joey55

Do you believe it now? Or is it coming straight from Brendan Rodgers mouth (and confirming everything I posted as to why we didn't sign Siggy above btw) still not enough proof? http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2012/07/its-his-loss-lfcs-brendan-rodgers.html The interview this came from will be put on YouTube soon if you want to watch it to make sure it happened and deluded LFC fans aren't inventing it. Secondly, I am not some 'wannabee' ITK. I don't go on Twitter or any LFC forums and lawd attention. If I hear the odd bit that is of interest to another club (like when LFC where after Downing last Summer) I pass it on to their fans in good faith and will, as if it was the other way around and an opposition fan got info of interest to LFC fans I would appeciate them passing it on. Trent one of the bosses on this site can back up the credibility of my source as I passed on everything regarding the Downing deal last summer to him which was proven. If you go back in this thread to about the end of May there will be a post from Trent attesting to this. You don't have to believe it as it goes against your agenda, but that still doesn't mean it isn't true, because it is. He done the right thing. If a player you are close to and personally owes a lot to you agrees a deal with you, and then at the last minute asks for more money, why should Rodgers have give him that money? If he did that to me I'd be highly offended! No all that tells you is that Liverpool offered him a similar deal to Swansea. It doesn't tell you anything about our offer at all. It doesn't confirm your guess in the slightest and certainly doesn't support the ludicrous claims that we are paying him £70,000 per week. It doesn't tell you Syg left for money at all. All it really tells you is that Liverpool tried to sign a player on much lower terms than would be the norm and the player rightly felt insulted or under valued. It sounds as if Liverpool made it seem as if they didn't really want him. It's got nothing to do with the offer we made him. If you were offered a job at a company where other people recruited to do the same job with similar experiences were offered far better starting salaries, would you feel as if they really valued you? All this shows is that for some bizzare reason your manager seems to be involved with the financial offers and should be excluded from now on.

Okay you've convinced me. I dismissed it as nonsene when I read it in the press, but now some random guy on an internet forum has made it very clear that it's a "fact" there isn't much left to say. Given internet ITKs accuracy when it comes to more general predictions, such as transfers, there is no reason for me to doubt that they'd not know the very private details of contract offers. I bet just after your financial guys put together the package to offer Syg, they made sure a few photo copies were distributed to guys who may or may not decide to share it on internet forums. And i definitely woulnd't dispute the numbers you've out forward for our offer, as I'm sure you put your best effort in to your "guess," which is good enough for me.

The likewise, why is his time at Porto? I think it's a very brave decision by Levy. But I think he's trying to change the structure of the club, so the man at the top (on the football side) has less influence. I think maybe Harry was becoming too integral to our success and that isn't healthy, as if a manager like that leaves, you are can be in big trouble. I think Levy wants to club to structurely set up for success and not dependant on a key individual. AVB is literally just Head Coach and it seems he'll have far less responsibilty and influence than Harry. Great, its never worked in English football before, no matter how many times its been tried (by Spurs themselves at least twice), so why does Levy think it'll work this time? He's not going for a D of F system either though. But that did work for us with Arnsesen/Jol. I think it just comes down to communication and experience. Levy has been in football for a long time now, so he'll know better who to listen to and who not to. I think ulitmately the DofF system isn't even that succesful aborad, as in most clubs it simply isn't necessary. If you look at Spurs as a business, it simply isn't very big. There is no need to have a buffer between then coaching/scouting/academy staff and the Chairman. I think Levy has come to the conclusion that the guy who runs the academy can answer to him, the guy who runs the scouting can answer to him and the Head coach can aswell. Why bother with a D of F? We aren't a massive institution like Barca or Man utd etc. Ultimately we are a small/medium sized business. As long as Levy feels everyone is pulling in the same direction, then neither a manager or D of F are needed. Time will tell if he's right and it's a brave decision.

The likewise, why is his time at Porto? I think it's a very brave decision by Levy. But I think he's trying to change the structure of the club, so the man at the top (on the football side) has less influence. I think maybe Harry was becoming too integral to our success and that isn't healthy, as if a manager like that leaves, you are can be in big trouble. I think Levy wants to club to structurely set up for success and not dependant on a key individual. AVB is literally just Head Coach and it seems he'll have far less responsibilty and influence than Harry.

