2 Points From 8 Games / 39 Points from 24 Games

[yanno]

You cannot use hearsay as factual basis,

Since when was SC a court of law?

 

[Coyboy]

Ok then I will go with the one I mentioned. Ramos may have been denied Diarra but he also was happy to see Keane go. There. (ignoring the chronological confusion on your part)

 

[lishiyo]

I'm not sure if you could say he was happy about letting Keane go, but 20mill is a lot for a 28 year old and perhaps he thought we could find better. I think our transfer dealings courtesy of Comolli, despite some great buys (and I would've liked to keep him for our academy), haven't helped either Jol or Ramos since our expensively assembled squad never seemed to achieve the kind of cohesion and balance that you see now at Everton - not only buying good players but the right players. Ramos certainly had a lot of disadvantages to deal with, same as Jol, but I think we were right to let him go since he had lost the dressing room at that point and we could easily have been too far adrift by the time results started picking up.

In any case all three of Ramos, Jol, and Harry are doing good jobs at their respective clubs, so now we've made three clubs pretty happy

 

[yanno]

Ok then I will go with the one I mentioned. Ramos may have been denied Diarra but he also was happy to see Keane go. There. (ignoring the chronological confusion on your part)

That's hearsay too.

As a pure guess, I would suspect that a sizeable chunk of the stuff discussed on SC is hearsay.

Some hearsay is true, but not provable. As long as it's acknowledged as speculative, I don't see what the problem is. Especially on a football message board.

So, in that spirit, the ITK known as "Dan Ashcroft", claimed that Comolli's "psychological profiling" of Lassana Diarra suggested he had a suspect temperament and this is the reason we didn't sign him. The claim was that Diarra's agents offered him to us both when he went from chavski to the goons, and then again when he moved to Pompey.

Why didn't we sign Diarra? I would imagine that the alleged "psychological profile" - if it did indeed exist - was a crucial part of our decision-making process whilst Comolli was DoF: ie under both Jol & Ramos.

As I stated above, I think trying to get a sense of a player's temperament, before blowing millions in transfer fee and wages, is clearly a professional and correct thing for Tottenham Hotspur FC to do. However, currently, Diarra has shown no signs of "blowing up" psychologically, and whenever I saw him for Pompey, he was very committed. Of course, he may "blow up" in the future.

Prince Boateng, on the other hand, does seem to have pretty much "blown up" at Tottenham.

It's surely legitimate, if speculative, to ask whether this is for footballing or psychological reasons?

Our scouts (plus DoF Monchi at Sevilla and SC's very own Bill Oddie) clearly thought that Prince Boateng was a very talented central midfielder. We outbid other major European clubs to sign him. Having seen Boateng up close, our coaches reacted as follows:

i) Jol hardly played him;
ii) Ramos didn't give him a squad number;
iii) Redknapp loaned him to Germany with an agreed purchase price in the contract (suggesting he's not bothered about him coming back to Spurs).

Maybe Boateng is a talentless footballer. My best guess is that he is, in fact, a potentially good player who needs to start concentrating on his football. But if, as Dan Ashcroft claims, we have a methodical "psychological profiling" system before signing players, then I'm surprized Boateng got through it, and I'd rather we'd taken the chance on Diarra.

As for Ramos being happy to let Keane go, this is also hearsay but may contain some truth.

My best guess is that Juande knew Berba, our team's "brain", was going to leave, and he wanted a new "brain". The name of that "brain" was Andrei Arshavin.

In Ramos' proposed team for this season, Arshavin would have pulled the strings behind a strong, tall, striker (Pavlyuchenko as it turned out), with players like Luka Modric, Bentley, Lennon and Gio also in the attacking mix.

So, yes, Ramos was probably prepared to sell Keane to Liverpool at an inflated price. On the strict condition that we managed to spend the money on a player he considered better.

Zenit wanted an inflated price for Arshavin, but it still appears to have been less (or very similar) to the inflated price we got for Keane. For whatever reasons, we only did half the deal. We ended up selling Keane and Berbatov (and Defoe in the previous window) and only signing Pavlyuchenko.

Despite Darren Bent's goals in pre-season, Ramos didn't seem to have any confidence in him, so in selection terms he was left with one (knackered after the Euros) striker that he rated: Pavlyuchenko.

Ramos had been very clear that he wanted the squad sorted by the time of pre-season training in Spain. That was never going to happen. But he surely didn't expect to end up with just one striker that he rated come September 1st.

Keane and Pav are a more than decent partnership (as are Pav & Defoe), and my best guess is that if Ramos knew Arshavin was not going to join us, he would have objected very strongly to the sale of Keane to Liverpool.

So, yes, Ramos was coach during our truly abysmal start to the season. However, he behaved with a lot of dignity and has not complained about being left, on September 1st, with what he probably considered to be half a strikeforce.

