Redknapp

[Pirate55]

You are obsessing. You will never accept my point of view, because you don't want to.

Now you are accusing me of ignoring points of view put by other posters, what makes you think I read every post on this board, much less feel compelled to comment on them?

If people make reasonable points that stand for themselves, then why should I have to argue the toss with them? If people make well reasoned arguments, why should I start disagreeing, its their opinion and they are entitled to hold them.

I have an opinion as I said, and I have made my POV clear, I am not going to repeat it in every thread just to make constant noise.

You however didn't make reasoned points, or present facts. You simply trotted out hackneyed opinions, misconceptions and piffle - in my opinion. I asked you for facts and you listed a load of opinions.

The simple fact is, your line of argument was weak and easily attacked, furthermore I did not say that I had a problem with people using facts to support their argument, but only if they misrepresent them to support their argument.

What the fudge am I going to learn from you, Brightons line up in the 1965 season?

I'm certainly not going to lern too much about football from you, not based on what I've read so far.

How about learning to spell for one.

You have just completely contradicted yourself. You did indeed say earlier that "what you cant accept is the principle of looking at a set of facts and then interpreting them in a way that suits your argument." That is what people do. They take the facts first and then form an opinion. What is your way? Form an opinion and then try and find facts to suit them?

 

[mick cooper]

How about learning to spell for one.

You have just completely contradicted yourself. You did indeed say earlier that "what you cant accept is the principle of looking at a set of facts and then interpreting them in a way that suits your argument." That is what people do. They take the facts first and then form an opinion. What is your way? Form an opinion and then try and find facts to suit them?

"For example.

Between the time that Capello resigned, and Hodgson was announced as his replacement the results were (fill in the details yourself, as I can't be bothered to dig them out) - and this is all down to the fact that HR was too busy showing his arse to the FA to get them to employ him, and that he lost interest in managing the club."

This is a classic case of people taking facts, then using them to support an argument that is unsupportable opinion

if this is too difficult for you to understand as an example of the point that I'm making, then I can't help you.

Now do me and everyone else on here, that would like to have a sensible debate, a favour, and go away.

 

[Pirate55]

"For example.

Between the time that Capello resigned, and Hodgson was announced as his replacement the results were (fill in the details yourself, as I can't be bothered to dig them out) - and this is all down to the fact that HR was too busy showing his arse to the FA to get them to employ him, and that he lost interest in managing the club."

This is a classic case of people taking facts, then using them to support an argument that is unsupportable opinion

Just to check you understand the difference between a fact and an opinion, which of the following in your example are facts and which are opinions:

1. our results between Capello's resignation and Hodgson's appointment
2. HR was too busy showing his arse to the FA
3. he lost interest in managing the club
4 the causal link between our form and HR's behaviour

if this is too difficult for you to understand as an example of the point that I'm making, then I can't help you.

Now do me and everyone else on here, that would like to have a sensible debate, a favour, and go away.

 

[DMac]

This is a classic case of people taking facts, then using them to support an argument that is unsupportable opinion

if this is too difficult for you to understand as an example of the point that I'm making, then I can't help you.

Now do me and everyone else on here, that would like to have a sensible debate, a favour, and go away.

Look, there's no doubt that whether Redknapp ought to stay is a matter of opinion. It's like whether I ought to help the poor and needy - there's no matter of fact about it, BUT we still collectively classify doing so as something worthy of praise. Based on the opinion that someone holds, we extrapolate their character and values. In a non-moral sense, that is what we are doing here. If we all want the same thing, which presumably is success and greatness for our club, then there should be an objectively correct conclusion to come to here, and we can discover it using facts and statistics.

So, yes there's no matter of fact about whether Redknapp should stay. But based on the facts, I think it is pretty safe to say that IF you have ambition for our club and IF you don't want to remain in the shadow of Arsenal, Chelsea, United, and City but want to actually challenge these teams, that Redknapp needs to go for that to happen. Of course, if you don't want then you have no worries, but it is inconsistent, based on the FACTS and STATISTICS to say that Redknapp should stay but you still want to challenge the best teams. The stats support the opinion that we cannot do that under Redknapp.

