No, but both are greedy businessmen and CL involvement massively increases the value of their investment
"I agree that was a mistake, but why is everyone so sure that it was Levy who decided to sign Saha and Nelsen and not Harry?" Even if Arry made the decision, a counter-claim can be that those were the best signings that he could have made with the money alloted by Levy that transfer window.
"No, but both are greedy businessmen and CL involvement massively increases the value of their investment" But no CL involvement is not forcing them into a situation akin to the end days of Scholar. If the costs of no regular CL hit the bottom line much as betting wrong on Black Wednesday could have, then you would see more action and urgency from Uncle Joe.
Yes - but nobody knows what really happened. Also remember that Harry was in danger of going to prison just after that window - not an ideal time to be trusting him with a big spend.
Whatever the specifics of the Saha/Nelsen signings, they are hardly the reason that Spurs failed to deliver a CL slot in 2011-12.
Redknapp was the manager, really does it not sink in that Redknapp managed the team to a position no other premier league manager has and this was done via his policy, his way, no DOF, , not levy. You should stop trying to shift praise elsewhere as it doesn't work unless you have an obsession with trying to praise Levy. Redknapp got us champions league football with players such as Defoe, Crouch, Bassong etc they where his players. He also got the best out of Bale. He also got the best out of Huddlestone. Modric wanted to leave the club before the 2011 season. Redknapp made sure after we forced him to stay that he still performed. He also got the best out of Adebayor and one of the main reasons we had such a exciting season was because Redknapp begged Levy to sign Parker. Plus our best period in the premier league happened with no DOF, Redknapps way, not Levys idea of how to manage a club and also as much as I dislike AVB, his best season came when we had no DOF, see the pattern? no DOF and the club perform better on the pitch.
He was a top pro. Redknapp signed Saha and Neilsen because it was either that or no signings because Levy refused to back the manager, just like he was penny pinching pre season and just like he was penny pinching when we first got CL footy.
Not often that I agree with PS, but he's right here - no sane businessman would backed Harry at that point, with the very real possibility of a jail sentence hanging over his head. I do agree that he should been backed the previous year when we got CL football, but blaming Levy for the problems of Harry's final year is bollocks - that was all of Harry's own making, up to and including the penultimate game of the season when he bottled it with his substitutions against a poor Aston Villa side and settled for a draw instead of going for the win that would have gotten us 3rd place. Harry's problem is that he can't play a f**king straight bat to anything, and that doesn't inspire confidence in the people who would be entrusting the club's money and future to him. Without a DOF Levy had to have 100% faith in Harry not to spunk the club's money up the wall, and I don't think he ever did.
Sure, valid point you need a Dof to ensure the money's club isn't spunked up the wall as shown by the great deals made on Bentley, Hutton, Bent, Pav, Lamela, Soldado, Chadli and co. The players Redknapp signed actually took the club somewhere so in reality power has no valid point in suggesting he couldn't be trusted as Redknapp had substance behind his methods If you're happy for us to be a talent spotter for big clubs, buy players cheap and sell them to make cash then sure believe blindly in Levys policy but if you want us to actually get somewhere you have to invest at the right time and trust a manager who has delivered results on the pitch. But I'm not blaming our failure to get 3rd on Levy. That isn't what I said at any point.
"blaming Levy for the problems of Harry's final year is bollocks - that was all of Harry's own making, up to and including the penultimate game of the season when he bottled it with his substitutions against a poor Aston Villa side and settled for a draw instead of going for the win that would have gotten us 3rd place." That result is always a bit of a fallacy. Spurs could have lost, and gone away with no points. The reality is that the damage was done well before those final 4 PL games.
We never bottled it against villa, Rose was sent off and even with ten men we looked the better team but luck wasn't on our side that day.
