Redknapp pissed a 10 point lead over 4th Place when he took his eyes off the spurs job he was paid to do while he tried to get the England job...he turned down a new contract offered to him as he wanted the england job...by time the final happened England had chosen Roy and Harry realised that no CL football meant that he was unlikely to be re offered a contract as the spurs board were pissed at him messing us around...his self preservation kicked in to be honest. As for relegation ... it was southampton he relegated and I'd have thought that would have been a worse feeling than missing out on CL football but what do I know. As for the administration issue...Redknapp did not cause pompeys problems...under no circumstances should the money men at any club allow a manager to dictate transfer fees and costs....pompeys problems were caused by their owners who learnt nothing from what happened at Leeds United. No one blamed David Oleary for Leeds ... they rightly blamed the Leeds Owners/chairman/board who sanctioned the outrageous spending spree. Redknapp has been held responsible for the financial problems of Bournemouth (which happened a decade after he left) West Ham (which happened 6 years after he left when their new Icelandic owners screwed up) Southampton (who were relegated a second time after he left and who made millions selling Bale and Walcott) and Pompey...he was blamed cos he is seen as a wheeler dealer. No one says the same about Martin Oneal...Wycombe went into receivership, Leicester went into receivership, Celtic had huge money problems, Villa have had money problems and sunderland are struggling! There are plenty of reasons to criticise Redknapp in my opinion but these reasons don't hold water in my eyes. As for the souless bit...not quite sure what that's got to do with Redknapp. I think that Chelsea spend money that they can afford to...Portsmouth didn't; Southampton didn't and have paid a big price...Redknapp did no financial damage at spurs cos they spent was they could afford to...the only difference is at spurs some one said "no" to him!
Who gives a flying **** what Harry Redknap thinks?? He's a low life bottom feeder from the shallow end of the gene pool, and not good enough to manage a PL club anymore, if he ever was. Maybe if he'd learned to speak English he would have done better.
BLUE, 42, JISM IS GOO, HUT! [video=youtube;OviZIskN5IE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OviZIskN5IE[/video]
I've been a Blue for over 50 years! When I was a young man I knew Harry when he was a player, socially! We'd occasionaly share a beer together and he'd always get me a seat ticket in the old upper stand when we played West Ham at home,otherwise I'd be on the terraces . We haven't kept in touch , so it would be difficult for me to join in the attack, but I can understand the sentiments of the poster and other blues!
I suspect Harry was told by the Chairman what the budget was, that it would be funded by the owners and acted accordingly. If Abramovich suddenly turned out to be a penniless fraud, would that mean that Mourinho should be criticised for his recent spending?
No i guess I agree with you. The chairman is to blame. Harry may be a thick, illiterate, gob sh!te, but the board should be blamed for allowing that level of spending.
I'm not sure Harry's a gob ****e....... the cricketer Javed Miandad was once accused by Dennis Lillee of being a 'cheating little bastard'. His reply: 'I'm not little'