The 70k figure is ridiculous. It's pure fabrication from the Liverpool end. Since when did Levy start giving out contracts that size to young players on their first contract? It would be totally out of sync with the previous decade. Liverpool fasn have made up figures as they don't waht to think he rejected them for us. But I seriously doubt he did "reject" them in the way they might see it anyway. With Suarez and Gerrard he was hardly likely to start anyway, so probably chose us for the simple fact he'd play more. I've been following this on RAWK all week and none of them have really considered that he might not want to be a bench warmer and have instead decided to believe it's abut money, when a simple look at our accounts over the last decade would show that's hugley unlikely.

I have, and I agree it's laughable. Very good, yes. Much better than when he plays for Spurs, yes. One of the best attacking players in the world? Absolutely not. So take his performances against Chile or Brazil. Which attacking players at International level have you seen perform to higher level in the last year or so? You say it's laughable but have any of the English players or Italian players etc played at that standard? Who and when? I'm not saying he's been the best, been he's been amonsgt the best. I think the truth is much more likely that neither yourself or Trent have watched him much for Mexico. He's the star player for a country ranked 11th in the world, was named Player of the Tournament at the CONCACAF Cup and was 2nd in the Young Player to the Tournament at the last WC. Football does exist outside of Europe. He might not have played well in this country, but when playing for Mexico he's been top class and one of the stand out attacking players at International tournaments. I can't see why as a non Spurs or Mexico fan you'd have been watching him. How do you know how much I've watched him? Why patronise me and suggest I don't know about football outside of Europe? I don't agree with your (frankly wrong) opinion, so the conclusion you draw is that I don't watch any non european football? I never said he hasn't been "top class" for Mexico. But YOU said he's one of the best attacking players in the world at international level. And that is simply not true. If you think I patronised you it was becasue you agreed with Trent that it was laughable. It's harldy laughable given how well he's played at International level. When he was named player of the tournament at the Gold Cup, that was him performing at the level being discussed. The same can be said of his performances in the WC which saw him come second in the Young Player award. Sorry if I patronised you, but to dismiss Gio as being one of the best attacking players at International level as "laughable" just isn't right given what he's achieved at that level. Have you seen much of him for Mexico? If so, what was it about his performances against Brazil, Bosnia and Chile that you don't think make him amongst the best attackers? If he was some unknown from the Mexican league don't be going crazy over his performance and linking him with the worlds biggest clubs? They were cracking performances. very impressive. I only saw the highlights of the CHile game but that certainly made him look good. Vs Brazil he caused them all sorts of problems. Think he got the assist for the penalty (if that's what you want to call it) too? Brazil were pretty unlucky in that game though. Not to take anything away from Dos Santos but they could quite easily have put Mexico to the sword. But anyway, alongside him running the game vs USA in the gold cup (my favourite performance of his) he's put in some very good performances. The USA game was the one where he scored that ridiculous goal as well. You seem to have taken me saying he isn't one of the best players in the world as not rating him. I do. But I don't think you seem to realise what "One of the best attacking players in the world" means. To me that is amongst the top say, 5 or 6, players internationally in the world. And for me, he's short of that. You're begining to sound a lot like Glaston. Don't be blinded by the fact he plays for Spurs. Internationally, he's performed very well. He's not been one of the best attacking players in the world. And regardless of if he is or isn't, there's clearly something not right domestically, or the highlight of his (admittedly still relatively young) career wouldn't be a semi successful loan spell at an average SPanish club I'm not blinded by the fact he plays for Spurs though. I think the problem is that you all know I'm a Spurs fan and thus you straightaway jump to this conclusion. Yet I've proved time and time again on this site I don't post like that. If you read back through the past few posts I think you'll see I'm probably right about this as the Villa fans have definitely responded as if I said Gio was a better player than Young, whilst in reallity all I did was point out that at International level he's performed at a much better than Young and in my opinion been one of the best in the world. I don';t think I'm being unreasonable or biased here, but I genuinely think I've tried discuess Gio's interntaionl perfomances and most of the Villa fan responses haven't done so and were blinded by the fact I'm a Spurs fan and answered a bit out of context becasue of it. And this wasn't the first time. In fact it happens pretty often. Last time I posted here regularly was during the Redknapp court case and the same thing happend then. Alot of the same posters were involved also. Even if you definition on that means best 5 or 6 (perosnally I'd say that per position, not attacking players in general), it still isn't a "laughable" comment, as even if you don't put him in that group, he can't be far away. I haven't discussed his performances at club level at all. The chances are with one year left on his contract he'll be sold anyway. On this very site I recommended him for Villa, as I suspect he'll be sold. I could understand you saying I was showing SPurs based bias if you hadn't seen him play. If an English player had performed at those levels against one of the best teams in the world everyone would be going crazy. You saw the Chile highlights and even from that you'd be able to tell he put in a performance that had it been replicated by a player from a top European country again everyone would be getting very carried away. His better performance against Brazil was the one last year, even though Mexico lost, not the recent one. He was also quality in their defeat to Argentina. When I made the comment about football existing outside of Europe I didn't mean to patronise you with it and it would seem it would have been better aimed at Trent. He went on to prove my point by simply dismissing his performances, saying the Gold Cup isn't a good enough standard, yet I doubt he'd be of the same opinion if a Villa player played well against a European minow in WC or EC qualifying game. He then said it's hardly CL, as if he was totally missing the point I'm making about Gio. Gio has performed against European teams (MOTM performance against France in the WC), but conversley which European attacking players have done so well against South American oppostion on their continent? European teams have famously struggled outside of Europe so it seems totally unfair to judge a player from Central America against European opposition without considering how the Europeans would fair if their roles were reversed. But I'm not saying he's been good at Spurs. I'm literally talking about international level. Trent doesn't seem to think games at International Level count when discussing how good he's been at Internationla level! I haven't said he's a better player than Young. I've said at International level he's been better and been one of th best attacking players in the world at that level of the last few years. Not many player perform at high level consistently for their countries, yet Gio does and for a highly ranked international team. He hasn't just done it against poor opposition but against the likes of Brazil and at the WC.

