Tim Sherwood…gone \o/

[JerusalemMan]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

I wish the thread had been able to be shut after Steff's recent post. Which was an excellent summary of the situation and felt like a suitable cap to it all.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

Yes. It is possible what you described happened but neither you nor I know that.

Ok so let's try and drive this point to it's logical conclusion.

Richard Keys supposedly reads a story in The Sun (who was the source for the Paul Jiggins story do you think by the way?) and thinks 'I know, this will get me a lot of Twitter followers if I talk about this. For extra points, I'm going to pretend that Tim Sherwood (who isn't quoted in the story but is spoken of as also having a 'bust up' with AVB because of being frozen out) told me this directly. I'm going to push the Twitter character limit to the...limit by clumsily wording my tweet in such a way that makes it looks like Tim Sherwood has told me directly even though I've only glanced briefly at the back page of The Sun.'

OR

Someone like Richard Keys who's been working in football media for GHod knows how many years makes the amateur mistake of glancing at the back page of The Sun and simply assuming that Tim Sherwood was quoted because there was brief mention of him at the beginning of the article, and rather than checking this he goes to Twitter with all the certainty in the world and confidently tweets that Sherwood told the world that the squad was unhappy with AVB.

I think you're one of the only people around that actually believes Sherwood had nothing to do with that story. Or at the very least you're so determined to come across as balanced and measured that you can't see the most obvious conclusion right in front of your eyes. Sherwood was very likely Paul Jiggins' source for The Sun's article. He was not quoted in the article and it was in no way suggested in the article that Sherwood had given any quotes. There's simply no way anybody (much less an experienced media professional) could read that article AND tweet about it because he assumed quotes were there that were not there. If Keys' tweet didn't exist, there would be a load more people wondering who the source for that article was because it wasn't suggested at all that it was Sherwood. At that point there were stories floating around that Sherwood and AVB got on well together and while there were other stories suggesting there was friction, it was by no means guaranteed that Sherwood would brief against him. It could have been anyone. But Keys blatantly knew who was briefing against AVB and Duncan Castle's has suggested this much since as well.

Besides, it's well within Sherwood's character history to do stuff like this. Why are so you so determined to argue that he wouldn't?

 

[DTA]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

Ok so let's try and drive this point to it's logical conclusion.

Richard Keys supposedly reads a story in The Sun (who was the source for the Paul Jiggins story do you think by the way?) and thinks 'I know, this will get me a lot of Twitter followers if I talk about this. For extra points, I'm going to pretend that Tim Sherwood (who isn't quoted in the story but is spoken of as also having a 'bust up' with AVB because of being frozen out) told me this directly. I'm going to push the Twitter character limit to the...limit by clumsily wording my tweet in such a way that makes it looks like Tim Sherwood has told me directly even though I've only glanced briefly at the back page of The Sun.'

OR

Someone like Richard Keys who's been working in football media for GHod knows how many years makes the amateur mistake of glancing at the back page of The Sun and simply assuming that Tim Sherwood was quoted because there was brief mention of him at the beginning of the article, and rather than checking this he goes to Twitter with all the certainty in the world and confidently tweets that Sherwood told the world that the squad was unhappy with AVB.

I think you're one of the only people around that actually believes Sherwood had nothing to do with that story. Or at the very least you're so determined to come across as balanced and measured that you can't see the most obvious conclusion right in front of your eyes. Sherwood was very likely Paul Jiggins' source for The Sun's article. He was not quoted in the article and it was in no way suggested in the article that Sherwood had given any quotes. There's simply no way anybody (much less an experienced media professional) could read that article AND tweet about it because he assumed quotes were there that were not there. If Keys' tweet didn't exist, there would be a load more people wondering who the source for that article was because it wasn't suggested at all that it was Sherwood. At that point there were stories floating around that Sherwood and AVB got on well together and while there were other stories suggesting there was friction, it was by no means guaranteed that Sherwood would brief against him. It could have been anyone. But Keys blatantly knew who was briefing against AVB and Duncan Castle's has suggested this much since as well.

