Tim Sherwood is a backstabbing monster and he saved Spurs

Gaz_Gammon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
16,047
#41
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.



Redknapp gave both Townsend and Rose their debuts, Townsend against Carlisle in the League Cup and Rose played against Sunderland in 2008.

Oh, and before you go blindly clutching for another straw, Kane was introduced to the team by Redknapp in the Europa League qualification round against Hearts in August 2011.

I got closer to being introduced to first team football for Spurs by AVB than any of the aforementioned players in your post.

Finally, if your darling AVB was "pressured" to play Ade, then he well and truly fucked that up as well because Sherwood (yes that unqualified son of a bitch) brought him back from the Youth academy where AVB left him, and got him to score 14 in 26 games.
 
Last edited:

Sweetsman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
5,707
#42
Redknapp gave both Townsend and Rose their debuts, Townsend against Carlisle in the League Cup and Rose played against Sunderland in 2008.

Oh, and before you go blindly clutching for another straw, Kane was introduced to the team by Redknapp in the Europa League qualification round against Hearts in August 2011.

I got closer to being introduced to first team football for Spurs by AVB than any of the aforementioned players in your post.

Finally, if your darling AVB was "pressured" to play Ade, then he well and truly fucked that up as well because Sherwood (yes that unqualified son of a bitch) brought him back from the Youth academy where AVB left him, and got him to score 14 in 26 games.
Where's Ade now? You know that you can get bereavement counselling to help you cope with the loss of Redknapp, don't you? I'm glad that at least you can now talk about it openly.
 

Sweetsman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
5,707
#43
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!!
There are a number of holes in that PhD thesis you just posted. Firstly, you have neatly segued the argument towards Levy, but we weren't discussing him per se. Secondly, he wasn't sacked, by all accounts. Thirdly, giving us a lecture about how people are sold by the media avoids the fact that AVB was attacked by various sections from the start and throughout his reign. Fourthly, formulating a gameplan around one player inevitably means that the system will not work when his performance drops; nevertheless, the development of Bale was greatly enhanced by AVB. Fifthly, AVB was stubborn rather than inflexible, which can't be the case if he was able to sort out our losses towards the end of games. He also had to cope with the losses of King, Modrić and VDV in his first season, Bale in his second.
 

Mullers

Unknown member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
24,633
#44
Fuck me any blog can get on the front page these days. I'll think I'll blog about Levy and get that on the front page every week. :sneaky:
 

rupsmith

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
1,277
#47
There are a number of holes in that PhD thesis you just posted. Firstly, you have neatly segued the argument towards Levy, but we weren't discussing him per se. Secondly, he wasn't sacked, by all accounts. Thirdly, giving us a lecture about how people are sold by the media avoids the fact that AVB was attacked by various sections from the start and throughout his reign. Fourthly, formulating a gameplan around one player inevitably means that the system will not work when his performance drops; nevertheless, the development of Bale was greatly enhanced by AVB. Fifthly, AVB was stubborn rather than inflexible, which can't be the case if he was able to sort out our losses towards the end of games. He also had to cope with the losses of King, Modrić and VDV in his first season, Bale in his second.
To answer your points:

Firstly, yes the discussion is not about Levy. However, what has gone on in the background of our football club has to be put into context about why things were done. What I put in there was how I saw the background of events and how that influenced what happened in terms of managerial appointments and removals - not sure why that is a hole.

Secondly, AVB wasnt sacked? Then why did he leave? He resigned in protest over his mistreatment? The lack of funds? Players not willing to come to Spurs? Don't get it. Why is that a hole?

Thirdly, I was merely pointing out that the image of how a football manager is portrayed in the media goes a long way to influencing peoples impression of his football managerial ability. He was sometimes attacked for his lack of flexibility, tactical naivete and as you rightly put it - stubbornness. But even though his results and team set up were poor, a lot of people defended him because of the way he portrayed himself in the media. Im not criticizing AVB for that, just saying that it has to be taken into consideration. Not sure why that is a hole.

Fourthly, are you saying that AVB was right in formulating the system around one player? I'm afraid you have never played the game before then my friend. If you read Harry Redknapp's book and heard Bale's recent interview, Bale was given the kick up the backside he needed by Harry. Harry played him out left when he was developing. He then even tried to play him further inside, but he wasn't ready yet and we fans were singing - "Gareth Bale, he plays on the left". Harry realised he wasn't ready yet and took him back out left. Harry was then sacked and AVB continued his development as you rightly pointed out. But the whole team was built around Bale and that is tactical suicide. If you were pointing out that AVB did a great job of developing Bale then Real Madrid are reaping the benefits - his job was not to develop Bale, his job was to develop THFC. Not sure why that is a hole.

Fifthly, AVB left VDV go and his demand for players whom we simply couldn't afford can't be held against the club. He should have known what he was signing up for. As I said at the beginning of my post - we are not a "natural" top 4 club. AVB from all accounts approved every one of the players that were purchased after he joined the club. They were apparently not first choices but they were not forced on him either - they were all post his approval - if he couldn't cope with that he is not a good enough manager. Don't see why that is a hole either.
 
Last edited:

rupsmith

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
1,277
#49
Watch a presser with TS to seek the truth?
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::stop:
I am not suggesting that every word he is speaking is the gospel truth but surely it it indicative of what goes on behind the scenes at the club. Is there anything to suggest that he is flat out lying? If so please let me know because I have't heard about it.
 

