GlastonSpur

So if Dawson is a donkey, yet last season won the club's Player of the Year award, I guess it must mean that players like Bale, Modric, Defoe, Lennon (etc etc) must all be worse than donkeys. So I can only imagine that, for you, it's a total mystery how such dreadful players have managed to secure a place in the Champion's League. Ignorance is bliss I guess. In similar vein, I read on here that Delph is apparently much better than Dawson. Oh well, never mind, poor old donkey Dawson can console himself with the thought that he may be fit enough in time to play against Inter in the San Siro, whilst Delph can look forward to a sub appearance against Accrington Stanley in the League Cup.

Then maybe you need to get out more. Here's just one example: Sir Alex Ferguson famously said in a 2002 interview that his "greatest challenge" as Manchester United boss was "knocking Liverpool right off their f****** perch" How many times on TV - across an average nightly output in the UK - is the word "****" said? And yet you're getting worked up because a football manager shows some balls and tells a snidy reporter to "**** off" in the heat of the moment? I imagine half the viewers applauded him for doing so. So which is it? Did he bring on "everything he got", or was he responding to the abuse being thrown out by Villa fans? You can't have it both ways. All this really amounts to is that Harry occasionally gets riled up and let's rip. So what? At least he shows some balls and a bit of passion, which is more than can be said for some managers. Basically, all this stuff about Harry swearing is a molehill, which you wish to turn into a mountain. And as I've explained before, it's not the manager who sets club or transfer budgets. Give any manager money to spend and he'll spend it ... as Lerner discovered with MON: rising wage bills and growing club losses. A manager is allowed to answer media questions and to cast his opinion - good or bad - on any player. If Harry is asked if he wants to sign player X, he's perfectly entitled to answer: to say yes or no, or to say that he doesn't think club X wants to sell, or to say that player X is fantastic or to say that player X is not the sort of player he's looking for etc etc. If Harry is breaking all these rules, as you claim, then why isn't he being fined for it by the authorities? The simple answer is that he isn't breaking any rules. We're going round in circles. Do you not understand that mere allegations prove nothing? He's presumed innocent until proven guilty.. and just I'm sorry that you and so many other VTers apparently reject this fundamental tenet of law and justice. When I breach site rules? You might care to cast your eye back at some of the vitriol directed at me in this thread? I give back much less worse than I'm given.

Why do you assume that a manager is responsible for deciding how much money is available to spend? It's the club owner/chairman who set the budget. If Harry is given X amount of money for transfers then sooner or later he's going to spend it, just as any manager will, because it's always possible to improve almost any squad in almost all areas. And why not also look at the successes that Harry has had as a manager (it's not as if they don't exist)? Sure, plenty of people think he's "dodgy as ****". It's not as if I'm unaware of this fact. I just happen to think that most of the reasons for it are the superficial ones that I've already cited in this thread. Beyond that, I reserve judgement pending the outcome of the Inland Revenue's court case against him, rather than assuming he's guilty. This is all fair comment, though I would also throw Sandro into the mix when it comes to assessing the Spurs squad compared to the end of last season. And I agree, a new, top-notch striker would have been ideal. But it's obviously not always possible to get all you want when you want it. In the meanwhile we still have cash to spend in January if a suitable striker becomes available. And a quartet of Defoe, Crouch, Pav and Keane isn't so bad, especially when both VdV and dos Santos can also play as 2nd striker. All in all I expect we'll do OK when it comes to scoring goals. So overall I'm pleased with the Spurs window: for 16m net spend we've acquired a couple of good players, a hot prospect and - in VdV's case - a very good player.

Yet more innuendos, based on nothing but superficial knowledge derived from media reports. Has Harry been found guilty of doing anything illegal? No. You're apparently another poster who somehow just "knows" Harry has broken the law. Is it really too much to ask that you wait for the outcome of the pending court case instead of weighing in now with your "verdict"?

I refer you to a post I made earlier - a day or so ago. Reading is your friend.

I guess he's the one and only football manager to swear - how shocking. What a hypocrite you are. Would these be the same football fans who chant vile abuse - all with the same kids in tow? More hypocrisy. MON gutlessly walked out on Villa just a few days before your season began. You obviously don't know what tapping up means. Talking about players is not tapping up and is not illegal nor against FA rules. Tapping up means initiating contact with players or their agents without the permission of said player's club and is a breach of FA rules. Has Harry ever been charged with tapping up by the FA, far less found guilty? No. In fact has Harry ever been found guilty of anything illegal? No. But that doesn't stop the muppets on here who just "know" he's guilty.

This post is yet another confirmation of everything I've said about shallow thinking and predjudiced stereotyping. So he's guilty because Google says he is? Is this supposed to be advance on the notion that he's guilty because he twitches and talks like Del boy?

