Harry Redknapp's first interview since leaving Spurs

[$hoguN]

I found that article a rather frustrating read. It seriously bothers me to read that he still thinks it was only bad luck that stopped us finishing third, as it most certainly was not. How he cannot see that poor decisions, bad performances and a shocking inability to address major weaknesses contributed to our slump? In fact, how can he not see that by the end of the season we were relying on individual brilliance to win us matches rather than using our superior playing ability.

Also it is absolutely shocking that he rates himself a better coach than Wenger, who over the years has imposed a style of football on Arsenal that is recognised throughout the World. Basically, having read that article I couldn't be happier we got rid of him when we did, as he clearly wouldn't have addressed the problems we were having as to him they did not exist.

 

[Sp3akerboxxx]

Yes...but the fact that you seem to think it is a clincher points to just how indoctrinated you are by the meeja portratyal of his time at Chelsea.
He was hired to phase the veteran players out and make them more exciting. The owner stated repeatedly that finishing outside the top 4 was not a problem that season, including not long before sacking him. When he was sacked, Chelsea were 5th and well within touching distance of 4th - after he was sacked di Matteo had a lower points per game ratio and took them form 5th and within touching distance of 4th, to 6th and somewhat off the pace. The Chelsea dressing-room was poisonous for his predecessors, and shows signs of being poisonous for his successor. It was the first year of a project that was intended to be beneficial in the long-run not the short.
Of course he made mistakes, everyone does, but I think he is a better man and manager for his time at Chelsea and his experience in the EPL with them with benefit us.

Don't be condescending and aloof, it is very unbecoming. I do not need the media's opinion to illustrate that he had a squad that 99% of PL managers would have killed for, and the results did not reflect the quality that he had at his disposal. Perhaps the main criticism is since he has become Tottenham manager our team has looked incredibly boring with nothing going forwards at all. People like to refer to the Newcastle game as a good performance, saying that "we were better than them". We may well have been better than them but neither team played well that day. Saying we were better than Newcastle on that day was like comparing two shits to see which one looked more like roses.

 

[Harry_Snatch]

er, who said I believe the media portrayal? Read the conversation back. I said I was concerned that the players would not adapt to AVB's advanced (compared to the 'arry regime) coaching techniques.

ok. Why are you concerned?

 

[Harry_Snatch]

Don't be condescending and aloof, it is very unbecoming. I do not need the media's opinion to illustrate that he had a squad that 99% of PL managers would have killed for, and the results did not reflect the quality that he had at his disposal. Perhaps the main criticism is since he has become Tottenham manager our team has looked incredibly boring with nothing going forwards at all. People like to refer to the Newcastle game as a good performance, saying that "we were better than them". We may well have been better than them but neither team played well that day. Saying we were better than Newcastle on that day was like comparing two shits to see which one looked more like roses.

To say a team is boring after the first 3 games is a bit harsh.

 

[StartingPrice]

Don't be condescending and aloof, it is very unbecoming. I do not need the media's opinion to illustrate that he had a squad that 99% of PL managers would have killed for, and the results did not reflect the quality that he had at his disposal. Perhaps the main criticism is since he has become Tottenham manager our team has looked incredibly boring with nothing going forwards at all. People like to refer to the Newcastle game as a good performance, saying that "we were better than them". We may well have been better than them but neither team played well that day. Saying we were better than Newcastle on that day was like comparing two shits to see which one looked more like roses.

And, as I have explained in this thread, and the other one where we seem to be carrying this out, it is wholly anachronistic to focus on his results at Chelsea or imagine that he was doing something idiotic in leaving the veteran payers out at Chelsea. He had been assured, repeatedly, that, as his remit was to phase the veterans out and alter the style of play, and this was for the long term benefit of the club, finishing in the top 4 was not a requisite...and yet they were fifth and within touching distance of fourth, in any case. Likewise, he was doing what Abrahmovich wanted him to do in phasing out the veterans, and they were schooled and successful in playing a certain, defensive brand of football and would, no doubt have hindered him in trying to alter the style of play. I am sure he knew well enough that if he shoved all of the veterans into the team that results would improve in the short-term, but that would have hindered the remit he had, and so why should he do that when his boss had assured him repeeatedly that he wasn't too concerned about results.

