So, your final thoughts 2011-2012 season?

[indianspur]

Yet we were fairly consistent overall. During the period you describe we still lost to Man Utd and City (twice), drew with Chelsea at home, lost at Stoke, drew away at Swansea, drew at Saudi Sportswashing Machine, drew against Wolves. If this was during the title form, then, in this context, the 9 game 'collapse', when you consider the similar quality opposition, wasn't all that incredible. Fact is, we had a long period after the first two games when we didn't have much of an away test, in particular. Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool at home are winnable, IMO. The vast majority of the remaning games up until City away were against bottom half opposition. Then the 9 game run came and certainly Arsenal away, Man Utd at home, Chelsea away, Everton away, Sunderland away.... these are different propositions to the games we'd had in the period before that.

Quite simply, it comes down to this: do you think we are closer to Man Utd and Emirates Marketing Project than Arsenal and Chelsea? I think we're closer to the latter by far. Therefore, not a major surprise that we had a blip.

i think we should be, just as we were for a large part of the season, 10 points off Utd and City, and 10 points better off than Arse, bang in the middle, the 3rd best team

 

[Sheffield Spur]

I just believe in giving people time to turn it around ESPECIALLY if they've proved for a period of time that they can deliver. Ferguson is living proof of that in my opinion, as was the success Burkinshaw had with us.....eventually.

I agree to giving enough time, unless it clearly is disaster zone time, like it was with Hoddle, Ramos, Santini, Gross etc. But Redknapp has been given nearly 4 years and we have crashed and burned late on in both the last two seasons.

Last of all, you cannot surely be even thinking of putting Redknapp in the same league as SAF or the Mighty Keith Burkinshaw?

 

[elltrev]

Aw come off it MK! #-o How many more excuses? The beef has been that you only judge over 38 games, or a season. I have done exactly that.

The bottom line is that Spurs collapsed catestrophically in February from the Arse game, and went from an average of 2.12 points per game, to 0.67. That has cost us bigtime. The reasons for this many be more than one, but from where I am, it all points to the manager.

No you haven't done exactly that. Once again, you have judged on the bad patch, and blamed the manager for it without crediting the manager for the good patch.

 

[indianspur]

Form when the England job was filled: P28 W18 D6 L4 Pts: 60 PPG: 2.14

Form when it was open: P10 W2 D3 L5 Pts: 9 PPG: 0.9

so, we are good enough to be the 3rd best team then???? only an exterior factor, not on the pitch related, prevented us from fulfilling our mission

 

[Sheffield Spur]

The blip was always coming. In fact many Arsenal fans I know knew it was coming, I doubt they knew there team was going to capitilize like they did but I bet the majority of fans knew Spurs were going to have a blip, it's a matter of when.

2/3 games are a blip. 9 games are a collapse. Big difference. A blip is recoverable, whereas a collapse......

 

[chicken_badge]

It was a collapse, comparable to Saudi Sportswashing Machine. Similar point lead?

 

[yiddo2786]

As soon as we start to beat them away...

 

[noddy1991]

coyle got what he deserved. did the dirty on burnley. what sort of manager walks out on a promoted club during the season ?

 

[Sheffield Spur]

fudge me. Again, you're totally ignoring the fantastic run we went on at the beginning of the season. You complain about the games we should have won but didn't, but totally take for granted all the games that we did win.

The fantastic run makes it all the more unpalatable that we crashed from that and did a complete u turn.

Yes, maybe we should have beaten Norwich at home. But maybe we should have lost away to Saudi Sportswashing Machine? Or lost away to Chelsea? Or drawn away to Fulham? Or drawn at home to Arsenal? Or lost away to Sunderland, as city did. Or lost at home to Blackburn, as united did. Or lost at home to Wigan, like arsenal did. Or lost at home to villa, like Chelsea did.

We should have won at Saudi Sportswashing Machine for sure. Awful error to make it 2-2. We should have won against Chelsea too. Lost at home to Blackburn??? The worst Prem side I have ever seen, at WHL!

We've had some bad results and some good results. We've had an amazing start and a crap finish. OVERALL we've been good and finished 4th, meeting your preseason expectations.

My preseason expectation was to qualify for CL. We have not done that yet, and are relying on another. Don't get it, and we will see if we hang on to Bale and Modric.

 

[elltrev]

2/3 games are a blip. 9 games are a collapse. Big difference. A blip is recoverable, whereas a collapse......

So by your own definition, it was a blip as it was still recoverable with 2 games to go (though obviously we didn't recover it in the end).

Personally I would call it a collapse; pretty crushing, but on the plus side our amazing first half meant we were still able to finish 4th.

 

[Harry_Perkins]

But as has already been stated, you could make this case for just about anyone. The league winners went from 2.38 points per games to 1.52 points per game over a 7 game period. Given they were starting from a stronger base, that is a 'collapse' not far off our apparent own. The difference is about 4 points. If the league champions can have a poor run of form like that, it is a bit absurd to claim ours as particularly exceptional.

 

[Sheffield Spur]

So by your own definition, it was a blip as it was still recoverable with 2 games to go (though obviously we didn't recover it in the end).

