• 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

Comolli sacked from the bindippers?

Jurgen the German said:
It seems like your one of his biggest supporters. Surely he deserves at least some of the blame for the failures at Spurs and Liverpool? Can't just give him all the credit for the good signings and none of the flak for the bad ones or the positions that we were in the league and Liverpool currently are.
Click to expand...

I agree he does deserve some flak for the poor signings (although I'm sure what went on at Liverpool, except to say that it clearly wasn't the same role as Spurs) and partly for the poor results but at the same time, surely you have to give him some credit for putting together nearly the whole squad that finished 4th? Redknapp really did very, very little with it - it was all about the training ground and simply recognising the talents of certain players who had either gone backwards, been ignored or stagnated under Jol. And with regards to Ramos, he simply won back the players that had been lost.
 
The whole thing is speculation. We don't know what Comolli actually did in his job. There's people listing all the players who signed at clubs he was at as his signings. There's inside sources at Tottenham saying the only player he was responsible for signing at Spurs was BAE.

We know he tried to take the responsibly for signing Berbatov when he had nothing to do with it.
We know he described himself as chief scout at Arsenal when he was just a minor scout.

To me he seems the person in the office who looks like he's doing work but is doing nothing but networking and lick arse who somehow ends responsible for all achievements and manages to shirk off all the negatives onto someone else. Everyone is delighted when he doesn't stay round very long as he managed to land a better position somewhere else with his embellished CV.
 
Modric THFC said:
The whole thing is speculation. We don't know what Comolli actually did in his job. There's people listing all the players who signed at clubs he was at as his signings. There's inside sources at Tottenham saying the only player he was responsible for signing at Spurs was BAE
Click to expand...

It isn't speculation. His job description was clearly outlined by Levy on several occasions and, in great detail, when he joined. He clearly lived or died largely by our performance in the market and the quality of player signed. And crucially (and fatallly for Comolli), the quality of coach signed. In fairness, even his most ardent detractors appear to agree on that point. This is why it is so absurd to not give him the credit for the good signings made whilst he was here. It is like the same assumptions made about Pleat being aware of the likes of Huddlestone and Lennon. So Arnesen doesn't get any credit. Well, that is great, but he had 6 years to sign players of this ilk and not one of those turned out to anywhere near as good as those two. We can't know if they would have signed had Pleat stayed. In truth, probably not, given the players we missed out on while Pleat was here. We would have waited until it was too late. And in the same way, how can we know Berbatov would have joined? This is why he gets the credit for the good and the flak for the bad. Otherwise there would have been little point in having a Sporting Director.
 
Harry_Perkins said:
It isn't speculation. His job description was clearly outlined by Levy on several occasions and, in great detail, when he joined. He clearly lived or died largely by our performance in the market and the quality of player signed. And crucially (and fatallly for Comolli), the quality of coach signed. In fairness, even his most ardent detractors appear to agree on that point. This is why it is so absurd to not give him the credit for the good signings made whilst he was here. It is like the same assumptions made about Pleat being aware of the likes of Huddlestone and Lennon. So Arnesen doesn't get any credit. Well, that is great, but he had 6 years to sign players of this ilk and not one of those turned out to anywhere near as good as those two. We can't know if they would have signed had Pleat stayed. In truth, probably not, given the players we missed out on while Pleat was here. We would have waited until it was too late. And in the same way, how can we know Berbatov would have joined? This is why he gets the credit for the good and the flak for the bad. Otherwise there would have been little point in having a Sporting Director.
Click to expand...

When he was here as DOF. Comolli, Levy and Jol had meeting and made joint decisions on signings. That's is why we can't judge him. He wasn't in control of signing players.
 
Modric THFC said:
When he was here as DOF. Comolli, Levy and Jol had meeting and made joint decisions on signings. That's is why we can't judge him. He wasn't in control of signing players.
Click to expand...

Well yes but if we say this then Redknapp now or any other traditional manager isn't in control of signings players. Therefore does this mean that the chairman or a member of the board gets all the credit for any signings that work well? I think it is usually taken as read that the chairman has the final say on all deals but that there is also someone on the football side who is the main man with regards to deciding who those players will be and how much we should be offering etc. And that man at Spurs was Comolli. This isn't just speculation. Levy said so and so did Jol.
 
Last edited:
Jol said there were four of them that discussed players and he had final word. He also said otherwise.

I think in reality no player is one single persons buy, there are too many in the process.

Kenny just said that he himself had the final word at Liverpool. If that is true it would appear Comollis job was scouting and negotiating if anything
 
Harry_Perkins said:
Well yes but if we say this then Redknapp now or any other traditional manager isn't in control of signings players. Therefore does this mean that the chairman or a member of the board gets all the credit for any signings that work well? I think it is usually taken as read that the chairman has the final say on all deals but that there is also someone on the football side who is the main man with regards to deciding who those players will be and how much we should be offering etc. And that man at Spurs was Comolli. This isn't just speculation. Levy said so and so did Jol.
Click to expand...

So why did Jol say he was responsible for bringing in Lennon and Bale not Comolli? "I took Gareth Bale and Aaron Lennon to Tottenham. Comolli took Benoit Assou-Ekotto, for example. But there are no hard feelings for me. I like Daniel."
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Jol said there were four of them that discussed players and he had final word. He also said otherwise
Click to expand...

