GlastonSpur

Actually Lennon was also his high school champion...

...

I had assumed the title in question was to do with the english (or UK) schools overall national championships, assuming there is such a thing.

However, I see from wiki that Milner was simply a "district" (i.e local) 100m champion at school, which probably means there were many schoolboys faster than him across the UK.

... Glaston said he is slow, I came back with an argument as to why Jimmy IS NOT slow.

I didn't say he was slow. I said he wasn't quick enough (and lacked sufficient abilty to beat players) to make it as an especially effective winger.

His being 100m schools champion means little in this respect. Speed in terms of being a winger is all about acceleration over much shorter distances, hitting top speed quickly, reaction time, anticipation and very often close ball control at top speed.

Besides, I doubt that Lennon even entered the schools 100m championships.

...

We've got three better right wingers than Lennon in our first team, they play every week

Mere assertion does not make it so. You've provided no argument.

Milner is better suited to CM than RW - apart from anything else he lacks enough pace and ability to beat players for RW.

Downing plays in LM/LW. Young is not as good as VTers crack him up to be. I've seen plenty of defenders keep him quiet, but rarely is Lennon stopped by anyone.

... when I see you posting I'll "hurl abuse" not to mention vitriol (look it up) until such time as you begin to understand what this thread is about

I see. What a surprise.

If this thread, as far as you are concerned, is all about hurling abuse and vitriol, then frankly I feel sorry for you.

Ok, your point of Lennon being the best winger in the league, bar none - can you back this up with evidence and/or reasoned argument?

I believe I said the best right winger in the Prem (or if I didn't that's what I meant since he is mainly right-footed even if he sometimes switches to the left).

The evidence comes mainly from just seeing him play in comparison to others. Defences are more scared of him down the right than any other player, because no-one else can go past defenders as easily as he does and no-one panics defences as much he does. If you look at opposition message boards just before they play Spurs, usually the main worry they have is Lennon, or else relief if he is not fit to play.

His combination of blinding pace, devasting acceleration, change of direction on a sixpence, trickery and close ball-control at speed makes him mostly unstoppable except by conceding a corner (if the defender manages to get that close to him) or fouling (which of course comes at the expense of free-kicks in usually dangerous areas). According to ESPN's stats, he has been fouled 46 times in 20 appearances, whilst committing just 6 fouls himself.

His crossing ability has improved a lot (10 assists this season, in just 19 games started and 1 sub appearance) and he also does his fair share of tracking back and defensive duties. He also rarely loses the ball or gives it away from a bad pass.

I don't see any right winger who is as good in the Prem, far less better.

... Why would I even attempt to marshall an argument with someone who's idea of a discussion is

1) I am right

2) Tottenham are correct and virtuous in everything they do

...

When I make a point, I usually support it with evidence and/or reasoned argument.

Your idea of response (or making a comment), apart from hurling abuse, seems to be mere assertion - "you are wrong, Spurs are crap etc", with no rhyme or reason involved.

Therein lies the difference. If you can't see it, and if you can't see why your approach is without point or interest, then I guess that's just the way things are.

Be honest Glaston, you must have slagged off Redknapp when he was West Ham manager?

No ... why would I? I don't usually have any great desire to slag off any manager.

It's not as if W.Ham are really any great rival to Spurs, and in any case, Redknapp generally did well for them and boosted his reputation as a good manager.

He helped to stabilise them and establish them in the Prem, and also helped bring through a number of young players from the club's academy, including Rio Ferdinand, Joe Cole, Carrick and Lampard.

He also took them to 5th place, which is a remarkable achievement for a club like W.Ham

I didn't say it was a criminal offence, those are your words not mine.

You didn't say it directly, but by referring to house sale at all you clearly implied it was all dodgy ... otherwise there would be no relevance or point in mentioning it at all.

As for your claim that him making 19% in 10 months during a property boom isn't that unusual then I suggest you re-read the article and pay close attention to the comments relating to the market in that time.

