The Harry Effect

[SoulDog]

I actually quite like reading what Arry has to say in the spurs programme he says things nice and simple and is easy to understand what he saying. I think that is just how arry is, does the simple things well.


Yes we are not playing such nice football now, but we are getting the results, the players are not scared to put there foots in, we are playing much more direct and it is working. Im glad we are out the relegation zone and I think arry will do ok this season but is he the answer? I dont think so...

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Interesting though how this guy Simon Clifford is saying very similar things to what I have been saying. My doubts about Redknapp's actual coaching abilities etc. How we not only ditched a good manager but a fantastic new regime that involved improving fitness and diet. Funny how the grumblers were people like Bentley struggling for fitness and form.
Also corresponds with Poyets remark about the players being a too thich to comprehend insructions. It also reflects Yanno's viewpoint about the communication problem, which I accept was also partly down Ramos.

This bloke resigned, and it's easy to figure out why and also why Redknapp has insisted on surrounding himself with a bunch of yes men.

To be honest I was worried before reading this. But this article sums up why perfectly.

I also saw that my old friend Harry Redknapp has enjoyed initial success at Tottenham Hotspur. I think he saw the writing was on the wall at Portsmouth, who had spent heavily in the hunt for success, and I think he was already looking for a way out. He’s now got millions of pounds worth of talent at his disposal – Mickey Mouse, if put in charge of that team, would enjoy success there, and I think Juande Ramos’ failings came down to a lack of communication and the player’s failing to respond foreign coaching methods and ideas.


If there’s one thing that Harry is good at, it’s working with players that are earning high salaries. People say that Harry can work on a budget and work his magic in the transfer market, and his great genius is having friends who are agents who get to the good players first and working with chairmen who are willing to pay the extortionate salaries that these players demand.
My abiding memory of Harry when we were working at Southampton is him sitting at his desk reading either The Sun or The Racing Post and it said everything to me when he appointed Kevin Bond as his assistant manager. Kevin’s a lovely man. On the training field, I’ve probably never seen anybody worse. Last year he got Bournemouth relegated and was forced to leave Newcastle yet there he is sat next to Harry at Tottenham Hotspur. People say that Harry did well at West Ham in bringing through the young players, but this was completely down to the academy director at the time, Tony Carr, who gets little credit.
Harry once said to me that he didn’t believe in coaching; he believed that you’re either born a good player or you’re not. It therefore makes more sense to me that he has employed Kevin Bond as his assistant. I mentioned to Harry that he should have a look at the Pro Zone statistics when we were at Southampton, which showed that in the first-half of games we were second in the table but in the second we were third-bottom, and I questioned the team’s fitness. I resigned on the Tuesday, and on the Saturday Southampton went into a 3-0 lead against Leeds United and then lost the game 4-3. I always remember Harry’s remarks to me weeks before that match, which were that he had never seen a computer win a football match.

 

[DC_Boy]

well our football may not have pretty at times v rovers - but overall it wa lot lot lot prettier and more attractive than the negative fouling fare Rovers dished up

I expect we will play the better football v toffees too

 

[Coyboy]

Yes, if you believe every word of that including the opinion, supposition and guess work then it is worrying.

 

[Shanks]

Interesting though how this guy Simon Clifford is saying very similar things to what I have been saying. My doubts about Redknapp's actual coaching abilities etc. How we not only ditched a good manager but a fantastic new regime that involved improving fitness and diet. Funny how the grumblers were people like Bentley struggling for fitness and form.
Also corresponds with Poyets remark about the players being a too thich to comprehend insructions. It also reflects Yanno's viewpoint about the communication problem, which I accept was also partly down Ramos.

This bloke resigned, and it's easy to figure out why and also why Redknapp has insisted on surrounding himself with a bunch of yes men.

To be honest I was worried before reading this. But this article sums up why perfectly.

Firstly I removed the article quote, because it was the biggest load of tosh I've ever seen. Clearly from someone who is biased by his view point.

