Harry Redknapp: The Aftermath

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

hmm good stuff, so if he could manage to retain those qualities here, whilst adapting his style of play to something more attacking/stylish, he'd be a good appointment ?

I was picking positives only. I think he is a very good manager, I just dont think he is right for us.

The main reasons why are style of play, and nous in the transfer market. He never impresses me when spending "big" (or relatively big)

I see nothing to suggest his style would change, and believe anyone how thinks it will is basing this on blind hope

 

[billyiddo]

so you want ferguson / wenger / guardiola / mourinho..., and you want it now.

not to mention you also want in built playing system thats been ingrained from the ground up , you also want this now i take it.

i canT really say much about the last two points, the squad thing is odd though....did you want harry to rotate the winning team or something?

Plus all this is moot in a way until someone tells me what their preference is, good football or results....or to make it easier......whats more important to them ..good football or results

as a club we can't attract the Messi's and the Ronaldo's of the world so we have to look future for players who may one day reach that level - why not take the same approach with our next managerial appointment ? id like to see us go for a manager who has shown the potential to become all of those things that those managers above are, rather than to appoint someone who is more of a steady appointment - the managerial Luka Modric signing (for us) so to speak rather than a Peter Crouch, if that makes sense

 

[BrainOfLevy]

another question dodger.

i just see it as people not trying to face hard facts and decisions. fact of the matter is that we have a manager now that brings good results and plays attractive football , we want to get rid for what exatly? someone that will bring better fotball AND better results? the chances of that being high or low? i say EXTREMELY low...BIG RISK

but by all means evade the question and focus on the comment above. i dont expect people to answer something that could make their points for about over 100 pages seem abit obselete

I actually agree with you in all of this - not sure why you think I wouldn't?

Only thing I don't agree on is dodging the question - there's no reason why you can't have a manager that plays good football and gets results. Moyes doesn't guarentee or improve chances of better results because he plays reactive football.

And we do have a good manager already in Harry, so I agree with you there too. I wouldn't want him out for Moyes. After the rage at the the 'speculation will affect the players' comments has subsided I'm very happy to keep Harry again. I reckon it will come down to the fact that Levy doesn't agree on Harry's estimation of his own worth, so Harry will either have to agree reduced terms to what he could have gotten a few months ago, or he may go.

My only reasonning is that maybe (although I haven't said definely) the reason we could get better results without Harry is with someone that plays a system that makes the players play to more than the sum of their parts as opposed to Harry who gets consistency and good football out of good players. But weighing it all up, it doesn't seem right to take the risk of getting Harry out. We just need him and Levy to hurry up and agree on a solution for the club.

 

[africanspurs]

Going to OT they had nothing to lose, its easy to play with freedom then. Though respect to them for not letting the size of the game get to them.

Big OCCASIONS? How about the last handful of derbys? The Cup final against Chelsea? The CL Qualifier?

ahhh, so we go that far back with the squad he has?

okay, i think i'll just get together a list of results from somewhere for the derby's, give a general squad comaprison....also the cup final V chelsea is a good one....not like we have lost to them in the last few years

agreed about the CL qualifier though, and yet that stuck out to me as amazingly uncharacteristic, as in i actually remember it and that i was surprised they capitulated like that...it was not like them,. yet when we fold ...it doesnt surprise me

by the way, going over results like this from past irrespective of squad resuources and abilities in order to show a team with bottle.....effectively rules out martinez and quite a few other managers that have been suggested. no man is an island i think the phrase is...as far as emotional and big game losses that phrase cetainly applies. ferguson can rule himself out as well...what with two big game losses to city

all this merry go round and am still yet to read what is more important between good results and good football

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

so you want ferguson / wenger / guardiola / mourinho..., and you want it now.

not to mention you also want in built playing system thats been ingrained from the ground up , you also want this now i take it.

i canT really say much about the last two points, the squad thing is odd though....did you want harry to rotate the winning team or something?