For me it's also a matter of pride - 5-2 loss to Arsenal, 5-1 to City, 5-1 to Chelsea, 3-0 to United, 3-1 to United. Chelsea had to beat Barca, Bayern, Benfica, Napoli, and Valencia to secure their spot in the CL. We knew what we had to do - which was beat Aston Villa, and we didn't do it, and instead of going for it Redknapp brought on a defensive midfielder. He has a loser's mindset imo, backed up by a record of 30 years with only 1 trophy (another undeniable fact). Replacing him is a risk yes, but it is one worth taking if we ever want to move forward.

And I don't actually think he's a bad manager - I think he's a pretty good manager but I think he's reached a limit here, and it's no good for us to come all this way only to be content to stop and give up instead of FINALLY breaking through. Wait much longer and our chances will dwindle further when Liverpool finish rebuilding themselves.

 

[Jordinho]

The only way to improve with some degree of certainty is to either spend a lot of money or go for a more negative and defensive approach - boring, possession based football, at least 8 players behind the ball at all times. Our biggest problem is that we don't score enough goals and that isn't ALL down to Redknapp.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

And I don't actually think he's a bad manager - I think he's a pretty good manager but I think he's reached a limit here, and it's no good for us to come all this way only to be content to stop and give up instead of FINALLY breaking through. Wait much longer and our chances will dwindle further when Liverpool finish rebuilding themselves.

1) I hope you never get angry at any player, e.g. Berbatov, Modric etc. wanting to move away from Spurs to a bigger club. If you did, it would make you a hypocrit. Only those that give loyalty should expect it back.

2) I keep reading from people about reaching our limit and pushing on. I do believe it's very possible we have reached our limit. I don't think Redknapp has reached his though. Our limit is currently not being dictated by the Manager, but by lack of resources. We were a whisker away from finishing 3rd which is the best we can hope for at present, and even then we're relying on better teams than us to have unusually poor seasons.

3) And who is this mysterious Manager who is going to come in and be better exactly? I keep reading that Redknapp has to go, and then the same people touting that we need to bring in Rodgers, Martinez or AVB. So they are guaranteed to push us up the table are they?! Based on what exactly? If the names being bandied around were proven top class Managers then fine, but let's be honest. They won't come to us. There were a few fools touting the name of Mourinho to replace Redknapp. What planet are some of these people living on?! And then we have the usual comeback that Redknapp isn't planning for the future. So Redknapp has to go because we need to push on, and yet they want him replaced with a Manager who they fully admit may plan long term and they are prepared to take a short term (which is 5 years or less) hit in performance with? Do people really think that Bale, VDV would stick around for 5 years to get back to where we are right now?!

 

[parklane1]

I'm not trying to, I'm being stalked here, in case you hadn't noticed

I would be more than happy to never have to engage with either of them again.

Wow a persecution complex as well.

Redknapp has done a good job i have not heard anyone say he has not, however ( imo) he has reached the limit on what he can do here ( again imo) and if we really want to try and become a real challenger for the top we have to look elsewhere. He has shown ( imo) that he has not got the tactical ability to overtake the real top teams, would it be a risk to appoint a new manager? of course it would, but that should not stop us trying to look further and higher.

Again i will say this is all my opinion and after supporting my team for 50 years i feel that i am entitled to express it, if others disagree fine but keyboard warriors will not browbeat me into saying anything different as i would hope they will not for others.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

"For example.

Between the time that Capello resigned, and Hodgson was announced as his replacement the results were (fill in the details yourself, as I can't be bothered to dig them out) - and this is all down to the fact that HR was too busy showing his arse to the FA to get them to employ him, and that he lost interest in managing the club."

This is a classic case of people taking facts, then using them to support an argument that is unsupportable opinion

if this is too difficult for you to understand as an example of the point that I'm making, then I can't help you.

Now do me and everyone else on here, that would like to have a sensible debate, a favour, and go away.

The main issues I have with those wanting Harry out, is that they genuinely seem to be basing their opinion on emotional feelings towards him AND they are so insulting towards him. Some of them try and act reasonable, but even those ones literally give him zero credit for anything and the difference between a reasonable anti-Harry poster and an unreasonable one is that the reasonable one doesn't make snide attacks about his looks, personality, dogs or come out with crap like "We won't get him because he doesn't feature on MOTD!". Yeah good joke you fudging halfwits #-o

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Wow a persecution complex as well.

Redknapp has done a good job i have not heard anyone say he has not, however ( imo) he has reached the limit on what he can do here ( again imo) and if we really want to try and become a real challenger for the top we have to look elsewhere. He has shown ( imo) that he has not got the tactical ability to overtake the real top teams, would it be a risk to appoint a new manager? of course it would, but that should not stop us trying to look further and higher.

