Feeling very 'flat' for the new season

[Jurgen the German]

We are built to sustain a challenge for the top 4 most seasons under our financial model. This won't change until a few years after we move into our new stadium, which makes the criticism of Jol and Redknapp look even more ridiculous as we do not have the financial clout to compete with Emirates Marketing Project, Chelsea or United or the recent history to compete with the scum as it stands.

Far too early to make any real judgments yet. With the exception of the two Manchester clubs and Chelsea, you can't predict what most clubs are going to achieve. That sad, I don't know how people can be happy with our start, 1 point from 6, despite the good attacking play in both games.

 

[DubaiSpur]

But isn't that just a typical fan argument that doesn't have much substance behind it? I want to make it very clear that I'm not opposed to AVB, as what has happened and happened and there is no going back. But I've never bought into the "time" argument, as I've seen little to no proof of it. It's one of those things (like many of the tactics based arguments) where I clash with the vast majority of fans on. I just can't understand why on so many subjects to do with football, theories become accepted, without much in the way of evidence.

In Premier League football I really can't think of many examples when a manager has started poorly and then gone on to take a club to new heights. It seems to me that the vast majority of successful appointments, set about showing they are going to have a big positive impact, pretty much straightaway. So I really don't understand where the "time" argument comes from. People often mention SAF as a manager that needed time, but forget his first 2 seasons were nothing but success, taking them from 21st to 11th and then finishing 2nd the following season. So he earned the right to be given time when things weren't going so well.

I definitely don't have a problem in giving a manager time if he is clearly showing that things will get better than before he arrived. But there is no point giving a manager time just for the sake of it and ignoring obvious warning signs that all isn't well. In my opinion, in the first 6 months if things aren't obviously on the up, then I'd cut my losses. It will be a hugely unpopular opinion, but at least it has some foundation. I feel much more comfortable using the history of the game as a barometer rather than blind faith.

The fact AVB has won trophies elsewhere means nothing. Again history has shown us this. And when he did win trophies, he again demonstrated that time really isn't needed.

Again, I stress this isn't anti AVB, but really about trying to get all our fans to see things more rationally. The worst thing we could do is see things start to slide and not look to prevent it as quickly as possible. Most fans think a manager must be allowed time to make changes, but I don't think Prem history supports that way of thinking in the slightest and usually allowing slow starting manager time, does more harm than good. If the whole point of his appointment is to give him time, then I feel it's a big mistake. Especially since he absolutely no history of building and developing a team. In fact it' would be pure insanity based on that point alone. He literally has never been at a club for more than one season!

I'm not saying if we aren't in the top 4 by Xmas sack AVB. But if we aren't slugging it out with the likes of Everton, Liverpool, Arsenal and Saudi Sportswashing Machine, then a change should be made, as it's more likely that given time, we'll fall even further backwards, as the "time" argument just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Didn't Mancini finish fifth in his first season, losing out on a CL place despite spending bucketloads of oil money?
Not saying we should compare ourselves to City, just pointing out that he got the time he needed. In three seasons, he finished 5th, 3rd and then 1st.

In the PL, the main problem lies not with the managers, but with the clubs. You made a good point; managers shouldn't get endless amounts of time to prove themselves. However, in the PL, clubs are inclined to give them almost no time at all in relative terms. The average tenure of PL managers is roughly two years, which in itself has been skewed by two enormously successful and likely unique coaches (Wenger and Ferguson), and one moderately yet consistently successful one (Moyes) staying at their respective clubs for 26, 16 and 10 years respectively. Take them out, and the average tenure would likely drop by at least half, if not more. That means managers are getting a year, maybe even less, to implement their ideas and shape a club to their vision. Is that enough? When you look at the comparatively longer average tenure (17-18 months, on average, with significant variations in the different leagues)of managers at continental clubs (madhouses like Atletico Madrid and Palermo aside), I'd argue it isn't.

I mentioned average tenure, a key point. If people aren't fully convinced by AVB, that's fine. But I'd suggest judging him after, say, 18 months, if you want a clearer indication of how we might do, going forward. That would give him roughly a season and a half under his belt, plus about three to four transfer windows to shape his squad and roughly 14 months (give or take) to implement his philosophy in training. If, after that, we look terrible, by all means let him go. But judging him prematurely might turn out to be one of the biggest mistakes we ever make.

If we're not in direct danger of slipping into the bottom ten, then his job should be considered safe for at least the aforementioned time-frame, in my opinion.

