

on a serious note..i do agree...injuries are part of the job...but you nicely mention that for AVB. why?

Not going to delve too deep in this one, but for me, dealing with injuries at the start of the season is different than getting some once everyone is up and running.

i did find this odd when he let pienaar go, but you know what....i ws okay with cause i 'thought' Niko would get more games and he did. Niko being IMO the better player. Pienaar on the other hand seemed to be the king of average and mediocrity. no idea what happened to him while he was here....he played enough games for us to show us that he could perform when called upon and pienaar didnt play well. put it mildly he appeared to be a guy that needs the team to function through him for his values to become apparent.

He wasnt going to get that here so we moved him. It was an odd one but we did it and IMO we did it for a player that was better coming off the bench in Niko

Its funny though after all Pienaars average performances that him not being here is now A BIG DEAL when he struts his stuff in a system that suits him.

This one IS one of the things that irks me abit, people are talking about this now. but why werent people suggesting us to play Niko when we were flying ...eh? who are you going to drop to play Niko ...regularly? who? bale? no...Lennon? no////VDV? no.....modric ? no...and i am telling you...no one was complaining here when we were winning...and when we were losing no one wanted our best players dropped. Human being are very similar and predictable in that they will yell murder from far away when things dont go their way. when things are on course no one complains.......hehe..the JOKER was right

I can remember many times people wanting to see more of our fringe players, if not as starters, at least give them some minutes to maintain match fitness. They COULD provide something different in matches where we're struggling. I sort of answered this further up, but I'd like to add this: What happened in training to make Kranjcar so unfit? Some of the fringies looked like complete strangers to the rest of the team whenever they played.

Oh MY GOOOOOOD!!! this bit needs challenging till Jesus returns....No one could get Pav to function. and that was down to key fundamental skills the man was missing. added to that the system didnt suit him..he would have been better to play to a 2 man strike force (in the premiership anyway)...but for that you would have to drop someone. again i ask you ..who are you dropping

Prior to Ade I found our use of strikers puzzling. There was no plan beyond Crouch. Defoe, Keane and Pav, they would appear from nowhere to be given a run, then suddenly out in the cold again. One of the things were Redknapp didn't seem to have any plan or the selections based on anything solid, like being in form or doing well in training.

who were the options? sandro and thudd were injured. Is livermore the great hope? he was the guy that would seamlessly replace parker who was our player of the season...and therefore integral to our great run AND also needed to get us out of the bad run? who were the options pray tell.
Its a shame that parker got injured but you make it sound like that scene in TRUE GRIT when John Wayne is flogging Blackie up the hill till he dies (there is a joke there somewhere but i keep getting outted as a racist so i'll leave that alone)

earlier in the same season sounds like it was back during the good run...it was only like a few weeks prior. but definately bring up his single worst game for us to prove that his tactical nous is lacking. Just say the word and i'll name TEN GAMES where his tactics and moves won us games. i'm THAT confident that people will reach for every morsel they can find to prove that he was a stupid tactician ..and morsels they are cause they arent 'that' many
and i like the way you smear our beating of Saudi Sportswashing Machine cause they missed a few players..oh yeah, if i remember correctly WE TOO didnt have a couple of players cause we started Saha and niko for that game if i remember correctly....where were lennon and VDV for instance ...ahaaaaa....but who cares when we are trying to be fair. but playing on the lack of quality being a strong factor as to why harry made mince meat of a team that despite not having said players managed to compete brilliantly with other teams and also played two strikers away to other teams as well, BEFORE and AFTER getting torn to shreds by us...and they came out looking pretty good still..playing on the factor of lower quality .. our boy AVB cant even beat norwhich at our ground. whats that about? Surely he should know that the quality being lower than his player he needs to go out there and spank these bitches...and even then he wont get enough of the credit cause he did with a strong factor of his team being miles better

Our basic setup was simple, let the match winners do their thing. What I missed was a bit more solidity in defense and the occasional Plan B if Lennon/Bale were either missing or not getting into a game. Still early days for AVB on this, but hoping for some improvement once all players have settled in. How many times have we seen United, Arsenal or Chelsea struggle, yet pop up with a late winner. Patience and stamina are the keys and of course the determination to win.

we started off with 442 then we went to 451.....cause we took off niko and saha and brought on VDV and sandro. where did you get 433 and not 451? he was trying to stem the tide, it didnt work, we got beat. but like i said...that has got to be a big jewel in the case against him. i can mention 10 games where Harry beat the other guy

yep we burnt out the previous season. And? thats not allowed to happen is it? especialy if we finished 5th that year. somewhere when i closed my eyes we must have become a true title contending team with out the title contending resources...as such it would be easy to get annoyed at getting 5th. Only us

These elements are reaches and for me they dont stick..if they do stick then they have to stick to AVB as well. its as simple as that

As for the burn out, we already saw that happen the season before. Disappointing to see the same thing happen again.
 
nah, am just saying that if injuries wont be taken into consideration for harry , then why should it for AVB...stuff like that. little niggly things that gets used to say that harry was brick or a bad manager. when we hit bad form and defoe misses from 5 yards..thats on AVB too.

i know it sounds stupid but its the only way to show how people are act.

