Jump to content

Official Football Thread

Recommended Posts

It is isn't it. I know from my time there, there is a hovercraft that is a lot quicker, hopefully not driven by Clarkson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nah no way, I can't even win a few hundred quid and this guy does this....

https://twitter.com/skybet/status/900319596133199873

https://twitter.com/skybet/status/900326196436750337

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even the police are ripping into Arsenal, total shambles :joy:

https://twitter.com/dorsetpolice/status/903208604383285249

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So Harry  Redknapp  wants to come and work at Yeovil, I’d love it to happen as our manager is so young and needs help (we have players older than the manager) plus with our rubbish owners who did nothing but pocket the money we got for getting into the championship. @Lukedfrt I think it’s a joke that he was sacked, given time he would have done well.
https://twitter.com/btsportscore/status/915103994426613760

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah they definitely shouldn't have sacked him, needed another 5 games to settle the players in properly. I'm gutted it didn't work out, he had a real connection with the fans.. I do think he's a bit overrated though, and he has made a few questionable signings that we're now left with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lukedfrt said:
Yeah they definitely shouldn't have sacked him, needed another 5 games to settle the players in properly. I'm gutted it didn't work out, he had a real connection with the fans.. I do think he's a bit overrated though, and he has made a few questionable signings that we're now left with.
Yeah Harry always has a good connection with the fans but then I think it's because he's honest and a hard worker. Did a great job during his spell with us as well. Got us playing some really nice football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lukedfrt said:
Yeah they definitely shouldn't have sacked him, needed another 5 games to settle the players in properly. I'm gutted it didn't work out, he had a real connection with the fans.. I do think he's a bit overrated though, and he has made a few questionable signings that we're now left with.
That's Harry Redknapp in a nutshell, popular figure, but a lousy manager, odd tranfer dealings that can cripple a club for years to come and an overall lousy human being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jiggy said:
Lukedfrt said:
Yeah they definitely shouldn't have sacked him, needed another 5 games to settle the players in properly. I'm gutted it didn't work out, he had a real connection with the fans.. I do think he's a bit overrated though, and he has made a few questionable signings that we're now left with.
That's Harry Redknapp in a nutshell, popular figure, but a lousy manager, odd tranfer dealings that can cripple a club for years to come and an overall lousy human being.
I wouldn't say he was lousy  a lot of the time he was working at clubs with pretty limited resources and a lot of the time were facing stuff like relegation and a lot of the time he saved them. As for the weird transfer dealing the people who own the clubs are probably just as much if not more responsible for that than he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jiggy said:
Lukedfrt said:
Yeah they definitely shouldn't have sacked him, needed another 5 games to settle the players in properly. I'm gutted it didn't work out, he had a real connection with the fans.. I do think he's a bit overrated though, and he has made a few questionable signings that we're now left with.
That's Harry Redknapp in a nutshell, popular figure, but a lousy manager, odd tranfer dealings that can cripple a club for years to come and an overall lousy human being.
Can’t cripple us anymore than our owners who were born in the Stone Age. Like how do you go from being in the championship with lots of great players, to now every season fighting to stay in the football league. 

Our manager does need help though, we have players older than him. His playing career was ended early after a bad car accident, so if Harry can help st all then that’s great. I don’t think Harry is lousy though, he’s also not to blame for financial mismanagement, as that’s up to the owners not him.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/aug/22/yeovil-town-manager-darren-way-fortunate-to-be-alive-everton-efl-cup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jiggy said:
Lukedfrt said:
Yeah they definitely shouldn't have sacked him, needed another 5 games to settle the players in properly. I'm gutted it didn't work out, he had a real connection with the fans.. I do think he's a bit overrated though, and he has made a few questionable signings that we're now left with.
That's Harry Redknapp in a nutshell, popular figure, but a lousy manager, odd tranfer dealings that can cripple a club for years to come and an overall lousy human being.
I wouldn't say he was lousy  a lot of the time he was working at clubs with pretty limited resources and a lot of the time were facing stuff like relegation and a lot of the time he saved them. As for the weird transfer dealing the people who own the clubs are probably just as much if not more responsible for that than he is.
He relegated Southampton and QPR, ruined Portsmouth and Queens Park Rangers by signing a monster load of odd players on shady contracts with crippling clauses and had a Tottenham with Modric and Bale in them and finished behind an Arsenal led by Song and Benayoun. Former players like Van der Vaart has stated that his tactical prowess and level of professionalism is basically non-existent and that the players basically managed themselves at Tottenham. Horrible manager. Especially at QPR, that was peak Redknapp. One of the highest wage bills in the league, had CL-winners in his side, Julio Cesar at goal, but dropped him for Green and QPR was dead last. Twice.