 

[Spur of the moment]

The way I see it we have thrown away a chance of success. We had something really special coming together. All thanks to realistic way of management focused on getting the best out of the players we had and bringing through the youngsters.
By win ratio the 4th best manager in our history.
Going into this season with Huddles tong returning from injury, Caulker and Naughton back from loan, Vertonghen and Ade lined up, this season was promising to see us step over the line and win some silverware.
Then we go and sack Harry. And entrust this team on the brink of greatness to an inexperienced manager who's simply not good enough for our football club.
Now I'm not saying Harry didn't have faults but balanced against his strengths they were minor.
There were numerous better managers available at the end of last season, but Levy waited until the Chelsea job was taken before sacking Harry.
Now I just feel completely flat about this season, I don't see any way that we can be successful under AVB and look forward to whoever comes next.

Well said. It beggars credulity that any Spurs manager obliged to let go of a supreme talent like Modric would then willfully offer up Huddlestone on loan to Stoke City (of all people). Sigurdsson and /or whoever else comes in had better be pretty damn special.

Been a fan for nigh on sixty years and never felt even remotely as flat at the beginning of a season as I do right now.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

You see I have a problem with that statement - we have a pretty good squad now, just lacking the creativity in the middle. But even lacking this creativity problem we don't look solid. We are not going out to buy more defenders or more holding midfielders. Why can't we hold on to a lead or a draw? It always looked like we would concede yesterday. If AVB doesn't have the players to play his system, why does he not play a system to suit his players until he gets the right players in? This is essentially my worry with him.

So spend a whole pre-season trying to implement the style of play, start the season, then sign a couple of players and start trying to implement a totally different one mid-season? No managers do that, but people always say this about managers that play to a certain system. We just need a couple of additions and we'll be great.

 

[joey55]

Didn't Mancini finish fifth in his first season, losing out on a CL place despite spending bucketloads of oil money?
Not saying we should compare ourselves to City, just pointing out that he got the time he needed. In three seasons, he finished 5th, 3rd and then 1st.

In the PL, the main problem lies not with the managers, but with the clubs. You made a good point; managers shouldn't get endless amounts of time to prove themselves. However, in the PL, clubs are inclined to give them almost no time at all in relative terms. The average tenure of PL managers is roughly two years, which in itself has been skewed by two enormously successful and likely unique coaches (Wenger and Ferguson), and one moderately yet consistently successful one (Moyes) staying at their respective clubs for 26, 16 and 10 years respectively. Take them out, and the average tenure would likely drop by at least half, if not more. That means managers are getting a year, maybe even less, to implement their ideas and shape a club to their vision. Is that enough? When you look at the comparatively longer average tenure (17-18 months, on average, with significant variations in the different leagues)of managers at continental clubs (madhouses like Atletico Madrid and Palermo aside), I'd argue it isn't.

I mentioned average tenure, a key point. If people aren't fully convinced by AVB, that's fine. But I'd suggest judging him after, say, 18 months, if you want a clearer indication of how we might do, going forward. That would give him roughly a season and a half under his belt, plus about three to four transfer windows to shape his squad and roughly 14 months (give or take) to implement his philosophy in training. If, after that, we look terrible, by all means let him go. But judging him prematurely might turn out to be one of the biggest mistakes we ever make.

If we're not in direct danger of slipping into the bottom ten, then his job should be considered safe for at least the aforementioned time-frame, in my opinion.

So he fits with my example of not needing time. He improved on Hughes straightaway (see Hughes PPG and compare it with Mancinni in the season they shared.) I'm not saying a manager should go from 8th to 1st in a matter of a season. I'm saying that Premier League history shows us the top managers have an almost instant impact and don't need lots of time. I can't really think of a manager that came in and didn't make a positive initial impact (first half season) and go onto to take a club to new heights. I'm sure there are examples, but not many and nowhere near enough to prove they need time.

18 months is far too long to give AVB. I think most would agree with you, but that argument I honestly don't think has any sound basis. Contrary to popular fan and often media based, opinion, 3-6 months is a much better time frame. In that time he doesn't have to take us to higher levels than we've seen in recent years, but he does have to at least demonstrate he can keep us in and around those levels, if we are to give him further time to build. This is even more true at our club, as we already know the infastructure is there for top 6 finishes. As you said the problem is often with the club. But in our case that is probably true of finishing in the top 3, but it's hard to argue we haven't got enough in place to finish top 6, seeing we've done it 5 times in 7 years. Ironically the only times we failed were due to courting a new manager than giving him too much time, when he should have been replaced very early on despite the CC.