 

[soup]

If these profiling reports are true does anyone know how they are put together in the first place? I would be interested to know how you can psychologically profile someone without their full co-operation as well as interview, referals and an in depth mental assessment. This isn't a serial killer we're talking about with speculative suggestons of motives and personality traits but a footballer with an apparent primadonna attitude.

I'd say the psychological profile would be more akin to a couple of phone calls to be honest.

 

[yanno]

If these profiling reports are true does anyone know how they are put together in the first place? I would be interested to know how you can psychologically profile someone without their full co-operation as well as interview, referals and an in depth mental assessment. This isn't a serial killer we're talking about with speculative suggestons of motives and personality traits but a footballer with an apparent primadonna attitude.

I largely agree.

Fwiw - even the famous FBI serial killer profiles have been heavily revised recently, because many of the "conclusions" turned out to be wrong.

However, the claim was made by a Spurs ITK with an excellent source at the club that "psychological profiles" of players form a crucial part of our scouting process, and this is why we didn't sign Lassana Diarra when we twice had the chance.

 

[Coyboy]

That's hearsay too.
.

Exactly my point and of course SC is full of hearsay but most qualify opinions backed up by it, you didn't seem to do that.

So, in that spirit, the ITK known as "Dan Ashcroft", claimed that Comolli's "psychological profiling" of Lassana Diarra suggested he had a suspect temperament and this is the reason we didn't sign him. The claim was that Diarra's agents offered him to us both when he went from chavski to the goons, and then again when he moved to Pompey.

Was that the right timing? I am not sure that it was but if you can show otherwise, fine.

Why didn't we sign Diarra? I would imagine that the alleged "psychological profile" - if it did indeed exist - was a crucial part of our decision-making process whilst Comolli was DoF: ie under both Jol & Ramos.

As I stated above, I think trying to get a sense of a player's temperament, before blowing millions in transfer fee and wages, is clearly a professional and correct thing for Tottenham Hotspur FC to do. However, currently, Diarra has shown no signs of "blowing up" psychologically, and whenever I saw him for Pompey, he was very committed. Of course, he may "blow up" in the future..

Yes he was but you could say that was just to put him back in the shop window, as he was out a year later or less. His words upon signing were hardly what you want from a new signing. Compare that with Palacios and I am glad we have the Honduran. I would not want us to sign someone that a) gets all hoity toity when left on the bench which should always be an option of any player or b) will leave when the next big club comes knocking. I would prefer longer term committment which is perhaps what Boateng offered with his potential. We don't know for sure which is worth saying to qualify any opinions to avoid coming off as more informed than others.

Prince Boateng, on the other hand, does seem to have pretty much "blown up" at Tottenham.

It's surely legitimate, if speculative, to ask whether this is for footballing or psychological reasons?

Our scouts (plus DoF Monchi at Sevilla and SC's very own Bill Oddie) clearly thought that Prince Boateng was a very talented central midfielder. We outbid other major European clubs to sign him. Having seen Boateng up close, our coaches reacted as follows:

i) Jol hardly played him;
ii) Ramos didn't give him a squad number;
iii) Redknapp loaned him to Germany with an agreed purchase price in the contract (suggesting he's not bothered about him coming back to Spurs).

Maybe Boateng is a talentless footballer. My best guess is that he is, in fact, a potentially good player who needs to start concentrating on his football. But if, as Dan Ashcroft claims, we have a methodical "psychological profiling" system before signing players, then I'm surprized Boateng got through it, and I'd rather we'd taken the chance on Diarra.

Perhaps the "psychological profiling" did not work with him, who knows? But I don't see that as necessary relevant to whether we should have signed Diarra or not. We don't even know we did and maybe there were other impediments such as wages or other facets to "psychological profiling" which were not what we wanted at Spurs. Maybe Wenger or Mourinho warned us off. The two are pretty independent. We signed Boateng, it hasn't worked out for who knows what reasons. We didn't sign Diarra but based on his brief stay at Pompey and poor proffesionalism at Chelsea and Arsenal, I think we have somewhat been vindicated.

As for Ramos being happy to let Keane go, this is also hearsay but may contain some truth.

My best guess is that Juande knew Berba, our team's "brain", was going to leave, and he wanted a new "brain". The name of that "brain" was Andrei Arshavin.

In Ramos' proposed team for this season, Arshavin would have pulled the strings behind a strong, tall, striker (Pavlyuchenko as it turned out), with players like Luka Modric, Bentley, Lennon and Gio also in the attacking mix.

So, yes, Ramos was probably prepared to sell Keane to Liverpool at an inflated price. On the strict condition that we managed to spend the money on a player he considered better.

Zenit wanted an inflated price for Arshavin, but it still appears to have been less (or very similar) to the inflated price we got for Keane. For whatever reasons, we only did half the deal. We ended up selling Keane and Berbatov (and Defoe in the previous window) and only signing Pavlyuchenko.

Despite Darren Bent's goals in pre-season, Ramos didn't seem to have any confidence in him, so in selection terms he was left with one (knackered after the Euros) striker that he rated: Pavlyuchenko.

