What's new

Tim Sherwood is a backstabbing monster and he saved Spurs

slartibartfast

Grunge baby forever
Oct 21, 2012
18,320
33,955
Could not agree terms with West Brom on either occasion. Was passed over for the Palace job in favour of Malky Mackay (who was always favourite), then ruled himself out of replacing Malky MacKay.
Not coming to terms and being overlooked by everyone are 2 completely different things.
 

avonspurs

MoPo's lover
Apr 28, 2006
4,072
4,100
Yay, that's what we need after a 5-3 win over Chelscum: an article about Sherwood to get fans all riled up and arguing again. The Christmas ceasefire has ended, let hostilities resume. :)
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
Tim Sherwood's contribution to the youth academy and firing up new prospects to help them get where they are today is something for which even I'm grateful.

Ultimately though, the youth academy was Sherwood's job but someone didn't get the memo. Sherwood pulling what he did was just flat-out detrimental to our club and dragged our chain of command down to a new low. If he wanted the manager's job, he should've done it through the proper channels by getting a license, presenting his alternate vision to the board at the end of the season if we missed a Euro spot under AVB. But why bother, when he could just capitalize on a vulnerable situation where AVB's relationship with Levy was fraying on top of no support? Talk about fast-tracking yourself to the top through backstabbing.

The article also ignores the fact that the universe can spawn more than two alternate timelines. The third possible timeline would be AVB getting his senior squad to gel and finishing the season strongly, while building a foundation for future success. Either way, the mid-season sacking screwed us and turned our club into a bad episode of Dynasty which wasted a season and sent our football back to the stone age.

Yes, our former youth prospects are thankfully saving our asses now that the damage inflicted by Sherwood was done. This is precisely why they need to stick with Poch and let him get on with his job, making sure he gets the support and backing he needs to succeed without any shenanigans.

Do you not think that, however undiplomatic his behaviour might have been, he has had his point proven by events? Sherwood must have been driven to hair-tearing fury, knowing he had helped to create an academy containing Bentaleb, Mason and Kane (and who knows who else), but AVB wouldn't even bloody well put them on the bench, as our football became more and more sterile?

What would you do? Sit there and seethe or go around the back and have a beef at the chairman?
 

deka_spur

Well-Known Member
Nov 3, 2006
221
369
Why do we keep arguing about these stupid thing... All the managers we have had have had their good and bad points. And in the end can only be judged by results - and Sherwood did OK. (better than some of the others). But all of the managers we had probably should have been given longer... And Poch didn't have the best start either... but thankfully we have stuck with him, and starting to see the results. But we still are a work in progress and wont play like that all the time... All I want to see is a stable management for a good period with the full financial backing, and the results will come.
 

CrazyHeart

Well-Known Member
Oct 26, 2013
3,702
4,288
Do you not think that, however undiplomatic his behaviour might have been, he has had his point proven by events? Sherwood must have been driven to hair-tearing fury, knowing he had helped to create an academy containing Bentaleb, Mason and Kane (and who knows who else), but AVB wouldn't even bloody well put them on the bench, as our football became more and more sterile?

What would you do? Sit there and seethe or go around the back and have a beef at the chairman?

This wasn't undiplomatic behavior on part of Sherwood. This was flat out backstabbing and dragging our club into a state of ill repute. The only point that was proven was that Sherwood was in over his head.

AVB brought in Townsend and Rose didn't he? And Kane wasn't out of contention either. But that being said it was clear that he was pressured to play Adebayor due to his astronomical wage bill despite acting like an ass (while Soldado was firing blanks). The same probably applied to the 100M players too.

Look, I'm not saying AVB was perfect - he made mistakes like any other manager, but this discussion isn't about him. It's the manner in which our club's integrity got ripped apart with petty, bitchy, sleazy and underhanded methods from within. He should've been given 'til the end of the season period.
 

CrazyHeart

Well-Known Member
Oct 26, 2013
3,702
4,288
Why do we keep arguing about these stupid thing... All the managers we have had have had their good and bad points. And in the end can only be judged by results - and Sherwood did OK. (better than some of the others). But all of the managers we had probably should have been given longer... And Poch didn't have the best start either... but thankfully we have stuck with him, and starting to see the results. But we still are a work in progress and wont play like that all the time... All I want to see is a stable management for a good period with the full financial backing, and the results will come.