Again i will say this is all my opinion and after supporting my team for 50 years i feel that i am entitled to express it, if others disagree fine but keyboard warriors will not browbeat me into saying anything different as i would hope they will not for others.

Who do you have in mind? Do you think we can realistically get them? And what criteria do you think they clearly are better than Redknapp and so will push us forward?

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

The only way to improve with some degree of certainty is to either spend a lot of money or go for a more negative and defensive approach - boring, possession based football, at least 8 players behind the ball at all times. Our biggest problem is that we don't score enough goals and that isn't ALL down to Redknapp.

Good post. And regarding this point we've reached a catch 22. See, what people don't seem to understand is that if a team creates a lot of chances but fails to convert them then that proves the tactics are excellent but that the players aren't good enough at finishing. So the key there is to replace the player, whilst not harming the current balance of the side. That is NOT easy to do for a team in the top six (unless you're City and you can just go out and spank ?ú120m on four strikers and just play the one that comes good).

We then have the added complication that if it's a player that needs to be replaced, and the Manager only suggests his targets to others and isn't actually responsible for bringing them in, then how can the Manager get the blame for not improving the squad/team?

 

[parklane1]

Who do you have in mind? Do you think we can realistically get them? And what criteria do you think they clearly are better than Redknapp and so will push us forward?

Who do you have in mind? Do you think we can realistically get them? And what criteria do you think they clearly are better than Redknapp and so will push us forward?

Well i agree we have to be realistic and that Jose was always going to be more in hope then anything, however if we do not try then we may as well give up. What i want is a manager who can build on the good work that Redknapp has done with our very good squad, i still feel that we can keep our top players here for another season and i hope that we can appoint a manager who has the insight, the tactical ability and record of being able to get us to the very top.

Appointing a manager is always a risky business, lets be honest there were many who doubted Redknapp was a good choice ( one trophy in over 30 years) and had more then a few doubts about him coming here. However as i has said he has done a good job, now we need to look forward and try and find a manager who can take us us that step forward, saying that there is no one who can do that is not the way too go.

As for who well a want to see a manager who has ( imo) a little more tactical knowledge then Redknapp, names have been bandied about and they have all been slagged off by those who support Redknapp and want him to stay, now again that is their opinion and of course it is not better or worse then those who feel its time for a a change, however it does not mean that they will not be able to achieve what we all want, a successful Spurs. Realistically i would imagine we could get Moyes, Lambert, Martinez, Rodgers and a few more if we tried, will they take us further? who knows but they are some who feel that under Redknapp we have reached as far as we can. Now this is my opinion, they are some who will disagree and some that will agree after all that's what being a supporter of the greatest team in the land is all about.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Well i agree we have to be realistic and that Jose was always going to be more in hope then anything, however if we do not try then we may as well give up. What i want is a manager who can build on the good work that Redknapp has done with our very good squad, i still feel that we can keep our top players here for another season and i hope that we can appoint a manager who has the insight, the tactical ability and record of being able to get us to the very top.

Appointing a manager is always a risky business, lets be honest there were many who doubted Redknapp was a good choice ( one trophy in over 30 years) and had more then a few doubts about him coming here. However as i has said he has done a good job, now we need to look forward and try and find a manager who can take us us that step forward, saying that there is no one who can do that is not the way too go.

As for who well a want to see a manager who has ( imo) a little more tactical knowledge then Redknapp, names have been bandied about and they have all been slagged off by those who support Redknapp and want him to stay, now again that is their opinion and of course it is not better or worse then those who feel its time for a a change, however it does not mean that they will not be able to achieve what we all want, a successful Spurs. Realistically i would imagine we could get Moyes, Lambert, Martinez, Rodgers and a few more if we tried, will they take us further? who knows but they are some who feel that under Redknapp we have reached as far as we can. Now this is my opinion, they are some who will disagree and some that will agree after all that's what being a supporter of the greatest team in the land is all about.

Can you give me examples as to why you think they're better tactically than Redknapp? Examples of where they've changed things halfway in a game to turn it around, or made a sub to combat something or changed their team selection for tactical reasons that made their team perform better?

And what would you expect to see from them immediately? Parity with where we currently are or would you accept us to fall into mid-table whilst they brought in (and replaced) the players that didn't fit in with their tactical thinking? How much time would you give them to move on? If they failed to finish 3rd after two seasons give them the boot?