Plus all this is moot in a way until someone tells me what their preference is, good football or results....or to make it easier......whats more important to them ..good football or results

You asked what I would want in a manager. Thats what I want. Redknapp + More. I never said "now" - thats your twist on my post.

To be explicit, I want it as soon as we can get it - but I am happy all the time I see progress in us moving towards these attributes.

I want a system of play. If it is ingrained from the ground up then brilliant, but that takes a while - in the meantime I would be happy with a system of play bedded into the first team.

I want Harry to manage his personel more so they are all involved more. With an embedded system of play its easier to interchange personell. Your "Winning team" becomes a "Winning 16"

Trying to pin someone down on Football/Results sounds suspiciously like MKs Rebels/Loyalists nonsense - I sense a straw man being built

 

[africanspurs]

I actually agree with you in all of this - not sure why you think I wouldn't?

Only thing I don't agree on is dodging the question - there's no reason why you can't have a manager that plays good football and gets results. Moyes doesn't guarentee or improve chances of better results because he plays reactive football.

And we do have a good manager already in Harry, so I agree with you there too. I wouldn't want him out for Moyes. After the rage at the the 'speculation will affect the players' comments has subsided I'm very happy to keep Harry again. I reckon it will come down to the fact that Levy doesn't agree on Harry's estimation of his own worth, so Harry will either have to agree reduced terms to what he could have gotten a few months ago, or he may go.

My only reasonning is that maybe (although I haven't said definely) the reason we could get better results without Harry is with someone that plays a system that makes the players play to more than the sum of their parts as opposed to Harry who gets consistency and good football out of good players. But weighing it all up, it doesn't seem right to take the risk of getting Harry out. We just need him and Levy to hurry up and agree on a solution for the club.

LOL, a pragmatic response. but still doesnt really answer the question though does it.

i never said moyes would guarantee results
i never said that good football and results were mutually exclusive

i just asked what you'd prefer. you'd think that was a simple question but the way my homies are DO_DG_ING the question is making me chuckle abit

 

[BrainOfLevy]

LOL, a pragmatic response. but still doesnt really answer the question though does it.

i never said moyes would guarantee results
i never said that good football and results were mutually exclusive

i just asked what you'd prefer. you'd think that was a simple question but the way my homies are DO_DG_ING the question is making me chuckle abit

Ok then I'll go for it:

Results.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

ahhh, so we go that far back with the squad he has?

okay, i think i'll just get together a list of results from somewhere for the derby's, give a general squad comaprison....also the cup final V chelsea is a good one....not like we have lost to them in the last few years

agreed about the CL qualifier though, and yet that stuck out to me as amazingly uncharacteristic, as in i actually remember it and that i was surprised they capitulated like that...it was not like them,. yet when we fold ...it doesnt surprise me

by the way, going over results like this from past irrespective of squad resuources and abilities in order to show a team with bottle.....effectively rules out martinez and quite a few other managers that have been suggested. no man is an island i think the phrase is...as far as emotional and big game losses that phrase cetainly applies. ferguson can rule himself out as well...what with two big game losses to city

all this merry go round and am still yet to read what is more important between good results and good football

Moyes has been at Everton for 10 years. I am not an Everton fan, so those were the first games to spring to mind as big occasions they bottled.

Are you saying we can only judge the characteristics of Moyes team based upon the last season instead of the last decade?

10 years is a long time. A lifetime in football. And a fantastic amount of information to be able to judge a manager on. The last season isnt the only relevant one IMO.

The characteristics in him I described before were present the whole period. As was the style of play and transfer inconsistency I highlighted as well.

 

[billyiddo]

but by asking the question do you prefer good football over results you aren't really gaining much insight with an answer, are you ?

with those very loose terms im sure most people would prefer results over style and im not quite sure what that tells you

 

[africanspurs]

You asked what I would want in a manager. Thats what I want. Redknapp + More. I never said "now" - thats your twist on my post.