I have, and I agree it's laughable. Very good, yes. Much better than when he plays for Spurs, yes. One of the best attacking players in the world? Absolutely not. So take his performances against Chile or Brazil. Which attacking players at International level have you seen perform to higher level in the last year or so? You say it's laughable but have any of the English players or Italian players etc played at that standard? Who and when? I'm not saying he's been the best, been he's been amonsgt the best. I think the truth is much more likely that neither yourself or Trent have watched him much for Mexico. He's the star player for a country ranked 11th in the world, was named Player of the Tournament at the CONCACAF Cup and was 2nd in the Young Player to the Tournament at the last WC. Football does exist outside of Europe. He might not have played well in this country, but when playing for Mexico he's been top class and one of the stand out attacking players at International tournaments. I can't see why as a non Spurs or Mexico fan you'd have been watching him. How do you know how much I've watched him? Why patronise me and suggest I don't know about football outside of Europe? I don't agree with your (frankly wrong) opinion, so the conclusion you draw is that I don't watch any non european football? I never said he hasn't been "top class" for Mexico. But YOU said he's one of the best attacking players in the world at international level. And that is simply not true. If you think I patronised you it was becasue you agreed with Trent that it was laughable. It's harldy laughable given how well he's played at International level. When he was named player of the tournament at the Gold Cup, that was him performing at the level being discussed. The same can be said of his performances in the WC which saw him come second in the Young Player award. Sorry if I patronised you, but to dismiss Gio as being one of the best attacking players at International level as "laughable" just isn't right given what he's achieved at that level. Have you seen much of him for Mexico? If so, what was it about his performances against Brazil, Bosnia and Chile that you don't think make him amongst the best attackers? If he was some unknown from the Mexican league don't be going crazy over his performance and linking him with the worlds biggest clubs?

I have, and I agree it's laughable. Very good, yes. Much better than when he plays for Spurs, yes. One of the best attacking players in the world? Absolutely not. So take his performances against Chile or Brazil. Which attacking players at International level have you seen perform to higher level in the last year or so? You say it's laughable but have any of the English players or Italian players etc played at that standard? Who and when? I'm not saying he's been the best, been he's been amonsgt the best. I think the truth is much more likely that neither yourself or Trent have watched him much for Mexico. He's the star player for a country ranked 11th in the world, was named Player of the Tournament at the CONCACAF Cup and was 2nd in the Young Player to the Tournament at the last WC. Football does exist outside of Europe. He might not have played well in this country, but when playing for Mexico he's been top class and one of the stand out attacking players at International tournaments. I can't see why as a non Spurs or Mexico fan you'd have been watching him.

