Redknapp logic

[TheVoiceofReason]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/9382905.stm

Just watched the Redknapp post match. As much as I may be reading between the lines here, but I kind of feel like Harry was aiming a swipe at Pav amongst his Niko comments.

It infuriates me when Harry uses this kind of logic, when it is clear that players like Pavlyuchenko are being treated in different ways to the other players that Harry favours. Whilst it may be true that Pav is sulking, I think he has a RIGHT to sulk. He has gone through this shit since coming to the club and has NEVER been given a decent opportunity by Redknapp. He is always looking to drop him after a poor performance. Its quite pathetic.

He says at one point during that interview that we 'lost our shape/purpose' when Crouch went off, which I wholeheartedly disagree with. We got a fantastic goal at the end through the means of fantastic movement with the ball ON THE GROUND, for once. How can he say that we were better when Crouch was on the pitch, when all those minutes we struggled to score in open play!?

I am a Pav fan but I'm not deluded into thinking he is the best in the prem or anything, but he is the best we have got. When Redknapp shows this kind of attitude it makes me feel sick to my stomach. I know Redknapp is the reason for our success, but his stubbornness infuriates me at times.

 

[sihills]

I agree with redknapp im afriad, I also felt we lost our shape when pav came on! The goal was purely down to the brilliance of niko, nowt at all to do with good movement or pav or anyone else, it was just niko!

 

[danielneeds]

Why does Redknapp favour some players though? It is because they work hard for him. This is the thing that all managers look for first and foremost when selecting their teams, not just our Aitch.

Very occasionally you accommodate a lazy fecker like Le Tissier because their quality is so much higher than the rest you have, but can we really say that about the likes of Pav?

 

[TheVoiceofReason]

...But you don't understand! Peter Crouch is ruining everything! EVERYTHING. Don't you see?!? HE'S RUINING THIS SHIT FOR US!

 

[kaz Hirai]

i think he's probably referring to bentley rather than pav but who knows

 

[Sanj]

I agree with redknapp im afriad, I also felt we lost our shape when pav came on! The goal was purely down to the brilliance of niko, nowt at all to do with good movement or pav or anyone else, it was just niko!

But surely the loss of shape was due to Arry's blunder of taking off crouch rather than the innefectual Defoe?

 

[sihills]

I agree again! didnt say it wasnt redknapps thought, just that we lost our shape when he came on! but yes, it should have been defoe who went of if pav was coming on, but I didnt really feel the need to bring him on, I honestly thought crouch and defoe were doing ok today!

 

[BorisTM]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/9382905.stm

Just watched the Redknapp post match. As much as I may be reading between the lines here, but I kind of feel like Harry was aiming a swipe at Pav amongst his Niko comments.

It infuriates me when Harry uses this kind of logic, when it is clear that players like Pavlyuchenko are being treated in different ways to the other players that Harry favours. Whilst it may be true that Pav is sulking, I think he has a RIGHT to sulk. He has gone through this shit since coming to the club and has NEVER been given a decent opportunity by Redknapp. He is always looking to drop him after a poor performance. Its quite pathetic.

He says at one point during that interview that we 'lost our shape/purpose' when Crouch went off, which I wholeheartedly disagree with. We got a fantastic goal at the end through the means of fantastic movement with the ball ON THE GROUND, for once. How can he say that we were better when Crouch was on the pitch, when all those minutes we struggled to score in open play!?...

I so agree. I thought that we played the better football in the second half, especially after Crouch came off.

 

[ziggy]

I agree with redknapp im afriad, I also felt we lost our shape when pav came on! The goal was purely down to the brilliance of niko, nowt at all to do with good movement or pav or anyone else, it was just niko!

Pav laid the ball for Niko (albeit with ind skill) to score

 

[maldini]

What shape/purpose was tat? It was a bad decision to play Lennon and VDV on the wrong flanks to begin with, just like the previous game. If u have Crouch in there, u've got to get crosses in! But he puts Lennon on the left and VDV on the right. Lennon can only use his right peg so keeps cutting in while VDV drifts all over and wasn't able to put any crosses in either. Just what Redknapp was planning to do with that set up I have no idea.

 

[camaj]

Redknapp logic? Buy a player who you'd "love to have" but then undermine there confidence and try sending them out on loan
Take a player, low on confidence, publicly embarrass them. When that doesn't work, flog them and buy a player who's never been any good.
Start a striker every game who started almost every game last year and this but has only managed 7 last season and 2 this.
Do this while the striker who got your team 4th spot last year watches from the bench. The same player whos scored almost 5 times the goals as the player above. If you have to bring him on, wait until the last 15mins so you can either say "well he's not scoring" or "I think so little of you I won't even risk taking off this lump to give you a go"
Marginalise one of the most exciting players you're club has bought in the last 10 years. Limit him to the occasional sub appearence. Then when he comes on and is too good to drop claim that he wasn't that good before but you've magically turned him into a world beater.