Finally, do we tell Redknapp that he is our Manager but we are actually actively seeking a replacement for him (and hope that somehow he doesn't find out through the grapevine, or that one of the other Managers we approach doesn't blab to the press and we end up with a disgraceful Jol situation all over again) or do we keep quiet and just do a Brutus on him when we find one?

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Ohh and finally. Lambert? Does it not bother you that Norwich is a long ball team? Why Lambert and not Pulis?

 

[spasm]

Look, there's no doubt that whether Redknapp ought to stay is a matter of opinion. It's like whether I ought to help the poor and needy - there's no matter of fact about it, BUT we still collectively classify doing so as something worthy of praise. Based on the opinion that someone holds, we extrapolate their character and values. In a non-moral sense, that is what we are doing here. If we all want the same thing, which presumably is success and greatness for our club, then there should be an objectively correct conclusion to come to here, and we can discover it using facts and statistics.

So, yes there's no matter of fact about whether Redknapp should stay. But based on the facts, I think it is pretty safe to say that IF you have ambition for our club and IF you don't want to remain in the shadow of Arsenal, Chelsea, United, and City but want to actually challenge these teams, that Redknapp needs to go for that to happen. Of course, if you don't want then you have no worries, but it is inconsistent, based on the FACTS and STATISTICS to say that Redknapp should stay but you still want to challenge the best teams. The stats support the opinion that we cannot do that under Redknapp.

For me it's also a matter of pride - 5-2 loss to Arsenal, 5-1 to City, 5-1 to Chelsea, 3-0 to United, 3-1 to United. Chelsea had to beat Barca, Bayern, Benfica, Napoli, and Valencia to secure their spot in the CL. We knew what we had to do - which was beat Aston Villa, and we didn't do it, and instead of going for it Redknapp brought on a defensive midfielder. He has a loser's mindset imo, backed up by a record of 30 years with only 1 trophy (another undeniable fact). Replacing him is a risk yes, but it is one worth taking if we ever want to move forward.

And I don't actually think he's a bad manager - I think he's a pretty good manager but I think he's reached a limit here, and it's no good for us to come all this way only to be content to stop and give up instead of FINALLY breaking through. Wait much longer and our chances will dwindle further when Liverpool finish rebuilding themselves.

close to perfectly articulating what i feel but am unable to coherently express. thank you sir.

 

[parklane1]

Can you give me examples as to why you think they're better tactically than Redknapp? Examples of where they've changed things halfway in a game to turn it around, or made a sub to combat something or changed their team selection for tactical reasons that made their team perform better?

And what would you expect to see from them immediately? Parity with where we currently are or would you accept us to fall into mid-table whilst they brought in (and replaced) the players that didn't fit in with their tactical thinking? How much time would you give them to move on? If they failed to finish 3rd after two seasons give them the boot?

Finally, do we tell Redknapp that he is our Manager but we are actually actively seeking a replacement for him (and hope that somehow he doesn't find out through the grapevine, or that one of the other Managers we approach doesn't blab to the press and we end up with a disgraceful Jol situation all over again) or do we keep quiet and just do a Brutus on him when we find one?

(1) Well seeing as i do not watch their teams on a regular basis for 90 minutes that is not going to happen, however from what i have seen and the way they express their thoughts on the game suggests to me they have a better tactical knowledge then Redknapp, now that is my opinion and i dare say that will not fully answer your question, and you probably would disagree but that is fine.

(2) I am not blessed with seeing the future, however i feel with the players we already have here and with one or two new signings we can hopefully progress from our present position, but again i can not say that will be the case. However as i have said before i really do not expect us to get any further under Redknapp which could leave to us falling down the table anyway ( imo)

(3) I would imagine if Levy was planning on getting rid of Redknapp he would have already made some plans for a replacement anyway, but i agree the sacking of MJ was done badly.

 

[parklane1]

Ohh and finally. Lambert? Does it not bother you that Norwich is a long ball team? Why Lambert and not Pulis?

Not getting into that debate with you, you asked who we can realistically get in as a manager and i offered up a few names. Never said they would be my choice or not and to be honest i do feel that comparing Lambert to Pullis is a bit over the top. But if that is your opinion then fine.

 

[thfcsteff]

How do you expect a Manager to love and be loyal to a club when the fans dont show the love and loyalty to the manager?

