Garage_Doors
Originally the Swankers
I like the bloke, but that was an over reaction, must have gone into it all wound up over something before he got there.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Harry Redknapp; As pleasant as ever.....
- Thread starter Richy_Seagull
- Start date
bhaexpress
New member
It's called being beaten at home by a team that's conceded ten goals in two games.
Why's that a joke? By any normal measurement he's the best English manager, no?
Which gives a fair indication as to the state of English management.
I love those tub-thumping on about English manager for English team, as they never actually follow it with a decent candidate for the joke.
His team finished 4th. That's good, isn't it? Why does it not suggest that he's done a good job?
I don't consider myself a 'tub thumper', but the argument for a foreign manager is looking slightly weak at the moment, wouldn't you say?
Redknapp is a prick. I'm not actually convinced he's that good a manager to be honest. He has been in the business years, and achieved little. I kind of think if I was a manager for 20 odd years I'd probably notch up the odd promotion or cup victory.....maybe even without bankrupting the club in the process.
Deffo, sorry I was implying you, I meant the likes of Pleat, Taylor et al, nothing personal.
Yep the facts don't lie, but all the time there's a large cloud implying 'arry does, he's not the man for England, who's next on the list?
Last edited:
Hodgson and then Allerdyce.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,265
wheeler dealer
Top Home > Library > Literature & Language > WordNetNote: click on a word meaning below to see its connections and related words.
The noun has one meaning:
Meaning #1: (informal) a shrewd or unscrupulous person who knows how to circumvent difficulties[/B][/B]
I think the interviewer was placing the emphasis (wrongly) on the "dealer" part, whereas Harry is probably all too aware of the true definition and with his HMRC court case is a bit sensitive about such a label.
To be fair to him he's tinkered with the Spurs side, as opposed to full scale surgery at his previous clubs, so the label's a little out of date, but funny interview all the same.
Top Home > Library > Literature & Language > WordNetNote: click on a word meaning below to see its connections and related words.
The noun has one meaning:
Meaning #1: (informal) a shrewd or unscrupulous person who knows how to circumvent difficulties[/B][/B]
I think the interviewer was placing the emphasis (wrongly) on the "dealer" part, whereas Harry is probably all too aware of the true definition and with his HMRC court case is a bit sensitive about such a label.
To be fair to him he's tinkered with the Spurs side, as opposed to full scale surgery at his previous clubs, so the label's a little out of date, but funny interview all the same.
Come on, Allerdyce!. (thanks for proving my point though)
Hodgson, granted, if he can get Liverpool together he deserves a knighthood, let alone 'the big job'.
Hodgson, granted, if he can get Liverpool together he deserves a knighthood, let alone 'the big job'.
Last edited:
I'm not passing judgement ont he man for anything other than his abilities as a manager.
He's got Spurs into the CL. That's a considerable achievement (undeniably surely). And he won the cup with Pompey (Again, does that not count as an achievement? Yes he spent big money, but not top 4 money). Fact is, no-one wins trophies these days unless you manage the top 4. Is Moyes a shit manager too? O'Neill? Of course not.
Redknapp is one of the best few English managers out there. I can't see how that's up for debate really - which is where I came in.
Joe Pineapples
New member
Harry Redknapp is an awful shit.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,265
Re the claim Harry financially wrecked West Ham and Pompey - a key question:
Q - How many cheques / payments for players did Harry PERSONALLY authorise?
A - None. They were all OK'd by incompetent board members.
Q - How many cheques / payments for players did Harry PERSONALLY authorise?
A - None. They were all OK'd by incompetent board members.
27 years as a manager, and he has finished 4th in the Premiership and the 2008 FA Cup draw was very very favorable to Pompey, one Prem team all competition I think. Fair achievements, but players and managers can all get lucky once or twice, right time right place etc. In all my years of watching football I've seen loads of manager achieve some sort of success which is never repeated. Same with players. Moyes and O'Neill have demonstrated sustainability. If in 5 years time Redknapp has kept Spurs knocking on the top 4 then fair enough...but I doubt he will. He'll either be in prison or have moved on for some slightly strange reason.
Within the parameters with which they operate Moyles etc have achieved a lot more.
Last edited:
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,265
Harry's record has been restricted by 2 factors:
1. His unwillingness to leave the South.
2. West Ham selling the Golden Generation he brought through.
If West Ham had had more dosh and kept the side that contained Glen Johnson, Rio Ferdinand, Frank Lampard, Joe Cole, Michael Carrick and Jermain Defoe together then who knows what he could have achieved.
This is the first time in his career he's inherited a good squad and had a chairman with patience and money.
1. His unwillingness to leave the South.
2. West Ham selling the Golden Generation he brought through.
If West Ham had had more dosh and kept the side that contained Glen Johnson, Rio Ferdinand, Frank Lampard, Joe Cole, Michael Carrick and Jermain Defoe together then who knows what he could have achieved.
This is the first time in his career he's inherited a good squad and had a chairman with patience and money.
Still think he's a prick.
I fail to see how the situations of Moyes and O'Neill are any different. O'Neill spent a fortune at Villa and got nowhere near the CL. Everton, whatever the achievements of their neighbours, are a big club, so are hardly different from Spurs.They've won nothing too. So where does the difference lie?
What I will say about your argument, is that every time you repeat it, you mention Redknapp's financial dealings. I don't think you are only considering footballing matters, I just think you don't like him. Which is fine, but it's not evidence that your argument has any value.
Makes my argument a bit obvious that...