Ramos had been very clear that he wanted the squad sorted by the time of pre-season training in Spain. That was never going to happen. But he surely didn't expect to end up with just one striker that he rated come September 1st.

Keane and Pav are a more than decent partnership (as are Pav & Defoe), and my best guess is that if Ramos knew Arshavin was not going to join us, he would have objected very strongly to the sale of Keane to Liverpool.

So, yes, Ramos was coach during our truly abysmal start to the season. However, he behaved with a lot of dignity and has not complained about being left, on September 1st, with what he probably considered to be half a strikeforce.

He did behave with a lot of dignity but he made some terrible mistakes;

1. Selling Keane comewhatmay. He underestimated or was ignorant to the man's affect on the team and took on a wildly scientific approach that you can replace him with another player easily.
2. Selling Malbranque and Tainio- two players that were hard workers and very good players and were not replaced.
3. Arrogantly believing that even with a new strikeforce and other key additions, he could propel the team to the top heights of the league without keeping enough of the team that had won him a cup and been in the top five for the year previous.
4. Banishing good, professional or promising players to peripheral areas of the training ground and taking away their squad numbers. This just looks childish and simply cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.
5. Keeping King for cup games only. Speaks for itself really.

There are a number of tactical and stylistic blunders he made as well but first and foremost there was the overly scientific and dogmatic approach he took which underscored a naievty and ignorance the chemistry of our squad and the tactical nuances of England. He may have been undone by the Arshavin affair but I cannot see the logic in the need to replace someone like Keane with a slightly similar but antithetically inexperienced (in this country) player.

I wish we had signed Arshavin, a terrific player, but if the rumours are true that Keane was happily sold that was a big mistake. We don't know, maybe Ramos was very reluctant and maybe Spurs never had the chance to sign Diarra when we got Boateng and maybe had we got the latter, he would not have worked as well as Harry's signing of Palacios has and will.

 

[yanno]

He did behave with a lot of dignity but he made some terrible mistakes;

1. Selling Keane comewhatmay. He underestimated or was ignorant to the man's affect on the team and took on a wildly scientific approach that you can replace him with another player easily.

"Comewhatmay" is hardly fair.

Levy said: "I don't regard it as a transfer deal - that is something which happens between two clubs when they both agree to trade - this is very much an enforced sale, for which we have agreed a sum of £19m as compensation plus a potential further £1.3m in additional compensation."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/7528735.stm

2. Selling Malbranque and Tainio- two players that were hard workers and very good players and were not replaced.

Ramos never seemed to get Teemu, which I found very puzzling. Playing in central midfield, Tainio was instrumental in our thrashing of the goons in the Carling Cup, but Juande thereafter played him at FB. I have no idea why, and Teemu definitely isn't a FB.

Teemu is unfortunately very injuryprone, as Sunderland have found this season, however I would definitely have kept him as a very valuable squad player.

We should probably have kept Steed too - at least for this season. However, Modric is a better player, and both Bale and Gio have the potential to be better LMs than Steed.

3. Arrogantly believing that even with a new strikeforce and other key additions, he could propel the team to the top heights of the league without keeping enough of the team that had won him a cup and been in the top five for the year previous.

But he didn't get a new strikeforce.

"Arrogantly" is based on what precisely?

That said, nearly all coaches (managers) have big egos, and a strong belief in their own judgement. Mourinho, Ferguson, Benitez, Whinger etc etc all the way back to Brian Clough. It goes with the territory.

4. Banishing good, professional or promising players to peripheral areas of the training ground and taking away their squad numbers. This just looks childish and simply cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

Presumably it was meant to motivate the banished players - Boateng, Taarabt, Rocha et al. However, I agree that it was a mistake and handicapped our UEFA campaign.

5. Keeping King for cup games only. Speaks for itself really.

I assume Ramos thought we had a better chance of winning a cup than the League, which is a correct judgement.

I'm more concerned by the fact that, after the Carling Cup final, Ledley hardly played last season, and still wasn't ready for this season's kick off. It's only in the last few weeks that our medical staff seem to have worked out how to get King fit to play once a week.

If we have a choice next season between, say, playing King in a cup semi-final or saving him for a not terribly important league game, I would hope Redknapp will play Ledley in the cup.

There are a number of tactical and stylistic blunders he made as well but first and foremost there was the overly scientific and dogmatic approach he took which underscored a naievty and ignorance the chemistry of our squad and the tactical nuances of England.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

 

[Stoof]

good answer on the fact that he doesn't have a clue on english football....but saved us from relegation zone and won us a trophy.

Very impressive to cheer on of the buddies.

Ramos got us to, what, 46 points? He came in when we were on 7 - in a much 'less tight' League than the one we currently find ourselves in. He made us safe, then let us drop down places with some truly awful games and results.

And from a watching every game after the Cup Final point of view - we were awful.