Now I do grant you that Redknapp may not be the most tactically astute in the business, but one thing he does well, is getting players to play for him.
No one can deny that.

Now the part highlighted, whilst I agree that Ramos is a good manager and I liked his regime, especially surrounding the fitness/diet area, one thing was certain, that it wasn't working at spurs.

This might be because of what Yanno highlighted, the communication, it may also be because his positive building was slightly out dated, or not within the 'engish' way, but it was quite clear that it wasn't working.

Surely you cannot deny, that Ramos, could see these problems and shoujld have rectified them, to give himself some breathing space?

Everything he done, whilst the back end was good, the front end or finished product wasn't.

Ledley King was being rested for League games, to play in Cup games - that immediately gave the impression that Ramos was only interested in one thing, and that was himself - build his silverware collection up.

I saw absolutely no evidence what so ever of this revolution in any league games, and even cup games this season, to indicate that he was putting in good foundations.

Its not rocket science to figure that out, and I'm surprised Ramos didn't start playing players in their correct position, with simple instructions - confidence, breeds confidence, winning breeds winning.

Get some wins, anyway you can, then work at the more complex of matters.

Exactly what Redknapp is doing - playing players in their correct positions, or at least the more comfortable positions. With simple direct instructions, get at them, run about, clear your lines, dont fuck about with the ball.

Both managers doing it their way, one is working, one failed to work.

Now, Redknapps plan was to get through to January were we could bolster a rather weak looking midfield. Hudd has started to play well, given the chance and has bulked up our midfield more than I thought he would.

If we can get into a decent position come January, we might actually see our squad improve somewhat - he could take us further, as you quite rightly stated, you hope he proves you wrong.

I'm not so sure he will prove you wrong with the tactical awareness, but I do think he will prove you wrong with the results.

 

[Coyboy]

Firstly I removed the article quote, because it was the biggest load of tosh I've ever written. Clearly from someone who is biased by his view point.

Now I do grant you that Redknapp may not be the most tactically astute in the business, but one thing he does well, is getting players to play for him.
No one can deny that.

Now the part highlighted, whilst I agree that Ramos is a good manager and I liked his regime, especially surrounding the fitness/diet area, one thing was certain, that it wasn't working at spurs.

This might be because of what Yanno highlighted, the communication, it may also be because his positive building was slightly out dated, or not within the 'engish' way, but it was quite clear that it wasn't working.

Surely you cannot deny, that Ramos, could see these problems and shoujld have rectified them, to give himself some breathing space?

Everything he done, whilst the back end was good, the front end or finished product wasn't.

Ledley King was being rested for League games, to play in Cup games - that immediately gave the impression that Ramos was only interested in one thing, and that was himself - build his silverware collection up.

I saw absolutely no evidence what so ever of this revolution in any league games, and even cup games this season, to indicate that he was putting in good foundations.

Its not rocket science to figure that out, and I'm surprised Ramos didn't start playing players in their correct position, with simple instructions - confidence, breeds confidence, winning breeds winning.

Get some wins, anyway you can, then work at the more complex of matters.

Exactly what Redknapp is doing - playing players in their correct positions, or at least the more comfortable positions. With simple direct instructions, get at them, run about, clear your lines, dont fuck about with the ball.

Both managers doing it their way, one is working, one failed to work.

Now, Redknapps plan was to get through to January were we could bolster a rather weak looking midfield. Hudd has started to play well, given the chance and has bulked up our midfield more than I thought he would.

If we can get into a decent position come January, we might actually see our squad improve somewhat - he could take us further, as you quite rightly stated, you hope he proves you wrong.

I'm not so sure he will prove you wrong with the tactical awareness, but I do think he will prove you wrong with the results.

It was you?

The King situation is not something people have mentioned a lot, oddly, because it is vital. He played him in so few league games-as far as I remember Chelsea and Sunderland-and had he realised the league was most important and played him, he may as you say have bought himself breathing space. Instead he made out that King was a 'Bentley' that you could only bring out of the garage on certain occassions.