The idea of giving an inexperienced manager, who has already flopped in the Prem, 3 or 4 transfer windows isn't realistic in my opinion. If there are problems we have to address them early. That is the key, but will be hugely unpopular among most fans. As important as recognizing and backing a manager when we are on to a good thing, it's equally as important to recognize when things aren't going to work out, as soon as possible. Not giving a manager time is something the media (usually pundits who are fiends with crap managers) have really criticized chairman for over the years and thus the fans have seemingly bought into it. But it ignores the fact that backing a manager, when he has been making bad decisions, still cost a lot of money and can often lead to losing ground on rivals. I don't think we could recover from falling out of the chasing pack for some time, as we are already behind them in terms of financial resources.

If we are in 10th place in Jan, most of our fans will say AVB hasn't been given anywhere near enough time and needs to be backed to build a team. But I don't think history supports that argument at all and I don't think AVBs past has demonstrated he's talented in the transfer market or knows how to build a team. Not because he's failed to do these things, but he's only ever been a head coach and for no more than a year. So from that point of view, backing him in those circumstance is pure madness and our fans shouldn't support it, though I feel due to past media influence they will. But even the most ardent believer that he should be given this time would have to admit it's based on blind faith, simply due to his career history and Prem football history. Let's be honest, we don't have a clue what he's like in the transfer market, as in Portugal and Cheslea his input would have been limited and he was only in those job for a short space of time. Virtually all the players he had success with a Porto were already there and playing the same formation.

But to be honest, I don't think any of this will be an issue. Ramos looked like a plonker from day 1 (he played Lennon in a 3 man midfield in his match). AVB seems to be a good bloke and really isn't going to make radical changes on the playing front, which I think is a good thing. Hopefully this week we'll make some good signings and have another shot at the top 4. My posts aren't really so much about AVB, but more to do with the way fans think, which I believe to be very heavily influenced by a pundit driven media. In my opinion, we'll know if AVB or any manager is going to be a success within the first 6 months. In fact in most cases we'll know in the first month. I wish I'd had the guts to point out all the mental things Ramos did early on, whilst most we doing everything they could to find reasons to suggest he was superior to Jol. I will definitely do so this time with AVB, but to date I've seen no real reason to. I can understand some of the criticism so far, but have his "errors" really been any different to those made by Mourinho, Wenger or SAF so far this season? I thought the reason many of our fans got Harry so badly wrong, is that they didn't compare him with other managers, but to some perfect ideal. To criticize AVB so far, you'd have to do the same.

 

[africanspurs]

Pay that little bit extra for say 3 of your targets in one summer and that's potentially 10 million more we've spent. That's another quality player. Accept Madrid's second offer? Why not, we'll get 6 million less but at least we get it done? Pay what Shakthar demand for Willian? Fine, it's only another 5 million. Etc etc.

We have to have a way of doing the deals. There are positives of doing the deals quickly, but it isn't as clear cut.

edit:- hopefully this doesnt come across as confrontational mate..

you do realise you havent actually said anything here.

its pretty easy to say, what if this or what if that, give an opinion.....so for instance if someone we NEED is valued at not that much more than we are offering do we cave in or do we tell them to stick

Jurgen is stating an opinion on the matter, so am i. it would be easy to sit on the fence and say the error in anything and finish off with "its not clear cut, there are a multitude of variables"...what do YOU think> what would YOU prefer? fight for the economy and fairness and stand your ground? or just cave in and meet the valuation ?

 

[mick cooper]

So he fits with my example of not needing time. He improved on Hughes straightaway (see Hughes PPG and compare it with Mancinni in the season they shared.) I'm not saying a manager should go from 8th to 1st in a matter of a season. I'm saying that Premier League history shows us the top managers have an almost instant impact and don't need lots of time. I can't really think of a manager that came in and didn't make a positive initial impact (first half season) and go onto to take a club to new heights. I'm sure there are examples, but not many and nowhere near enough to prove they need time.

18 months is far too long to give AVB. I think most would agree with you, but that argument I honestly don't think has any sound basis. Contrary to popular fan and often media based, opinion, 3-6 months is a much better time frame. In that time he doesn't have to take us to higher levels than we've seen in recent years, but he does have to at least demonstrate he can keep us in and around those levels, if we are to give him further time to build. This is even more true at our club, as we already know the infastructure is there for top 6 finishes. As you said the problem is often with the club. But in our case that is probably true of finishing in the top 3, but it's hard to argue we haven't got enough in place to finish top 6, seeing we've done it 5 times in 7 years. Ironically the only times we failed were due to courting a new manager than giving him too much time, when he should have been replaced very early on despite the CC.