I paid to watch that bunch of dross lose to Newcastle in probably one of the worst second halves I've seen us play since Christian Gross. Going to Spurs was something I felt I had to do in those last few games, as opposed to now something that I can't wait each week for. But hey, that's just the opinion of one fan. But no - it was all the fans around me. He was steadily destroying the club, mate. No matter how good his Spanish stats are, or the fact that in the first three minutes of every game he didn't have someone sent off - or whatever ludicrous numbers you want to throw at me in comparison with Redknapp.

His stand-offish dealings with the media distanced me from the club that I loved - delegating his responsibility to the Uruspanglish of Poyet. He was cold, unloving and had no connection to us (as fans) or us as a club - but maybe we had just been spoilt with Martin Jol talking the way I imagine Bill Nicholson did. When Jol spoke, people listened. When Ramos spoke, people waited for the translation then got disillusioned. When Redknapp speaks now, it may all be convenient spin - but, it's spin I can relate to. He talks the talk, he says the right things and the team is certainly starting to walk the walk - playing traditional Tottenham football - and oh golly he's a West Ham man, how could that possibly be?

We can pick the minutae apart all day, true Ramos 'saved' (/gently stopped) us from relegation, but the plight wasn't as bad as it was under Redknapp. As you bleet on about Keane and Berbatov being removed, what exactly did Redknapp have when he came in? The same group of players that beat Liverpool, spectacularly drew with Arsenal and put together a serious set of results that really saved us.

How many times could you predict a Ramos line-up - even with everybody fit? I certainly couldn't - and I had more conversations in the pub with people that began "what's he done there / why's he done that?" than I'd ever had before. The team today picks itself and we have a manager on the touchline with Premiership experience who knows how to win games. Not a Spanish pretender trying to not lose.

 

[Hoowl]

You've got to judge ramos on how he did at spurs. That's what counts. Managers can't necessarily take success from one country to another, look what happened to Scolari at Chelsea. As for what might have happened if Ramos had been given more time, we can only speculate and that doesn't get us anywhere as no-one can be wrong. Ramos has to be judged on the results (hard facts) and performances (which have a large subjective element) of the team whilst he was in charge.

On the Plus side he won the carling cup, giving us fans a fantastic ocasion of a final. He also gave us the most memorable victory over Arsenal in recent history. Even if we weren't convinced he was the man to take us forward, we shouldn't diminish these achievements as they don't come around every day. On the negative side, we never looked like capturing this form in the premier league, especially this season. Obviosuly losing players who have played a key role is going to be a blow but it's a coaches job to get the best out of what he has at his disposal. This is where I was hugely dissapointed. We had the players to be higher than 20th in the league. There was no way we could afford to get relegated and Ramos' league record was relegatio form. A manager lives or dies by his league results and Ramos' weren't good enough.

 

[lishiyo]

If anyone's curious, here's Ramos's league progress last season:

http://www.statto.com/football/teams/tottenham-hotspur/2007-2008


and Harry's at Spurs so far:

http://www.statto.com/football/teams/tottenham-hotspur/2008-2009


Ramos had the difficulty with motivation after the CCF and probably a worse squad compared to ours after the January spending, but Harry did have to work with a team in more trouble at the start. Btw I think he and Pompey had a better year than us last season, also winning a cup but maintaining a stronger league position.

2007-08 Portsmouth:

A poor start, but fairly consistent after that despite a mid-season slump.

 

[Coyboy]

Yanno, what I meant by 'comewhatmay' is Ramos' alleged decision to okay the release of Keane whether or not we had Arshavin which we clearly did not. Levy's words indicate that Keane wanted out which I accept but do not confirm or deny that Ramos accepted his departure. It is irrelevant of course and I don't necessarily believe it but it has as much mileage as the alleged truths you were quoting.

As for the numbered points, you seem to agree and just hypothesise as t Ramos' thinking. I don't deny that there was a theory behind each decision but that each theory was deeply flawed. As for the King decision, we would never have won the league with or without King of course but we could have done much better in the league with him Ramos could have saved his job or bought time. Don't you think that we could have beaten Newcastle and Krakow sans King?

This decision gives weight to the theory, which I neither endorse or denounce, that Ramos was more interested in beefing up his CV with cup medals than achieving a sustainable and organially grown success in the league.

As for what I meant in the last part, without going into how badly we played under Ramos in most games this season what I was getting at is what Stoof and others have said; that Ramos thought he could implant his style and science from Spain and achieve success in a different footballing culture and environment, within which lies elements of arrogance and hubris. He chose to dismantle a lot of the squad and suffered the consequences. He came to Spurs off the back of a man sacked supposedly for a poor start to a league season so should have done whatever necessary to hit the ground running. We nose dived.

The best foreign managers have suceeded here by achieving a blend of their continental talents and experiences and melding them with English customs, styles and tactics. Ramos failed here.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Carrick was far and away the most important player in that team. And the reason we had to completely rebuild our side. Somehow managing to finish 5th the next year (props to Mr. Jol for that; having the heart of his side viciously amputated).