Personally I would call it a collapse; pretty crushing, but on the plus side our amazing first half meant we were still able to finish 4th.

Nope. A collapse. Horribly. Then Hodgson was appointed, and there were still 4 games left. A bad result by Arsenal let us back in, and we blew that as well, against Villa.

 

[Harry_Perkins]

i think we should be, just as we were for a large part of the season, 10 points off Utd and City, and 10 points better off than Arse, bang in the middle, the 3rd best team

I mean in terms of the quality of the squad he had available. I don't think it is closer Emirates Marketing Project/Man Utd than compared to Chelsea and Arsenal. This doesn't really come down to where we were at certain stages of the season, because again, it is only a snapshot. What if Redknapp just had us overachieving at certain points? After the poor run, the last few games was something like business as usual and we finished just about right IMO.

To be honest, I just think people nailed their colours to the mast during the bad run and it is hard to change again so quickly after just 4 games. Even if he'd got 3rd, I think a lot of people on here would be giving him grudging praise, more than anything else.

 

[Sheffield Spur]

No you haven't done exactly that. Once again, you have judged on the bad patch, and blamed the manager for it without crediting the manager for the good patch.

#-o#-o#-o#-o Managers are judged on results. Its the bad patch that needs dissecting. The good patch takes care of itself.

 

[elltrev]

I would use a stronger word than 'unpalatable' on an emotional level. But it's illogical to blame management for the crash and give them no credit for the amazing run.

You've changed your definition of the words 'should have'. Before you were basing it on the difficulty of the game on paper, now you're basing it on what happened in the game. On paper, we should not win away to Chelsea. My point with regard to Blackburn is that every top team loses games that they 'should win' on paper.

Again, to judge our management on the outcome of a game we're not involved in is illogical. At the beginning of the season, would you have wanted Harry sacked for finishing 4th?

I understand that people are frustrated with 2 poor finishes to seasons in a row, but a) they've been different kinds of poor finishes and b) the previous 2 seasons we had very good finishes, so I'm not yet convinced that it's as 'uncoincidental ' as people are making out. Plus, given that overall weve had 3 seasons under Harry that, OVERALL, have been good at worst and incredible at best, I'm willing to give him another season.

 

[Sheffield Spur]

But as has already been stated, you could make this case for just about anyone. The league winners went from 2.38 points per games to 1.52 points per game over a 7 game period. Given they were starting from a stronger base, that is a 'collapse' not far off our apparent own. The difference is about 4 points. If the league champions can have a poor run of form like that, it is a bit absurd to claim ours as particularly exceptional.

??? Our collapse was far worse, and they had a manager who turned it round. He also had a stronger squad with an embarrassment of riches. They didn't go to 0.67 points per game over 9 games (relegation form). As you state; 1.52 per game over 7 games. Nowhere near as bad.

 

[elltrev]

#-o#-o#-o#-o Managers are judged on results. Its the bad patch that needs dissecting. The good patch takes care of itself.

If you honestly believe that, then we've uncovered the difference in our thinking and there's no point carrying on discussing it. But seriously, your statement that 'the good patch takes care of itself' is ridiculous and totally flawed. Why bother having a fudging manager then, if having title-challenging form for 20 matches 'takes care of itself'?

 

[Sheffield Spur]

If you honestly believe that, then we've uncovered the difference in our thinking and there's no point carrying on discussing it. But seriously, your statement that 'the good patch takes care of itself' is ridiculous and totally flawed. Why bother having a fudging manager then, if having title-challenging form for 20 matches 'takes care of itself'?

A major role of a manager is to correct something when there is a problem. If its running OK then you nurture it along. Redknapp performed poorly in correcting the collapse....but the again, was he part of the problem?

 

[Harry_Perkins]

??? Our collapse was far worse, and they had a manager who turned it round. He also had a stronger squad with an embarrassment of riches.

The difference is between 3 or 4 points, max. Not 'far worst', in my book. Especially when they won the league! This is the problem with dealing with such short time frames - one or two results either way can change the picture considerably. And yes, Mancini has a far better squad. That is half the point. Plus, surely Redknapp also turned it around and as you aren't including the final 4 games in the collapse period?

 

[indianspur]

Redknapp's side now face stiff competition for third, which guarantees entry into the lucrative Champions League group stage, with two difficult away games approaching at Everton and Chelsea.

However, the former Portsmouth boss appeared undaunted, telling reporters: “We're still in pole position. I still fancy us to finish third.

"That 10-point lead has suddenly become four points and we've got some hard games to come. We go to Everton and we've got Chelsea away.

"It's going to be tight but I'd still rather be where we are than Arsenal. We're four points in front and we've still got a big chance.

"I'm looking to finish third, not fourth. I'd be disappointed if we finished fourth. I'd be even more disappointed if we finished fifth!"

-------------------

i think if the manager said and thought that, then its only fair for the fans to also be disappointed at eventually finishing 4th after being in such a good position for most of the season. Its a disappointment to finish 4th, unbelievable, but there you go. Expectations are now higher than in the past.