New England manager = Roy Hodgson

[Libero]

Well all I'm telling you is that I thought we could challenge for fourth under Harry when he was appointed .. I thought we could challenge for fourth at the time with any half decent manager , which Harry is ... I just resent this notion constantly forwarded that we were so rubbish when he took over. We wern't rubbish , we were a squad that had lost its spearhead , Berbatov & Keane and were led by a manager that didn't have the backing of his players due to his strict management style and lack of english . But we were not rubbish and Harry was not the messiah .

I think this is probably an example of exactly how the majority of fans feel who are now being accused of being Harry Haters. The squad we had in 08-09 was a decent squad and with a tweak or two was well capable of reaching 4th place. Redknapp has done quite well considering it was his first job at a club of this level and expectation but I wouldn't say he has exceeded expectation. There are reasons for that and not all those are his fault by a long stretch but from personal view he has gone as far as he will go with us and whilst I would support him for this next year if he stays, I personally feel that we would be best served by a change. I certainly wouldn't want him to get an extended contract.

In closing, I am of the opinion that Harry has done well and will be remembered as having done well which is only fair. However, it is not at the exclusion of being aware of his failures, with this period also being remembered without a doubt as a large regret.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Well all I'm telling you is that I thought we could challenge for fourth under Harry when he was appointed .. I thought we could challenge for fourth at the time with any half decent manager , which Harry is ... I just resent this notion constantly forwarded that we were so rubbish when he took over. We wern't rubbish , we were a squad that had lost its spearhead , Berbatov & Keane and were led by a manager that didn't have the backing of his players due to his strict management style and lack of english . But we were not rubbish and Harry was not the messiah .

To be fair, we were :lol: Two awful seasons, and that was hard to take after the previous two 5th places. Even that second 5th place was more Berbatov dragging us up single handedly than the team functioning superbly.

What Redknapp did to turn things around was simple and obvious to everyone but Comolli (I am not going to blame Ramos because we don't know if Ramos was asking for this and it wasn't delivered to him). He bought a defensive midfielder, which is an absolute crucial position in the team.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I find the opposite. Harry loyalists tend to be well aware of his shortcomings and will freely be critical of him. Harry rebels will give him credit for hardly anything. And the credit they do give him is normally followed by a but or is a back handed compliment.

Hardly a surprise :lol:

Im guessing in your view I am a rebel, yet Im very happy to give Redknapp credit. I can do so in isolation of my misgivings with him. I dont believe he can do any better with us, but that we can do better without him (dependant upon the right appointment) - while at the same time having enjoyed the last 4 seasons and every success Harry has brought.

I find in the Harry loyalists any shortcomings (if even mentioned) are swiftly ignored and excused, and only positive things can ever be said about him - else you are immediately and henceforth an irrational rebel. Im also increasingly annoyed at this concept that if you dont want Harry as manager you are somehow not as good a supporter.

I only ever want what I believe is best for the club. Regardless of whether or not that is agreeable, its certainly makes me no less a fan/supporter.

Its the nature of message boards. Ive long thought that most peoples views only really differ by small margins (in the main) but to argue them on a message board people seem to go 100% in opposite directions and polarise. As if extremety somehow reinforces their POV.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Well all I'm telling you is that I thought we could challenge for fourth under Harry when he was appointed .. I thought we could challenge for fourth at the time with any half decent manager , which Harry is ... I just resent this notion constantly forwarded that we were so rubbish when he took over. We wern't rubbish , we were a squad that had lost its spearhead , Berbatov & Keane and were led by a manager that didn't have the backing of his players due to his strict management style and lack of english . But we were not rubbish and Harry was not the messiah .

I don't think we were rubbish, I think we were mid-table and with investment should probably have been 6th. We are currently 4th. I cannot see how anyone can realistically say we 'should' be doing better. I too think we will need a new manager if we are ever going to do it, if we continue conservatively spending like we have been. Because Harry's skill set is making good players perform to a good level. We need someone that implements a system that makes good players perform to an excellent level well above what would normally be expected in my view. Maybe a Martinez, or an AVB, or a Rodgers would do that. I dunno, I could be completely wrong. But as we are now, I think we are doing as well as we can and should be doing.

Looking at the squad we had when Harry game, we had Hutton and Gunter at right back. A BAE that had never lived up to his potential and a Bale that had never lived up to his potential (and a poor Gilberto) at left back. Dawson, an always injured King and an always injured Woodgate, and Corluka in defence. On the right we had Lennon and Bentley. On the left we had...Modric and Dos Santos (for arguments sake). In the middle we had Huddlestone, who was never a top 4 player at that point. And the much maligned Jenas and Zokora. Upfront we had 2 strikers that couldn't play together and a Man United youth teamer. How could anyone in their heart of hearts say that that squad, unbalaced and lacking in real quality as anything, should be challenging for the top 4 with a couple of additions?

