1. Our key players have done no more, give or take a game, than other teams around us.
Let's start with the raw data - the three outfield players of the top six with the most starts.
Manchester United: Evra (44), Rooney (39), Carrick/Ferdinand (35)
Manchester City: Silva (43), Yaya Toure (38), Lescott (37)
Arsenal: Van Persie (34), Walcott (32), Song (31)
Newcastle: Simpson (34), Jonas (33), Coloccini (31)
Spurs: Walker (42), Benny (40), Bale (38)
Chelsea: Cole (30), Mata (28), Terry (27)
Gareth Bale, our third most regular starter, has started more games than 11 of the 15 rival players on that list. Then there's the fact no Arsenal, Newcastle or Chelsea player has come close to starting 40 games this season, and these are the teams currently on form.
2. Our 'plan B' players who I'd happily rotate with, have generally been injured when needed. Daws, Hudd, Sandro, and Niko to an extent.
You may want to read this:
http://www.myfootballfacts.com/Tottenham_Hotspur_Minutes_2011-12.html
This underlines how badly Harry has rotated the squad. When available, the following occurred:
Bassong: Featured in 13 games, didn't get off the bench for 18, dropped from the squad for 2
Kranjcar: Played 18, benched 13, dropped 3
Dawson: Played 13, benched 4, dropped 0
Rose: Played 17, benched 14, dropped 6
Dos Santos: Played 12, benched 9, dropped 24
Corluka: Played 8, benched 5, dropped 13
Townsend: Played 7, benched 7, dropped 13
Pavlyuchenko: Played 14, benched 11, dropped 2
Pienaar: Played 7, benched 9, dropped 3
Three things stick out:
1.) Just looking at the total number of minutes played underlines the alarming discrepancy between the amount of football played by Walker, Benny, Parker et al and their replacements
2.) For the games where Lennon and Kranjcar were both injured, the obvious like-for-like replacements in Townsend or Dos Santos weren't played
3.) Some of the "appearances" for the reserves total less than ten minutes at random intervals, which is hardly likely to increase match fitness or sharpness
3. Squad players after the above list are 'plan C' or emergency, and not good enough.
Btw, I take no pleasure in being right and ramming this back down yer 'gregory'!
and just for the hell of it I did look at Chelsea...old man Ashley Cole, 45 ****in games and still going strong!
....aaah! poor Benny and Kyle!
30 games. I don't know where you got 45 from, as it's right there for you (and the rest of the forum) to read that he's played 33.333% less games than you say he has.
As I said, there's a difference between not being good enough to play a full season, not being good enough to play 90 minutes, and not being good enough to play for the team in the first place.
For the first, any youngster breaking into the team (Livermore or Townsend) or players whose years are catching up with them (King or Gallas) can come in and do a good job for a run of games.
For the second, a player who might not be good for 90 minutes but can be an effective impact sub (Pavlyuchenko) can win a game.
For the third, there's the collective cry of despair when people hear Alnwick is in goal, or Obika is playing as the lone striker.
Instead we have...
Youngster being loaned out to Championship clubs for the business end of the season, as the aging players have to play every game
Pavlyuchenko gets sold off
Well, could be worse...
Nothing more from me now on this subject...JD!...no not him...job done!
Probably for the best, as you're doing a pretty bad job of it.
Harry Redknapp dismisses claims that he'd burned out players two seasons in a row, after two seasons where Spurs' league form petered out after March due to the players...well, if they hadn't played too many games, why did their form tail off both times? The FA weren't tapping up 'Arry this time last year leading to unrest in the squad, were they?