Lets be honest - from the get go - you have a number of fans who never wanted Harry, you have a number of





fans who would drop Harry at the drop of a hat, and you have fans who persist in thinkin he is small time. How do you expect a Manager, who has been "successful" to be loyal? loving of the club?

Its not unconditional, your kids could hate you but you will still love em, fans need to show the loyalty n love and it will be returned. Harry has done enough to warrant another season with the players at his disposal and ultimately our support.

Well mate I can only speak for myself, but if Harry had once stood up and taken some blame, or once stood up and taken a stand when bricky season-busting decisions are given, I would feel more for him. He has never once this season said he made a tactical error/got it wrong, furthermore he has never admitted that the whole England fiasco affected the players; the closest he got was some half-arsed 'well those around me say it did so I suppose it must have'...he's a very smart man, very football-wise, he knows the story and frankly, I think it would show him in better light if he actually was honest. There again, the final straw so far as trusting his deep motives came for me last August, when in the last week of the window he inexplicably spoke about possibly selling the player to get 3 or 4 more in for a better squad. Number one, it was a massive u-turn on his supporting the chairman's stance, and number two, if I were going to get 40 mill for Modric, I might want to spend at least half of it on one world class player with a similar effect on my squad as opposed to three or four decent ones who might work out OK (Carrick and Zokora all over again, 19 mill in, 8 mill out for a player 'as good' who actually turned out to be no more than a cult hero at best).
Again, when he's focussed he's obviously good, my continual questions revolve around his lack of focus at critical points and whether he will ever put us/Spurs before Harry when it comes to working in football.

 

[thfcsteff]

Good post. And regarding this point we've reached a catch 22. See, what people don't seem to understand is that if a team creates a lot of chances but fails to convert them then that proves the tactics are excellent but that the players aren't good enough at finishing. So the key there is to replace the player, whilst not harming the current balance of the side. That is NOT easy to do for a team in the top six (unless you're City and you can just go out and spank ?ú120m on four strikers and just play the one that comes good).

We then have the added complication that if it's a player that needs to be replaced, and the Manager only suggests his targets to others and isn't actually responsible for bringing them in, then how can the Manager get the blame for not improving the squad/team?

Can you name me games where we were hitting a wall/failing/being outplayed where Harry shifted th tactical shape and make-up of the side yielding a positive turnaround? Genuine question here, a genuine attempt for discussion, a genuine attempt to rise above the usual flimflam Moonlit...

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Not getting into that debate with you, you asked who we can realistically get in as a manager and i offered up a few names. Never said they would be my choice or not and to be honest i do feel that comparing Lambert to Pullis is a bit over the top. But if that is your opinion then fine.

I just want to understand what sort of Manager you are after and what your expectations are.

Mine are pretty simple

1) Try and play attractive football, especially at home. This is my number one caveat. Even over success. I'd rather us play attractive football and finish 7th than dull percentage football and finish 3rd. Football is about entertainment in my opinion.

2) Have us where we are realistically meant to be or higher. I believe we should be 6th. Anything higher than that then I am delighted and wouldn't dream of sacking the Manager.

3) As we're over achieving at the moment I would not expect a new Manager to improve us immediately, if at all. I wouldn't even expect a new Manager to maintain the status quo initially. If Redknapp was replaced in the next week then a top 10 finish next year would be an acceptable achievement for his replacement. Outside of the top 10 and I would be disappointed but as long as we weren't in serious relegation danger I'd give the new guy at least another whole season to turn things around. I'm a great believer in that when a new man comes in, you often have to go backwards for a while before you can go forwards.

4) Once we've built a new stadium AND paid it off then things may be a little different. Until then, we have to accept the fact that we can't realistically compete on a regular basis with the sugar daddied clubs or those with massively higher turnovers.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Can you name me games where we were hitting a wall/failing/being outplayed where Harry shifted th tactical shape and make-up of the side yielding a positive turnaround? Genuine question here, a genuine attempt for discussion, a genuine attempt to rise above the usual flimflam Moonlit...

Stoke when we switched to 3-5-2. City away when we were 2-0 down.

To be honest, I don't think he has managed to turn around many games. I don't think many managers do. I think it's a bit of a myth generally and it mainly comes down to the quality of players. But what I want is hard and fast evidence that the names being bandied around do it more than Redknapp, and with evidence.