Besides, it's well within Sherwood's character history to do stuff like this. Why are so you so determined to argue that he wouldn't?

I think that you give keys to much credit there, he really doesn't seem like the brightest or the best of people... See his off air debacles both with and without gray if you need any proof.

 

[Superhudd]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

I think that you give keys to much credit there, he really doesn't seem like the brightest or the best of people... See his off air debacles both with and without gray if you need any proof.

I think that is agreeable with the majority, it is because of that he put Tim Sherwood in the food blender.. because the man is an idiot. Seriously he has no street smarts. Akin to those idiots who publish pictures and boast there crimes on facebook.

 

[Kingdawson]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

Ok so let's try and drive this point to it's logical conclusion.

Richard Keys supposedly reads a story in The Sun (who was the source for the Paul Jiggins story do you think by the way?) and thinks 'I know, this will get me a lot of Twitter followers if I talk about this. For extra points, I'm going to pretend that Tim Sherwood (who isn't quoted in the story but is spoken of as also having a 'bust up' with AVB because of being frozen out) told me this directly. I'm going to push the Twitter character limit to the...limit by clumsily wording my tweet in such a way that makes it looks like Tim Sherwood has told me directly even though I've only glanced briefly at the back page of The Sun.'

OR

Someone like Richard Keys who's been working in football media for GHod knows how many years makes the amateur mistake of glancing at the back page of The Sun and simply assuming that Tim Sherwood was quoted because there was brief mention of him at the beginning of the article, and rather than checking this he goes to Twitter with all the certainty in the world and confidently tweets that Sherwood told the world that the squad was unhappy with AVB.

I think you're one of the only people around that actually believes Sherwood had nothing to do with that story. Or at the very least you're so determined to come across as balanced and measured that you can't see the most obvious conclusion right in front of your eyes. Sherwood was very likely Paul Jiggins' source for The Sun's article. He was not quoted in the article and it was in no way suggested in the article that Sherwood had given any quotes. There's simply no way anybody (much less an experienced media professional) could read that article AND tweet about it because he assumed quotes were there that were not there. If Keys' tweet didn't exist, there would be a load more people wondering who the source for that article was because it wasn't suggested at all that it was Sherwood. At that point there were stories floating around that Sherwood and AVB got on well together and while there were other stories suggesting there was friction, it was by no means guaranteed that Sherwood would brief against him. It could have been anyone. But Keys blatantly knew who was briefing against AVB and Duncan Castle's has suggested this much since as well.

Besides, it's well within Sherwood's character history to do stuff like this. Why are so you so determined to argue that he wouldn't?

I'm with you on this one and i also feel it's in his character to do something like that (and he has previous).

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

I think that you give keys to much credit there, he really doesn't seem like the brightest or the best of people... See his off air debacles both with and without gray if you need any proof.

You're right, he's not. But did work with Timmeh for a while on a channel that quite a few of those there at the time have described as pretty much a bunch of lads ****ing about. The two of them still work in the same industry. I'd be very, very surprised if the two weren't still in touch from time to time.

For me, the far most likely scenario (considering two of his previous bosses have gone public about being undermined by Timmeh) is that Keys was told by Timmeh he was the source and didn't realise Timmeh wanted it off the record. Or equally likely, Keys was the middle man for the article and tweeted about it later.

 

[milo]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

Ok so let's try and drive this point to it's logical conclusion.

Richard Keys supposedly reads a story in The Sun (who was the source for the Paul Jiggins story do you think by the way?) and thinks 'I know, this will get me a lot of Twitter followers if I talk about this. For extra points, I'm going to pretend that Tim Sherwood (who isn't quoted in the story but is spoken of as also having a 'bust up' with AVB because of being frozen out) told me this directly. I'm going to push the Twitter character limit to the...limit by clumsily wording my tweet in such a way that makes it looks like Tim Sherwood has told me directly even though I've only glanced briefly at the back page of The Sun.'