This isn't about manager vs. manager. It's the sleazy back room manner in which we had a bald faced coup, in which the instigators won at the expense of the stability our club desperately needed through shit-stirring and fire-starting. Fuck, I'm starting to think Sherwood was the lead singer of Prodigy when "Firestarter" came out! Jeez...
 

eddiebailey

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2004
7,452
6,672
Who did sherwood back stab ?
The backstabbing allegation is the oddest of those aimed at Sherwood. It seems clear that he had left AVB in no doubt as to his feelings, and that they were reciprocated. There is not much evidence of false friendship here.
 

Matthew Wyatt

Call me Boris
Aug 3, 2007
2,224
1,988
The article is a contemptible, vicious, foul, obnoxious and vile piece of work by a malicious writer who has no redeeming characteristics as a journalist. The attempt to be constructive in the final paragraphs does not undo the work of the rest of the article.

It's a hate-filled article and I can't decide whether its character-assassination toward Sherwood is worse than its unjustifiable bitterness toward AVB.

Anyone who reads that and doesn't feel dirty afterwards wants to to think about why they follow football.
Thanks for the warning, David. I don't want to feel dirty so I shan't read it. I'm off to read something else about how good we were against Chelsea instead.
 

gloryglory

Well-Known Member
Oct 19, 2004
1,537
302
Do you not think that, however undiplomatic his behaviour might have been, he has had his point proven by events? Sherwood must have been driven to hair-tearing fury, knowing he had helped to create an academy containing Bentaleb, Mason and Kane (and who knows who else), but AVB wouldn't even bloody well put them on the bench, as our football became more and more sterile?

What would you do? Sit there and seethe or go around the back and have a beef at the chairman?

I must be missing something - are Bentaleb and Mason now proven to be better than the central midfielders AVB used? We had a lot of options last season - Sandro, Dembele, Capoue, Paulinho - and I don't really see what the two from the academy have shown that is better than that list can do. Did Sherwood even play Mason anyway? And he didn't really use Kane either for that matter until the season was dead and gone.

What Sherwood showed was that he could motivate some players brilliantly, at the expense of alienating others. That suggests to me he could over time possibly build a squad of players who were all motivated, if he controlled transfer policy over time. But he showed limited tactical awareness, so it could be tricky for him to keep confidence of a club over that period. I hope he isn't a successful manager - he just seems an unpleasant man, with a sense of entitlement that I couldn't abide. But that arrogance can be helpful in sport, and other unpleasant men like Ferguson have done a lot on the back of it.

Personally will always be in the AVB camp because I just liked him as a person. And I will always remember fondly his first season in charge - even before Bale started firing, we had Sandro and Dembele looking imperious and running games, Walker surging forward, Vertonghen showing his class, and ironically it was partly Lloris finding his feet early in the season that cost us the points we'd need at the end of the season - that and Adebayor's travails up front, which even Bale couldn't make up for in the end. There were AVB mistakes too, above all letting Van der Vaart go. Still, it was a great season, when I thought the only way was down.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
I must be missing something...

My point, mainly.

I'm less concerned about passing comparative judgment about AVB 's and Sberwood's managerial reigns and more concerned about explaining why Sherwood might have been sufficiently pissed off to undermine AVB.

AVB, upon his appointment and then thereafter, paid lip service to promoting youth and then didn't do it. That must have made Sherwood feel betrayed, as the renascent Tottenham youth system was obviously something of which he was very proud. He wanted 'his kids' in the team - and time and Pochettino have demonstrated that they were, at most, a few months away from outplaying the expensive signings.

Sherwood must have been doing his nut: having promised his young players that they would be given a chance, he couldn't even get AVB to watch them play, nor could he get to watch the players who were being selected in preference to the youth. It was the opposite of the basis upon which he had taken the job.
 

eddiebailey

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2004
7,452
6,672
I hope he isn't a successful manager - he just seems an unpleasant man, with a sense of entitlement that I couldn't abide. But that arrogance can be helpful in sport, and other unpleasant men like Ferguson have done a lot on the back of it.

Personally will always be in the AVB camp because I just liked him as a person.
I have never really understood why anyone should consider AVB likeable.

But that is neither here nor there. His vision for Spurs as a club just didn't chime with me, whereas Sherwood's did.
 

Greenspur

Very old member
Sep 1, 2004
2,681
3,090
My point, mainly.

I'm less concerned about passing comparative judgment about AVB 's and Sberwood's managerial reigns and more concerned about explaining why Sherwood might have been sufficiently pissed off to undermine AVB.