Sorry, but your analysis of his games with us is just not what I saw at all. We were not poor against Newcastle - this is the team whi finished fifth, who had had no upheavals or major departures in the Summer, at a notoriously difficult ground where they lost once all of last season - we absolutely dominated them in the first half, hit the woodwork twice and had several other chances. And we were pretty much even with them in the second half - and that was with 1 (ONE) available first team striker who was wholly unsuited to the style of play the manager was trying to inculcate. They scored a goal through individual brilliance and we conceded a penalty while Sandro, who would have been covering the space Ben Arfa was running into, was off the pitch injured. There is an old adage that you can only play as well as the opposition let you, and we didn't let Newcastle play on their own patch where they always get at clubs backed by a hugely vocal and partisan crowd. We played very well that day, and were very unlucky not to get something from the game.

I'm sorry if you think I am being condescending, but, sorry, for you to make the arguments you are I can only conclude that you have taken everything the meeja has said about his time at Cheslea at face value and then looked at the results in a totally uncritical eye with that in mind and making no allowance at all for context.

 

[Sp3akerboxxx]

And, as I have explained in this thread, and the other one where we seem to be carrying this out, it is wholly anachronistic to focus on his results at Chelsea or imagine that he was doing something idiotic in leaving the veteran payers out at Chelsea. He had been assured, repeatedly, that, as his remit was to phase the veterans out and alter the style of play, and this was for the long term benefit of the club, finishing in the top 4 was not a requisite...and yet they were fifth and within touching distance of fourth, in any case. Likewise, he was doing what Abrahmovich wanted him to do in phasing out the veterans, and they were schooled and successful in playing a certain, defensive brand of football and would, no doubt have hindered him in trying to alter the style of play. I am sure he knew well enough that if he shoved all of the veterans into the team that results would improve in the short-term, but that would have hindered the remit he had, and so why should he do that when his boss had assured him repeeatedly that he wasn't too concerned about results.

Sorry, but your analysis of his games with us is just not what I saw at all. We were not poor against Newcastle - this is the team whi finished fifth, who had had no upheavals or major departures in the Summer, at a notoriously difficult ground where they lost once all of last season - we absolutely dominated them in the first half, hit the woodwork twice and had several other chances. And we were pretty much even with them in the second half - and that was with 1 (ONE) available first team striker who was wholly unsuited to the style of play the manager was trying to inculcate. They scored a goal through individual brilliance and we conceded a penalty while Sandro, who would have been covering the space Ben Arfa was running into, was off the pitch injured. There is an old adage that you can only play as well as the opposition let you, and we didn't let Newcastle play on their own patch where they always get at clubs backed by a hugely vocal and partisan crowd. We played very well that day, and were very unlucky not to get something from the game.

I'm sorry if you think I am being condescending, but, sorry, for you to make the arguments you are I can only conclude that you have taken everything the meeja has said about his time at Cheslea at face value and then looked at the results in a totally uncritical eye with that in mind and making no allowance at all for context.

Oh you were so close to hiding your arrogance on this one.

I do take the context into hand, I just do not see how 'losing control of the dressing room' is an excuse for the manager. Surely if you cannot control your players then that is a negative on a manager's performance, not an excuse. Even within the 'context' of the situation, the squad at his disposal was far too good for where they were placed, even if you minus Lampard, Terry, Drogba, and Malouda.

I just do not understand people like yourself who flatly refuse to admit that AVB performed poorly at Chelsea. Yes he had problems, but the problems he had were far easier to deal with than say Wenger's, who has to run at a profit every season.

 

[StartingPrice]

Oh you were so close to hiding your arrogance on this one.

I do take the context into hand, I just do not see how 'losing control of the dressing room' is an excuse for the manager. Surely if you cannot control your players then that is a negative on a manager's performance, not an excuse. Even within the 'context' of the situation, the squad at his disposal was far too good for where they were placed, even if you minus Lampard, Terry, Drogba, and Malouda.

I just do not understand people like yourself who flatly refuse to admit that AVB performed poorly at Chelsea. Yes he had problems, but the problems he had were far easier to deal with than say Wenger's, who has to run at a profit every season.

Oooooh, you were just so close to hiding your arrogance on this one.

I just don't understand people like yourself who flatly refuse to admit that there is a big difference between saying he made mistakes, which I admit readily* (hell, even he admits readily), and suggesting he plum performed poorly, which is what you were doing.