Does that really make any difference?

Most did the first time around, but many never foragve him for leaving. Personally I think they were very unreasonable and had no hard feelings over him leaving. Also he suffered from his rivalry with Defoe for a starting spot. Defoe, like Keane, has never been the most popular player and it's largelly due to a divide between pro Keane and pro Defoe fans. L always liked them both, but Keane at his peak was the better player. Defoe would have scored more, but the team overall would be better having a player like Keane. To be honest I think Keane ruined Defoe's career. If it wasn't for Keane, Defoe would have scored 20+ goals per season on several occassions.

Why is it laughable Trent? Have you watched his international performance over the last few years?

To be honest I think Spurs fans are still pretty divided on who is better out of Friedal and Gomes. At their best, there is no debate as Gomes is better. But Friedal is very consistent and Spurs fans greatly appreciate him for that. He was exaclty what we neeeded last season, the season before that, Gomes was so up and down. Brad is a solid 7/10 keeper week in week out, whilst Gomes can be the best in world for a few weeks and then look like a Sunday league keeper for a few weeks. Persoanlly I'd like Brad to retain the No 1 jersey next season, but there isn't much in it. If Gomes shows his 2009/10 form and pre Spurs form, then he'll be our number 1. Dos Santos probably is better than Young when playing at Internatinal level. In fact here isn't much doubt at all, he blatantly is. He's never really had much of a chance to show what he can do in the Prem. Why Harry didn't like him is hard to tell, but my thinking is that Harry wanted a professional mentality in the squad and used Dos Santo to implement that. By ignoring an player as talented as Dos Santos due to his unporfessional ways and at the same time giving so much time to a limited but determined player like Livermore, it really sets a good example. I wouldn't be at all surpirsed if the new manager wants to keep Gio and make him a key player. I think it's unfair to write him off and say it's clear Young is better, as Gio just hasn't had a chance. He's been one ofthe best attacking players in the world at International level and did very well during his loan spell in La Liga. Bentley is shit. I really thought he'd be a good player for us, but he's been a terrible signing and nowhere near as good as Young.

I don't think we will sell. He can play both LB and RB. Both Danny Rose and Corluka look to be leaving, so there should be plently of opportunites for him. Harry spoke about him coming back not long ago and I suspect it wasn't just his opinion that he should be involved next season but that of Sherwoods and possibly even Levy is involved in these discussions. It seems pointless to buy him, loan him out to the point he is ready to be more involved and then sell him. I think one of the most positive things we've seen at Spurs in recent years is that we've got rid of the reserve team and now heavily use the loan system. It's better for the likes of Naughton and Caulker to have a few years out on loan playing regularly than playing weak reserve level football. I think the press might just be linking him with a move away as he's hardly featrued for us, but in our case if the player is consistently loaned out, but always moving up a level with each loan, then he's very unlikley to be sold, whilst those who occassionally get in the first team squad but rarely feature are much more likely to be moved on. Basically someone like Danny Rose might appear to be more established and part of our plans, but in reallity I'd say it's the complete opposite.

audere - est - facere That's the Latin equivalent of Del Boys favourite saying. Sadly we've proven this to be about as true as Del Boy has over the years.

ITKs are suggesting it's AVB. Seems a very odd choice to me. I just can't see how anyone can form an opinion on him that's positive. All we saw at Cheslea were some odd tactical approaches and that he struggled to man manage. We know little about how he'd behave in the transfer market or what he can do at a club given time. What happened after he left Porto suggests he was far more incidental to their success than the vast majority assumed. Very kind draws in cups, weakend opposition in the league and the blossoming of players who had already been improving year on year are surely vastly more to do with Porto's treble success than any contribution by AVB. I'm very surprised at this given Levy tried to get Paul Le Guen when he was at Lyon and famously hired Juande Ramos after the success Sevilla had when he was there. A bit of research into recent history at Sevilla would of highlighted many more imoprtant reasons for their success than Ramos. Has Levy learned nothing from these experiences? If it is AVB, then it's a massive gamble.