I never said it ensured anything, I just said from Levy's point of view it makes more sense than entrusting it solely to someone who opens a bank account in their dog's name. What PS actually said was "Harry was in danger of going to prison just after that window - not an ideal time to be trusting him with a big spend". Again, I didn't say anything like that. I said he should have been backed the previous year. Even if he'd wasted the CL money, well he was the one that earned it. But you are blaming him for penny pinching in that January transfer window right? The same January that Harry was in court that is. Oh for sure most of the damage was done before that, but it was a final chance to salvage something. We'd have still finished 4th if we lost. He brought on Parker for VDV in the final 5 minutes, with Defoe sitting on the bench and 3rd place up for grabs. He bottled it.
Redknapp was reined in by Levy and a number of the more successful players under him either weren't his signings (van der Vaart) or ended up being frozen out (Bassong). We've all seen what happens when he's allowed to do what he wants with a club's transfer policy and it's not pretty. In other news, QPR announced losses of £65m yesterday... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26468560 Levy didn't invest massively on the squad because Redknapp showed what happens when he has a lot of players at his disposal. He sticks with the same small group, ignores everyone else, burns out his main players and then can't rely on the ones that he's pissed off, so his sides end the season badly if they've played a lot of games. What would be the point in bringing in more faces if they're just going to go the way of Dos Santos, Pienaar, Boateng, Kranjcar and anyone else that he didn't fancy? Redknapp did a very good job, but he had some obvious limitations that he never addressed and he pissed off the chairman by acting like a twat. Eyeing up the England job was fairly understandable, even though he'd been stuck by during a messy court case, but his contract wrangling when Levy's mum was dying was appalling.
I'm not sure why you want the exact same discussion as you have typed exactly the same response as before and we discussed all these points. But as for ''Levy didn't invest massively on the squad because Redknapp showed what happens when he has a lot of players at his disposal'' Yes, finish top four.
And a bunch of players that he hasn't used and then have to be got rid of, whilst our top players still get poached. What would be the point in investing in players that the manager had no intention of using? You still haven't addressed the fact that Redknapp got sacked because he acted like a prick, either. He got taken to court because of his dubious finances. He eyed up the England job and didn't want to discuss a contract. He tried to force the issue when Levy had more important things to deal with.
If you think Redknapp got the best out of Bale there is really no hope that we will ever agree. Harry has been a manager for many years during which he has one exactly one trophy while bankrupting the club. Yet because he chanced to be our manager when we had our best ever squad you think he is some sort of genius. It is a very common mistake to see patterns in very small data samples.
"Oh for sure most of the damage was done before that, but it was a final chance to salvage something. We'd have still finished 4th if we lost." A loss would have meant going into the last game of the season level on the same pts as the Toon (but with much better GD) , rather than the one point gap we had on them. Shows you the scale of the collapse that the Toon were also able to bridge a 10 pt gap in under 2 months.
It's very easy to focus on Redknapps 'dodgy' tag but he won the court case so surely any issues re that should be left in the past as he isn't as dodgy as people try and suggest. I think you know that you're being a tad unfair by bringing up aspects about his past or financial situation at QPR or the apparent asking for a contract while Levy had a personal issues as they are cheap shots attempting to discredit his character or blame him for a clubs financial plight. Redknapp isn't responsible for QPRs finances, nor does he sign cheques. Which you know. Redknapp wanted Parker in his final season and used him, as did he want and use Adebayor so it doesn't tell the full picture by suggesting he wouldn't have used players if signed. And yes the England situation was unfortunate for us and I was disappointed by Redknapp at the time. Just if we look at the job Redknapp done then he deserved a chance to have another year.
Where have I said he's a genius? I remember you saying at one point you thought Redknapp was a special manager. The fact you and others are now resorting to his past and bringing up the situation at pompey shows you have another agenda as if you understood what happened at Portsmouth and the roles of people above Redknapp then you would realise he wasn't to blame for them going bankrupt. And yes Redknapp got the best out of Bale at that time, he helped him progress as a player and allowed him to perform. Do you forget all the great performances Bale put in before Avb arrived? Bale had changed as a player each season and no one even thought about playing Bale through the centre until Redknapp played him there at various stages in his final season.