Saying that you take the context into account is just not the same as actually taking the context into account...and you do not take the context into account at all, otherwise you would acknowledge that if a manager is given a remit to phase out veteran players who could give results immediately but at the expense of a new style of play, then it is axiomatic that there may be some poor results - which is, presumably, why the owner stated that he understood this fully and there was no insistence on CL football.

Your arrogance, again, shows through when you can only categorise an explanation as an excuse - I explain why he lsot the dressing-room, I have no interest in excusing it (what ever would give you the impression that I would?).

In context, he made some mistakes, but I also foresaw it happening, because it was kinda obvious, which does kinda mitigate against any interretation that he was totally woeful, as the media portratyed it - and therefore anyone who is trying to portray him as having being wholly woeful at Cheslea is pursuing the same line as the media (which makes it seem highly likely that htye have been influenced by the media and are totally ignoring the context).

* As seen as I sincerely believe that some of the best lessons are learned from some of the worst mistakes, and I believe AVB has learned from mistakes he made at Chelsea, it makes no logical sense to believe I am trying to excuse he failings at Chelsea to nothingness - as then he would have no lessons to learn. I just categorically do not accept any simplistic, media driven agenda of portraying him as wholly inept.

 

[SpurSince57]

Oh dear. And what player interviews would they be exactly?

We have a squad of 25 players, how many do you claim to have heard interviews with praising AVB's methods?

Even discounting the glaringly obvious fact that player interviews are not at all indicative of the genuine feelings of the player in question, let alone those of the entire group.

Did any of our players come out and criticize Ramos' methods while he was at the club? No? Because to do so would be career suicide.

Ergo, your point is....pointless.

Lennon, Defoe, Dawson, Jenas, Walker…

But hey, who needs what players have actually said when you can interpret a momentary 'nod and wink' so accurately?

 

[Sp3akerboxxx]

Oooooh, you were just so close to hiding your arrogance on this one.

I just don't understand people like yourself who flatly refuse to admit that there is a big difference between saying he made mistakes, which I admit readily* (hell, even he admits readily), and suggesting he plum performed poorly, which is what you were doing.

Saying that you take the context into account is just not the same as actually taking the context into account...and you do not take the context into account at all, otherwise you would acknowledge that if a manager is given a remit to phase out veteran players who could give results immediately but at the expense of a new style of play, then it is axiomatic that there may be some poor results - which is, presumably, why the owner stated that he understood this fully and there was no insistence on CL football.

Your arrogance, again, shows through when you can only categorise an explanation as an excuse - I explain why he lsot the dressing-room, I have no interest in excusing it (what ever would give you the impression that I would?).

In context, he made some mistakes, but I also foresaw it happening, because it was kinda obvious, which does kinda mitigate against any interretation that he was totally woeful, as the media portratyed it - and therefore anyone who is trying to portray him as having being wholly woeful at Cheslea is pursuing the same line as the media (which makes it seem highly likely that htye have been influenced by the media and are totally ignoring the context).

* As seen as I sincerely believe that some of the best lessons are learned from some of the worst mistakes, and I believe AVB has learned from mistakes he made at Chelsea, it makes no logical sense to believe I am trying to excuse he failings at Chelsea to nothingness - as then he would have no lessons to learn. I just categorically do not accept any simplistic, media driven agenda of portraying him as wholly inept.

No one said that he was "wholly woeful" at Chelsea, just that his performance left much to be desired. I believe you are mistaking "taking the context into account" with having a different interpretation of the situation at the time. Just because I "take the context into account" does not mean that my opinion of those circumstances has to mirror yours. This would seem like the age old argument between an 'objective reality' and a 'subjective reality', and it is clear which side of that argument you fall on.

Please stop using the infantile media crusader stance, like no one has noticed that the media spins things and you are the only person in the land who hasn't been brainwashed. My viewpoint was comprised with no help from the media. Yes you can expect lowered expectations when phasing in a new style of play, and new players. However, Chelsea won the double the season before that, and lowered expectations would not see the team in 5th place, and on the edge of going out of the Champions League

 

[YidGraham]

A fair few interesting things from that interview.

One wonders that as he wasn't distracted, had a better squad than arsenal and he's the best coach around how he managed to finish below arsenal. Ahhh bad luck....