Rednapp has brought him out on the right occassions. So there's that.

 

[idlepete]

He’s now got millions of pounds worth of talent at his disposal – Mickey Mouse, if put in charge of that team, would enjoy success there,

Shit, we missed a trick not hiring Mickey. He's better than Redknapp, Ramos or Jol.

 

[Hoowl]

For all the the stats in the first post i'm surprised this thread got much beyond the stats that count:

08/09 ------WIN --- LOSS --- DRAW
Ramos ----- 17% ---58% -----15%
Redknapp -- 75% ---17.5% ---12.5%

That's pretty much all we can examine at the moment. At the end of the season we can take a step back and see how Redknapp has done but as for Ramos, I previously wrote this post on the virtue of continuity and I think some of it applies now:

When a manager is struggling a lot is said about continuity but surely continuity is only a good thing with the right person in charge? The obvious problem with this logic is that there is no way to definitively say that we have the right person in charge. We can only know the answer retrospectively and if a manager is sacked we can only speculate what could have been.

Fergurson had a poor start to his United managerial career. He potentially could have been sacked and no-one would have been the wiser about how United would have blossomed with him at the helm. In the case of Martin Jol, we can only guess how we would be doing now if he were still in charge. He could have continued the poor start to last season or he could have taken us up the table.

The case of Martin Jol can possibly be compared to Curbishly or Grady. Some fans considered that Jol had taken the club as far as he could and we needed someone else to help us push on. However, there is no guarentees that a new manager can come in and improve the teams fortunes. Maybe the manager has overachieved at the club but the fans have become complacent with their percieved deserved position in the league. As I said, we can only speculate.

Anyway, I think the chairman should always have an idea of potential managers to come and replace the current incumbant if necessary. I'm not suggesting he goes and starts sounding out these guys at the first signs of trouble but he should always be aware who we could get if necessary. As for deciding whether to sack the current manager, we need to look at the facts. Are there any signs of improvement? Are we grinding our results? One of these clues will come on Sunday. I don't care how good Hull are, we have the players to beat them (the same way we had the players to beat Sunderland and Wigan). If we don't do that then I can see Levys trigger finger becoming very itchy despite the possible benefits of continuity.

 

[Michey]

Yes, if you believe every word of that including the opinion, supposition and guess work then it is worrying.

When would it not be worrying :think:

100% true
80% true
60% true
40% true
20% true
10% true

 

[spursFanKC]

For all the the stats in the first post i'm surprised this thread got much beyond the stats that count:

08/09 ------WIN --- LOSS --- DRAW
Ramos ----- 17% ---58% -----15%
Redknapp -- 75% ---17.5% ---12.5%

That's pretty much all we can examine at the moment. At the end of the season we can take a step back and see how Redknapp has done but as for Ramos, I previously wrote this post on the virtue of continuity and I think some of it applies now:

Hoowl - very nicely put. Bottom line for me is that the team is more competitive than it has been for a while and we are getting results.

I did like one of the earlier posts that the execs should be on the lookout for a future manager. A SAF or AW don't come along much and it would be nice to follow the old Liverpool model where they promoted from within although aside from Allen I am not sure who I would like as next manager.

 

[themanwhofellasleep]

I simply don't believe for a second that Harry isn't tactically astute.

I think that a lot of the rubbish surrounding Harry is to do with perceptions. We are told he's not a tactical manager. We're told that he's just a lovable rogue who toussles the players' hair and tells them that they're world-beaters. We're told over and over what a great man-manager he is, as though being a good man-manager automatically means that you don't understand tactics.

The thing is, people keep on separating things like tactics, man-management, motivation, style and team-selection, as though they are all different things. But actually, they are all components of football management. You can't be a good manager if you're tactical and move players around like chess pieces, but can't motivate the players to run 10 metres. You can't be a good manager if you motivate the players but fail to notice that the opposition are playing three at the back or don't know which players should be attacking and which should be defending.

