• 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

Redknapp

indianspur said:
i was looking at points totals over the last few years since Jol was in charge

Jol's 3 seasons he completed........52...65...60

Redknapp's 4 seasons completed...51...70...62...69

there isnt a staggering difference points wise
Click to expand...

That means nothing because youre not taking into account the fact that the premier League is much more competitive. In Jol's days you had the top four and the rest. Last season we had the top six or seven - much more competition.
 
elltrev said:
From what I've read a lot of people don't credit him for that achievement! Either implicitly, by saying he's not good enough because he's at fault for us dropping from 3rd to 4th (instead of judging him over the whole season), or explicitly, by saying something like "when your on a great run and full of confidence its easier to win games. Harry would basically have to just say, listen lads, same again".

"It was a show of what we could do when things went right. That isnt the issue" - my problem is with this kind of attitude - you seem to be saying that Harry shouldn't be judged for the things he did right (at which point we were challenging for the title), only for the things he did wrong. **Edit: maybe this ties in with my last paragraph, in that you're referring to what should be discussed, rather than what should be used to evaluate Harry**

"And would it really make a difference if Armchair Expert (for example) typed "Harry did really well up to Christmas, then...." then proceeded to critisise Harry?" - Honestly, for me, yes it would! All I'm saying is that people should judge Redknapp over the whole season, not just over the slump.

Of course people are going to discuss what went wrong more than they are going to discuss the period when things are going well, because it's a more interesting discussion and there's more to talk about. I've no problem with that. It's when people seemingly evaluate Harry as a manager based only on the negative whilst ignoring the positive, or in other words give him all the blame for poor form and none of the credit for good form.
Click to expand...

I think the talk of whether someone explicitly credits Harry before criticising him is kind of missing the over all point of the discussion - dancing around semantics, instead of getting to the root of the discussion - is Harry good enough?

You are passionate in supporting Harry and arguing against those who havent credited him before complaining - perhaps you could articulate what he did so well to make it happen?

And then what he did so well when things went wrong - because thats the real test of his mettle IMHO.

Genuinely, I see little between his efforts either time. I see plenty wrong with his actions in the latter half - which begs the question - what did he do so right in the first place?

After "putting good players in a balanced formation" Im running out of ideas...
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
erm - no one has said we didnt do well to be in that position - which seems to be the accusation. Unless you are taking the views of a couple of total numpties and applying it to all how dont think the sun shines out of Harrys harris.

We did fantastically well up to Christmas, of course Harry played his part in that.

We did far from as well for a sustained period afterwards - and I dont think its unfair to point out Harry certainly played his part in that. Some will say he had his mind elsewhere and such - thats their opinion. I can certainly understand where that belief stems from.

When things are going well everything is easy, its when things arent going well that you really get tested - a test that (for me) Harry ultimately failed in.

I do believe we could have done much, much better. I do believe we did very well before Christmas. I use "we" to include the club, players and manager. I do though, ultimately, believe the manager is responsible over all - hence the fact you would probably have me pigeon holed as from the "Harry is a tactical testicle phalanx"
Click to expand...

The trouble with forums is that a person responds to a specific post, and then others see that response as being directed at all people who share the original poster's opinion. This is probably especially true of the Harry debate, as most people seem to view it as an anti vs pro debate, and group all people from each side together.

Personally I'm not particularly pro-Harry. And in any case, I have no problem with people who have different opinions to me, an accusation that often gets thrown around on here. I just get frustrated when people's opinions (of any kind) are IMO poorly formed and based on poor logic or reason. If I criticise the post of an 'anti-Harry' poster, it's not necessarily because I'm trying to defend Harry; it's just because I think their argument is flawed.

Generally Nayim I think you make fair points and posts, including your last one regarding Harry.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
I think the talk of whether someone explicitly credits Harry before criticising him is kind of missing the over all point of the discussion - dancing around semantics, instead of getting to the root of the discussion - is Harry good enough?

You are passionate in supporting Harry and arguing against those who havent credited him before complaining - perhaps you could articulate what he did so well to make it happen?

And then what he did so well when things went wrong - because thats the real test of his mettle IMHO.

Genuinely, I see little between his efforts either time. I see plenty wrong with his actions in the latter half - which begs the question - what did he do so right in the first place?

After "putting good players in a balanced formation" Im running out of ideas...
Click to expand...

I made my last post before seeing this one.

Firstly, I think you need to be more specific - is Harry good enough for what?