I don't read through all of your posts Glaston, but if you did say that, then why are you debating that Redknapp is dodgy then. You seem to contradict yourself constantly and you argue for arguments sake. I said it earlier as an example of the shallow, cliche-riddled attitudes which assume that Harry must be guilty of illegal tax evasion simply because he's been charged with that offence. Even if he's found to be not guilty when it comes to court, there'll doubtless be plenty of small-minded bigots on here who'll say he'll bribed the judge and jury.

In return I'll bless your cotton nappies (that's diapers to you, my American "friend") ... after all, judging by your comments it's probably not long since you stopped wearing them.

Yes, obviously, how could we ever doubt it. As I've said, let's not bother with courts and all the rest of that time-wasting nonsense. It's an open and shut case. Did I mention "no smoke without fire" earlier on? You know, I rather think I did.

Gosh ... how wonderfully clever, typing out your little insults. This is bound to make you such a hero ... keep it it up, and keep practising with the awfully witty expletives, preferably on some random stranger in the street, face to face like. After all, a big brave man like you has no need to hide behind a keyboard. Hasta la vista ....

Your comments just about sum up perfectly - and confirm - much of what I've said. You've said that simply being charged with tax fraud makes him dodgy, regardless of whether or not he's found to be innocent. You've also said that everybody just "knows" he's dodgy. I guess so - I mean, the twitch is such a dead giveaway - right? So let's not bother with courts, judges, juries and evidence - let's just proceed straight to findiing him guilty regardless, preferably in front of a baying mob. Sometimes I really do despair for the human race.

It's you who doesn't get it - why don't you try reading what I've said! I haven't said he's disliked because of this appearance - I've said his appearance and twitch lends itself to accusations of being dodgy/corrupt. It's hardly a novel concept - people are often predudiced by appearances: look dodgy and many will assume your are dodgy.

I'm not telling anyone to stop - that's not up to me. In this instance I've simply pointed out one factor - his facial appearance and twitch in this instance - concerning attitudes to Redknapp in relation to allegations of his being corrupt. This linkage was disputed in an above post, so in response I've given several sample quotes as evidence that what I've said is correct. I'm sure I could just as easily find several examples linking his "Del boy" accent with allegations of being dodgy/corrupt.

Is that right? Here's a just a tiny selection of the linkage made between facial appearance and dodgy/corrupt here on VT: Jez_Villa: "The dodgy twitching ball bag is on the BBC tonight ..." stevenavfc1874: "i couldnt stand that dodgy candlefaced prick in the champions league.... " villadude: "They're hopefully compiling a huge case against twitchy, one he can't wriggle ... his way out of this time." PaulMcgrathsknees:"twitchy melted candlewax face ... Two faced, lying, sneaky, corrupt ..." granville: "40 grand is peanuts to a brown envelope passing rich bastard like Twitchy?"

Not at all. You only have to look back through this thread to see a vast number of hostile posts that centre on Redknapp's facial appearance and many instances of links being made between "twitchy" and "dodgy". For you to call it a "**** outrageous" accusation simply tells me that (a) you're living in denial; and ( that you are the one who is actually detached from the real world ... because the real world is chock-a-block with people who rush to judgement about all sorts of things, despite usually knowing very little about the issue/person in question, and are easily manipulated by predjudice arising from superficial appearances, including facial appearance. PS. I didn't say that "it's all because" of .... I said it was a major factor, amongst other factors.

Doubtless many Villa fans would like think that overall it's been a disappointing window for Spurs, but that's just wishful thinking I'm afraid. From what's been said in this post-window thread so far, I'm pretty convinced that half of the VT posters haven't the faintest clue about VdV and are thus ignorant as to just how good a player he is.. I'd say he's the biggest signing for Spurs since the days of Jurgen Klinsmann - so you can stuff that in your "disppointing window" pipe and smoke it!