The art of management is combining all the various skills: buying the right players, selecting the right team, motivating the players, ensuring that the team has the right shape and can respond to changes on the pitch. And much more. A manager wins football games by getting the combination right.

A manager may have decisions to make about specific players. For example, he might think that Pavlyuchenko is dropping too deep, concerned with getting involved with build-up play, and as a result isn't in positions to score goals, so he's getting demoralised. And so he might tell Pav to just hang around the box, waiting for chances. Or he might think that ideally a team should play 4-3-3 but he knows that the players aren't confident at the moment so until results pick up he wants them to play in a formation that they feel comfortable with. Or a thousand other examples that aren't strictly either a) tactics or b) man-management, but simply good management in getting the team to win.

So, at the end of the day, I don't think there are tactical manager or motivational managers, there are simply good managers and bad managers. And a good manager shouldn't be obsessed with either man-management or tactics, only with getting a team winning.

A lot of this is to do with England vs Europe, and the notion that all English coaches are simply pig-headed bulldogs who motivate the players, whereas European coaches are tactical geniuses who can see things mere mortals cannot. And it's rubbish. Look at Liverpool under Benitez and Bolton under Allardyce; both essentially played ugly, long-ball football (although Liverpool had better players). But whereas Benitez was looked upon as a quintessential European manager whose sides controlled every aspect of the game, Allardyce was seen as an old-fashioned long-ball merchant. I dislike both managers, but I don't think Benitez was drastically better than Allardyce - he just had access to much better players.

In conclusion: Harry, so far, so good.

 

[AngerManagement]

That article is moronic

To suggest that Mickey Mouse could enjoy success with the quality in the sqaud is to basically dimiss the worth of having a manager in the game at all.

The is a reason to jobs require top managers and said top managers are paid vast sums of money. To suggest their role is trivial to the extent a ficticious cartoon mouse could do it is to frankly make a fool out of yourself (this is excatly what the writer has achieved.)

Tell that to those managers who have tried and failed to bring success to clubs brimming with talent in recent times, countless Newcastle managers, Roy Evans during his regin at Liverpool, Ranieri at Chelsea (Avaram GRant too) managers at Real and Barca constanly pay the price for failed campagins dispite having untold talent at their disposal.

There are many many more factors involved in a top manager bringing success to a top club then simply the players in the squad they manage. For the authour of that article to have such a generic view is to prove one of two things, he is an idiot or he has a personal vendetta and is using his article to express his bitterness with what is little more then sour grapes (could well be both.)

The sad things is there are so many people who will simply take everything he wrote as the gospbel seeing as far too few question what they read and hear and are all to quick to take such hate mongering at face value and adopt it as their own view.

That article has all the class of a BNP newsletter informing the members of Dagenham borough that the government is giving £80,00 grants to any African family wishing to purchase a house in the area.

He dismisses Redknapps achievements at Pompey, that is laughable, before Redknapp they were a lower league team with no hope of every reaching the top flight. Under him they became established Premiership outfit and won the FA cup to boot (the first non top four side to do so in 13 or so years)

I'm sure if you were to ask any well informed non bitter Pompey fan if Redknapp under achieved there they would not be so quick to agree with the author on this occasion.

How any Spurs fan can be looking to shoot down or write off Redknapp already is truely beyond me and really disapoints me. He as the new manager deserves a clean slate with us, it is after all the first time he has ever been giving such a high profile and presitgeous role at a club with real potential and resources.

So in my mind his work at the likes of Pompey and West Ham is not directly comparible with what he will have to do here, he has never been in the postion he is now and while this serves as no evidence for why he can take us forward, equally it does not to serve to prove he cannot and at this stage (after already dragging us out of the bottom 3) he certainly deserves the beneift of (the admittidly large) doubt.