In any case, I think BrainOfLevy has made some very good posts about Harry. I think what he does well is allowing players to play with freedom and confidence. He doesn't over-complicate things, and (it seems to me) thinks that footballers know how to play football - you just have to select a balanced lineup and give them confidence in their abilities.

In the first half of the season this worked very well. Harry had helped to form a fantastic first XI (Friedel, Walker, Kaboul, Parker, VDV [not his signing, bla bla!] and Adebayor), we had a balanced side, and everyone was enjoying their fotball and so playing with confidence.

As for the slump, I agree with what many others have said about laying key players out of position, and using the 4-3-3 formation that largely wasn't successful IMO.

HOWEVER/ I do think people place too much importance on this, in terms of finding reasons for our slump. I think that the difference between our great and brick spells was also down to harder fixtures, worse luck (at least in terms of teams (including us) taking their chances or not) and then a loss of confidence.

Overall, if Harry had left for England and we had replaced him with Rodgers I'd be excited. But I don't want to see him sacked because I think that it could cause a crisis when we're actually pretty stable right now (assuming the end-of-season slump doesn't continue into next, which i don't think it will).
 
Good enough to take this club forward, to get the most out of the squad, to develop the team and club...

Good enough to be our manager, basically. In as much as I think thats what a manager is responsible for.

I agree that Harrys strength is in setting up a balanced side and letting them play, though as I have discussed with BOL - I dont think thats top quality management - I think its flawed. Particularly in as much as while things are good its great, yet when things are bad it offers you no means to dig yourself out of a hole.

I think tactically Redknapp is often left wanting, not only in an absence of an inbuilt system of play, but also in reacting to things that arent working.

I also think this lack of direction leads to a mish-mash transfer policy.

I like Harry, I really do. He makes me laugh, he tells a fantastic story and can be really engaging. I think he has done extremely well with us to date.

However, I also think there is more to come from this side (or the club in its current situation), and I dont think he has the ability to extract it from the set up.

Thats where my wanting a new man stems from, not from the idea Harry is rubbish, just the idea that he isnt good enough to take us on the next stages.

A new manager can build upon what Harry has done these last few seasons and create something special IMHO. (similar to the comment often made on Rodgers benefiting from Martinez' work at Swansea)
 
africanspurs said:
Are people basically tinkled because we had a poor run of form for 9 games? or is there something else?
Click to expand...

Mate,

Have you just been skim-reading?

My complaints with him are largely about what he does NOT do that he is CAPABLE of doing, how he protects himself always and never puts team before self, how he is not slow to speak up in good times but goes missing when there's criticism to take, and how he conducts himself with regards to media and what-not.

The TRUE legacy of Harry is that he COULD have been a Ferguson if he could fully accept who HE (Redknapp) is and address those weaknesses accordingly. One thing about Ferguson which EVERYBODY misses, is that he never ever claimed he could do it all, and has ALWAYS had TOP coaches and assistants beside him, moreover, he LISTENS to them and works WITH them. The ONE time he went missing, during that weird moment when he thought he was going to retire, he gonaded himself and took all the blame for a relatively poor season. You will never, ever see Harry Redknapp doing that.

As I've said many many times, in this thread and others, some self-accountability would go a long, long way IMHO, both outside and inside the club. It's easy to lead and large it when you're 10 points clear in Feb in 3rd. It's harder to lead when you've been cut back to neck and neck. It's even harder when you actually didn't finish 3rd after looking like it was going to happen for a long stretch of the season. We need strength in leadership and self-accountability as we go forwards. The chairman has no choice but to be strong. The manager, I hope, concludes the same if he does remain...
 
mick cooper said:
errm - what?

The people who decry Harry's right to manage our club do so on a manifesto of blaming him for the clubs fauilure to finish 3rd, because we were X points ahead of the 4th placed team at Christmas. They cite the collapse as being proof that he was too busy preparing to be England manager and he is a tactic clown shoe. The list then goes on, but we'll settle on the main points of the manifesto.

The question raised was - if he is such a tactical testicle how come he managed to get us to that point? The HR out phalanx can't have the argument every way that suits them. He can't be good enough on one hand but not on the other.
Click to expand...


I'll take that one on Mick.

As the season gets longer, as you play the same teams again, as players get more and more tired, as you pick up small injuries and as you face increasing pressure approaching the finishing line, players need a strong manager who can change things up, rotate inclusively and pull a tactical rabbit from the hat with regards to certain teams who he will know have watched us once and will thus combat our perceived, expected style. From August to Christmas is still relatively fresh and spritely, so yes, a very talented side sent out in a basic 4-5-1 or sometimes 4-4-2 can certainly perform with minimal interruption. But those last 2 or 3 months of a season require strength AND something a little different if you're in the mixer at the top.