OR

Someone like Richard Keys who's been working in football media for GHod knows how many years makes the amateur mistake of glancing at the back page of The Sun and simply assuming that Tim Sherwood was quoted because there was brief mention of him at the beginning of the article, and rather than checking this he goes to Twitter with all the certainty in the world and confidently tweets that Sherwood told the world that the squad was unhappy with AVB.

I think you're one of the only people around that actually believes Sherwood had nothing to do with that story. Or at the very least you're so determined to come across as balanced and measured that you can't see the most obvious conclusion right in front of your eyes. Sherwood was very likely Paul Jiggins' source for The Sun's article. He was not quoted in the article and it was in no way suggested in the article that Sherwood had given any quotes. There's simply no way anybody (much less an experienced media professional) could read that article AND tweet about it because he assumed quotes were there that were not there. If Keys' tweet didn't exist, there would be a load more people wondering who the source for that article was because it wasn't suggested at all that it was Sherwood. At that point there were stories floating around that Sherwood and AVB got on well together and while there were other stories suggesting there was friction, it was by no means guaranteed that Sherwood would brief against him. It could have been anyone. But Keys blatantly knew who was briefing against AVB and Duncan Castle's has suggested this much since as well.

Besides, it's well within Sherwood's character history to do stuff like this. Why are so you so determined to argue that he wouldn't?

I'd love you to point me in the direction of a post where I have said that Sherwood had nothing to do with the story.

 

[DTA]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

You're right, he's not. But did work with Timmeh for a while on a channel that quite a few of those there at the time have described as pretty much a bunch of lads ****ing about. The two of them still work in the same industry. I'd be very, very surprised if the two weren't still in touch from time to time.

For me, the far most likely scenario (considering two of his previous bosses have gone public about being undermined by Timmeh) is that Keys was told by Timmeh he was the source and didn't realise Timmeh wanted it off the record. Or equally likely, Keys was the middle man for the article and tweeted about it later.

Or keys is a f ucking idiot and put two and two together himself and came up with Sherwood.

Both are likely to be honest.

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

Or keys is a f ucking idiot and put two and two together himself and came up with Sherwood.

Both are likely to be honest.

It's more likely than not IMO, that Keys already knew Timmeh was the sauce. So there was no need to him to put two and two together.

In fact, Timmeh was probably going on to all his mates about this dingdonghead going about WHL using ridiculous, confusing words like "tactics" and "defending" and "concentration".

 

[milo]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

I'm not sure that we are going to get much further than when this was discussed on page 12

http://www.glory-glory.co.uk/showth...eated-with-the-respect-a-headmaster-is/page12

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

I'm not sure that we are going to get much further than when this was discussed on page 12

http://www.glory-glory.co.uk/showth...eated-with-the-respect-a-headmaster-is/page12

Only because you're determined not to accept something, because there isn't cast iron proof in the form of a quote from someone saying 'Tim Sherwood said this'.

Sherwood is a snake that has looked out for himself and not the club throughout his entire managerial run here. He's also admitted before to undermining Hoddle and Hodgson, and was a direct beneficiary of AVB leaving. The Jiggins story came from somewhere. Where do you think it came from?

 

[JerusalemMan]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

Only because you're determined not to accept something, because there isn't cast iron proof in the form of a quote from someone saying 'Tim Sherwood said this'.

Sherwood is a snake that has looked out for himself and not the club throughout his entire managerial run here. He's also admitted before to undermining Hoddle and Hodgson, and was a direct beneficiary of AVB leaving. The Jiggins story came from somewhere. Where do you think it came from?

Not accepting something without proof? How unreasonable!

Of course it's possible. But with the poisonous Jiggins who had form for lies about Spurs I wouldn't 100% say he needed a source to write his tripe.

 

[Kingdawson]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

Not accepting something without proof? How unreasonable!

Of course it's possible. But with the poisonous Jiggins who had form for lies about Spurs I wouldn't 100% say he needed a source to write his tripe.

This is also true.