To be explicit, I want it as soon as we can get it - but I am happy all the time I see progress in us moving towards these attributes.

I want a system of play. If it is ingrained from the ground up then brilliant, but that takes a while - in the meantime I would be happy with a system of play bedded into the first team.

I want Harry to manage his personel more so they are all involved more. With an embedded system of play its easier to interchange personell. Your "Winning team" becomes a "Winning 16"

Trying to pin someone down on Football/Results sounds suspiciously like MKs Rebels/Loyalists nonsense - I sense a straw man being built

you are right, it was a twist on what you said, seeing as you never said it in the first place...but i was operating under the assumption that when we let go of harry we were after something in particular and that the outcome or receipt of this thing we were after would happen pretty much immediately? if you want to wait a couple a few years then thats certainly your perogative and is actually ver much something i would applaud as being extremely visionary and patient.

my only ting is that if you're willing to wait, then why not wait with harry..year after year we have shown the 'progression' your talking about have we not?

plus another thing, if you want redknapp and more...why did you mention martinez and rodgers etc....when they havent even shown their capabilities to be redknapp aside from implement a continental style of playing football during a good run of games?

the managing personell thing is still confusing me, to put it simply.,..what did harry do wrong in accordance with personnel management? we were winning and he played a winning team....what did he do wrong? what could he have done differently that would make this more acceptable to you


the irony thing is that the straw man thing is actually you bringing it up LOL. i havent said that you are either one thing or another...i've just asked a simple question...LOL LOL. the fact that you find it an issue to answer is more telling than the question or even the answer itself.

 

[africanspurs]

Moyes has been at Everton for 10 years. I am not an Everton fan, so those were the first games to spring to mind as big occasions they bottled.

Are you saying we can only judge the characteristics of Moyes team based upon the last season instead of the last decade?

10 years is a long time. A lifetime in football. And a fantastic amount of information to be able to judge a manager on. The last season isnt the only relevant one IMO.

The characteristics in him I described before were present the whole period. As was the style of play and transfer inconsistency I highlighted as well.

you highlighted transfer inconsistecy? i missed that ..sorry

i totally agree though, 10 years is how you judge someone...i'm just ttrying to get into your thinking process of what makes you think that Moyes' teams bottle it as apart from coming to a conclusion that they are a fighting team with lots of bottle and spirit. from my point of view you've mentioned isolated incidents over the course of years where they have shown resolve IMO...

....and the derby situation thing is actually quite a good point..cause then you would have to apply that same 'big game logic' to redknapp,...in which case it would be yet ANOTHER feather in his cap. his results v arsenal are pretty good i would have thought

i'l try and piece together something on those reuslts you were talking about

 

[africanspurs]

but by asking the question do you prefer good football over results you aren't really gaining much insight with an answer, are you ?

with those very loose terms im sure most people would prefer results over style and im not quite sure what that tells you

what that tells me is that when push comes to shove...people prefer winning over anything else.

if you asked me that question i'd look you stone in the face with no reservations whatsoever and say to you "RESULTS MOTHER FUKING BIATCH!!! WHAT WHAT!!!"

end of the day thats whats MOST important to me, winning games. If you gave me choice of a manager that i felt would bring about consistency and results ...and asked to decide against one thats glamorous / exciting / leaves me with butterfly petals as to what could or couldnt be / an unknown factor........i'm going for the first one.

people dont realise but chelsea when mourinho first went there were the living representation of ' spoil and win' tactics.....not sure they really cared much cause they were winning..how long was it before jose lost a home game? now thats results....

 

[africanspurs]

Ok then I'll go for it:

Results.

wohoooo...we have motion baby

okay then, next question...in your view.....who is more likely to get results, someone that has shown a consistent level ..or someone that shows extremely volatile and fluctuating levels of performance?

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

I think by the responses, albeit clever ones, that i am getting is that people dont actually know what they want from this new manager as a priority.

are people just be 'bored' of redknapp?...that he's become too familiar?