Ironically, Wenger very nearly did what Redknapp did, and in a sense, you could say the goons have papered over cracks. He had bad luck with injuries in the last month of the season, but nonetheless he was struggling big-time to find a plan 'B' and rode enormous luck. Had we not shown such massive ineptitude at Villa (where Helen keller would've known how Villa would play) this conversation would likely be happening on goner message boards too...

IF HR stays/is kept, I can only pray he has learnt from the last two seasons...more likely you will hear him hammer the point over and over that we finished top 4 and 'ooo could've predicted Chelsea?' blah blah blah...again, if he remains.
 
braineclipse said:
Chelsea are not as close to a deal for Hulk as we are for Vertonghen. Has Hulk been in the media urging his club to accept a bid from Chelsea cause that's where he wants to go? If so I haven't seen it.

Maybe you're forgetting that Chelsea have an almost unlimited supply of transfer funds and wage funds to help them while we have to operate within our budget, and maybe you're forgetting that Chelsea are the CL winners and that they will be in the CL again next season while we will not. If you're already getting impatient about transfers at this point I would not like to be the F5 key on your keyboard this window.
Click to expand...

He was sending tweets and stuff to Chelsea fans...

And I'm quite sure he's urged his club to accept a bid.
 
thfcsteff said:
Mate,

Have you just been skim-reading?

My complaints with him are largely about what he does NOT do that he is CAPABLE of doing, how he protects himself always and never puts team before self, how he is not slow to speak up in good times but goes missing when there's criticism to take, and how he conducts himself with regards to media and what-not.

The TRUE legacy of Harry is that he COULD have been a Ferguson if he could fully accept who HE (Redknapp) is and address those weaknesses accordingly. One thing about Ferguson which EVERYBODY misses, is that he never ever claimed he could do it all, and has ALWAYS had TOP coaches and assistants beside him, moreover, he LISTENS to them and works WITH them. The ONE time he went missing, during that weird moment when he thought he was going to retire, he gonaded himself and took all the blame for a relatively poor season. You will never, ever see Harry Redknapp doing that.

As I've said many many times, in this thread and others, some self-accountability would go a long, long way IMHO, both outside and inside the club. It's easy to lead and large it when you're 10 points clear in Feb in 3rd. It's harder to lead when you've been cut back to neck and neck. It's even harder when you actually didn't finish 3rd after looking like it was going to happen for a long stretch of the season. We need strength in leadership and self-accountability as we go forwards. The chairman has no choice but to be strong. The manager, I hope, concludes the same if he does remain...
Click to expand...

Harry constantly listens to other people, I'd say that's one of the things that's meant he's been able to stay at the top of the game as long as he has. He may not go out doing all the studying like Rodgers, but he seems more than willing to take on the opinions of the people that do, be that his coaches, players, or friends. Sometimes he doesn't listen to them but sometimes he does. Sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't. But I think he does listen.

So that point of view is that it's not neccesarily down to his ability, it's down to his character. Which is fair enough, you can dislike him for it (I certainly wish he would have come and and said something either way on England for example, because there was always the 'what if he doesn't get it?' scenario that he didn't seem to account for, and it worked out to his detriment) but it doesn't actually make him a good or bad manager. His character seems to get on with players, so in that case it's a good trait to have from a professional point of view.

So I think why AS asks if people only want him out because of a 9 game spell, is because really there haven't been any actual football management related issues thrown up outside of that. I'd bet that 98% of people would not be saying 'Harry is a tactical clutz, I don't like how he gives the players freedom to express themselves' when we have just won our 9th game in a row in the league. (Nayim may be the 2% :) ) and of course you wouldn't expect it, it would be ridiculous. But the fact is, Redknapp is the same manager during the good run as he is during the bad run. Whatever he does to prepare the team for the good run is exactly what he does for the bad run. And no-one is really picking out the times that he was mucking it up during the good run, it is only during that 9 game spell, where we threw away the lead. Well yeah we did, and I don't think I'll personally ever get over it (I still think I'm in a state of shock, because I was absolutely buzzing in January at the thought of watching Spurs) but we also got to 13 points ahead of Arsenal in the first place.

