In effect I feel we are not signing him to be Tainio's replacement - a central midfielder played somewhat out of position on the left he is, but a first choice player when fit (as Tainio was for the majority of his time at spurs) he is not, not yet at any rate. The crux of the matter is that O'Hara will be happy to be second choice - and not even in his best position - for the next two seasons, while Tainio will not. The two questions for me are; 1. Is O'Hara good enough to be a backup player to the LM and CM positions , and 2. Is it fair enough to rely on him for LM and LB when he should be playing CM? 1 - I'm not sure about, 2- Given that this is Spurs and his chances of playing in a good prem team with UEFA appearences would be limited elsewhere I think it is.
We will buy other midfielders to be first choice in CM and LM and thereby replace Tainio long term.
When he won the award he said something along the lines of he thought he'd had a good season 'although today wasn't good if i'm being honest'. He got a round of applause for his honesty.
"Well, you're crap, but jolly good work on admitting it. Have a round of applause. And a new contract."
Yes, I realise that's incredibly harsh and I do rate JOH. He earned that award and has put in some very good performances, displaying commitment in every role he's been asked to fill (including on the bench and in the ressies). I think he could be a very, very valuable squad player for the next couple of years before making us a tidy sum from another Premier League side. I just think thats typical of the acceptance of mediocrity in England.
A reminder to those browsing without an account, it's quick and easy to Register Here. Come and join the fun!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.