There are no well established managers that standout, as if you look carefully at their track records, there is enough evidence to suggest they'd fail at Spurs. Fans, pundits and the media nearly always ignore these things and point to things they've won as reasons they'd take us forward, but I'd say this is one of the dumbest of all the dumb arguments constantly used in football. Why focus on how a coach won things in totally different circumstances and ignore their failing in circumstances more similar to what they'd find when working at Spurs? So from that point of view the likes of Ancelotti, AVB, Hiddink and Capello wouldn't really mean much to me. The reason I was one of the few Spurs fans who was so pro Redknapp's appointment, was that his record was largelly unlblemished other than a short stint at Southmpton. He'd taken all his other clubs forward and usually to new peaks. The fact he hadn't won much meant nothing to me, as clubs win things, not managers. So from that point of view I guess I'd be more interested in someone who is untested at a higher level but has shown potential in previous jobs. So I wouldn't be against Moyes. I wouldn't be particuarly excited though. I'd take a manager who had been at a higher level as long as his record in unblemished. Laurent Blanc fits the bill, but hasn't had many jobs and is unlikley to want to leave France for Spurs. Pep definitely doesn't interest me, as he's totally untested in my opinion. The only hints we can get is from his transfer activity when at Barca and that was pretty average. Bascially I don't know who I want. With someone like Capello you can look at his time with England and when Roma had financial issues and could pay for the best players and ask why it would be any different when managing under the restrictions at Spurs? Yet with somone like MArtinez, he hasn't won anything, but unlike a Capello type there is nothing in his past that really strongly suggests he'd fail when the competition had greater resources, so at least that offers hope. Maybe Martines has the same thing the likes of Harry or MON have, but only to an even greater degree? It's unlikely, but with most of the more proven managers there is evidence they definitely don't have what it takes. Fans keep saying we need a proven winner, but that is utterly stupid in my opinion and totally ignores football history of when these so called "winners" work is less favourable circumstances in a tough domestic league. I'm not saying I want Martinez, but just I don't want someone who has failed in more similar circumstances to what he'd find at Spurs and had success with the biggest clubs.

I agree, tough job and in my opinion rather daft (hehe) to let him go. We'll see I guess. I'm not sure I agree on Newcastle though. I don't think you have to worry much about them next season. I'm not really convinced by Newcastle either, but I didn't want to dismiss them given their season.

Yesterday said I wouldn't be shocked if he went, but I actually was. It doesn't make any sense to me at all. You'd have to question the sanity of a new manager for accepting the job. To improve on 4th place is going to be incredibly tough. I honestly don't think Mourinho could do and he's considered the best in the world. Chelsea had a blip, that's all. To improve on what Harry did the new manager is going to have to finish above one of Man City, Utd and Chelsea, whilst at the same time fight off the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool and an emerging Newcastle. It's a job that could easily ruin the career of an established manager, as it did for Geaorge Graham and Juande Ramos. I'm not sure who I want as none of the candidates really jump out, but I suppose that's as much to do with the fact I think they've got an incredibly difficult job that i'm not sure anyone could do. If Mourinho wouldn't convince then who would? Unless there is a large cash injection coming in, then I don't think the club has reasched its limit until we move to a new stadium.

The Rangers fans called him the Scottish Cafu and that's how it caught on.

When asked he'd say "why not?" But that isn't the same as the calims the anti Redknapp forum brigade are making. They are saying we had a squad that should have been pushing for the title, which frankly is mental. Top 4 is a great achievment with our squad. Having a squad as good as ours is a great achievment with our resources. Our fans should be delighted with how things have gone over the last few years, but many of them are acting as if they support Man Utd and have grown used to winning titles and challenging for the CL. I promise you that had a manager who fitted the bill more, like Ramos, finshed 4th twice in 3 years they'd be saying he's the best in the Prem. It's many of the same posters who wanted Jol out and Ramos in, that are behind all the anti Redknapp stuff.

