Redknapp Out

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
totsfan said:
goal say's that harry will accept the England job next week when it's offered to him,and Spurs are lining up brenden Rodgers as his replacement
Click to expand...

There's reasons to take this with a fistful of salt:
1.) Levy would make sure the FA would pay even more to take him when the season is still being played
2.) Harry leaving us with CL qualification still to play for would see Spurs fans turn on him, and give the tabloids a stick to beat him with down the line
3.) Rodgers? No. He is - no disrespect to Swansea fans - a one season wonder (as was Owen Coyle last season), which is no reason to hire him
 
Spurf said:
Redknapp would be in the same mould as Joe Mercer and Ron Greenwood both of whom allowed players to express themselves without too much in the way of 'tactics'. At least England produced some enjoyable performances under them and we couldn't be much worse than we already are. On the other hand the two best tacticians IMO were Ramsey & Venables who weren't without success. Robson became more successful when he gave the players more room to express themselves.

So Redknapp would probably be as good as anybody and we might be a bit more entertained when watching the games.
Click to expand...

That was before the likes of Germany and Spain had set in place 10-15 year progammes to massively improve their national teams and the skill levels of their club players. Just saying, "go out there have fun and express yourselves," will not cut it. As far as international soccer is concerned, we are obviously inferior. Shrewd tactics are the only way we will overcome the top teams. IF we go toe to toe, the usual debacle will not be far off.
 
Spurf said:
Redknapp would be in the same mould as Joe Mercer and Ron Greenwood both of whom allowed players to express themselves without too much in the way of 'tactics'. At least England produced some enjoyable performances under them and we couldn't be much worse than we already are. On the other hand the two best tacticians IMO were Ramsey & Venables who weren't without success. Robson became more successful when he gave the players more room to express themselves.
Click to expand...

Didn't Greenwood habitually drop Glenn Hoddle in favour of the likes of Peter Reid?

Greenwood was a pretty poor man-manager - Bobby Moore noted that West Ham players were never congratulated for their performances when Greenwood was there, whilst as England coach his handling of Hoddle was pretty poor, as was his decision to nail Kevin Keegan to the bench at the '82 World Cup. Whilst at West Ham, he also had great tactical ideas - but didn't have the players to carry them out.

Hang on...
* Dropping players for no reason
* Keeping players that can make a difference on the bench
* Using systems or tactics the players might not be suited to

Sound familiar to anyone?
 
humanbeingincroydon said:
There's reasons to take this with a fistful of salt:
1.) Levy would make sure the FA would pay even more to take him when the season is still being played
2.) Harry leaving us with CL qualification still to play for would see Spurs fans turn on him, and give the tabloids a stick to beat him with down the line
3.) Rodgers? No. He is - no disrespect to Swansea fans - a one season wonder (as was Owen Coyle last season), which is no reason to hire him
Click to expand...


I would only concur with that partly. I would agree fhat Rodgers is a risky proposition, given his relative lack of experience. However, to call him a one season wonder is a little premature. That may, or may not, be the case. That is obviously the risk. I would go for Moyes, if we can get him.
I read this article as well, and if there's any truth in the bit about the players complaints, then the sooner Harry is out the door, the better.
 
humanbeingincroydon said:
Didn't Greenwood habitually drop Glenn Hoddle in favour of the likes of Peter Reid?

Greenwood was a pretty poor man-manager - Bobby Moore noted that West Ham players were never congratulated for their performances when Greenwood was there, whilst as England coach his handling of Hoddle was pretty poor, as was his decision to nail Kevin Keegan to the bench at the '82 World Cup. Whilst at West Ham, he also had great tactical ideas - but didn't have the players to carry them out.

Hang on...
* Dropping players for no reason
* Keeping players that can make a difference on the bench
* Using systems or tactics the players might not be suited to

Sound familiar to anyone?
Click to expand...

He actually built his team around Robson instead of Hoddle (as did Robson)and set in place a tradition of perspiration over inspiration for the next 30 years.
 
Chirpy rides again said:
He actually built his team around Robson instead of Hoddle (as did Robson)and set in place a tradition of perspiration over inspiration for the next 30 years.
Click to expand...
Indeed it was only when Robson got injured and Wilkins was banned, and he was forced to pick Hoddle and Reid that we started to play proper football
 
OriginalSufferingSpur said:
And to think they picked Greenwood over Clough. Clough had his failings too but by God it would have been entertaining......
Click to expand...

<laugh> Nice one! With God (alias Clough) it would have been entertaining.

They didn't take any notice of the fans and media in those days, otherwise Clough would have been a shoe in.
 
It's a sad age in which we are more likely to believe "social media" than established news agencies... not that a lot of "journalists" haven't brought it on themselves by their antics but even still, it's a sad situation when people believe completely uncorroborated stuff from people that could be making it up completely (yes journalists have been known to, but generally speaking they have somewhat more accountability than someone posting on Twitter).
 
vimhawk said:
It's a sad age in which we are more likely to believe "social media" than established news agencies... not that a lot of "journalists" haven't brought it on themselves by their antics but even still, it's a sad situation when people believe completely uncorroborated stuff from people that could be making it up completely (yes journalists have been known to, but generally speaking they have somewhat more accountability than someone posting on Twitter).
Click to expand...

I think that depends on who they work for vimhawk.
 
Chirpy rides again said:
That was before the likes of Germany and Spain had set in place 10-15 year progammes to massively improve their national teams and the skill levels of their club players. Just saying, "go out there have fun and express yourselves," will not cut it. As far as international soccer is concerned, we are obviously inferior. Shrewd tactics are the only way we will overcome the top teams. IF we go toe to toe, the usual debacle will not be far off.
Click to expand...

That may well be the case Chirpy but I don't see a Germany as relatively strong as they were then, and I don't see much return from Mr.Capello and his tactics. In fact recent England performances have been so poor because of them IMO. If an England team retuned to basics and used the strength of the PL game instead of trying to outdo the Spanish at their own game we might make more of an impact. So tactics yes, of course but in Englands case fairly basic. Run at them, play fast, don't give them time on the ball. The way Stoke, and Norwich manage to survive in the PL should be the England plan rather than the more sophisticated play of teams full of foreign players.

The other thing that has changed is the rules which now favour skill above power.
 
vimhawk said:
It's a sad age in which we are more likely to believe "social media" than established news agencies... not that a lot of "journalists" haven't brought it on themselves by their antics but even still, it's a sad situation when people believe completely uncorroborated stuff from people that could be making it up completely (yes journalists have been known to, but generally speaking they have somewhat more accountability than someone posting on Twitter).
Click to expand...

The thing is, news agencies are hardly as credible as their reputation implies - they have always reported uncorroborated stories and it has gone to print/the airwaves before anyone checks it, in doing so painting a skewed version of the events they;re supposed to be covering with impartiality. The best example, from personal experience, is the coverage of Fukushima last year - the BBC were tripping over themselves to scream "CHERNOBYL!!!" at every opportunity and reporting stuff that was highly inaccurate, or based on guesswork and conjecture, all the while hoping it would explode as that was the story they were really looking forward to. I spent three weeks ignoring the BBC and checking the Japanese agencies, who were actually there, as I happened to have a trip to Tokyo booked for three weeks after.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back