This completely undermines your own argument. Carrick is an extremely good footballer, but played as a holding midfielder player, the way Jol played him, meant he was far more replaceable than if he'd been used correctly. Which we by and large did. Is Carrick better than Zokora ? yes. Is he a better holding midfielder ? barely.

Ok then I will go with the one I mentioned. Ramos may have been denied Diarra but he also was happy to see Keane go. There. (ignoring the chronological confusion on your part)

I think there is far more evidence (ie Ramos signs Diarra for Real Madrid) that Ramos wanted Diarra than that Ramos happily waved goodbye to Keane without a replacement. We have had Comoli and Levy publicly stating that they regretted not bringing in another experienced striker in the Summer window. Wouldn't any manager be more likely to have said "I'd rather we replace Keane then allow him to go". The reality is Levy had a gun to his head (Keane wanted to go and Liverpool were offering stupid money) and convinced Ramos Arshavin ( or other) was on the way.
Hence the very public apology for the striker mess they left Ramos with.

I think Ramos possibly was prepared to let Keane go, as was Benitez. And I can understand why both would. He has merits but I think Ramos with Modric and Dos Santos intended to play a different way.

Yes he was but you could say that was just to put him back in the shop window, as he was out a year later or less. His words upon signing were hardly what you want from a new signing. Compare that with Palacios and I am glad we have the Honduran. I would not want us to sign someone that a) gets all hoity toity when left on the bench which should always be an option of any player or b) will leave when the next big club comes knocking. I would prefer longer term committment which is perhaps what Boateng offered with his potential. We don't know for sure which is worth saying to qualify any opinions to avoid coming off as more informed than others.




Perhaps the "psychological profiling" did not work with him, who knows? But I don't see that as necessary relevant to whether we should have signed Diarra or not. We don't even know we did and maybe there were other impediments such as wages or other facets to "psychological profiling" which were not what we wanted at Spurs. Maybe Wenger or Mourinho warned us off. The two are pretty independent. We signed Boateng, it hasn't worked out for who knows what reasons. We didn't sign Diarra but based on his brief stay at Pompey and poor proffesionalism at Chelsea and Arsenal, I think we have somewhat been vindicated.



He did behave with a lot of dignity but he made some terrible mistakes;

1. Selling Keane comewhatmay. He underestimated or was ignorant to the man's affect on the team and took on a wildly scientific approach that you can replace him with another player easily.
2. Selling Malbranque and Tainio- two players that were hard workers and very good players and were not replaced.
3. Arrogantly believing that even with a new strikeforce and other key additions, he could propel the team to the top heights of the league without keeping enough of the team that had won him a cup and been in the top five for the year previous.
4. Banishing good, professional or promising players to peripheral areas of the training ground and taking away their squad numbers. This just looks childish and simply cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.
5. Keeping King for cup games only. Speaks for itself really.

There are a number of tactical and stylistic blunders he made as well but first and foremost there was the overly scientific and dogmatic approach he took which underscored a naievty and ignorance the chemistry of our squad and the tactical nuances of England. He may have been undone by the Arshavin affair but I cannot see the logic in the need to replace someone like Keane with a slightly similar but antithetically inexperienced (in this country) player.

I wish we had signed Arshavin, a terrific player, but if the rumours are true that Keane was happily sold that was a big mistake. We don't know, maybe Ramos was very reluctant and maybe Spurs never had the chance to sign Diarra when we got Boateng and maybe had we got the latter, he would not have worked as well as Harry's signing of Palacios has and will.

Some of this post I have addressed above. However, if you hinestly believe we didn't need to strengthen in all the areas Ramos did I am surprised. Defensively we were terrible. Key positions were fatally weak. Despite finishing fifth our defensive record was terrible. Robinson, Dawson, Chimbonda were all poor defensively.

We also lacked creativity and intelligence in midfield. The signing of Modric was the most important signing we have made for about 25 years. He is of a different class, world class. Intelligence and endeavour. Berbatov was intelligent but lacked endeavour (not as much as say Keane but he was nowhere near as industrious as Modric is relative to his position)

If you can't see the difference between Keane and Arshavin you are never going to appreciate some of the arguments for Ramos. Arshaving is, like Modric, the very top drawer. Keane is second drawer. With Keane's you can do well. With Arshavin's you do fucking well.

Thanks to Ramos we have IMO the second best goalie in the EPL. Top drawer. We have possible the srd/4th best CB pairing. Top drawer. We have possibly 3/4th best RB. Close to top drawer. Top Drawer midfield creative.

These were fantastic, vital building blocks. Imagine going into this season with the strike force depleated as it was (Berbatov and Keane were going regardless) but with Robinson in goal, Dawson at CB all season and Chimbonda at RB.

I have no problem with Tainio going, he was over rated, continually injured. We paid nothing and received a fee. Malbranque was a poor decision. Kaboul was treated poorly. No argument.