So what? The % figure quoted is one estate agent's estimate of of average price rises in that area. They bear no necessary relation to each particular transaction, the bargain price that may have been negotiated for a house in the first place (before it's later sold on), the keen desire of a purchaser with plenty of money to pay over-the odds to acquire a particular property they fancy before some else takes it, or any improvements to that property that may have been carried out before sale.

Average is average. It means some sales at a gain of much less than average and some at a much bigger gain than average. In short, your introduction of a house sale into this discussion is ridiculous.

Thank you for that totally pointless explaination of the basics of a Bosman signing, oh on the subject of Bosman signings in case you didn't see my post the other week, Sol Campbell wasn't the first high profile example in the UK as you claimed but back to the case at hand...

My explanation was far from pointless. It was directly relevant to the issue of high wages, a subject which you introduced.

What is pointless is your dragging in the issue of Sol Campbell's Bosman transfer to Arsenal - what the hell has he got to do with a discussion of Redknapp and Pompey's finances?

As for the case being politically motivated against Redknapp, that is an new one, an amusing one as well I might add. Is it perhaps some cunning way for Gordon Brown to deflect attention away from his running of the country????

Political-motivation can apply not just to governments or Prime Ministers, but also to police forces and a whole raft of goverment agencies such as HMRC.

There have been plenty of cases where a body insists on taking action simply to try and justify it's own existence or the costs of an lengthy investigation, because they don't wish to admit failure.

I will stick with the 'I'll wait and see' stance thanks ...

Well, that's more than most posters on this issue seem to do. Apparently with the majority it's "guilty until proven innocent".

How dare HM Custom and Excise take issue with an undeclared 6 figure payment! Don't they know who he is! Thats an insignificant amount to him so it should all be forgotten about!

If that was what I'd said, then I'd agree with you. But sadly for you I didn't say that it should be forgotten about.

Instead I said that the motivation for Harry to dupe the taxman of 40k is pretty hard to fathom when the guy is a multi-millionare and earns 40k every 3 or 4 days. In other words, I'm suggesting that the charge may a face-saving crock of shit to try and justify months of investigation, and I won't be surprised if Harry wins the case.

PS. 40k is 5 figures, not 6

^^^^^^^^^

yet again

To use you own words

NR

or more appropriately

Pompous Bollocks

It's a pity that you don't have the slightest idea about discussion, marshalling an argument and presenting your case.

What have we learned from your "contribution"? Nothing except that you disagree, but not why or anything of interest. I'm not sure why you bother with such pointlessness really.

...

Would that be before he plunges us into debt and leaves for Small Heath?

You obviously don't know that Redknapp made Pompey big profits on several players sold by the club that he signed for them. For example:

Defoe (6m profit), Diarra (14.5m profit), Johnson (14m profit), Muntari (5.7m profit) ... that's 40m profit from these 4 players alone.

The financial troubles at Pompey have very little nothing to do Harry, who in any case didn't decide the club's budget or manage their finances.

What is a reasonable stake then Glaston?

If you want to bet that Villa will finish higher than Spurs, then I'm up for a cash bet, provided it's not a silly sum of money. What amount did you have in mind?

How about £50?

If Villa finish higher then you make a donation to Acorns (our club charity) and if Spurs finish higher I will donate to Spurs official charity. Proof of donation to be posted on this thread. Deal?

OK

Glaston I think it is fair to say that your sides strength is going forward and our side's strength is its ability to defend, each of our sides has an advantage over the other in this respect. It is also fair to say that both sides play to their respective strengths and at times at least fall short in respect to the other side of the game, we at times struggle to create chances and score goals you on the other hand struggle to keep them out at the other end.

I'd agree with this.

I think it is though a little foolish or perhaps bias to suggest that Spurs some how make more attempt to win games than some of their rivals they simply have different strengths. I also think it is a little foolish to suggest that a side that goes out to win more games will have a better chance of finishing 4th than others, such a suggestion would indicate you haven't watched Liverpool much in recent season.

I'm thinking more of Villa in this respect (and Liverpool also this season to some lesser extent), rather than all of the rivals for top 4.