I honestly think those banging on about how we shouldn't have sacked Ramos and trying to prove why Redknapp has no future are as bad as the Baekz and co bring back Martin Jol posts. Same waste of time, it doesnt matter spilt milk crying posts, just this time written with a good deal more eloquence.

I'm not trying to be a Spurs Nazi (oxymoron in the extreme) and this forum is here for debate of course, but I am truely disapointed by fellow Spurs fans who are showing such neagativity already and not (in my opinion) backing the club to the extent they should.

I am one of those people that believe strongly a positive attiuide has a direct releation to positive achievement and I feel we as the fans have a role to play in that aspect of the positive energies surrounding our club.

Im not saying we should blindly follow the club and accept whatever the system (in this case board) does and tells us, but Harry deserves and if you think not has certainly earned with his inital results the right to have us all back him 100% at this stage not to be calling him small time, belittling his past achievements and suggesting he is not good/big enough to be incharge of our club.

A few weeks ago we were languishing at the bottom, playing god awful football and never looked like scoring let alone winning. Ramos was rightly sacked as a result (the whats and whys this came to pass are no longer important) and the new guy has came in and turned things around, we are winning games and scoring goals.

this ends my interest in this thread, I will not be reading or posting in it again I hope it goes away quickly and articles like that ex Southampton failure wrote are never posted in this forum again.

 

[SpurSince57]

Interesting though how this guy Simon Clifford is saying very similar things to what I have been saying. My doubts about Redknapp's actual coaching abilities etc. How we not only ditched a good manager but a fantastic new regime that involved improving fitness and diet. Funny how the grumblers were people like Bentley struggling for fitness and form.
Also corresponds with Poyets remark about the players being a too thich to comprehend insructions. It also reflects Yanno's viewpoint about the communication problem, which I accept was also partly down Ramos.

This bloke resigned, and it's easy to figure out why and also why Redknapp has insisted on surrounding himself with a bunch of yes men.

To be honest I was worried before reading this. But this article sums up why perfectly.

So if Mickey Mouse could succeed at Spurs, what does that make Ramos? Dumbo?

The guy clearly has a personal axe to grind, in more ways than one.

 

[Coyboy]

When would it not be worrying :think:

100% true
80% true
60% true
40% true
20% true
10% true

Well I think there is some truth layered between the bitter and jaundiced side comments- that Rednapp is not a tactical mastermind and that he had done all he could at Pompey. And I am sure the Academy coach deserves a lot of credit for Lampard, Defoe and the rest but this guy's theory presupposes that Rednapp was just given these players and all he had to do was start the engine so to speak. It ignores the fact that Rednapp had to coach, develop, motivate and utilise them so they would turn out the performances that got the big clubs looking.

It is also true to say that Ramos' failings came down to lack of communication but there were other factors. But in that very sentence he contradicts himself woefully. He says Mikey Mouse could squeeze success out of our players but Ramos engineered our worst start ever? Who the fuck is he then Donald Duck? The idea that any manager can get the best out of a talented squad is rubbish. Quieroz had the best players at his disposal at Real Madrid and they finished 4th. It's about chemistry and understanding.

And trying to make out that our players didn't understand 'foreign ever so sophisticated coaching methods' makes no sense as our squad was glittered (if that's a verb) with foreign talent. (edit unless he meant foreign as in different then fine but that's another reason for Ramos' unsuitability).

I am sure his time at Soton was a mess. God knows what happened with Mandaric but the club was sinking before Rednapp got there and has ever since. There is, I am sure, truth that Rednapp was not successful at Soton and it was doomed to failure having a Rugby manager there. I am sure he is right about Bond's failures as a manager but he is not our manager he is our coach and the likes of Roeder, Rice, Clarke and Quieroz have proved the difference between coach and manager is huge.

And he is right about the 'computer' quotation but takes it out of context. There has been plenty of people who have confirmed that Rednapp uses statistics and scientific evidence as coaching instruments but he also puts value in old fashioned aspects like talent, effort, confidence and communication.

