Jump to content

The QPR circus thread


dudevillaisnice

Recommended Posts

 

 

Harry Redknapp is the biggest word removed in football.

And he isn't even that great a manager either.

 

He's a shite manager. 

 

 

 

No he's not, at worse he is an average manager. He got Portsmouth promoted and took them to an FA cup win. At Spurs he took them from the relegation to the champions league in 18 months - that's not exactly bad is it? Ye he spent lots of money and he did badly in a few other jobs, but his overall record if you look at it club by club is not bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harry Redknapp is the biggest word removed in football.

And he isn't even that great a manager either.

He's a shite manager.

No he's not, at worse he is an average manager. He got Portsmouth promoted and took them to an FA cup win. At Spurs he took them from the relegation to the champions league in 18 months - that's not exactly bad is it? Ye he spent lots of money and he did badly in a few other jobs, but his overall record if you look at it club by club is not bad.

He financially crippled Portsmouth, he had a clause in his contract allowing him a % of any profits made from player sales if he signed the players, making himself a nice bit of Bunce, who does he sign when takes over at spurs? Pompey players.

But its Arry, so you gotta laff, incha?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Harry Redknapp is the biggest word removed in football.

And he isn't even that great a manager either.

 

He's a shite manager. 

 

 

 

No he's not, at worse he is an average manager. He got Portsmouth promoted and took them to an FA cup win. At Spurs he took them from the relegation to the champions league in 18 months - that's not exactly bad is it? Ye he spent lots of money and he did badly in a few other jobs, but his overall record if you look at it club by club is not bad.

 

Yeah look at Portsmouth now, their plight is purely a function of his spending there. I have to LOL at this 'taking Spurs from relegation' what an absolute load of nonsense, he inherited a good team that was drastically underperforming but was not getting relegated! He took over in October, I didn't realise teams were on the verge of relegation in October LOL.

 

Oh, let's not forget the fantastic job he did at Southampton as well. Quality manager.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As with the MON spending argument with us, the ownership of the club get the ultimate blame for allowing him to engage in unsustainable spending.

Not that I'm disputing he isn't a very good manager though. 30+ years in management and one FA Cup to show for it is enough said as far as I'm concerned.

Edited by Isa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a Harry Redknapp lover - far from it. But you have to give credit where it is due. He did a good job at Spurs. As he constantly reminded us, they had 2 points from 8 games, that is heading for relegation at the quarter way point of the season. He steered them to 8th that season. The very next season they got 4th place ahead of money bags Man City. In his 2nd full season they beat AC Milan and Inter Milan on their way to the Champions league quarter final winning in the San Siro in the 2nd round. Spurs had never had champions league before or since Harry came.

 

I am not talking about what Harry did at other clubs, just specifically what he did at Spurs. Even the Harry haters can see he did a good job at Spurs.

Edited by Voinjama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, but I would argue what he did at Spurs was more then 'half decent'. If a Villa manager came in and took Villa to the champions league in his 1st full season, and then in his 2nd full season took the club to the champions league quarter final beating both Milan clubs along the way, we would be calling him a legend and putting him in the Mcgrath category. He did alright at West Ham too.

 

To sum up his managerial career has been very mixed, lots of ups and downs - literally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that it's hard for managers, apart from those at the absolute top level, to go through a full career without having some blemishes on their record. Despite me not liking Redknapp much, I will admit that he's a solid enough manager.

He's been in top flight football for a long time* and can still attract decent enough jobs. It's not like he's shit and nobody wants him to the point where is having to manage obscure teams in Eastern Europe or Asia.

(Okay, he's in the Championship this season, but was given the job when they were a Prem club).

Edited by Morley_crosses_to_Withe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with MCTW and Voinjama in that he's a decent manager without being spectacular. Also I very much doubt he would've been given free leash on the finances so for him to take the sole blame is harsh albeit he obviously was the instigator in the financial circumstances his previous clubs are now in or were in. Also, I believe his target set by his superiors would be to try and compete with larger clubs which would require similar budgets with less income which would inevitably lead to financial decline unless the club managed sustained success.

 

To clarify I' not a Rednkapp fan and would much rather Lambert over Rednkapp, especially at club level. However, I dont think  he is as poor as is made out on here and if I supported a regularly battling relegation club than I probaly would be more than happy with his appointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont think anybody would say he wasnt a decent manager but he is hardly Jose Mourinho that the media and himself try to make out. For all his hype he has 1 trophy which financially crippled the club in question which they probably will never recover.

 

as for the relegation argument, that is rubbish, spurs were just in a false position

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â