Perhaps I have an unbalanced view due to the two Villa-Spurs games this season, and perhaps Villa have played adventurous attacking football in many of the Villa games I've not seen. But certainly in those two Villa-Spurs games it seemed like Villa were largely playing to hold out for a draw, whilst maybe hoping to nick a goal on the counter. OK, in some away games I could understand this approach, but don't you find it a bit dissapointing when it happens in a home game?

To some extent I'm probably complaining because Spurs like to play in open games since it suits us better in terms of chances to win rather than just draw, whereas we have struggled to break down packed defences on several occasions this season. Man City came to play an open game with us and lost 3 - 0, whereas Villa at least got an away point.

As for Liverpool, I do think that this season they have been less adventurous in their playing style and team selections than previously. But then again I suppose the loss of Alonso has had an effect on this.

What is a reasonable stake then Glaston?

If you want to bet that Villa will finish higher than Spurs, then I'm up for a cash bet, provided it's not a silly sum of money. What amount did you have in mind?

... I think you need to reconsider who makes the rules here. If you post any of this 'NR' bollocks, you'll be spending more time on Red Cafe.

Obviously I haven't tried to make site rules. I'm making a rule, for myself, about what I personally will and will not respond to.

This personal rule is that I'm not going to respond further to any comments or questions about me personally. I'm entitled to take that decision and I won't be changing it.

It's hardly a surprising decision in view of the content of many posts, despite my best efforts to respond reasonably and without undue rancour to even the most aggressive posters, some of whom seem only interested in conducting a personal vendetta, entirely unrelated to football.

I'm happy to talk about football and to abide by site rules, but there is no good reason why I should be expected to do anything else.

Blues 'have a chance' too. Liverpool 'have a chance' of winning the league title. But that's when knowledge comes in and you realise both have no chance when you take everything into account, same with Spurs, they have no chance of getting 4th.

I'm not the one objecting to people saying Villa have no chance of getting 4th.

I'm disagreeing - not "objecting". Posters are perfectly entitled to hold whatever opinions they like.

And you maybe not the one who is "objecting", but you are the one refusing to take the same bet with regard to Villa. Ever heard of double-standards?

And even if you did agree to take the same bet concerning Villa, and lost, you might well just change your user-name and come back with a new account.

So let's stop playing silly games, shall we?

...

Glaston, I think you missed the above question for the billionth time.

As I said above, FROM NOW ON I SHALL NOT BE RESPONDING TO ANY COMMENT OR QUESTION ABOUT ME PERSONALLY.

Let's give this policy a short-hand: Not Relevant or NR for short.

I shall occasionally repeat this 'NR' as appropriate, until either boredom sets in or postees decide they actually want to talk about football. It's your choice.

... You just objected to people saying you have no chance of finishing 4th.

I'm one of those, you have NO CHANCE and I'm willing to bet you.

Patently Spurs do have a chance - the league table says so quite apart from anything else.

You might not think that Spurs will be able to take that chance, but that's a different issue. If you can't see the difference then sorry, I can't help you.

In any case, why should I take your bet on Spurs finishing 4th, when (a) I've predicted 5th place for Spurs; and ( you are NOT willing to accept the same bet with regard to Villa?

Spurs have drawn four of their last seven league games.

That's not the point ... the intent to play attacking football and least really try to win, to take risks, is the point.

I bet Milner is ahead of Lennon in the pecking order for the England squad.

I'd say you have no chance of finishing 4th, want to make a bet about it, winner leaves VT forever?

I notice you don't propose this bet about Villa finishing 4th.

As for Spurs, I've predicted 5th place for them, with a chance for 4th.

Teams that try and win games will come up trumps?

Yeah, that's why Arsenal are top of the league.

They are in the top 4, just as are Chelsea and United. When was the last time you saw any of these 3 set out to mainly just "park the bus" in front of their own goal and hope to nick a goal on the counter?

The logic of 3 points for a win (but just 1 point for a draw) says that teams who play to win - or at least really try for the win and take some risks along the way - are more likely to do well in the longer run.

Is it a co-incidence that Liverpool's relatively poor season so far has coincided with them generally fielding 2 DMs (Mascherano and Lucas) and playing in a less adventurous fashion? I think not.

I think the problem with Glaston is he doesn't have an ounce of humility in him, or the ability to see any fault with Spurs.