This for me is the tickle my balls with a feather. I understand why people don't like Redknapp and want him gone on a personal level, but those wanting him out because they perceive he has failed us on a football level are very misguided IMO either in their expectations of what Spurs can realistically achieve in the short term or in their rating of Redknapp's ability.

We finished 4th, a single point behind 3rd. That is fine margins and yes we could have finished 3rd this year had the fates conspired slightly differently. Next season will be tougher as I can't see Chelsea underperforming like they did this year. Next year 4th is probably the best we can attain, and we're underdogs to achieve it. Why?

Wenger. I'm a Redknapp loyalist, and make no bones about it. I think he has done a very good job at Spurs and a very good job should be rewarded with time. But I, and I would guess practically every other Redknapp loyalist, am under no illusion that Redknapp is in the same quality as the Arsene Wenger's of this world. This said if Wenger is that much better than Redknapp why did we only finish 1 point behind Arsenal? "Because we have the better team!" I will hear some Spurs fans cry. That may or may not be true, but who build that "inferior" Arsenal team if that is the case?

It's pretty obvious that Arsenal are underachieving at the moment (and I don't believe it is soley down to Wenger either) but let's not take credit away from our Manager and team. They've done a bloody good job in being this close to Arsenal, a team that should be comfortably clear of us, regardless. AND we've just finished above Chelsea. If it wasn't for the emergence of City, we'd be looking at 4-4-3 and not 4-5-4.

Is there better than Redknapp out there? Yes there is. Are there many? No there aren't. Could a better Manager achieve more than Redknapp has? In Cup competitions maybe, but in the League? Only marginally in terms of position, if at all.

I'll preach it again. When Redknapp goes I just hope that we're all behind the new manager and give him time. LOTS of time. And I hope we don't judge him against the Redknapp era because although many don't see it now I genuinely believe that in a few years time we'll look back at this era as a mini-golden era and if Levy is going to fire Redknapp for failing to finish 3rd last year then I hope he doesn't fire the next Manager for failing to achieve the same next season.

 

[billyiddo]

what that tells me is that when push comes to shove...people prefer winning over anything else.

if you asked me that question i'd look you stone in the face with no reservations whatsoever and say to you "RESULTS MOTHER FUKING BIATCH!!! WHAT WHAT!!!"

end of the day thats whats MOST important to me, winning games. If you gave me choice of a manager that i felt would bring about consistency and results ...and asked to decide against one thats glamorous / exciting / leaves me with butterfly petals as to what could or couldnt be / an unknown factor........i'm going for the first one.

people dont realise but chelsea when mourinho first went there were the living representation of ' spoil and win' tactics.....not sure they really cared much cause they were winning..how long was it before jose lost a home game? now thats results....

we should be striving for both and id choose taking a chance on a manger i feel could bring both success/consistency and style over a someone who is consistent yet 'negative'.

obviously there are times in which the more pragmatic appointment is required , but that time is not now IMO

 

[africanspurs]

as a club we can't attract the Messi's and the Ronaldo's of the world so we have to look future for players who may one day reach that level - why not take the same approach with our next managerial appointment ? id like to see us go for a manager who has shown the potential to become all of those things that those managers above are, rather than to appoint someone who is more of a steady appointment - the managerial Luka Modric signing (for us) so to speak rather than a Peter Crouch, if that makes sense

sorry mate, didnt address this...what you're saying makes perfect sense (as in i understand what you're saying).

the thing is that a reply like this means that (have you watched the program MAD MEN? there is this brilliant scene with a partner and the head of the admin team (a woman) ...which actually sums up what its looking more and more like the reason why some would rather we replace harry. its set in a Bar after they go to a prospective client (jaguar)...anyway never mind)...you would rather risk where we are, dive into the unknown....as opposed to keep with something steady and working

incidentally, the managerial luka modric? the only guy i can think of that ticks all the boxes like that is Wenger..am sure there are tons more though/.......i just dot know who they are

 

[africanspurs]

This for me is the tickle my balls with a feather. I understand why people don't like Redknapp and want him gone on a personal level, but those wanting him out because they perceive he has failed us on a football level are very misguided IMO either in their expectations of what Spurs can realistically achieve in the short term or in their rating of Redknapp's ability.