You're forgetting that Spurs could not be sure of qualifying for the CL until after the 2nd leg against Young Boys: August 25th - just one week before the window closed. Most transfer deals are complex things to arrange: very few get sorted so quickly: the deal for VdV was a real exception. Sure you can try and line up prospective deals based on IF you qualify, but plenty of clubs and players won't hang around for your convenience. And even if they do hang around, the selling club/player will often try and change the deal financially at the last minute because, they'll argue, you now have CL money. Spurs could have signed Fabiano - a fee had been agreed, but the player suddenly demanded a 5 year contract at 90k per week. For a player who's nearly 30 that doesn't make financial sense for Spurs and would have taken the total commitment for Spurs for him to over 40m. So Levy walked away, rightly choosing to keep his powder dry for January. Anyhow, you're dismissing Gallas - a player that Arsenal tried to keep by offering him a new contract - as if he's some no-mark, when clearly he isn't. The same with Sandro: you don't get to be Brazilian U-21 captain for nothing. You are also exaggerating the attractive effect of qualifying for the CL just once, as compared to season after season like Chelsea or Arsenal. Doing it once helps, for sure, but is'nt some magic bullet that solves all problems. VdV + Gallas + Sandro + Pletikosa: hell yes, I'll more than settle for that. "Van der Vaart admitted the lure of Champions League football at White Hart Lane played a major role in his decision to join Spurs, but the 27-year-old knows he will have to earn his place in Redknapp's starting XI. He added: "I don't think I am going to have any problems adapting in England to the style of play and the country I am living in. "The fact that Tottenham were playing in the Champions League influenced my decision a great deal. ... "

There isn't a single area in mostly all teams where improvement is not possible, regardless of the fact that improvement in some areas may be needed more than in others. Do you turn down an improvement in one area just because it's not possible, in the prevailing circumstances, to improve another area? Well, you might if you are an idiot. In a 4-4-2 I can recall plenty of games last season where Spurs played with Jenas in central attacking midfield and Modric in LM. Now we can, where desired, do the same except with VdV instead of Jenas. That's an upgrade, and a significant one at that. And that's only in relation to 4-4-2: bring in other formations, or play VdV as a 2nd striker, and the improved/extedned options reach out further. Some of you on VT are just plain crackers: a player like VdV joins Spurs and you attempt to write it off as "disappointing for Spurs fans" or as having little value for the team/squad. Get a grip FFS: it's VdV we're talking about here, not some journeyman hack.

OK, 2nd time around, let me answer your question: the answer is "not particularly" and "not any more than the average manager." Why? Because half the bias against him is simply because of his appearance and facial mannerisms - twitching etc- all of which results from a very bad car accident in which his fellow passenger died. But many folk are superficial beings: show em' a bashed up, twitchy face and they'll assume the owner is dodgy. Some of the remaining bias stems from his east end London accent: again the superficial folk fall into easy stereoptypes: think either cockey gangster of popular myth or Del Boy from Only Fools and Horses, or a mixture of both. Finally, most of the remaining bias stems from the Inland Revenue charges against him - over very little money as it happens, especially for someone who is already very rich and continues to earn a big whack every year. A reasonable person might wonder if he could really be bothered to try and con the taxman over peanuts. But the more important point is this: in law he's presumed innocent until proven guilty, and he's been found guilty of precisely nothing as yet. The problem is again with the superficial folk, who assume the opposite: guilty until proven innocent, no smoke without fire and all the rest of the tired old cliches that form the bedrock of their shallow mindss

Jez, why do you think that you stopped beating your wife? It's the same type of question.

These are supposed to be 5 reasons why Spurs have failed? Dear oh dear! 1) Wage structure: a big reason why Spurs usually have plenty of spare cash available to spend on transfer fees when they wish to. Nor does it stop the club from signing talented players. 2) Young Boys defeat? I seem to recall we won the tie 6 - 3 in the end. 3) Levy's love of brinkmanship: a prime reason why he succeeds in screwing 30.25m from Man. Utd for Berbatov, 18.6m for Carrick (in the days when 18.6m was huge) and sign VdV for just 8m .. just 3 examples from many. 4) Scattergun transfer policy? Which club finished 4th? Which club finished 5th twice in the preceding 4 years? Which club has improved its squad out of all recognition compared to 5 years ago? 5) Shirt sponsor: massive increase in money ... what more needs to be said.

If you're asking whether is Sandro availiable to play for Spurs this season in any and all competitions, then yes, of course he is.

# 1 is a typo mistake (I meant 17 clubs besides Spurs, Villa and Man. Utd) - now edited (see above). #2 It's a vast distortion to describe King and VdV as arguably world class? I think not. #3. Not ignorance, but instead an accurate representation of my what I've previously said on here.

A typical mixture of lies, vast distortion and just plain old ignorance. 1) There are (edit) 19 other clubs in the Prem besides Spurs - I post on here and RedCafe: two forums out of (edit) 19. So much for "omni-present" 2) I have never claimed that any Spurs player is world-class, with the arguable exception of King and now VdV. 3) I have never said that Spurs "will smash their way through every competition they are in". For example, in relation to finishing 4th last season and making through the group stages of the CL this season, I have merely said we stood/stand a decent chance - which we did/do. The problem with most of the critcisms on here is that they are just so weak: often not based on facts, badly argued, often based on nothing more than wishful thinking and sometimes with a good dose of bitterness thrown in. They often betray an amazing ignorance of various players: your calling VdV "over-rated" is a case in point.