AVB, upon his appointment and then thereafter, paid lip service to promoting youth and then didn't do it. That must have made Sherwood feel betrayed, as the renascent Tottenham youth system was obviously something of which he was very proud. He wanted 'his kids' in the team - and time and Pochettino have demonstrated that they were, at most, a few months away from outplaying the expensive signings.

Sherwood must have been doing his nut: having promised his young players that they would be given a chance, he couldn't even get AVB to watch them play, nor could he get to watch the players who were being selected in preference to the youth. It was the opposite of the basis upon which he had taken the job.

Are you speculating?
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
Are you speculating?

Not really, no, just combining, cross-referencing and summarising a very large number of quotes and comments from Sherwood and other people associated with the club. When I'm speculating, I generally use the word 'speculating' in my post, as you will find in several locations of the 'new stadium' thread.

I actually don't forget this stuff, y'know. And I don't just remember it selectively, to suit my own preconceived ideas. It just sort of sticks and then I connect the bits. I couldn't immediately paste in the sources, but I retain this sort of information and it doesn't mutate to fit subsequent events.
 

Sweetsman

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2011
6,673
6,588
I must be missing something - are Bentaleb and Mason now proven to be better than the central midfielders AVB used? We had a lot of options last season - Sandro, Dembele, Capoue, Paulinho - and I don't really see what the two from the academy have shown that is better than that list can do. Did Sherwood even play Mason anyway? And he didn't really use Kane either for that matter until the season was dead and gone.

What Sherwood showed was that he could motivate some players brilliantly, at the expense of alienating others. That suggests to me he could over time possibly build a squad of players who were all motivated, if he controlled transfer policy over time. But he showed limited tactical awareness, so it could be tricky for him to keep confidence of a club over that period. I hope he isn't a successful manager - he just seems an unpleasant man, with a sense of entitlement that I couldn't abide. But that arrogance can be helpful in sport, and other unpleasant men like Ferguson have done a lot on the back of it.

Personally will always be in the AVB camp because I just liked him as a person. And I will always remember fondly his first season in charge - even before Bale started firing, we had Sandro and Dembele looking imperious and running games, Walker surging forward, Vertonghen showing his class, and ironically it was partly Lloris finding his feet early in the season that cost us the points we'd need at the end of the season - that and Adebayor's travails up front, which even Bale couldn't make up for in the end. There were AVB mistakes too, above all letting Van der Vaart go. Still, it was a great season, when I thought the only way was down.
AVB did not want VDV to go, for the record.
 

Sweetsman

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2011
6,673
6,588
Not really, no, just combining, cross-referencing and summarising a very large number of quotes and comments from Sherwood and other people associated with the club. When I'm speculating, I generally use the word 'speculating' in my post, as you will find in several locations of the 'new stadium' thread.

I actually don't forget this stuff, y'know. And I don't just remember it selectively, to suit my own preconceived ideas. It just sort of sticks and then I connect the bits. I couldn't immediately paste in the sources, but I retain this sort of information and it doesn't mutate to fit subsequent events.
So, basically you are saying that it was within Sherwood's right to undermine the manager of the first team? I honestly can't get my head around the support some people have for that toad, who had a lot of similar shits in the media undermining AVB; it has become clear that he was leaking information to them. These are the likes of the obese Martin Samuel, his glove-puppet Ashton, and of late, Danny 'Mr Grey' Murphy. AVB had these Little Englander bastards on his back from Day One: you do remember the stuff about 70-page dossiers, David? People forget that AVB constructed the team to get the best out of Bale, but this meant that he was in the shop window. Bale has immense respect for him, and I would rather take his opinion than those on here that I don't respect. Losing Bale ripped up his whole strategy: AVB got fed up and walked away. The performances last season were turgid, but he was getting the points with a team containing players he hadn't wanted and yet had to fit in. Asking him to bring in youth players at the same time was ludicrous.
Yes, Sherwood did tell some home truths and did get some players doing well, but alienated others; Eriksen stated that AVB was too nice and tried to please everybody. Adebayor's behaviour was appalling: Levy appears to have learnt from his mistake in supporting Adebayor against AVB and this time has backed his manager.
If I read one more piece in The Indie by Sherwood, where he constructs the whole article to point out his own qualities, it will be one too many. Although MP wasn't my first choice, I am glad he is here rather than AVB, because he is more robust than him when it comes to dealing with big personalities. He's played a very sharp game with them, and he has given some of them enough rope to hang themselves.
 

