Harry Redknapp has been named Barclays Manager of the Month for September by the sponsors of the Premier League. Tottenham Hotspur secured maximum points during the month with a comprehensive 4-0 win against Liverpool at the Lane as well as away wins at Wolves and Wigan Athletic, which have seen the North London club move up to sixth in the league table. It is the second time Harry has won the award since taking charge at Spurs after winning the prize in August 2009 and the seventh time in his managerial career since its inception in 1993. Redknapp is unique in winning the award with four different Premier League clubs. "It's always nice to win an award," said Harry. "We have had a good month and played some good football so I couldn't be more pleased. "We have put in some great performances, especially against Liverpool as well as picking up two away wins against Wigan and Wolves and credit must go to all the players for that." Premier League Manager of the Month Awards Meanwhile, Manchester City's Spanish winger David Silva picked-up the Premier League Player of the Month award, following-on from team-mate Edin Dzeko, who won in August. Premier League Player of the Month Awards
It's tradition that a manager winning MOTM sees their side go on a losing streak In this case it's just in time for the NLD. Bugger.
Well Sir Alex Ferguson has won the award more times than anyone else and its never seemed to stop him winning matches.
Yes but he wins it regardless of form Most people could do well managing Man Utd but that is conveniently ignored when giving out the awards
So Fergie wins MOTM even if United are going through a bad patch? Don't be silly. United have to be in scintillating form for Fergie to win it, as everybody expects us to do well anyway. As for your "most people could do well as United manager comment", why do so many people say we'll decline when he leaves? Fergie is the best manager out there without a doubt. He's forgotten more about management than 'Arry has ever known.
No they don't have to be in scintillating form for Fergie to win it. They just have to be better than the rest. As shown by last season. Wenger has already shown that his success at Arsenal was built on players inherited from the previous manager/bought from other clubs. There is little difference for Ferguson. Not many of your current first team are home grown. That's simply to show that any manager can buy success.
Fergie has only won MOTM 26 times. Utd have won the league 12 times under him. There are 9 months in a season. 12 x 9 = 108 months Fergie has been Utd manager in a title winning season. So if we just have to be better than the rest for Fergie to win MOTM, surely he'd have won it more 26 months out of 108? You've changed your tune anyway, before you were saying Fergie wins MOTM regardless of form. Now you're saying he wins whenever Utd outperform their rivals. Make your mind up. All managers buy players. But if any manager who spends large sums of money can win the league, how come Keegan didn't win it at Newcastle? Or O'Leary at Leeds? Why didn't Scolari win it at Chelsea? Why didn't Benitez win it? Why hasn't Redknapp won it? Why haven't City won it yet? They were taken over in 2008. You should visit http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/1992-to-2011.html Utd are only 4th biggest net spenders in PL history. As you can see, Chelsea, City and Liverpool are all ahead of us. But we've won 9 more titles than all 3 combined. Maybe that's down to our manager? We've only spent £76m more than Spurs FFS, an average of only £4m extra per season. Are you sure any manager with cash can win it? I think you should stick to slagging off Muslims Colonel, you're better at that
OK fine Man Utd have, with the exception of Abramovich Chelsea and Mansour Man City, outspent their rivals. Those two were playing catch up. Of course all managers buy players but that doesn't make the manager great. For example, a lot is made of Beckham/Giggs/the Nevilles/Scholes but how well would they/Alex Ferguson have done without Keane/Cantona/Sheringham/Schmeichel/Yorke/Cole/Van Nistelrooy Your transfer record owes a lot to Real Madrid doing to you what you have done to a lot of PL clubs - Cristiano Ronaldo vs Berbatov/Carrick/Ferdinand/Sheringham/Young/Cantona/Keane/Tevez/ When I said Fergie wins MOTM regardless of form I meant the achievement vs the squad he has to work with.
Liverpool have spent more too. City and Chelsea weren't really playing catch-up at the start of the Premier League. We all had the same TV money, and City finished above us not long before the start of the PL. A lot is made of Becks et al because it's so rare to have a successful team with nearly half its first XI composed of academy players. Look at the other title-winners in the PL era: Blackburn - 1 youth team product (Jason Wilcox) Arsenal 1998 - 2002 - 2 youth team products (Tony Adams and Ray Parlour) Arsenal 2004 - 1 (Ashley Cole) Chelsea 2005 - 2010 - 1 (John Terry) Obviously Fergie spent money too, but he didn't just throw money at it like Blackburn in 1994/5 and Chelsea when Abramovich took over. He mixed signings with academy players. As for the Ronaldo point, I presume you're referring to nett spend. Well, Utd weren't just 4th in the nett spend category, they were 4th in gross spend too. Have a look again. So the Ronaldo deal changes nothing. Fergie's relatively low number of MOTM awards - only 26 months in 234 active (ie not close season) months - shows that if anything, it is harder for Fergie to win the award. He has won the league, on average, nearly every other season since he took over (12 times in 25 years) - 48% of the time in fact. If he won it every time Utd were superior, surely he'd have won it more than 11% of the time? BTW, when I said "I think you should stick to slagging off Muslims Colonel, you're better at that" before, I wasn't being sarcastic. Keep up the good work