BOL you can't get ****ed off if Milo chooses not to accept it as there is no concrete evidence. Much like you choose not to accept certain things even when the evidence points to it being true. As i said, i happen to agree with you on this occasion but there is no concrete evidence one way or another.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

This is also true.

BOL you can't get ****ed off if Milo chooses not to accept it as there is no concrete evidence. Much like you choose not to accept certain things even when the evidence points to it being true. As i said, i happen to agree with you on this occasion but there is no concrete evidence one way or another.

No there isn't but banging the 'we have no proof!' drum is just a bit ridiculous here to me. No there isn't, but there's plenty of things that get discussed here and everywhere else that on the balance of probabilities are extremely likely to be true. We don't always need someone reminding us we haven't seen the exact quotes yet. What does it achieve? Does anyone seriously want to argue Sherwood hasn't gone into business for himself? As well as this, Castles has already said Sherwood was briefing against AVB.

KD, I don't choose not to accept things in the face of evidence, if you're referring to AVB stuff, I simply refuse to blindly accept the anti AVB version when we haven't had anybody putting the pro-AVB version out there.

 

[Harry_Perkins]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

So Sherwood ends on:

Played 22, Points 42, Goals For 40, Goals Against 30, Goal Difference +10.

The points per game improved from 1.68 to 1.90. 63 points over a season versus 72 points over a season. Essentially we went from getting 7th place results to 5th place results. Goals For improved from 0.93 to 1.81. So the number of goals scored nearly doubled. Goals conceded went from 1.31 to 1.36. One goal difference. So the accusation that he left us more open in exchange for scoring more goals is largely without basis. We conceded about as many as before but Sherwood also had the marginally tougher fixtures - which also further enhances the improvements in other areas. There was no improvement in results against the top 4 but there can be argument for a small improvement in performance. We gave Arsenal a much tougher game than at the Emirates and we were competing against City and Chelsea until we had a man sent off. Liverpool though, was nearly as shambolic as the home game. After that, Sherwood was played 7 won 7 against everyone 5th-10th. The best result before this was against the team who end in 11th. Our goal difference went from -7 to +10. So there was some improvement across the board but nowhere near enough to make up the lost ground. There is no shame in this. As it ended up, with the top 4 so far out in front early and staying there, it would have taken near championship winning form to get to 80 points. That would have been 53 points in 22 games. No one is likely to have achieved that from the position we were in.

On the cups, with hindsight we can consider ourselves unfortunate to be drawn against the probable winners of both the FA Cup and Europa League so early on. The West Ham defeat meanwhile was horrible but came on only his 3rd day in charge after we'd been battered 0-5 on the Sunday.

All in all, he was a more than decent stop gap. Thanks for your efforts Tim and best of luck for whatever you'll be doing next!

 

[Kingdawson]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

He's done a decent job and nowhere near as bad as some like to make out. He needs to decide on a tactic now (well at his next club) rather then chop and change and quit behaving like a macaron when interacting with the media.

He deserves credit for putting attention on our youth prospects and making us aware that Benteleb and Kane are good enough (also the two other youngsters that played today but jury is still out).

 

[Cochise]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

I think the problem is that Spurs sacked AVB without anyone there to replace him. Sherwood threatened to leave the caretaker post unless given a contract and due to a lack of options we gave him it. Maybe the board always planned for a real manager in the Summer and weren't prepared for the upturn in our fortunes. If Sherwood had just been happy with the caretaker job then there is every chance that at the end of this season he would have been in a stronger position. Instead now he has burnt his bridges and looks set to be given the boot within the next few days. In a way I'm sorry for him, but in another way he has been the key to his own downfall.

 

[Armchair Expert]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

Has he been sacked yet?

 

[ALtottenham_hotspur]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

So Sherwood ends on:

Played 22, Points 42, Goals For 40, Goals Against 30, Goal Difference +10.