I really don't think it was an amazing achievement to save us from relegation. He would have had to be a diabolical manager to fail in that task. But to make us bang up there as challengers every season. That takes some doing.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Hardly a surprise :lol:

Im guessing in your view I am a rebel, yet Im very happy to give Redknapp credit. I can do so in isolation of my misgivings with him. I dont believe he can do any better with us, but that we can do better without him (dependant upon the right appointment) - while at the same time having enjoyed the last 4 seasons and every success Harry has brought.

I find in the Harry loyalists any shortcomings (if even mentioned) are swiftly ignored and excused, and only positive things can ever be said about him - else you are immediately and henceforth an irrational rebel. Im also increasingly annoyed at this concept that if you dont want Harry as manager you are somehow not as good a supporter.

I only ever want what I believe is best for the club. Regardless of whether or not that is agreeable, its certainly makes me no less a fan/supporter.

Its the nature of message boards. Ive long thought that most peoples views only really differ by small margins (in the main) but to argue them on a message board people seem to go 100% in opposite directions and polarise. As if extremety somehow reinforces their POV.

I think under Harry we could finish 3rd or 4th next season. Realistically we have to say 4th. I think if Mourinho took charge in the Summer, we would finish 3rd or 4th.

City, Chelsea (under the right Manager) are totally uncatchable. We are ahead of Chelsea this season because they stupidly sacked their Manager last season and replaced him with someone not up to the job in the short term. Realistically regardless of who is in charge of us we are unlikely to finish ahead of Utd either.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

This was your argument: "Now, with the money Chelsea, Liverpool and especially Emirates Marketing Project have spent, they should be well ahead of us. United will always be up there. Arsenal now have the big stadium and can pay much bigger wages."

You really still think Chelsea are better now than under Mourinho? You really think Liverpool are better now than when they had Alonso, Mascherano and Torres? You don't think Arsenal are worse now then they were when we had Jol?

Of course Chelsea aren't better now, but they should still be well ahead of us. The fact that we are even in the conversation to take advantage of their poor start is down to Harry's good management. We aren't best of the rest under him, we are WITH the other top teams. Liverpool are clearly worse, and lets say for example that they don't need to be in this conversation, because their's is an example of bad management and it's nothing to be proud of to be ahead of them. But Arsenal are much stronger now than they were when we first got 5th and almost 4th.

Emirates Marketing Project, Man United and Arsenal should have the CL places sewn up considering their resources. They are above us for a reason and to call it bad management because we aren't ahead of them is just absurd. Chelsea should be ahead of us, but we are in the conversation to take advantage of their bad league form. The fact that we were third (and may well still be if the England stuff never started) is due to good management. We are in a great position, in amongst the other big clubs because we have players performing to their potential. Walker, Kaboul, Assou-Ekotto, Bale, Modric and Lennon didn't have to turn into consistent, top 4 quality players, and they had never demonstrated they were that good before Harry got here. In addition to that, Harry has to be given credit for the signings of the older players. Friedel didn't have to have another couple of years in him going on 40. We could have risked it with a younger keeper who may have cost us more points this season. Gallas, Parker, Van Der Vaart and Adebayor, all talented quality players that Harry has for the most part got the best out of while they have been here. They all could have easily not settled, not been as good anymore, or simply get found out to not be that good in the first place. The fact is Harry hasn't really made a bad signing to improve the first team. Everyone he has brought in to improve us has done so. And that's another example of good management by him. People talk about our good squad...well it was he who brought them in rather than other players.

 

[africanspurs]

We were moving in the right direction.

were we? it looked like we were stagnant and going back wards

also as good as the footabll was at times wih Jol there were many ugly games and games where it looked like we had no clue what to do next

i agree that as a club in general we were reaching the kind of status recognition that showed that we were probably CL ready. but still....harry actually did do this. there is no speculation...i happened with hary

thing is though, would have given Jol time? especialy after how poor the team was going?)

 

[NickTB]

Confirmed. 4 years http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17904713

 

[Superhudd]

I'm in the mood to report all the posters talking about whether Harry should be Tottenham coach.

FOOK OFF TO THE HARRY THREAD!!! ITS FOOKING BORING

 

[Superhudd]

Clear violation of code of conduct.

THREAD HIJACKING

10 points ÔÇô minor violation - niggling, taking threads off topic, carrying on disputes across threads, taking the man not the ball, frivolous reporting of posts, arguing with administrator actions (expires after two months)

This thread should be about Hodgson and his 4 year fricken deal

 

[braineclipse]

Confirmed. 4 years http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17904713

Scratching my head. The FA have an outstanding ability to repeatedly confuse me.