We will never see this issue the same it seems. I still believe that we are reaping much of what Ramos started to sow. The team has not just evolved but revolved. This isn't just hindsight on my part.

I was saying before the season started that adjustment was inevitable and maybe we need to write this season off as there were so many new faces and vital areas. IMO we were playing the type of football that was every bit as good as we now. And back then it was clear to some of us where the problems lie. New faces gelling and finding a ryhthm, piss poor striking options. You chose to believe where the blame for the strikers lay but I am certain the apologies from Comoli and Levy say it all.

If I was completely alone I may question my sanity, but a few others could see the positives I saw under Ramos, and the negatives under Jol too for that matter.

We will never know what would have happened but my belief was that we had improved most areas of our team significantly and would have bought strikers the next window. IMO we would have had a similar season to the one we had (give or take) but would have gone into the next season even stronger with a manager tactically/mentally of the top drawer as well.

I am reserving my opinion of Redknapp for when I revisit the "Harry Effect" thread later on.

 

[yanno]

This decision gives weight to the theory, which I neither endorse or denounce, that Ramos was more interested in beefing up his CV with cup medals than achieving a sustainable and organially grown success in the league.

Ramos had a highly lucrative 5-year contract. Perhaps he just made a realistic judgement as to which trophies Spurs had a chance of winning in season 2008-9.

As for what I meant in the last part, without going into how badly we played under Ramos in most games this season what I was getting at is what Stoof and others have said; that Ramos thought he could implant his style and science from Spain and achieve success in a different footballing culture and environment, within which lies elements of arrogance and hubris. He chose to dismantle a lot of the squad and suffered the consequences. He came to Spurs off the back of a man sacked supposedly for a poor start to a league season so should have done whatever necessary to hit the ground running. We nose dived.

The best foreign managers have suceeded here by achieving a blend of their continental talents and experiences and melding them with English customs, styles and tactics. Ramos failed here.

The players have to share a lot of the blame. A lot of our players didn't show up from the Carling Cup Final to Redknapp's arrival. Perhaps they didn't like Ramos' methods, but that still doesn't excuse their massive level of underperformance.

Scolari clearly is a motivational coach, but Drogba wouldn't play for him. Drogba busted a gut for Mourinho. Didn't turn up for Scolari. And is now busting a gut for Hiddink and is back, pretty much, to the force he was under Mourinho. Why?

Only Drogba can explain that. But I'm not convinced it's all down to Scolari.

Similarly, I think some of our players have to take a look at themselves and ask why they displayed such a lack of professional pride in their performances for six months.

Whilst some players are performing very well under Redknapp - notably Lennon, Modric and Benny - others have continued to underperform when given a chance. David Bentley take a bow. Unless his agent is waving a Rolex at him...

Ramos' "science" may have alienated some players. Ramos is not a charismatic type of coach. He is a disciplinarian, and demanded - and received - respect from his players at Sevilla. Some of his calls - eg trying to slim the Hud down to make him more mobile - were probably correct but didn't succeed.

I will accept that Ramos made some mistakes, but every coach in history has. However, I don't think he can bear sole responsibiltiy for our abysmal 2 points from 8 games. We had a bunch of international players who are much much better than that level of performance, and they have to share a lot of the responsibility.

 

[lishiyo]

Hm, I think you're overrating our squad there though overall I think we have improved this summer and in any case, Comolli should be given credit too if the squad is better. It was clear we relied upon on strikers far too much in previous years, and we would've been screwed even more this season had we not had a better midfield + defense, and certainly Arshavin would've been a huge boost - but I'm not sure why our performances disappeared after the CCF last year with the same strikers. I know many players in our team have a poor mentality and lost motivation, but it's also part of the manager's job to make the team that he has maintain their commitment and confidence, not just tactics and transfers. Man management seemed to be one of his weaknesses in England, and the lack of communication didn't help matters whereas he's fine in Spain where the footballers share the same background and language and still respect him for his accomplishments there.

I always thought we would need a major adjustment period after so many new faces at the Lane, and we were very unlucky with some of those early games, especially Hull at home where we completely dominated them. That said, other clubs have had major turnover such as Sunderland, who had a decent start this season, and Pompey over the last few seasons. The way we played reminds me a bit of WBA and Boro this season, and it could've worked eventually with our better players, but it might have taken more time than we could afford. We might have brought strikers the next window, but it's not easy to buy very good strikers in January even with high prices - there are too few available, and even fewer who would be willing to join a relegation battle. By that point, we could've been too far adrift. Our body language was completely wrong by the Stoke game and I do believe that despite perhaps decent performances - and certainly teams down there have played some good football this season, such as Boro and Newcastle when on their game - we would've continued to lose without confidence.