Very occasionally you accommodate a lazy fecker like Le Tissier because their quality is so much higher than the rest you have, but can we really say that about the likes of Pav?

No we can't. Pav isn't lazy. People use the lazy tag when they don't like a player but don't have any facts to back it up. You can't disprove "lazy". Berbatov was "lazy" but yet he ran all over the pitch. Kanoute was "lazy". Mido was "lazy".

 

[CrazyConrad]

...But you don't understand! Peter Crouch is ruining everything! EVERYTHING. Don't you see?!? HE'S RUINING THIS SHIT FOR US!

Fair enough he runs for us but that doesnt change the fact that he is a totally shit player. These last 2 games Crouch has really shown me how poor he is.

Pav > Crouch for me any day...

 

[Babylon22]

Why did Redknaap bring pav on?

Why did Redknaap bring kranjcar on?

he wants to win.

football is a simple game.

there in no agenda.

 

[mpickard2087]

I read it as he realised he was wrong to take Crouch off instead of Defoe. Its a fair point though, if you are looking for a goal it is natural tendency to play it long earlier to get it towards there Penalty Area and you need someone to hold the ball up/win the flick on.

The other bit about players not working hard in training like Niko was aimed more at Bentley and Dos Santos I would think.

 

[StartingPrice]

Why does Redknapp favour some players though? It is because they work hard for him. This is the thing that all managers look for first and foremost when selecting their teams, not just our Aitch.

Very occasionally you accommodate a lazy fecker like Le Tissier because their quality is so much higher than the rest you have, but can we really say that about the likes of Pav?

This is very true. As I said in an argument with another Crouch-ophobe, I'm sure 'Arry does have favourites. That is probably because he feels he can 'trust' these particular players (not always rightly IMHO).

I don't think he feels that he can 'trust' Pav. I like Pav, I really do, but some of the chances he has had he has been positively horrific in them, hasn't he:shrug:

...But you don't understand! Peter Crouch is ruining everything! EVERYTHING. Don't you see?!? HE'S RUINING THIS SHIT FOR US!

With this post, I fear, you have replaced "reason with madness" (LOTR:wink.

 

[Goldman]

I so agree. I thought that we played the better football in the second half, especially after Crouch came off.

Lol we were pretty awful in the second half. We kept punting it forward to Pav who maybe linked up the play successfully once.

Harry is right, we lost our focal point and the ball kept going straight to bolton. We just weren't retaining the ball well enough. We had some nice link up play here and there, but that was more to do with Piennar and Kranks rather than Pav.

 

[edson]

Time to start using Niko as a CM a bit more often.Pav is the new JJ.

 

[GoldstarYid]

Redknapp logic? Buy a player who you'd "love to have" but then undermine there confidence and try sending them out on loan
Take a player, low on confidence, publicly embarrass them. When that doesn't work, flog them and buy a player who's never been any good.
Start a striker every game who started almost every game last year and this but has only managed 7 last season and 2 this.
Do this while the striker who got your team 4th spot last year watches from the bench. The same player whos scored almost 5 times the goals as the player above. If you have to bring him on, wait until the last 15mins so you can either say "well he's not scoring" or "I think so little of you I won't even risk taking off this lump to give you a go"
Marginalise one of the most exciting players you're club has bought in the last 10 years. Limit him to the occasional sub appearence. Then when he comes on and is too good to drop claim that he wasn't that good before but you've magically turned him into a world beater.




No we can't. Pav isn't lazy. People use the lazy tag when they don't like a player but don't have any facts to back it up. You can't disprove "lazy". Berbatov was "lazy" but yet he ran all over the pitch. Kanoute was "lazy". Mido was "lazy".

Bale?

 

[Tottenham_OZpur]

I agree again! didnt say it wasnt redknapps thought, just that we lost our shape when he came on! but yes, it should have been defoe who went of if pav was coming on, but I didnt really feel the need to bring him on, I honestly thought crouch and defoe were doing ok today!

mg:

Crouch had a golden chance to score, yet again he fluffed it by taking too much time and Defoe is very much off form and due to his lack of discipline in staying onside, cost himself a goal.

The only difference between us and $ity is Tevez, can you imagine if we had him, they wouldn't be ahead of us, that's for sure :wink:

 

[SpurSince57]

What shape/purpose was tat? It was a bad decision to play Lennon and VDV on the wrong flanks to begin with, just like the previous game. If u have Crouch in there, u've got to get crosses in! But he puts Lennon on the left and VDV on the right. Lennon can only use his right peg so keeps cutting in while VDV drifts all over and wasn't able to put any crosses in either. Just what Redknapp was planning to do with that set up I have no idea.

Perhaps if the chances that should have gone in had gone in, and we'd been over the hills and far away at half-time, you would have an idea. Or perhaps you wouldn't.

The last time we were on this kind of league form a lot of SC members weren't even thought of, and yet all some of you can do is blub about how nasty Mr Redknapp isn't giving your favourite player a chance. Well boofuckinghoo.