The idea of giving an inexperienced manager, who has already flopped in the Prem, 3 or 4 transfer windows isn't realistic in my opinion. If there are problems we have to address them early. That is the key, but will be hugely unpopular among most fans. As important as recognizing and backing a manager when we are on to a good thing, it's equally as important to recognize when things aren't going to work out, as soon as possible. Not giving a manager time is something the media (usually pundits who are fiends with crap managers) have really criticized chairman for over the years and thus the fans have seemingly bought into it. But it ignores the fact that backing a manager, when he has been making bad decisions, still cost a lot of money and can often lead to losing ground on rivals. I don't think we could recover from falling out of the chasing pack for some time, as we are already behind them in terms of financial resources.

If we are in 10th place in Jan, most of our fans will say AVB hasn't been given anywhere near enough time and needs to be backed to build a team. But I don't think history supports that argument at all and I don't think AVBs past has demonstrated he's talented in the transfer market or knows how to build a team. Not because he's failed to do these things, but he's only ever been a head coach and for no more than a year. So from that point of view, backing him in those circumstance is pure madness and our fans shouldn't support it, though I feel due to past media influence they will. But even the most ardent believer that he should be given this time would have to admit it's based on blind faith, simply due to his career history and Prem football history. Let's be honest, we don't have a clue what he's like in the transfer market, as in Portugal and Cheslea his input would have been limited and he was only in those job for a short space of time. Virtually all the players he had success with a Porto were already there and playing the same formation.

But to be honest, I don't think any of this will be an issue. Ramos looked like a plonker from day 1 (he played Lennon in a 3 man midfield in his match). AVB seems to be a good bloke and really isn't going to make radical changes on the playing front, which I think is a good thing. Hopefully this week we'll make some good signings and have another shot at the top 4. My posts aren't really so much about AVB, but more to do with the way fans think, which I believe to be very heavily influenced by a pundit driven media. In my opinion, we'll know if AVB or any manager is going to be a success within the first 6 months. In fact in most cases we'll know in the first month. I wish I'd had the guts to point out all the mental things Ramos did early on, whilst most we doing everything they could to find reasons to suggest he was superior to Jol. I will definitely do so this time with AVB, but to date I've seen no real reason to. I can understand some of the criticism so far, but have his "errors" really been any different to those made by Mourinho, Wenger or SAF so far this season? I thought the reason many of our fans got Harry so badly wrong, is that they didn't compare him with other managers, but to some perfect ideal. To criticize AVB so far, you'd have to do the same.

Waits expectantly for intellectual rejoinders from the anti Harry inteligencia

You know who you are, but you won't speak will you?

 

[mick cooper]

Thank you Joey for your rationale

 

[noddy1991]

about the only good thing is that arsenal and liverpool haven't pulled up any trees so far either. could be very wide open for 4th this year

 

[Modric THFC]

Ultimately I'm blaming the Euros and the Olympics. At the start of the season I'm usually itching for football watching random Italian games and about 4 live premier games a weekend. This season though I've watched the 2 Spurs games and haven't even caught the other Premier League highlights on MOTD.

 

[billyiddo]

.

 

[COYS]

I can't understand the problems people have with our squad. The squad that had us in 3rd place for a whole half of last season is still more or less with us today, though that may have been different should Levy have given in to Chelsea last season for Modric. Our 3rd place wasn't fudged up by the players, but the general start date of our meltdown was the game vs Arsenal about a week after Capello resigned, so was down to the management. I still fail to see why we didn't just keep things the same, tell all the other clubs who bid for our players to fudge off, and try and improve our squad depth in some areas. We're all thinking with such short-term memories. It feels like we finished 5th, not 4th last season and I still have to pinch myself to remember we finished in the top 4 last season despite having the most diabolical of all second halves to a season imaginable. If we're aiming for 4th again this season why change things? All players are still under contract, and we have no need to sell. I have never been under the impression that other clubs now have better squads than we had last season so I feel we didn't need to change things to compete for the top 4. I'm still bewildered as to why we sacked Harry, and it just feels like we've gone back to square one which is why I feel the same as the OP, as we have now lost all the threats we posed to bigger clubs for reasons I really can't understand.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Oh here we go with the Harry 'as good as it gets' myopia...