Sweetsman

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2011
6,673
6,588
I have never really understood why anyone should consider AVB likeable.

But that is neither here nor there. His vision for Spurs as a club just didn't chime with me, whereas Sherwood's did.
Oh, I don't know, but maybe the quality of integrity figures highly for some. That may be something else you may never really understand. Just out of interest, what is your understanding of what AVB's vision for the club was and how did it differ from Sherwood's?
 
Last edited:

rupsmith

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2006
1,714
2,328
I have to say I find some of the comments here astounding. Tim's "backstabbing nature", AVB's "likability" - factors to be considered in their appointment or removal. What total nonsense. This is a ruthless results based industry - e.g. Arsene Wenger - no matter what he has done in the past is being called on to resign.

We are Tottenham Hotspur. City and Chelsea have almost unlimited financial resources much, Arsenal and United have 60-80 K seater stadiums, Liverpool are on their way to 60. We have a capacity of 36K. We are not that big a club anymore. Having said that we are a very well run club - financially sound and well managed off the field. Dan Levy has turned this club into a strong, financially stable club. We may not agree with his every decision (for me it was Harry getting sacked after two fourth place finishes), but we should remember the dark days of the 90s and early 2000s before his work started to take effect.

He is a savvy businessman and like most clear thinking leaders he has not tried to dabble in the details of the business where he is not that knowledgable and experienced - the actual football. What he therefore sought to do is appoint someone reliable to "direct" the development of the football side of our club - my understanding is that person is Franco Baldini. What they have sought to do is define a way of playing our club will be associated with considering our history and the players who have played for our club in the past - a philosophy. Players in the development squad and and first team recruits will be brought in based on that philosophy and the approval of Baldini, the first team coach - Poch - and the youth development coach - not based on the judgement of a first team manager no matter how reliable and experienced because it is not a sustainable model. Sounds good on paper but not so easy in practice. Santini, Jol, Ramos, Redknapp, AVB, Sherwood since 2004, with Redknapp - the manager not in keeping with this structure - the most successful and longest serving.

AVB seemed to fit the bill - Chelsea had sacked him for whatever reason so he was available "free". He was a young coach, open and comfortable with the concept and structure, well spoken and previously successful, and had learnt his trade and had the respect (at least previously) of the greatest manager in the world - Jose Mourinho. He ticked every box for the project. However, two things clearly did not work out - his style of play and lack of flexibility. The first season was entirely dependent on Gareth Bale and therefore successful. However, while the system seemed set, the lack of penetration was apparent with Bale bailing the team out on more than one occasion (West Ham and Sunderland in the last few minutes spring to mind). In the second season, the lack of flexibility in approach - in terms of tactical set up, player development and man management - was clearly hampering the progress of the "project" and was therefore not considered viable. AVB was sacked (whether Tim's back stabbing caused it or not is irrelevant - what was happening on the pitch and in the league table was apparent).

Tim was asked to take over. If anyone wants to have something of an understanding of what went on and why - please watch these through to the end and understand what Levy asked him to do and why.









Now, I'm not going to start this conversation again about Tim versus AVB but in my view, Tim contributed a lot to the club and we have to be grateful for what he did. There is no doubt he is a tough, straight talking, "old-school" type player and manager; he has own way of doing things and people may not agree with that - but in my mind everything he did was for the best of the club and I am appreciative of that. He also contributed a lot to our youth development and some of that is coming through now. I think he was asked to go again because of Levy's idea of a "project" and a manager who would fit into that concept. Tim in many ways is a Harry mark II. I don't think he was asked to go because of his personality or results as it seems to come through in the videos.

I must admit I was nervous about Poch and was worried about an AVB mark II situation. But he clearly is far more flexible. The youth lads coming through and our pace of play - great to see. And that performance and result against Chelsea - I still haven't stopped smiling.

Anyway, an overall message is also clearly how personalities are "sold" through the media and how important that is - AVB's sophistication, intelligence and "likability", Tim's anger and "back stabbing", Harry's "facking run about a bit" etc etc. The fact that we are discussing those aspects; and not results and what happens on the pitch is evidence of that.

Total bollocks - its results; and adherence and development of the philosophy and structure is what the objective is. Lets keep those in mind. Daniel Levy has been great for Spurs and the signs mid way through Poch's first season are good.

COYS!!
 
Last edited:
Top