I won't pass any judgment on Harry until next season, and I do think he is reaping the benefits of a better adjusted squad + 45 mill in January transfers + new manager bounce at the beginning, but the threat of relegation that was very much real at the start aren't worth taking for a manager who was potentially top-class yet unproven in England. Even if we scraped by, a poor season could've still set us back years if we struggled to hold on to our best players and to attract good players in the summer. If we finish the season strongly now, even without Europe we at least have a greater chance of convincing players that this was a blip and we're still a club with ambitions.

 

[SpurSince57]

This completely undermines your own argument. Carrick is an extremely good footballer, but played as a holding midfielder player, the way Jol played him, meant he was far more replaceable than if he'd been used correctly. Which we by and large did. Is Carrick better than Zokora ? yes. Is he a better holding midfielder ? barely.



I think there is far more evidence (ie Ramos signs Diarra for Real Madrid) that Ramos wanted Diarra than that Ramos happily waved goodbye to Keane without a replacement. We have had Comoli and Levy publicly stating that they regretted not bringing in another experienced striker in the Summer window. Wouldn't any manager be more likely to have said "I'd rather we replace Keane then allow him to go". The reality is Levy had a gun to his head (Keane wanted to go and Liverpool were offering stupid money) and convinced Ramos Arshavin ( or other) was on the way.
Hence the very public apology for the striker mess they left Ramos with.

I think Ramos possibly was prepared to let Keane go, as was Benitez. And I can understand why both would. He has merits but I think Ramos with Modric and Dos Santos intended to play a different way.




Some of this post I have addressed above. However, if you hinestly believe we didn't need to strengthen in all the areas Ramos did I am surprised. Defensively we were terrible. Key positions were fatally weak. Despite finishing fifth our defensive record was terrible. Robinson, Dawson, Chimbonda were all poor defensively.

We also lacked creativity and intelligence in midfield. The signing of Modric was the most important signing we have made for about 25 years. He is of a different class, world class. Intelligence and endeavour. Berbatov was intelligent but lacked endeavour (not as much as say Keane but he was nowhere near as industrious as Modric is relative to his position)

If you can't see the difference between Keane and Arshavin you are never going to appreciate some of the arguments for Ramos. Arshaving is, like Modric, the very top drawer. Keane is second drawer. With Keane's you can do well. With Arshavin's you do fucking well.

Thanks to Ramos we have IMO the second best goalie in the EPL. Top drawer. We have possible the srd/4th best CB pairing. Top drawer. We have possibly 3/4th best RB. Close to top drawer. Top Drawer midfield creative.

These were fantastic, vital building blocks. Imagine going into this season with the strike force depleated as it was (Berbatov and Keane were going regardless) but with Robinson in goal, Dawson at CB all season and Chimbonda at RB.

I have no problem with Tainio going, he was over rated, continually injured. We paid nothing and received a fee. Malbranque was a poor decision. Kaboul was treated poorly. No argument.

We will never see this issue the same it seems. I still believe that we are reaping much of what Ramos started to sow. The team has not just evolved but revolved. This isn't just hindsight on my part.

I was saying before the season started that adjustment was inevitable and maybe we need to write this season off as there were so many new faces and vital areas. IMO we were playing the type of football that was every bit as good as we now. And back then it was clear to some of us where the problems lie. New faces gelling and finding a ryhthm, piss poor striking options. You chose to believe where the blame for the strikers lay but I am certain the apologies from Comoli and Levy say it all.

If I was completely alone I may question my sanity, but a few others could see the positives I saw under Ramos, and the negatives under Jol too for that matter.

We will never know what would have happened but my belief was that we had improved most areas of our team significantly and would have bought strikers the next window. IMO we would have had a similar season to the one we had (give or take) but would have gone into the next season even stronger with a manager tactically/mentally of the top drawer as well.

I am reserving my opinion of Redknapp for when I revisit the "Harry Effect" thread later on.

Defensively we were terrible, but why? After all, for two seasons under Jol (and Hughton, and let's not forget to give Fruitini a little credit) we were about as tight at the back as Spurs have ever been. Then it all went tits-up. Did Jol suddenly forget how to organise a defence? No. After Ramos's arrival it was reported that he'd returned to the Gooner George training method of roping the back four together. That didn't work. We signed Woodgate and Hutton (Hutton's never convinced me) and there was a noticeable improvement. The only problem was that Ramos largely failed in getting us to walk and chew gum at the same time—something I expressed the hope that he'd be the first Spurs manager ever to do.

Thanks to Ramos we have acquired Woodgate, Gomes, Corluka and Modric. No-one in their right mind would dispute they are top, top, players. The jury's out on Pav. Yet clearly something went horribly wrong. We not only had a shocker of a start to this season, it continued from a pretty shite second half of last season. There is no way around this, unless you were brought up by Jesuits, and you'd be struggling then. The graph lishiyo posted shows what everyone should be aware of—we got to 11th by New Year, not least due to turkey-shoots against sides in freefall (Fulham, Wigan) and then proceeded to flatline for the remainder of the season.