So there is some truth in what he says, as far as I know and in my opinion (BC!), but it is contaminated with half truths, smugness and bitter arrogance.

 

[Coyboy]

So if Mickey Mouse could succeed at Spurs, what does that make Ramos? Dumbo?

The guy clearly has a personal axe to grind, in more ways than one.

You beat me! I went for Donald Duck. Your cartoon favourite is obvious then!

 

[Damian99]

Of Redknapp's six EPL (on which those figures are based) games we have been behind in 4 of them. In fact Redkanpp had nothing to do with the Bolton game so technically he's been behind in 4 out of 5.

looks like I've taken repossession of you.

But the BIG difference is Reknapp got something(points) out of those games. Just what did Ramos get?

 

[Michey]

So if Mickey Mouse could succeed at Spurs, what does that make Ramos? Dumbo?

We haven't won to much silverware lately for posts like that.....


:wink:

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Firstly I removed the article quote, because it was the biggest load of tosh I've ever seen. Clearly from someone who is biased by his view point.

Now I do grant you that Redknapp may not be the most tactically astute in the business, but one thing he does well, is getting players to play for him.
No one can deny that.

Now the part highlighted, whilst I agree that Ramos is a good manager and I liked his regime, especially surrounding the fitness/diet area, one thing was certain, that it wasn't working at spurs.

This might be because of what Yanno highlighted, the communication, it may also be because his positive building was slightly out dated, or not within the 'engish' way, but it was quite clear that it wasn't working.

Surely you cannot deny, that Ramos, could see these problems and shoujld have rectified them, to give himself some breathing space?

Everything he done, whilst the back end was good, the front end or finished product wasn't.

Ledley King was being rested for League games, to play in Cup games - that immediately gave the impression that Ramos was only interested in one thing, and that was himself - build his silverware collection up.

I saw absolutely no evidence what so ever of this revolution in any league games, and even cup games this season, to indicate that he was putting in good foundations.

Its not rocket science to figure that out, and I'm surprised Ramos didn't start playing players in their correct position, with simple instructions - confidence, breeds confidence, winning breeds winning.

Get some wins, anyway you can, then work at the more complex of matters.

Exactly what Redknapp is doing - playing players in their correct positions, or at least the more comfortable positions. With simple direct instructions, get at them, run about, clear your lines, dont fuck about with the ball.

Both managers doing it their way, one is working, one failed to work.

Now, Redknapps plan was to get through to January were we could bolster a rather weak looking midfield. Hudd has started to play well, given the chance and has bulked up our midfield more than I thought he would.

If we can get into a decent position come January, we might actually see our squad improve somewhat - he could take us further, as you quite rightly stated, you hope he proves you wrong.

I'm not so sure he will prove you wrong with the tactical awareness, but I do think he will prove you wrong with the results.

I don't know why you think this bloke talks tosh but Redknapp doesn't ?

Because he's a chirpy fucker always ready with a quip. Bit of a geezers geezer.

I think you are typical of the type of person I aimed this thread at. When Ramos came in he achieved the same last year. Results picked up almost immediately. So he must be a confidence maestro too the eh ?
Ramos rarely played players out of position, but when he did I didn't like either. But Redknapp has done exactly the same. Bentley LW, Bent and Pav, Modric LM (not his best position), Huddlestone central in a 2.


I don't know why you say the article is a load of tosh. I and a couple of others were of exactly the same opinion despite have no axe to grind with him whatsoever. He inhererited all the talent young players at West Ham, added some really good players like Kanoute, Sinclair, DeCanio, Foe etc and did what with them ? Absoloutely fuck all. Pretty much the same with Pompey. He actually had one of the best defence and midfields in the EPL last season, but they were boring and but for the jammiest of cup runs would have achieved nothing but mid table mediocraty. That team should have been pushing the top 4. Same with the West Ham team. You have to ask yourself why ? Maybe because Redknapp has a deceent eye for the obviously good player, and can deliver great "your brilliant now go and fucking run about" motivational back slap but when it comes to training, coaching and tactics he's actually not very good.