Everlasting Seconds

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
10,085
#50
I am not suggesting that every word he is speaking is the gospel truth but surely it it indicative of what goes on behind the scenes at the club. Is there anything to suggest that he is flat out lying? If so please let me know because I have't heard about it.
There is "truth", there are "lies", and in between there is "agenda". The latter is most suitable for dealing with the press, the two former are not.
 

Greenspur

Very old member
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
2,681
#51
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.
Wouldn't you agree that phrases like "Sherwood must have felt betrayed" and "Sherwood must have been doing his nut" sound like opinion and speculation?
 

UbeAstard

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,177
#52
.

Fourthly, are you saying that AVB was right in formulating the system around one player? I'm afraid you have never played the game before then my friend. If you read Harry Redknapp's book and heard Bale's recent interview, Bale was given the kick up the backside he needed by Harry. Harry played him out left when he was developing. He then even tried to play him further inside, but he wasn't ready yet and we fans were singing - "Gareth Bale, he plays on the left". Harry realised he wasn't ready yet and took him back out left. Harry was then sacked and AVB continued his development as you rightly pointed out. But the whole team was built around Bale and that is tactical suicide.
How can it be tactical suicide when is works? It worked under AVB and we won games that we should have drawn because of it. It has worked for other clubs. When you have one special player in your team how can it be wrong that the team plays to his strengths, and what does Sweetsman or me playing the game before (I have) have to do with anything?
 

rupsmith

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
1,277
#53
How can it be tactical suicide when is works? It worked under AVB and we won games that we should have drawn because of it. It has worked for other clubs. When you have one special player in your team how can it be wrong that the team plays to his strengths, and what does Sweetsman or me playing the game before (I have) have to do with anything?
When it works?! A team built around one player?!? What happened if Bale had picked up a knock? He scored 8 winning goals for us and 21 goals in the premier league. There was barely a system in place - rotation was slow and poor, for any attacking thrust we basically needed Bale to get us out of trouble. This is not playing to one player's strengths, this is over reliance on ONE player. My point about you - not sure who the other guy is - not playing the game is that anyone who has played the game at any decent level would realise the importance of a sound tactical base and flexibility - none of which are possible when the basic strategy is "get the ball to Bale ASAP".

Also you haven't responded to any of my other responses - any reason or can't be bothered? Curious to know what you think as you were quick to say my analysis had several "holes"
 

rupsmith

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
1,277
#55
There is "truth", there are "lies", and in between there is "agenda". The latter is most suitable for dealing with the press, the two former are not.
Totally agree with you but I have to admit I'm not sure what a sacked manager's agenda would be. His future job prospects would be hampered? Perhaps. But still I thought it interesting to watch the Sky videos particularly because he seemed to be telling it broadly like it was - and what he said about Levy is pretty much the perception we have of him anyway. So not really sure he did have an "agenda" in these interviews.

Also about agenda

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/foot...Tottenham-Chelsea-Oscar-Willian-transfer-news

Not
 
Last edited:

CrazyHeart

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Messages
2,341
#56
When it works?! A team built around one player?!? What happened if Bale had picked up a knock? He scored 8 winning goals for us and 21 goals in the premier league. There was barely a system in place - rotation was slow and poor, for any attacking thrust we basically needed Bale to get us out of trouble. This is not playing to one player's strengths, this is over reliance on ONE player. My point about you - not sure who the other guy is - not playing the game is that anyone who has played the game at any decent level would realise the importance of a sound tactical base and flexibility - none of which are possible when the basic strategy is "get the ball to Bale ASAP".

Also you haven't responded to any of my other responses - any reason or can't be bothered? Curious to know what you think as you were quick to say my analysis had several "holes"
So by your logic, if we were to put Bale in the starting lineup of Accrington Stanley, it follows that he'd shoot them to joint fourth place in the premiership after consecutive promotions?
 

CrazyHeart

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Messages
2,341
#57
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.
Agreed, but one manager was royally screwed over through sleazy underhanded means, while deferring any semblance of stability to another season. The manner in which this went down was scandalous and it goes way beyond a simple change in management.
 

rupsmith

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
1,277
#58
So by your logic, if we were to put Bale in the starting lineup of Accrington Stanley, it follows that he'd shoot them to joint fourth place in the premiership after consecutive promotions?
No - but if you put him in a team of international players who have been told to give him the ball as soon as they get it - he can shoot them up the table. But if he wasn't on the pitch, the team of international players would struggle as they were not equipped to cope without him.
 

rupsmith

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
1,277
#59
Agreed, but one manager was royally screwed over through sleazy underhanded means, while deferring any semblance of stability to another season. The manner in which this went down was scandalous and it goes way beyond a simple change in management.
I request you to kindly read my analysis - or as another poster put it - my "thesis"
 

CrazyHeart

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Messages
2,341
#60
No - but if you put him in a team of international players who have been told to give him the ball as soon as they get it - he can shoot them up the table. But if he wasn't on the pitch, the team of international players would struggle as they were not equipped to cope without him.
Oh so the other players DO have a part to play in the grand scheme of things via strategy to yield positive results. Okay, thanks.
 
Top