He never said he didn't have the final word. He essentially complained that he didn't believe he'd got the type of player and quality that he had requested from Comolli. He pointed out he wanted the likes of Distin and Petrov and the deals fell through. The press assumed from all this that he meant players were signed without his consent. But he was very careful never to claim this at all (but I suspect was quite happy for the press to make this assumption)

I think in reality no player is one single persons buy, there are too many in the process
Click to expand...

I agree but at the same time, no one follows these nuances with, lets say, Wenger or Ferguson. They tend to get the credit if a player works out or if he doesn't. Which might technically be wrong but is really no different to saying that they live or die by the results when sometimes the board or the owners can have an impact here too.
 
Last edited:
ArcspacE said:
So to summarise

His 'bad' signings = failure of a DOF

His 'successful' signings = irrelevant since he managed some 'bad' ones too


:|
Click to expand...

It is irrelevant because if you give him responsibility of all signings, then he has to get players for every position with a range of skills across that squad.

I'm quite sure you are able to understand this point, but you choose to ignore it (and hope everyone else does) rather than consider how important it is.

He signed some of our best ever players, but it doesn't mean he was a success. We won a cup under Ramos but that doesn't mean he was a success. You look at the whole picture and in Comollis case there are massive negative points that every fan could spot. Harry comes in and confirms his opinion is the same as the fans, puts it right first transfer window and away we go.

It was that easy but Com didn't do it. Jol confirmed he hadn't agreed with his request for a DM.

I would be more forgiving had he tried to put it right but was unlucky with big players not performing. Bentley and Bent were not required and were brick anyway. Had he used that money for Palacios, sandro and Parker, but they had been brick, you'd sort of think 'unlucky'.
 
Last edited:
So why did Jol say he was responsible for bringing in Lennon and Bale not Comolli? "I took Gareth Bale and Aaron Lennon to Tottenham. Comolli took Benoit Assou-Ekotto, for example. But there are no hard feelings for me. I like Daniel."
Click to expand...

This is a somewhat baffling quote given Lennon was signed a full year before Comolli arrived but it doesn't really contradict what I said. There is no doubt that there would have been players where Jol accepted his judgement. He wanted a left back of a certain style and quality and Comolli went out and got Assou-Ekotto. In other instances he may have openly said, I want 'xyz' player. He said as much with Distin and Petrov. Yet, that was it as far as his role went. In the same way, how do you explain his quotes about wanting a certain type of player and getting, lets say, Kaboul or whoever? Doesn't that imply that it was Comolli largely deciding on these players? He maybe wasn't happy with the quality at the time but look at how Redknapp has made it work. Doesn't it show that he was perhaps something of a limited coach?

Golfball said:
Harry comes in and confirms his opinion is the same as the fans, puts it right first transfer window and away we go
Click to expand...

The thing is, all this is to say that Comolli was one player (Willo) away from the squad that finished 4th. In a way, is this not a sort of a backhanded compliment? That said, I still think you are vastly overestimating the importance of that signing. Yes, we needed a player like him but the bottom line was that he quickly became one of our weak links and was eased out in favour of Huddlestone who became the regular in the role, eventually alongside Modric. Parker in turn was then the upgrade on Willo. But lets face it, Willo was hardly key for 4th place.

Someone mentioned Comolli leaving us short at left-wing. I remember the hysteria about this at the time and how it apparently left us so painfully unbalanced. And what could poor Martin Jol and then poor Ramos do? And yes, it was also an issue that Comolli should have sorted. That said, again, the importance of this was absurdly overestimated. Has Harry signed a single left-winger in his four years at the club? Has Harry singed a single left sided player at all? Hasn't he just used better what he inherited than those who went before? And this can hardly be blamed on the Sporting Director!
 
Last edited:
ArcspacE said:
Do you have a link where Redknapp openly states he was in contact prior to his move over a possible loan?
Click to expand...

It was before a Champions League game. Gullit and Jamie Redknapp were guests and they were talking about it. Real Madrid was offering VDV out to several teams as a loan. Harry called Gullit to ask for his advice and what he thought. Gullit told him that VDV was a great player, but had stamina problems. Gullit advised Harry to get him on loan if possible. Real Madrid then pulled the deal and everyone at Spurs thought that was that, until on the very last day Real Madrid approached Spurs again but this time offering to sell VDV instead of loaning him. Levy called Redknapp to ask him if he definitely wanted him, and Harry said yes. The rest is history.
 
Harry_Perkins said:
It is true we were left unbalanced but I ask again: when considering the chairman's modus operandi over the last decade, it is not likely that he was to blame for leaving us in that position? He has the final say on the financials and the when and how, after all. This was also nothing new. Remember Rasiak on the last day having sold Kanoute? Remember Michael Ricketts (failure) on the last day, having sold Les Ferdinand? And that was under two different managers/head coach. And then it happened again having sold Berbatov and Keane. Were Jol and Hoddle to blame for leaving us unbalanced or does the chairman have to take some considerable blame too?

Ignoring this situation, Redknapp only added 3 players: Willo, Bassong and Kranjčar to the squad he inherited and he finished 4th with it. These were hardly key players that season either and it is difficult to say that Comolli had left holes at centre back or on the right wing! Redknapp clearly bought these players as cover only. So I'm not sure how Comolli failed on this front, when nearly all his signings were retained for a season when we finished 4th? And not only that, they were the key players in that 4th place finish. I'd say it is more to the point that the Sporting Director should be getting in a higher quality of player and/or getting better value in the market, so that any decent manager can make use of them and doesn't want to get rid of them. And I think that is exactly what happened with the players Redknapp inherited.
Click to expand...

Crouch? Defoe? Keane?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back