Other point was the revisionism on moving modric to the middle. He was vehemently opposed to it (I remember quotes where he flat out said he couldn't play there) and it seemed his hand was forced rather than it being a flash of inspiration. This during the time when modric was playing central for croatia so had proven form there.

Being a young(ish) spurs fan the Harry years have by far been the most exciting a pleasing for me but boy will I not miss the stuff that comes from his gob.

 

[King of Otters]

Lennon, Defoe, Dawson, Jenas, Walker…
But hey, who needs what players have actually said when you can interpret a momentary 'nod and wink' so accurately?

Jenas on Ramos "We all feel it's good times now. One of the main things is the manager has installed a lot of confidence in the players and he trusts us.
"He wants us to play football and attack. He knows this is the football that suits us."

Dawson pre-season before the '8 points from 2 games' 'We’re confident we can challenge for the top four this season. We’ve had a good pre-season, scored plenty of goals and the fans are excited by the new players that have come in.
'If you look at the signings we have made — Luca, Giovani and others — that shows the club’s ambition. David Bentley will also be a good signing.

Ledley on Ramos "Without taking anything away from the previous regime, the players know this manager has a great record in cups. He has a knack of getting his players to believe, even against big sides, that they can find a way of getting the job done."

Woodgate (who later revealed his true feelings) on Ramos "If you speak to any of the players at Spurs they would tell you the coach has had a big influence on them already."

Hudd praising his new Juande 'no ketchup diet' (I'm sure this interview expresses exactly how he really felt, he wouldn't lie in an interview with the press now he would he?) http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/tom-huddlestone-heaps-praise-on-new-722622

Keane on Ramos "This just goes to show what he has done in a short amount of time. It's no fluke because he did it at Sevilla as well so he must have something really special. Certain managers have that luck about them. He has certainly done a tremendous job. To have a trophy after a few months is an incredible achievement.He has helped us to believe we can win. You could see that not just against Chelsea, but in previous games"

​

​

​

I think that's enough for now.​

​

Note to anyone else reading this. I'm not slagging off AVB, far from it. I'm just making the point that player interviews with the press aren't worth the paper they're written on. Most of the the players above later went on to slag off Juande, and with good reason, he was a disaster. But it does call into question whether they were being entirely truthful when they heaped praise on our unhappy Spanish friend while he was still in charge.​

 

[SpurSince57]

Well, until AVB turns out to be a Ramos-style disaster, I'll give the players the benefit of the doubt.

 

[StartingPrice]

1) No one said that he was "wholly woeful" at Chelsea, just that his performance left much to be desired.
2) I believe you are mistaking "taking the context into account" with having a different interpretation of the situation at the time.
3) Just because I "take the context into account" does not mean that my opinion of those circumstances has to mirror yours.
4) This would seem like the age old argument between an 'objective reality' and a 'subjective reality', and it is clear which side of that argument you fall on.

5) Please stop using the infantile media crusader stance,
6) like no one has noticed that the media spins things and you are the only person in the land who hasn't been brainwashed.
7) My viewpoint was comprised with no help from the media.
8) Yes you can expect lowered expectations when phasing in a new style of play, and new players. However,
9) Chelsea won the double the season before that, and lowered expectations would not see the team in 5th place, and on the edge of going out of the Champions League

1) Did I say you said he was wholly woeful. I believe his reign at Chelsea was portrayed in certain quarters as wholly woeful - primarily by taking no aco**** of the context whatsoever, and viewing any issues to arise as being wholly AVBs fault. Where you come into it (at all) is that we have stated that he inherited a double winning side, his perfromamce left a lot to be desired, he only has 3 wins in the EPL in the last 15 games, he's had benign fixtures for us and got poor results*, being new isn't an excuse, getting rid [sic.] of AVB hasn't done Chelsea any harm (would be nice if you actually acknowledged that actually di Matteo actually had a lower points per game ratio than AVB last season after bringing the veteran players back), and sought to minimize his achievements at Porto. Now excuse me for extrapolating, and I am not saying you are accusing him of being wholly woeful, but it does come across that you really don't rate him very much - far mroe on the wholly woeful side of the pendulum than even holding a neutral opinion about him.
*I would call them disappointing results, from a mixed bag of performances (from very good at Newcastle to woeful against Norwich), but would allow that maybe some of the players heads were dropping a bit against Norwich due to playing very well (N) and pretty good for two-thirds of the WBA and getting jsut one point from it. I would also point to the abscence of key signings and injured players, and limited time to work with the players. No excuses, just understanding the context of things.