Ramos' reputation rests solely on two successful seasons with Sevilla. They'd narrowly missed out on CL qualification the season before he took over, overhauled at the last gasp by Betis under Ramos' successor there (Ramos' achievement at Betis was, shall we say, decidedly ho-hum, as everywhere else). On this rather slender basis, he's branded as a 'world-class' manager by Dan Ashcroft and others. Are they having a laugh, or what?

 

[rich75]

Defensively we were terrible, but why? After all, for two seasons under Jol (and Hughton, and let's not forget to give Fruitini a little credit) we were about as tight at the back as Spurs have ever been. Then it all went tits-up. Did Jol suddenly forget how to organise a defence? No. After Ramos's arrival it was reported that he'd returned to the Gooner George training method of roping the back four together. That didn't work. We signed Woodgate and Hutton (Hutton's never convinced me) and there was a noticeable improvement. The only problem was that Ramos largely failed in getting us to walk and chew gum at the same time—something I expressed the hope that he'd be the first Spurs manager ever to do.

Thanks to Ramos we have acquired Woodgate, Gomes, Corluka and Modric. No-one in their right mind would dispute they are top, top, players. The jury's out on Pav. Yet clearly something went horribly wrong. We not only had a shocker of a start to this season, it continued from a pretty shite second half of last season. There is no way around this, unless you were brought up by Jesuits, and you'd be struggling then. The graph lishiyo posted shows what everyone should be aware of—we got to 11th by New Year, not least due to turkey-shoots against sides in freefall (Fulham, Wigan) and then proceeded to flatline for the remainder of the season.

Ramos' reputation rests solely on two successful seasons with Sevilla. They'd narrowly missed out on CL qualification the season before he took over, overhauled at the last gasp by Betis under Ramos' successor there (Ramos' achievement at Betis was, shall we say, decidedly ho-hum, as everywhere else). On this rather slender basis, he's branded as a 'world-class' manager by Dan Ashcroft and others. Are they having a laugh, or what?

I may be wrong but I'd say he was only branded world class by ashcroft because ashcroft was chums with one Mr G Poyet. Other than being rather verbose I didn't notice any particular evidence that his opinion was any more valid than anyones else, yet oddly enough the majority of this board felt the need to fawn over him.

 

[lishiyo]

I wouldn't say anyone called him world-class, but he's good enough for Real Madrid and doing a very decent job for them atm (except for in the CL). Granted that's not really overachievement given the strength of their squad in comparison to most other squads in la Liga, but they did look very unmotivated and lost before he arrived.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Defensively we were terrible, but why? After all, for two seasons under Jol (and Hughton, and let's not forget to give Fruitini a little credit) we were about as tight at the back as Spurs have ever been. Then it all went tits-up. Did Jol suddenly forget how to organise a defence? No. After Ramos's arrival it was reported that he'd returned to the Gooner George training method of roping the back four together. That didn't work. We signed Woodgate and Hutton (Hutton's never convinced me) and there was a noticeable improvement. The only problem was that Ramos largely failed in getting us to walk and chew gum at the same time—something I expressed the hope that he'd be the first Spurs manager ever to do.

Thanks to Ramos we have acquired Woodgate, Gomes, Corluka and Modric. No-one in their right mind would dispute they are top, top, players. The jury's out on Pav. Yet clearly something went horribly wrong. We not only had a shocker of a start to this season, it continued from a pretty shite second half of last season. There is no way around this, unless you were brought up by Jesuits, and you'd be struggling then. The graph lishiyo posted shows what everyone should be aware of—we got to 11th by New Year, not least due to turkey-shoots against sides in freefall (Fulham, Wigan) and then proceeded to flatline for the remainder of the season.

Ramos' reputation rests solely on two successful seasons with Sevilla. They'd narrowly missed out on CL qualification the season before he took over, overhauled at the last gasp by Betis under Ramos' successor there (Ramos' achievement at Betis was, shall we say, decidedly ho-hum, as everywhere else). On this rather slender basis, he's branded as a 'world-class' manager by Dan Ashcroft and others. Are they having a laugh, or what?

Jol's best season defensively was 2005-6 when we played 4 central midfielders across the pitch in front of a defence which included King, Lee & Stalteri. We conceded 38 goals.

The following season we conceded 54.

This season we have conceded 36 so far with 6 to play with a midfield that contained Modric and Lennon nearly all season.

That defensive solidity was largely due to the acquisitions of Ramos who managed to do what Jol catagoricvally couldn't. Identify the weakest links and radically improve them.

 

[Coyboy]

BC, in case you are interested or wondering I am not going to answer your post. No offence whatsoever, I respect your views but we have been here haven't we. I didn't even really read your post fully. I just find it tiring going over the same stuff. I responded to Yanno and it has somehow, in large part due to my posts, become a disection of Ramos' time. That time has passed and I don't see the mileage in rehashing it. As I said, I am responsible for reliving it here but six months on is there much point in going over it, are we going to say out new?