- Feb 23, 2007
- 13
- 4
Take a look at these stats:
30/08/2008: P2 W0 D0 L0 F2 A4 Pts0
28/08/2011: P2 W0 D0 L2 F0 A7 Pts0
And this:
28/09/2008: P6 W0 D2 L4 F4 A9 Pts2
Think we'll be in much better shape after Wolves, Liverpool, Wigan and Arsenal?
Here's something else. In the Portsmouth line-up when we lost 2-0 at Fratton Park on 28/09/2008 were: Kaboul, Diarra, Crouch and Defoe. There was also Campbell, so read Gallas in our currents quad for experienced ex-Arsenal defender who still knows the ropes. In the Spurs side that day: Corluka, Dawson, BAE and Lennon (second half). Modric was an unused substitute. Our centre midfield was Jenas and Zokora (versus Livermore and Hudd v Man C on Sunday, after ineffectual, disinterested Modric was replaced). Can you tell me how we have progressed? I mean "progressed" as in our rivals' definition of the word? Can you not see that Harry is a mid-table manager, with zero tactical nous, an appalling record for game-changing substitutions (usually proof of a sharp, tactical mind), and - the sure sign of limitation - a tendency to revert to type, no matter the environment?
This Spurs side is Juande Redknapp, nothing more. We are Tottenham Portspur, almost in personnel, certainly in tactics and set-up, most definitely in coaching (or lack of it).
Spurs are not a club like Portsmouth. In so many obvious ways. But we share the same manager through an unfortunate turn of history. And Harry is slowly turning us into a better version of Pompey, class of 2008/09.
And before anyone accuses me of being one of the so-called Spurs Whinging Fans; I am not. I did not celebrate Redknapp when he was appointed. I do not celebrate him now. He is a 4-4-2, up and at 'em Englishman, with the odd minor variation (and only as forced by his players' characteristics, not his vision). He bangs on about where we were when he arrived - the relentless motor-mouth self-publicist - and exudes arrogance and superciliousness. But we were a Top 5 club when he arrived, almost Top 4, with the likes of Mendes, Ziegler, Edman et al. We're no further forward now, IF you measure us against Manchester City and Liverpool, NOT Portsmouth.
Honestly, if Tony Pulis came to Spurs, with the same personnel, we'd see an improvement. That's an interesting benchmark - who wants Pulis at the Lane? Nobody in their right mind of course. But actually, if you step out of what we've become, and imagine looking down on our Club from altitude, that would be no madder a decision in strict context than appointing a man like Harry Redknapp was.
We will improve this season, maybe come 5th with Adebayor and one or two more reinforcements. But. WHAT A LOST OPPORTUNITY.
Harry Redknapp is a disaster for Tottenham Hotspur. We achieve ("achieve") in spite of him. He's a midget on the shoulders of giants. And if you can't see that, you're sucked in so far you've lost perspective.
So, I will keep the faith in the Club, I will keep following through thick and thin, and there will be some great days ahead, even in this season. But I am not overreacting. I am providing a strategic view on the reign of Harry Redknapp, and an historical context too. He never was and never will be Spurs.
PS: We should have told Chelsea that Modric was for sale for £40m by the end of July, no later, not a penny less. Got him out. He doesn't want to play for us. In business, you push against open doors, not shut ones. Modric wants to go, treble his wage, play Champions League and, for all I know, actually get some coaching fit for his ability. Have you ever heard of "The First Rule of Holes"? It's a fundamental business principle. The First Rule of Holes is this: If you're in one, stop digging. In other words, cut you losses, go dig somewhere else. That's what we should have done. Instead, we've unsettled the squad, provided endless soundbite opportunities for Harry 'Max Clifford' Redknapp, created a soap opera, but WORST OF ALL, left no time for a proper Plan B. And in running a business, that's a truly basic error.
PPS: Actually, The First Rule of Holes applies to Redknapp being manager, too......
30/08/2008: P2 W0 D0 L0 F2 A4 Pts0
28/08/2011: P2 W0 D0 L2 F0 A7 Pts0
And this:
28/09/2008: P6 W0 D2 L4 F4 A9 Pts2
Think we'll be in much better shape after Wolves, Liverpool, Wigan and Arsenal?
Here's something else. In the Portsmouth line-up when we lost 2-0 at Fratton Park on 28/09/2008 were: Kaboul, Diarra, Crouch and Defoe. There was also Campbell, so read Gallas in our currents quad for experienced ex-Arsenal defender who still knows the ropes. In the Spurs side that day: Corluka, Dawson, BAE and Lennon (second half). Modric was an unused substitute. Our centre midfield was Jenas and Zokora (versus Livermore and Hudd v Man C on Sunday, after ineffectual, disinterested Modric was replaced). Can you tell me how we have progressed? I mean "progressed" as in our rivals' definition of the word? Can you not see that Harry is a mid-table manager, with zero tactical nous, an appalling record for game-changing substitutions (usually proof of a sharp, tactical mind), and - the sure sign of limitation - a tendency to revert to type, no matter the environment?
This Spurs side is Juande Redknapp, nothing more. We are Tottenham Portspur, almost in personnel, certainly in tactics and set-up, most definitely in coaching (or lack of it).
Spurs are not a club like Portsmouth. In so many obvious ways. But we share the same manager through an unfortunate turn of history. And Harry is slowly turning us into a better version of Pompey, class of 2008/09.
And before anyone accuses me of being one of the so-called Spurs Whinging Fans; I am not. I did not celebrate Redknapp when he was appointed. I do not celebrate him now. He is a 4-4-2, up and at 'em Englishman, with the odd minor variation (and only as forced by his players' characteristics, not his vision). He bangs on about where we were when he arrived - the relentless motor-mouth self-publicist - and exudes arrogance and superciliousness. But we were a Top 5 club when he arrived, almost Top 4, with the likes of Mendes, Ziegler, Edman et al. We're no further forward now, IF you measure us against Manchester City and Liverpool, NOT Portsmouth.
Honestly, if Tony Pulis came to Spurs, with the same personnel, we'd see an improvement. That's an interesting benchmark - who wants Pulis at the Lane? Nobody in their right mind of course. But actually, if you step out of what we've become, and imagine looking down on our Club from altitude, that would be no madder a decision in strict context than appointing a man like Harry Redknapp was.
We will improve this season, maybe come 5th with Adebayor and one or two more reinforcements. But. WHAT A LOST OPPORTUNITY.
Harry Redknapp is a disaster for Tottenham Hotspur. We achieve ("achieve") in spite of him. He's a midget on the shoulders of giants. And if you can't see that, you're sucked in so far you've lost perspective.
So, I will keep the faith in the Club, I will keep following through thick and thin, and there will be some great days ahead, even in this season. But I am not overreacting. I am providing a strategic view on the reign of Harry Redknapp, and an historical context too. He never was and never will be Spurs.
PS: We should have told Chelsea that Modric was for sale for £40m by the end of July, no later, not a penny less. Got him out. He doesn't want to play for us. In business, you push against open doors, not shut ones. Modric wants to go, treble his wage, play Champions League and, for all I know, actually get some coaching fit for his ability. Have you ever heard of "The First Rule of Holes"? It's a fundamental business principle. The First Rule of Holes is this: If you're in one, stop digging. In other words, cut you losses, go dig somewhere else. That's what we should have done. Instead, we've unsettled the squad, provided endless soundbite opportunities for Harry 'Max Clifford' Redknapp, created a soap opera, but WORST OF ALL, left no time for a proper Plan B. And in running a business, that's a truly basic error.
PPS: Actually, The First Rule of Holes applies to Redknapp being manager, too......