Why 4 years? It's not like Hodgson is going to walk out after 2 if they want to extend his contract, it's the England job. By giving him 4 they set themselves up to have to pay a big settlement in two years if they want to get rid, or even mid World Cup qualifier if it doesn't work out.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Confirmed. 4 years http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17904713

Good luck to him, he must be mad to want to be England manager! :lol:

 

[braineclipse]

Good luck to him, he must be mad to want to be England manager! :lol:

Why not? A chance to take England to the Euros and most likely World cup, or struggle along in mid table with a West Brom side that will most likely never even get close to Europe in that time. A chance to work with some actual stars on a bigger stage, most likely for more money with shorter hours while knowing full well that if it doesn't work out he will against find at the very least a West Brom like job within 6 months of leaving the England job.

 

[Ganter]

thank GHod this is over

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Why not? A chance to take England to the Euros and most likely World cup, or struggle along in mid table with a West Brom side that will most likely never even get close to Europe in that time. A chance to work with some actual stars on a bigger stage, most likely for more money with shorter hours while knowing full well that if it doesn't work out he will against find at the very least a West Brom like job within 6 months of leaving the England job.

England aren't good enough to win either competition and he'll get no mercy or patience from the press or fans. I just really hope he drops Gerrard.

 

[braineclipse]

England aren't good enough to win either competition and he'll get no mercy or patience from the press or fans. I just really hope he drops Gerrard.

Are West Brom good enough to win anything they ever compete in? Maybe they could fluke a League cup at some point, perhaps, maybe.

Press is the one negative I see... Wouldn't want to have to talk to them regularly.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

thank GHod this is over

Is it? In his pursuit of the England job I dont think its unimaginable that Redknapp has burned some bridges with the Spurs hierachy.

There are already (unsubstantiated, I know) reports to the effect that we were going to offer him a bumper contract, but are now re thinking that position.

With one year remaining on his current deal it there are only two options IMHO - Back him or Sack him. If a new contract isnt forthcoming then the later is the only option IMHO.

Otherwise we go into the summer and next season with much instability around the whole club.

 

[Raziel]

Why not? A chance to take England to the Euros and most likely World cup, or struggle along in mid table with a West Brom side that will most likely never even get close to Europe in that time. A chance to work with some actual stars on a bigger stage, most likely for more money with shorter hours while knowing full well that if it doesn't work out he will against find at the very least a West Brom like job within 6 months of leaving the England job.

Fair re the opportunities, but the facts seem to be

- Hodgson didn't fair too well under the Pool circus spotlight, at the best of times, England is far worse
- The media buddies that self elected Harry are going to pounce the minute England stumbles
- The Euros are likely to be a disaster, with no chance for Hodgson to work out his best team/tactics
- Early exit in Euros, then 1 bad result in the next WC qualifying = blood in the water ...

Really glad this brick looks to be settled, I care less about England, but Hodgson better enjoy the salary, because I suspect it will be a miserable few years.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Are West Brom good enough to win anything they ever compete in? Maybe they could fluke a League cup at some point, perhaps, maybe.

Press is the one negative I see... Wouldn't want to have to talk to them regularly.

Managing a smaller club he gets plaudits for what he does, with little pressure. Managing England is a thankless task. Managing this current England team is even more of a thankless task.

Wonder if Zamora just jumped up the pecking order for a start though!

 

[braineclipse]

Is it? In his pursuit of the England job I dont think its unimaginable that Redknapp has burned some bridges with the Spurs hierachy.

There are already (unsubstantiated, I know) reports to the effect that we were going to offer him a bumper contract, but are now re thinking that position.

With one year remaining on his current deal it there are only two options IMHO - Back him or Sack him. If a new contract isnt forthcoming then the later is the only option IMHO.

Otherwise we go into the summer and next season with much instability around the whole club.

I agree fully. We need some stability and planning that goes further than 6 months now, whoever the manager ends up being.

Fair re the opportunities, but the facts seem to be

- Hodgson didn't fair too well under the Pool circus spotlight, at the best of times, England is far worse
- The media buddies that self elected Harry are going to pounce the minute England stumbles
- The Euros are likely to be a disaster, with no chance for Hodgson to work out his best team/tactics
- Early exit in Euros, then 1 bad result in the next WC qualifying = blood in the water ...

Really glad this brick looks to be settled, I care less about England, but Hodgson better enjoy the salary, because I suspect it will be a miserable few years.

I agree, but it's still better than managing West Brom