- May 5, 2005
- 21,626
- 45,274
No agenda there at all.....
Oh, and just for the sake of some accuracy:
Glenn Hoddle was manager for 2.5 seasons combined (2 full seasons, 1 near half season, and 6 games at the start of his last).
Martin Jol was manager for 3 seasons combined (2 full seasons, 1 season minus the first handful of games, 1 season of just the first handful of games)
Harry Redknapp was manager for 8 games short of 4 seasons (3 full seasons, 1 season minus the first 8 games).
Santini lased just a handful of games. He wanted to leave, nothing to do with the plan in place.
AVB lasted just under 1.5 seasons, his departure appears fairly mutual (if not political) and is the only one where the reasons aren't 100% obvious (though they are still relatively apparent).
Ramos lasted 1 full season combined, he had to go, we were bottom of the league and several points adrift after a quarter of the season.
To state that the club have no plan in place when making these appointments is tosh. Well written, eloquent tosh, but tosh never the less. Had Arnesen not been lured by Chelsea, he'd have no doubt overseen the Jol tenure at least (especially as Jol was his man). Comolli was in place for the entirety of Jols two successful seasons (and one terrible start to a season) and up until Ramos left, as Ramos (and the money spent for Ramos) were very much his responsibility. Redknapp wouldn't have ever worked with a DoF, got most of the players he wanted (Defoe, Parker, Crouch, Kranjcar, Friedel) and, while he'd been our best and most successful manager, left because the end of the road had fairly clearly been reached (his conduct from the second he was acquitted onwards being more than a bit questionable). In comes AVB, who a year on gets the DoF that AVB WANTED in Baldini, and he left because, and this is the only part of the article I particularly agree with, he and the club no longer had faith in eachother. The politics behind it can be speculated on, but from the moment he took the step to criticise our fans (he's a smart man, he knows that there's only one way that ends) it seemed fairly plain that he was not a man who wanted to be here.
And guess what... he's been replaced with a man who knows the club from top to bottom due to his exposure to all aspects in the past half decade, is (not quite as) young too, and has been given a contract which ends at the exact point that AVB's contract would have ended. No plan? I'd say that it's same plan, different man.
The article was an interesting read, but it was ultimately a load of agenda driven drivel cleverly disguised and intelligent objectivity. One should not be fooled.
For years I would've agreed with you, until recently.
I've defended Levy/the club over each of these individual incidents repeatedly over the years, and also in the case of selling Carrick, Berbatov, Modric and Bale etc. But I can't do it anymore.
There comes a point where you realise that you can't keep defending and excusing someone/something who repeatedly demonstrates the behaviour you're defending them against.
It's like trying to defend a drug addict - you keep trying to see the best in them, keep coming up with excuses for their behaviour, to defend each incident where they've let you down. Then at some point you realise they're an addict and you can't do it any longer.
Levy is an addict. He's addicted to change, to upheaval, to new and exciting 'long term' plans, to player trading. I'll never dislike Daniel as he's brought us a period of comparactive success, and he's faced some massive obstacles in his time in charge as well. But I can no longer defend his behaviour, I can no longer defend his changing of managers, of DoF's, of his constant and unending player trading.
I can no longer defend his addictions. Which is a real shame. But I've lost almost all feeling of connection with the club and it's because every single time I look at the team/staff, I see endless new faces, and the faces I recognised are gone.