I don't think that you are showing anyone anything, to be honest. To me it is coming across as a silly personal crusade. Where by repeating the worst behaviour of those that you are seeking to criticise you undermine your argument and turn people against you rather than strengthen your case or highlight hypocrisy.

I was one of the most vocal supporters of Harry on this board and I think that some of the arguments against him last season were flawed. But that does not mean that all of them were flawed or all that criticise him were wrong. It is possible to be pro-Harry and pro-AVB. Just as it is possible to be pro-Harry but think that it was the right time for him to be replaced.

Message boards have a habit of polarising opinions and people often making inflated claims to try and back up their arguments. One of the silliest manifestations of this on this board is people trying to putting people into one of two camps pro or anti Harry Redknapp. The truth is that most of us are probably somewhere in the middle and anyone at either extreme is probably a bit odd.

I saw that you said earlier today in this thread that people were not allowed to discuss Redknapp on this board at one stage. I do not remember that and I certainly never stopped discussing him. All the admin team asked is that people stopped making the same arguments across various threads. That's just the site rules and are there to try and keep the board flowing.

I think that it is such a shame that this has become such a divisive issue, particularly coming so hot on the heels of the Stratford debacle. I hate to see anything that pits fan against fan. We should feel free to disagree about anything and have robust discussions about it but this has become personal for some and it is damaging.
 
There was one Redknapp thread that got so out of hand it had to be closed, but it was replaced by a new one pretty quickly. I stopped reading the first one at about page 30 and it went close to 100 in the end, most of it rehashed arguments and abuse.
 
There was one Redknapp thread that got so out of hand it had to be closed, but it was replaced by a new one pretty quickly. I stopped reading the first one at about page 30 and it went close to 100 in the end, most of it rehashed arguments and abuse.

Like I said, it has become a poison pitting fan against fan. Stratford was bad, this is worse.
 
Like I said, it has become a poison pitting fan against fan. Stratford was bad, this is worse.

I was never strongly pro or anti in either case, but it was very much 'if you're not with us you're against us' for some. I wanted, or rather I wasn't opposed to Harry staying on as manager, but he made it very difficult with his actions early in the summer. I have raised issues that I wasn't happy with many times during his tenure, but it doesn't mean I wanted him sacked and it was never about our league finishes. Though I was very disappointed we didn't go for it against Villa. Anyway, the decision has been made and we have a new manager who needs our support.
 
Like I said, it has become a poison pitting fan against fan. Stratford was bad, this is worse.

Stratford was a much bigger issue imho and had it gone any further than it did then i think there would have been some serious fall out, much worse than we have seen with Redknapp - thankfully the issue has no relevance anymore and we can brush it under the carpet.

the Redknapp thing will drag on until either AVB proves to be a success where it will finally be put to bed or AVB is a failure and then we can prepare ourselves for a mammoth few weeks/months of "i told you so's" etc

wonder which it'll be :-k
 
Last edited:
I was never strongly pro or anti in either case, but it was very much 'if you're not with us you're against us' for some. I wanted, or rather I wasn't opposed to Harry staying on as manager, but he made it very difficult with his actions early in the summer. I have raised issues that I wasn't happy with many times during his tenure, but it doesn't mean I wanted him sacked and it was never about our league finishes. Though I was very disappointed we didn't go for it against Villa. Anyway, the decision has been made and we have a new manager who needs our support.

I think that most people were but the problem with a polarised opinions is that balanced discussion can get lost in the noise
 
I think that most people were but the problem with a polarised opinions is that balanced discussion can get lost in the noise

I was gonna drag up a post as an example of that right now anyway :). It's not about the content or the posters of these particular posts, but how something strongly worded can get to people if they disagree. It wouldn't take long to turn the following exchange into something very heated with the right reply.