What I believe is that more than anything Ramos suffered from the striker problem. An unfit, tired Pav needed to settle, and the most limited striker I've seen since Armstrong in Bent. We had no fulcrum for the passing attacking football that we were trying to play.

Getting 3/4 of a team to gel at the same time obviously didn't help. Then you had Bentley pl,aying like a **** and having to justify himself to the media. Not my fault, it must be the managers fault that I'm playing shit.

I believe that if we'd rode it out, sooner or later Pav would have acclimatised, we only had to string a handful of results together and what we'd have long term was so much better than what Redknapp's Racing post future offers us.

 

[danielneeds]

Clifford's piece had been edited on the Setanta site and now has no mention of Redknapp.

It is pretty obvious that Harry treated him and Woodward with utter contempt when at Southampton, if there is one thing he values above all others its that he works with his kind of "football people". ie those that have played or been around the game for years.

 

[danielneeds]

I don't know why you think this bloke talks tosh but Redknapp doesn't ?

Because he's a chirpy fucker always ready with a quip. Bit of a geezers geezer.

I think you are typical of the type of person I aimed this thread at. When Ramos came in he achieved the same last year. Results picked up almost immediately. So he must be a confidence maestro too the eh ?
Ramos rarely played players out of position, but when he did I didn't like either. But Redknapp has done exactly the same. Bentley LW, Bent and Pav, Modric LM (not his best position), Huddlestone central in a 2.


I don't know why you say the article is a load of tosh. I and a couple of others were of exactly the same opinion despite have no axe to grind with him whatsoever. He inhererited all the talent young players at West Ham, added some really good players like Kanoute, Sinclair, DeCanio, Foe etc and did what with them ? Absoloutely fuck all. Pretty much the same with Pompey. He actually had one of the best defence and midfields in the EPL last season, but they were boring and but for the jammiest of cup runs would have achieved nothing but mid table mediocraty. That team should have been pushing the top 4. Same with the West Ham team. You have to ask yourself why ? Maybe because Redknapp has a deceent eye for the obviously good player, and can deliver great "your brilliant now go and fucking run about" motivational back slap but when it comes to training, coaching and tactics he's actually not very good.

What I believe is that more than anything Ramos suffered from the striker problem. An unfit, tired Pav needed to settle, and the most limited striker I've seen since Armstrong in Bent. We had no fulcrum for the passing attacking football that we were trying to play.

Getting 3/4 of a team to gel at the same time obviously didn't help. Then you had Bentley pl,aying like a **** and having to justify himself to the media. Not my fault, it must be the managers fault that I'm playing shit.

I believe that if we'd rode it out, sooner or later Pav would have acclimatised, we only had to string a handful of results together and what we'd have long term was so much better than what Redknapp's Racing post future offers us.

I agree with you, in the extent that I don't think Redknapp is a special manager in the mould of Ferguson, Wenger, Mourinho, Hiddinck et al, and will probably never take us to heights that we all hope for.

But I think by holding on to the idea that Ramos was "unlucky" in matches or "unfortunate" in the events surrounding transfers, you are grasping on straws.

The team that I saw play this season pre-Redknapp would have got relegated, no doubt. Not Pav acclimatising, nor anything else would saved them, there was no belief in the side, it would have got worse not better.

Ramos allowed the rot to set in last season even with Berbs and Keane, so ultimately he has to be blamed for the continuing poor league form. He should have had the strength to stamp his authority on the club and team..something which from afar I didn't see.

You criticise Redknapp for building a good team at Portsmouth and then not challenging for champs league, but the fact was that he had to balance the books and didn't really have the depth of squad or quality in wide areas to push on to extent he would have liked, a reason he has come to Spurs...

Oh and by the way, I would lay good money on Sir Alex having a cup of tea and Racing Post in his office too, never done United any harm has it?