So what has he actually done wrong? Let's ignore the 'he knows nothing about tactics/just tells the players to run around a bit' type arguments because they are clearly rubbish, and if everyone could agree that the debate would be much better for it. It's schoolchildren stuff. Let's get to the meat of the issues.

Is it the letting Bale roam? Fair enough. It worked at Norwich away, but after that it didn't. It's understandable that Harry wanted to mix it up because people were beginning to figure out Bale, so he wanted him to roam, but maybe the best way would have been to keep shape, and use the space to let someone else have more impact, even if it meant Bale was subdued he'd still be doing a good job. It's an experiment that over all probably didn't work out. Sackable offence because of it though? Not really.

Is it letting a 2-0 lead slip in the NLD? Ok, well first of all he did try and tighten it up after half time, but our players were mentally gone. I'd say the cause of that defeat was a clearly hurt King being forced to play, as well as simply poor psychology on the players part. I think at 2-0 up, subconsciously they switched off, not that they wanted to. I'm sure someone will say 'Harry should have motivated them better' but again it's not really a valid debate when every single top manager in the world has been on the end of a thrashing. He could have done something else sure, but again, in isolation, not really a sackable offence.

What else is there? Calling the fans 'they' instead of 'we'? Couldn't care less, doesn't impact his ability as a manager. Is it not winning at Villa? (Again, something that will probably forever frustrate me, but they score a fluke and we play a half with ten men). Is it a failure to rotate? Argument to say we could have done it more, but we also didn't have to play our first team in Europe and therefore the players should have been able to handle one game a week.

Anything else? I'm not saying he's made no mistakes. But to say 'he made mistakes' and use it in a debate is also pointless, because every manager does. There's no point using the fact that he didn't make every decision absolutely perfectly against him. I genuinely can't think of much else. I think the speculation killed us and effected us from a psychological perspective. I think it could have been handled better. But I've yet to see any real, sackable things that he's done. He was the same manager in the 9 game poor run as he was during the 9 game winning run.
 
thfcsteff said:
I'll take that one on Mick.

As the season gets longer, as you play the same teams again, as players get more and more tired, as you pick up small injuries and as you face increasing pressure approaching the finishing line, players need a strong manager who can change things up, rotate inclusively and pull a tactical rabbit from the hat with regards to certain teams who he will know have watched us once and will thus combat our perceived, expected style. From August to Christmas is still relatively fresh and spritely, so yes, a very talented side sent out in a basic 4-5-1 or sometimes 4-4-2 can certainly perform with minimal interruption. But those last 2 or 3 months of a season require strength AND something a little different if you're in the mixer at the top.

Ironically, Wenger very nearly did what Redknapp did, and in a sense, you could say the goons have papered over cracks. He had bad luck with injuries in the last month of the season, but nonetheless he was struggling big-time to find a plan 'B' and rode enormous luck. Had we not shown such massive ineptitude at Villa (where Helen keller would've known how Villa would play) this conversation would likely be happening on goner message boards too...

IF HR stays/is kept, I can only pray he has learnt from the last two seasons...more likely you will hear him hammer the point over and over that we finished top 4 and 'ooo could've predicted Chelsea?' blah blah blah...again, if he remains.
Click to expand...

Hang on, you're not towing the party line here. In the slump Harry was whoring his arse to the FA. Stick to the script.

WE were inept against Villa? Not Harry was inept? Are you sure? What as a matter of interest, were we doing that was tactically wrong? All I seem to remember was wave after wave of attacks, even when we were down to 10 men, and the usual alamo like defence from YET ANOTHER premier team, that was made to look like a pub team. So what do you propose Harry does, get us to defend in depth against teams that are not fit to be on the pitch with us, to catch them by surprise? Turn up in cricket gear? Dress as a troupe of Morris dancers?

I thought the tactic of attacking them like a raging monster football machine, non stop, was a fantastic tactic, on the basis that if the ball is closer to their goal than ours, we probably have more chance of scoring.

Perhaps if we had played our joker, we'd have got double points?

Hans plays with Lotte
Lotte plays with Jane
Jane plays with Willi
Willi is happy again
Suki plays with Leo
Sacha plays with Britt
Adolf builts a bonfire
Enrico plays with it
 
Mick/Levy...great responses, will answer in detail later chaps...good debate/discussion to keep the summer interesting eh!
 
No idea why my thread has been closed its nothing to do with Redknapp per se. Makes no sense but then again..
 
Cant wait, I'll not be doing one Iota of work tomorrow and will be celebrating getting rid of this clueless classless taco. It had better happen!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back