Genuinely I have/had no issue with him wanting the job

Genuinely I thought he was made for the job

Genuinely I would have been very accepting had he got it, wished him well and everything

However, this

the england job was something he wanted, IMO he dropped the ball on that one. He took his eyes of the prize and stiood on the street corner waiting for a pick up while we were doing badly....the correlation was too much. it clearly played a part

Is 100% unforgivable. Its dereliction of duty, negligence - he completely left us for dead - and there are no excuses.

=D>

I wish him luck in the future, I really do, but the above is a truth which cannot be denied.
 
Stratford was a much bigger issue imho and had it gone any further than it did then i think there would have been some serious fall out, much worse than we have seen with Redknapp - thankfully the issue has no relevance anymore and we can brush it under the carpet.

the Redknapp thing will drag on until either AVB proves to be a success where it will finally be put to bed or AVB is a failure and then we can prepare ourselves for a mammoth few weeks/months of "i told you so's" etc

wonder which it'll be :-k

Unless we're sitting bottom or near it come January I think AVB will be given at least one full season. Levy has to give him a little wiggle room considering the significant change in playing staff. Not only does AVB desperately need a positive result versus Reading but also a performance that shows at least the beginnings of how things will take shape under his tenure. So far I've seen a match and a half of good stuff and match and a half of bad stuff. Maybe 4 points is what we deserved from our first three matches but we didn't take our chances.

On topic I don't give a fiddlers fudge about Harry any more. He's the past and AVB is the present.
For the record I was pro Harry but now I'm pro AVB.
 
Forgive me for bringing this down to one comment but i still am not sure where rdknapp is going to build a balanced team when it isnt even him buying the players and players arent coming in for the right money or the right quality. even in one window AVB got back alot more than Harry. we were going to break the 20 million mark ..24 million. 50% more than out previous record of 16.5...and that on top of a 15 million pound siging? AVB is getting backed..Harry didnt..your saying that he has X amount of years to sort things out..but people leave and people get bought (or dont get bought to specifications in this case) so how do you build a team when its not your money and you're relying on someone else?

its funny you mention the 4 years and 7 windows and then stick it to Harry that HE hadnt built the squad.

how much of that is Harry and how much of that is the board do you think? Infact actually say it..cause i know i can use this later on down the liine.

P.S AVB is truly brick at closing a deal....taking his time on moutinho? he should have closed that brick out time ago...tut tut tut. thats on him

as for redmond.....again i dont know..i can only speculate that levy wouldnt pay the money for him. i honestly dont know

Sorry mate, I think thats rubbish. I have absolutely no doubt Levy can be an obstacle, but also have absolutely no doubt it doesnt take huge money to get quality players (to those that know where/how to look) and no doubt that Redknapp had more than ample opportunity to build a better, more balanced squad.

I also think you get success with Levy in the market when you sing his tune. Younger players who will appreciate, opportunity buys, selling to service buys. For someone known as a wheeler dealer this should not have been to much of a challenge.

AVB getting supported? I believe we made net profit this window. He brought potential as well as proven premiership material, young players as well as those bordering on the dreaded 30s. With the same 'obstructive' chairman Harry had.

And Harry didnt build the squad? You think the likes of Friedel, Gallas and Parker are anyone but Harrys moves?
 
Sometimes on here, it's like listening to people arguing about a shade of blue none of them has ever seen.
 
Have you got a spy somewhere in Harry / levy's offices?

you know for a fact that it was Tevez or bust. that harry didnt do research, and that harry wouldnt commit after he lost his last chance on england.

give me strength, this is baseless but it comes across like its factual...its probably true but how can you be so sure thats what happened. he even mentioned on match of the day he wanted Dembele. who esle did he look at
#
how do you know the tevez quip wasnt a cheeky one liner?

this is too much

Genuine question: would an honest answer make any difference to your viewpoint?
And yes, I am sure the Tevez thing was sort of a one-liner...the worrying thing to me is that he would not commit to a contract extension at any time in the 12 months prior, yet as soon as the England job was not his, he "needed" one because otherwise the players wouldn't be settled (remember, beforehand they "didn't give a brick")...no mate, milo won't tear me a new one for that, because as you must've read a few pages ago, I supplied direct quotes from both time frames. Harry switched the goalposts, and chose the hire Stretford, a known antagonist, and speak out in the week Levy was observing shiva for his mother. Not the greatest bit of timing really, especially if you actually wanted to keep your job...wait a minute, have you and I rumbled a conspiracy theory? I mean, Harry does nothing with the media without thinking? Did he want the tin-tack? Did he know this was 'as good as it was going to get' before Modders, King and others left/retired?The plot thickens. Like Twighlight Zone...
 
Back