2) No, no mistake on that (I'm quite good with that kind of thing, thanks ). If you showed me clearly that you had taken all the factors I listed into account and reached a rational conclusion that was different to mine, I would happily acknowledge that (as I have in other threads, in other debates, with other posters). But I genuinely don't see any of that coming from you. I can point to the fact that I predicted pretty much what was going to happen at Chelsea (while most forum members were terrified that Chelsea were getting the greatest manager ever), and that would seem to suggest that I do, in fact, understand the context he was operating in very clearly. Because you piont blank refuse to acknowledge the context as even being contributory to, or mitigating against an overly harsh rading of the situation at, Chelsea, it leads me to a conclusion that you aren't paying due consideration to it, and not that you are paying due consideration to it but jsut reaching alternative conclusions.

3) Well, thanks for the lesson in disputation 1-0-1 I refer you to 2, above.

4) Oooh, 'ark at 'er Maybe it is clear which side of the fence I sit (though it might help if you told me ). I did think, though, that I took a grown up and educated view on it. In this instance, I am more than willing to accept an alternative interpretation where and when I see it explained rationally. I have yet to see that. Ever attempt you have put forward to justify your (to me) overly harsh judgement of his time at Chelsea and his opening games with us, I have shown to be unacceptable. I am willing to ameliorate, or alter, my opinion in the face of viable alternative answers/superior disputation. I have met with neither as of yet.

5) There is nothing infantile in stating that the media appear to be carrying out a campaign against AVB, or that the media can have a disturbing, indeed, all pervasive influence on individuals or the public at large (having studied such things at post-graduate level it does kinda make one aware of the isues, ta ). I don't know that you haven't been influences, wholly or in part, by the media (other than by your assertion), but I do know that you seem to hold an overly harsh opinion of AVB, and that does seem to mirror (to one degree or another) the media's portrayal of him. I will utilise whatever arguments and debating techniques I see fit - I don't really care whether you like them or not (but a psychologist may suggest that there is a reason you are reacting particularly to this possibility ).

6) Where did I say that. In fact, aside with any generalised awareness of media issues (see 5, above), I am also aware that there are many Spurs fans on this very forum who believe a lot of their contemporaries hold a somewhat negative opinion of AVB due to the media's influence (indeed, two posters, yesterday, stated explicitly that they ascribed their father's negative view of him to the media). Equally, there are a large number of posters denying that there negative view of AVB is influenced wholly or in part by the media. Though once they get past this, they do seem to struggle to explain it.

7) Yes, we all like to believe this - and yet none of us live in a media-free bubble, and, presumably, the media must be influencing someone. If your opinion happens to mirror, to any degree, the pervasive attitude coming from media sources, you can't blame people for making a connection. You could dispel it with compelling rational argument - sorry, but you haven't done that yet. Maybe, alternatively, you could consider that there is a possibility that you have been influenced by the media - it does happen (to most folk).

8) Thankyou for acknowledging that. Now, just how low would you allow those expectations to go? Abrahmovich stated, explicitly and publicly, that he was prepared to miss out on CL football as he understood that what AVB was doing was for the good of the club - that was how low he was prepared to take his expectation. Makes it reflect more badly on him, than on AVB, IMVHO, that he should state this emphatically several times and then sack him at a time when Cheslea were fifth and within touching distance of fourth spot.

9) Wouldn't it? That truly is a subjective opinion. As said in 8, above, it wasn't what Abrahmovich was saying.And that is the whole problem with your argument. You ignore what Abrahmovich said, but he got rid of the manager who won them the double. So, you expected them to do considerably better than the owner did, but think that the fact that the owner sacked him for doing no worse than he said was acceptable, having sacked a manager for achieving the double the previous year, it reflects badly on AVB. I think that's harsh.

Like I said, he made mistakes, I just do not think those mistakes invalidate him from being a very good, and potentially great, manager. You seem to.

 

[StartingPrice]

​

Note to anyone else reading this. I'm not slagging off AVB, far from it.

Are you slagging AVB off (and spilling wor pint)?

 

[PrettyColors]

And those who are writing AVB off after THREE games are not?

Never said they weren't mate. I am actually pro-AVB.

 

[parklane1]

Never said they weren't mate. I am actually pro-AVB.