I think we have to get some things straight about where we were at the end of last season before we talk about AVB.
Harry in his 3 and a half years with us took us to a level we haven’t seen (winning away in the San siro!) and also had us often playing some sublime football, whilst getting the PL basics and bread-and-butter right (see our very solid away record and hime banishing our commonly soft underbelly, again especially away from home.)
I look back over Harry’s tenure and I have some very fond memories, for which I will always be grateful to him for.

However, at the end of the last season to me it was clear his time was up and I think it was the right decision to let him go. For the following reasons:

Results:
Whether any extremely pro-Harry posters want to admit or not, last season was, ultimately, a BIG disappointment in terms of us missing out on 3rd place and then being edged out altogether from CL by Chelsea’s freak CL win. There were some things that we couldn’t control: Arsenal’s resurgence, Chelsea’s luck. But frankly, being 10 points clear of 4th in mid-February meant that we would have only had ourselves to blame had we not finished 3rd. That blame goes ultimately to the manager, who was not able to get us to win two games on the trot between mid-january and mid-april.
That is a woeful record whichever way you look at it. And our transfer policy this summer, which people are understandably frustrated about, would likely have been much easier if we could dangle instant CL footy over our rivals such as Arsenal or Chelsea. Think about that before you slag Levy off: 3rd place equals easy option for the likes of Hazard and then further recruits who would want to play with Hazard etc.

Squad use vs squad sales/wages:
As I’ve often said, Harry’s use of our first 14 pr so players was very good, however, we did start to have a big squad and due to the fact we no longer had a reserve league, there were many parts of the squad that become rusty, wasted, unfit or all three. Harry showed that he did NOT have the knowhow/skill/desire/whatever to utilise our squad more than he did. Often a player not in the favoured first 14 would not be given many chances to play (fine, as we had a winning formula AND we were winning!) but then when needed due to injury/suspension etc would be VERY ring-rusty and would not have other opportunities to gain the correct levels of fitness, sharpness, confidence etc to really make an impact on the first team when required. This is clearly part of what happened to the likes of Krancjar, Corluka, Pienaar, Bassong etc. On the flip side, when one of the firt-teamers got an injury, then all of a sudden we turned into mush (think when the likes of Bale, Lennon or Ade were not available) and hence whenever any of those players were injured they’d often be rushed back partly because there was not much of a plan B and/or their squad replacements were so rusty anyway as previously mentioned.
We are not a club that can afford to have players such as Pienaar, Corluka, Krancjar, Bentley, Bassong etc be on the wage bill but barely used. That situation had to change. Hand on heart did you REALLY think Harry would have been able to get better at this side of things? Do you think we would have been able to attract more players to challenge for the top 4 AND continue as we were with the underusing of our squad (some of those players HE bought btw)? Again, something had to give.
Two straight seasons with end-of-season meltdowns
You had to give Harry credit for the way he got us up there to third after our two early losses against the mancs, but then you have to then give him the criticism for the meltdown in the last 12 games or so – which happened the previous year as well. You have to ask, why was this happening YET AGAIN? Nobody can argue about fatigue, too many games etc (in fact, you couldn’t really argue it when it happened in 2010-11 as we had A LOT of time between the PL and CL games). Could we REALLY afford for that thing to happen yet again, what with Chelski and Arsenal knowing they had to strengthen and try to edge away from us again?

Transfer dealings:
This was always going to be the time when we would likely have to replace at least one of our important players, e.g. Modric. Unless we have the spending power of the mancs, Chelski or even Arsenal this was always going to be very very delicate. It needs a load of money spent on transfer fees/wages or perhaps careful scouting. I’m not having a dig a Harry here but do you honestly think that without CL footy Harry would have been able to pull this off with those constraints? If so, please give evidence, because I can only go by the types of players he often boasted about wanting to sign (Phil Neville, David Beckham etc) which leads me to believe Harry would NOT have been able to do this adequately (see also our continuous striker issues under him).

