He's right though. Arry has killed spurs season, yet there have been no calls for him to be fired, Arsene nearly cost us the CL, and spent the entire 1st half of the season being hounded by press. Look at Boas, he was doomed from the get go, a young (foreign) upstart with fresh ideas, the media killed him (figuratively speaking).
Harry has not killed spurs! Their problem is that they can't defend and teams have found that out at the same time Spurs have struggled to score. The only poor thing Spurs did was not invest in decent defenders. The CB's are all cripples and BAE is ****e.
I think you'll find he has. Do you want Harry as england manager? Only a fool would say yes (or a wales fan )
So you don't want harry as england manager, yet you don't think he's damaging spurs? Bit of a quandry there mate.
I think England should get Neil Lennon (pbuh), be funny as **** and at last bring some sense to the current crop of ****s failing that, Neil Warnock
He's not though, Spurs' didn't spend money when they needed too. Merson said it a month ago on Soccer Saturday and I totally agree with him. They rested upon their laurels.
We didn't either, yet we overturned a large deficit to them. It's poor management, and poor tactics, who plays 2 midfielders against Chelsea's 3, Arsenal's 3 etc.
Imagination: Arsenal imploding like Spurs did after NLD -> Wenger's fault Reality: Spurs imploding after NLD -< Arry for next England manager. The reason why Spurs are getting good press might be because Arry works closely with the Sun (writes column for them) and he might give them good information in return of good press). Spurs players get hyped more easily. They make up fake stories of Bale wanted by Barca and make up over exaggarated values like £50m etc. £50m for a one-trick pony The Media would also be all over us if we had embarrassed English football in the group stages of the Champions League like Man Utd did now twice in 7 season. Suddenly the Europa League became a significant club competition. Even had the feeling that it was bigger than Champions League. I'm sure we would have been slated badly if we had gone out in the average group they had. We actually went through in one of the hardest groups a Pot 1 team got and hardly got any recognition. The only positive headlines I can think of about us, was after the 3-0 win over Milan. But that was almost inevitable. In 2007, the media already started to count/pointing out the number of trophyless seasons (which was 2 at that time) at every opportunity. Liverpool went without silverware from 2006 until they won the Mickey Mouse Cup earlier this year on penalties against a Championship team after spending more than £100m and the media didn't criticize them at all. Or not as bad as Arsenal was. There are probably many more examples out there, but one thing is for sure: No Man Utd or Spurs (since Harry took over) fan can complain about being treated harshly by the media. Or District bought the example of everyone talking about the Mata 'goal' (which made it 2-0) after Chelsea hammered them 5-1 in a cup-semifinal. It was hardly mentioned that Chelsea was the much better team. Let me remind you that Spurs went up 2-0 at the Emirates after a pentaly resulting from a blatant dive by the British Lionel Messi and I'm sure the press was already getting their articles ready. With headlines such as 'Tottenham triumphant at Arsenal', 'Tottenham No.1 in NL' etc. As Jayram (I think) said like before, it is just like referee decisions. They never even themselves out, and Man Utd in particular gets more controversial decisions in their favour than any other team in the league. This goes for media coverage. Certain teams get away with anything, others are always doing something wrong.
Harsh red though, Walcott knew what he was doing. Pen and a yellow because in no way did Bassong mean to tangle with Walcott.
You get the decisions though, we don't. If Walcott had done what young did against Villa, he would have been booked. The wolves incident was a clear penalty, Bassong fouled Walcott.
Rules are the rules. I do not agree with the pen AND red card anyway. Think a pen is enough. Should change that rule.
You're so ****ing biased it's unreal, what makes you think Walcott would've been booked, he's as bad as Young, there's no ****ing bias anywhere, referee's get decisions wrong, not intentionally. Neither the Young or Walcott one's were pens
Off course it was a pen. If Bassong is going to be a clumsy **** then it's his fault. Once Walcott was through he should have left it. But he decided to bundled him over.