The points per game improved from 1.68 to 1.90. 63 points over a season versus 72 points over a season. Essentially we went from getting 7th place results to 5th place results. Goals For improved from 0.93 to 1.81. So the number of goals scored nearly doubled. Goals conceded went from 1.31 to 1.36. One goal difference. So the accusation that he left us more open in exchange for scoring more goals is largely without basis. We conceded about as many as before but Sherwood also had the marginally tougher fixtures - which also further enhances the improvements in other areas. There was no improvement in results against the top 4 but there can be argument for a small improvement in performance. We gave Arsenal a much tougher game than at the Emirates and we were competing against City and Chelsea until we had a man sent off. Liverpool though, was nearly as shambolic as the home game. After that, Sherwood was played 7 won 7 against everyone 5th-10th. The best result before this was against the team who end in 11th. Our goal difference went from -7 to +10. So there was some improvement across the board but nowhere near enough to make up the lost ground. There is no shame in this. As it ended up, with the top 4 so far out in front early and staying there, it would have taken near championship winning form to get to 80 points. That would have been 53 points in 22 games. No one is likely to have achieved that from the position we were in.

On the cups, with hindsight we can consider ourselves unfortunate to be drawn against the probable winners of both the FA Cup and Europa League so early on. The West Ham defeat meanwhile was horrible but came on only his 3rd day in charge after we'd been battered 0-5 on the Sunday.

All in all, he was a more than decent stop gap. Thanks for your efforts Tim and best of luck for whatever you'll be doing next!

Excellent post.

I dont hate Tim and I hate love him. Its been obvious from day one some Spurs fans where never going to give him a chance(rightly or wrongly). He did a decent job and made some brave decisions some which worked like introducing Bentalab and Kane other decisions have failed 442 against Arsenal away. I think the image of the club and the atmosphere would have been better if Levy had made it clear Tim was always only going to get 6 months in charge, if Tim didnt of accept that he should have gone plenty of other managers where willing to come in for 6 months.

Thanks Tim for your effort, good luck to ya

 

[Raziel]

Re: Tim Sherwood…not treated with the respect a headmaster is.

So Sherwood ends on:

Played 22, Points 42, Goals For 40, Goals Against 30, Goal Difference +10.

The points per game improved from 1.68 to 1.90. 63 points over a season versus 72 points over a season. Essentially we went from getting 7th place results to 5th place results. Goals For improved from 0.93 to 1.81. So the number of goals scored nearly doubled. Goals conceded went from 1.31 to 1.36. One goal difference. So the accusation that he left us more open in exchange for scoring more goals is largely without basis. We conceded about as many as before but Sherwood also had the marginally tougher fixtures - which also further enhances the improvements in other areas. There was no improvement in results against the top 4 but there can be argument for a small improvement in performance. We gave Arsenal a much tougher game than at the Emirates and we were competing against City and Chelsea until we had a man sent off. Liverpool though, was nearly as shambolic as the home game. After that, Sherwood was played 7 won 7 against everyone 5th-10th. The best result before this was against the team who end in 11th. Our goal difference went from -7 to +10. So there was some improvement across the board but nowhere near enough to make up the lost ground. There is no shame in this. As it ended up, with the top 4 so far out in front early and staying there, it would have taken near championship winning form to get to 80 points. That would have been 53 points in 22 games. No one is likely to have achieved that from the position we were in.

On the cups, with hindsight we can consider ourselves unfortunate to be drawn against the probable winners of both the FA Cup and Europa League so early on. The West Ham defeat meanwhile was horrible but came on only his 3rd day in charge after we'd been battered 0-5 on the Sunday.

All in all, he was a more than decent stop gap. Thanks for your efforts Tim and best of luck for whatever you'll be doing next!

I think Sherwood has done himself a disservice with his media antics, otherwise people might be a lot more appreciative of the final results.

That said, I caveat your post by saying that is the most positive view point, a more realistic viewpoint is we failed in the cups mostly against moderate opponents, and in the words of our chairman, even in the games we got maximum points from, our football was not good enough.

Good luck to TS, but here's to hoping the club makes a replacement announcement very soon.