Harry is very hated amongst a lot of Spurs fans Hated? Why? He embarrassed them. When he was appointed the anger wasn't because he was generally disliked, but becasue the majority were convinced he wasn't good enough for Spurs. Most football messageboard posters are the same in that they want to demosnstrate a greter knowledge of the game. This is why there are so many "expert" scouts and tacticians. Teh fact Redknapp has been so succesful has casued for a great deal of resentment amongst many messagebaord fans. Thus they look for any reason to criticise him and so far all reasons have been absured. They main argument is that our squad was supposedly good enough to challenge for the title and Redknapp is holding us back. Other arguments include there is no planning for the future and Levy signs our players, apart from the odd older one! They hate him so much that they actually believe this. They will never back down and admit their view of football in general is wrong and it's a far simpler game than modern, pretentious, messageboard fans would have like to believe. Basically they struggle to support a regime that if successful makes them look stupid. Their entire online credibiltiy depends on their opinion and it's very important to them as they spend much of their day on the forums. I stopped posting on Spurs forums as it was becoming an obsession.

Harry is very hated amongst a lot of Spurs fans and ITKs are fans. Many of them have an anti Harry agenda and I think it's possible they are trying to make this a self fullfilling prophecy. I don't think Harry could be behind much of it, as so much of the stuff posted is utter nonsense that makes Harry look bad. Though some of the stuff in the media could be Harrys doing, hoping the fans would put pressure on Levy to give him a new contact. So, if it isn't true, which I'm still more inclined to believe, then I'd say the reason it's got so out of control is in part due to Harry using the media to try and get a better contract, but mainly due to the ITKs utterly abusing their status to massively push their own agenda.

Another of the most well estbalished ITKs, who has definitely got a lot of quite unique stuff right over the years, has just said he's being sacked. It's getting harder and harder not to believe it.

But if the people who count know that there is nothing going on, then no one has been disrupted. I just don't see the incentive for Levy to give him a new contact when he still has a year left. I never believed that he offered him a 3 year deal when the England specualtion started. The reality is that Harry is 65 years old and still commutes from Sandbanks on a daily basis because he and his wife are so settled there. He turned down the Newcastle job for that reason. The rumours of him going abroad are crazy in my opinion. He's family man with grand children. He's not going to the Middle East. There just aren't mnay opitions for him and none better than what he has now. Levy knows that, so I don't see why he'd offer him a longer term deal. Harry can use the media to bluff all he wants, but the idea of him and Sandra leaving Sandbankc to move to Qatar in their mid to late 60's just beggars belief, even if the money on offer is huge. Harry just doesn't have the cards to play a decent hand and Levy knows it. From my point of view this is the only issue between the two and it's been blown out of all proportion. In my opinion there is nothing going on here more than a contract dispute which I doubt Levy is really bothered by, as he doesn't think Harry will quit. Given the scale of the Harry out rumours, it's tough to ignore them, so, as I said I wouldn't be shocked if he went, but the whole things doesn't make sense to me. What is for sure, is that if he does stay, the whole thing was totally sensationalist nonsense, but ITKs will come out with all sorts of bollocks to explain why Harry is still in a job, which sadly a lot of people will believe.

Very interesting to see what happens here. If he doesn't go it just shows the sheer power of interent rumours. It started off on SPurs messageboards with some ITKs and has now caught on in the media and twitter etc. Everyone is becoming more and more convinced it is true, as each new source appears. But personally I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was virtually nothing in this. None of the reasons given by the ITKs make sense. I really do think it could be a modern case of Chinese whispers. I suspect the source of 99% of those claiming to know he is gone or is going, all origintate from the same place. If he stays they will come up with loads of BS like he was on the edge and Levy decided to give him a reprieve or some other nonsense, but they shouldn't be allowed to back track. But If he's as close to going as is being made out and Lvey wants him gone as much as is being made out, then there is no chance he'll still be here at the start of the season. If he stays then the ITKs have been found out (yet again) and we'll have an amazing example of how these things work and that there really can be smoke without fire. It's hard to be convinced by the sheer wieght of numbers behind this rumour, but when I step back and look objectively from Levys point of view, it would seem hugely unlikely he wants Harry out and the reasons put forward by ITKs seem to be more soap opera than reallity based. So I think it is that it's total rubbish and that Levy and Harry have a good working relationship. However, I'm finding it tough to stay rational and look at things objectively as all the talk is starting to convince me aswell, to the point I wouldn't be surprised if he went!