Player development:
Perhaps in line with the point above about our end-of-season meltdowns, how many players would probably say that Harry developed their game to go to another level? Perhaps Bale maybe? Kaboul? I think Harry is very good at getting the players to play instinctively and to do what comes naturally, but it was clear that when there was a need for an emphasis on team systems, shape and drilling the players on new formations, tactics etc Harry was not so good at developing players in this regard. Hence why I think our two end-of-season collapses happened as once the instinctive play patterns of our players were nullified they looked clueless as to what to do next (e.g. Everton away, QPR away, when often the opposition let us have the ball as we didn’t look like scoring with it). Again, I think in our situation we needed to be able to call upon this kind of resource to compete with our top 4 rivals who all have more money, better players, experience etc to call upon when competing with us for those top 4 spots. Arsenal compete with the others mostly because they have systems of player development throughout the club that counteract their financial lack of might…though that is waning imho…

Harry’s court case and then Harry’s England ‘issue’ (basically going AWOL):
It’s easy to forget how silly Harry’s evidence made him look in public (not being able to write better than a two-year old, not being able to fill in a team sheet). Do you think the best players would really want to join a club whose manager says things like that? Either it makes him look stupid or VERY crooked.
Also, he fact is when the England vacancy appeared our form hit the skids, even worse than the year before; this was partly to do with the England speculation. What did it say that Harry couldn’t see that him concentrating on Spurs was a win-win situation for him? Funny how he said that ‘it doesn’t bother the players, they just play’ but then later said that ‘if the players don’t know that the manager has security in his job, then they’ll let it get to them’.
Come on! How was he ever going to be kept in the job by the board with those kind of comments? I think he knew his time was up and was just concentrating on getting his compensation.

So all in all it was the right time for Harry to go this summer; those pining for him right now seem to have short memories, and whilst AVB is still to be proven as the correct successor, you can see why Levy and the board replaced Harry with him as he would like have certain traits that Harry lacked which might be more important in taking us forward at this stage:

- Keys ideas about formations and systems – which HAVE brought results in the past
- A methodology which would more likely involve utilising a larger part of the SQUAD
- A ‘name’ likely to attract some of the better players across Europe etc, when competing with our more moneyed top 4 rivals
- Contacts across Europe and a more likely ability to attract good but less known talent outside of the big leagues
- A likelihood of developing young players with plans for them in years to come

I for one am NOT feeling flat for this season, and if I did it wouldn’t be because I want my new manager sacked after two not outstanding but promising performances, it would be because we are NOT in the CL even though we really should have been and will likely struggle to again due to Chelsea and Arsenal strengthening to make sure we don't get that golden chance again for a while.

Time will tell if AVB is the answer, but for me, it will be fun finding out.

COYS

 

[glorygloryeze]

Thank you Joey for your rationale

I'd like to ask what Rationale is that? Do you mean judging and then sacking a manager after two games?

 

[Mulletperm]

I'd like to ask what Rationale is that? Do you mean judging and then sacking a manager after two games?

Hmmm, not quite sure where Joey says that anywhere in his post. Making assumptions or simply not bothering to read the post?

 

[AuroRaman]

Whether you agree with him or not, Joey55 is in danger of very quickly becoming one of the best posters on here.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Hmmm, not quite sure where Joey says that anywhere in his post. Making assumptions or simply not bothering to read the post?

I think most people who are saying that AVB needs time are effectively saying he needs to be judged over more than just TWO games, which seems to be a problem for some. Happy for this to be clarified if I have this wrong, and actually the question was directed more at Mick than Joey

 

[Mulletperm]

I think most people who are saying that AVB needs time are effectively saying he needs to be judged over more than just TWO games, which seems to be a problem for some. Happy for this to be clarified if I have this wrong, and actually the question was directed more at Mick than Joey

Don't want to turn this into a slanging match, but it seems that you're having a pop at Mick for no reason here. His 'rationale' comment was with regards to Joey's post was it not?

How can you therefore assume that Mick wants AVB sacking after two games from his reference to Joey's post?

 

[glorygloryeze]

Don't want to turn this into a slanging match, but it seems that you're having a pop at Mick for no reason here. His 'rationale' comment was with regards to Joey's post was it not?

How can you therefore assume that Mick wants AVB sacking after two games from his reference to Joey's post?

I can because instead of leaving Joey's post as a point of reference to use to judge AVB our new manager, instead he uses it to bring up the old Harry issue to confront those who say AVB needs time. What I ask then has it to do with Harry, unless Mick says AVB should be sacked and Harry brought back?

 

[Mulletperm]

I can see what you mean. But I'm guessing (and it's purely a guess) that Mick was referring to the final couple of lines in Joey's post where he says:

"I thought the reason many of our fans got Harry so badly wrong, is that they didn't compare him with other managers, but to some perfect ideal. To criticize AVB so far, you'd have to do the same."

Which I agree with. Harry's record was extremely impressive, and while he certainly had his negative aspects you can't deny that while he was manager of Spurs he done well. But I'm speaking on behalf of Mick, and could be completely wrong.