Maybe he does privately and keeps up the company line on here or something but he's such a frustrating poster and when spurs do have a bad result he's nowhere to be seen, therefore he has nothing but positivity to post.

I'd almost think he was a Spurs spin doctor the way he goes on.

The problem with some VTers is that they insist on personalising issues, rather than actually discussing football.

I never hurl personal abuse at anyone, nor seek to single out individual posters for attack.

And many posters only see what they wish to see. For example, you say that I never see any fault with Spurs .. yet in the last fews days alone I've posted at least 3 examples of transfer failings made by the club.

You also say that I don't post when Spurs lose. But again many times I have done, and many times I've not posted when Spurs win. But some on here seem to expect a running commentary from me on every Spurs game. That's not going to happen.

I've said the above several times, with many specific examples, but it won't stop the same tired old and tedious nonsense being repeated over and over.

The problem with most of the criticism of Spurs on here is that it is just so obviously weak. For example:

* Defoe is mediocre, or worse

* Bale is shite

* Young or Milner should go the WC ahead of Lennon

* Spurs generally make bad signings

* Spurs have no chance of finishing 4th

* Young players are generally wasted at Spurs and never develop.

etc etc etc.

Anyhow, in a probably futile attempt to improve the footballing content of discussions, FROM NOW ON I SHALL NOT BE RESPONDING TO ANY COMMENT OR QUESTION ABOUT ME PERSONALLY, whilst remaining happy to discuss anything football-related.

... It seems to be a recent issue that Villa fans have with Spurs and seems to be largelly of your own making.

...

joey, you only have to look at the longevity of this thread to realise that the anti-Spurs thing is something of an obsession on here for a few VTers. The mods might as well make it a sticky-thread ... because it's always on page 1.

Even when I've not posted on here for a longish-while, I know without even looking which thread will be near (or at) the top of the page.

Can you imagine a similiar, never-ending thread about Villa on a Spurs site? No way jose.

It wouldn't be so sad, except that probably about half the posts are not about football at all, but rather concern various forms of personal abuse, many of them directed against Harry and most of these concerning his post-car accident facial appearance.

Oh well ....

It's a better result for you than Spurs, yes.

seeing as we've won at OT and won at Anfield this season , old Harry bottled it and was content to see a draw today ..if he had been serious about 3 points then he would have made some attacking substituions and gone for it .... but he didn't

the aim is to win your home games , so it was a case of 2 points lost today for Spuds , and a point gained for us

end of the day we played badly and yet you still couldn't beat us .. we could probably keep playing for another week and you still wouldn't have scored

I've already said it was a better result for Villa than Spurs, so what are you arguing about?

The point I disputed was that it was a "great" result for Villa, when clearly it wasn't ... winning would have been great result for you, drawing is merely decent/OK.

The rest of your post is mostly nonsense. Harry bottled it and was content for a draw? Did we watch the same match? Spurs had probably 80% (or more) of the attacking play, with wave after wave of attacks breaking on the Villa defensive wall. It's clear beyond the slightest doubt that Villa played for a draw and that Spurs played for a win. If any manager bottled it, it was clearly MON.

As for "attacking substutions", Spurs already had pretty much their most attacking line-up on the pitch from amongst the available players.

You also say "the aim is to win your home games". Sorry, the aim is to try and win all games, which at least is what Spurs try to do.

Reaching 4th place is a tough ask for all of the contenders. But I'm pretty sure that Villa need to take risks if you are to make it, and I've not seen much sign so far this season that Villa/MON are capable of doing that.

The team that finishes 4th will IMO be a team that mostly goes for a win above all else. Of the four contenders - Liverpool, Spurs, Villa and Man. City - Villa display the least capacity/intent to play adventurous, attacking football. Some VTers will not like this view, but most neutrals will see it as the truth.

Great result for us especially as it is a shit result for them

It's a better result for you than Spurs, yes.

But it's hardly a great result for Villa (winning would have been) and hardly a shit result for Spurs (losing would have been).

The way that Villa usually set up to play means that the chances of a genuinely great result for you today were always rather small.