We finished 4th, a single point behind 3rd. That is fine margins and yes we could have finished 3rd this year had the fates conspired slightly differently. Next season will be tougher as I can't see Chelsea underperforming like they did this year. Next year 4th is probably the best we can attain, and we're underdogs to achieve it. Why?

Wenger. I'm a Redknapp loyalist, and make no bones about it. I think he has done a very good job at Spurs and a very good job should be rewarded with time. But I, and I would guess practically every other Redknapp loyalist, am under no illusion that Redknapp is in the same quality as the Arsene Wenger's of this world. This said if Wenger is that much better than Redknapp why did we only finish 1 point behind Arsenal? "Because we have the better team!" I will hear some Spurs fans cry. That may or may not be true, but who build that "inferior" Arsenal team if that is the case?

It's pretty obvious that Arsenal are underachieving at the moment (and I don't believe it is soley down to Wenger either) but let's not take credit away from our Manager and team. They've done a bloody good job in being this close to Arsenal, a team that should be comfortably clear of us, regardless. AND we've just finished above Chelsea. If it wasn't for the emergence of City, we'd be looking at 4-4-3 and not 4-5-4.

Is there better than Redknapp out there? Yes there is. Are there many? No there aren't. Could a better Manager achieve more than Redknapp has? In Cup competitions maybe, but in the League? Only marginally in terms of position, if at all.

I'll preach it again. When Redknapp goes I just hope that we're all behind the new manager and give him time. LOTS of time. And I hope we don't judge him against the Redknapp era because although many don't see it now I genuinely believe that in a few years time we'll look back at this era as a mini-golden era and if Levy is going to fire Redknapp for failing to finish 3rd last year then I hope he doesn't fire the next Manager for failing to achieve the same next season.

NOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooo.....dont do it MK , please dont do it

i would like to highlight that i am not a redknapp loyalist...i dont think that its an either loyalist or rebel kind of thing. please do not associate me with divisive types of mantra

lets not ruin something beautiful

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

NOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooo.....dont do it MK , please dont do it

i would like to highlight that i am not a redknapp loyalist...i dont think that its an either loyalist or rebel kind of thing. please do not associate me with divisive types of mantra

lets not ruin something beautiful

Too late 8-[

People have taken the loyalist/rebel thing out of context anyway or tried to twist it for no other purpose than having a pop at me (sad little tacos) when I even said at the time that it was meant light heartedly. Now that people have taken it so seriously though, I'll run with it and hopefully it will continue to annoy the fudge out of them.

Redknapp loyalist = someone that wants him to stay
Redknapp rebel = someone that wants him go go
Redknapp neutral = someone that doesn't care or is undecided.

The phrase is historical, and can be applied to anything.

 

[africanspurs]

we should be striving for both and id choose taking a chance on a manger i feel could bring both success/consistency and style over a someone who is consistent yet 'negative'.

obviously there are times in which the more pragmatic appointment is required , but that time is not now IMO

of course we should be striving for both...and i definately agree with the second point. but if you are going to sack a good manager who you know what he brings to the table.......you would rather do that for someone that could just as easily fail, or even start the building process all over again, just as easily as they could succeed? as opposed to someone that would keep the ship steady (even if it is negative) and keep you at a level (points wise) that you would be happy with.

in essence, your grass is green ...but because it 'could be greenER' ..you would be willing to go for a gardener with a patchy field with some seriously dusty / brown bits...but some very nice and vivid green blotches ? over someone that also has a green field with less resources..

now that is a bricky analogy...but i'm sticking to it

 

[Wriggly]

Are you both having gay sex ?