I also strongly disagree with the idea that the club is more responsible for Redknapp's mismanagement than Redknapp himself. You shouldn't give Redknapp that much liberties, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he misuses them greatly when he gets them. Always finds a way to get "his people" involved. Plus English football culture is about giving the manager lots of freedom to control the technical aspect of the game. I think West Brom a few years ago with Clarke, was one of the few clubs where they didn't had a manager, but a head coach who had zero say in which players came in. Either way, you can at best blame the club for making the appointment, but that doesn't excuse Redknapp's disgraceful wheel-and-dealing ways that's somehow branded as endearing by the media over the years.

Zola was doing a terrible job, so last season was more about getting him out than getting someone in, but Birmingham City should be glad they got Redknapp out as early as they did before he got a chance to sign Niko Kranjcar. Although I still don't get why they got rid of Gary Rowett.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nobody will ever understand why we sacked Rowett haha, other than having Chinese owners with no clue about football! 

Our performance last night was the best I've seen since we sacked GR, so hopefully it's a sign of things to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jiggy said:
Jiggy said:
Lukedfrt said:
Yeah they definitely shouldn't have sacked him, needed another 5 games to settle the players in properly. I'm gutted it didn't work out, he had a real connection with the fans.. I do think he's a bit overrated though, and he has made a few questionable signings that we're now left with.
That's Harry Redknapp in a nutshell, popular figure, but a lousy manager, odd tranfer dealings that can cripple a club for years to come and an overall lousy human being.
I wouldn't say he was lousy  a lot of the time he was working at clubs with pretty limited resources and a lot of the time were facing stuff like relegation and a lot of the time he saved them. As for the weird transfer dealing the people who own the clubs are probably just as much if not more responsible for that than he is.
He relegated Southampton and QPR, ruined Portsmouth and Queens Park Rangers by signing a monster load of odd players on shady contracts with crippling clauses and had a Tottenham with Modric and Bale in them and finished behind an Arsenal led by Song and Benayoun. Former players like Van der Vaart has stated that his tactical prowess and level of professionalism is basically non-existent and that the players basically managed themselves at Tottenham. Horrible manager. Especially at QPR, that was peak Redknapp. One of the highest wage bills in the league, had CL-winners in his side, Julio Cesar at goal, but dropped him for Green and QPR was dead last. Twice.

I also strongly disagree with the idea that the club is more responsible for Redknapp's mismanagement than Redknapp himself. You shouldn't give Redknapp that much liberties, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he misuses them greatly when he gets them. Always finds a way to get "his people" involved. Plus English football culture is about giving the manager lots of freedom to control the technical aspect of the game. I think West Brom a few years ago with Clarke, was one of the few clubs where they didn't had a manager, but a head coach who had zero say in which players came in. Either way, you can at best blame the club for making the appointment, but that doesn't excuse Redknapp's disgraceful wheel-and-dealing ways that's somehow branded as endearing by the media over the years.

Zola was doing a terrible job, so last season was more about getting him out than getting someone in, but Birmingham City should be glad they got Redknapp out as early as they did before he got a chance to sign Niko Kranjcar. Although I still don't get why they got rid of Gary Rowett.

In the case of Southampton and QPR being relegated that was just bad luck and personally I was quite happy with what he did for us at Spurs. Got a bit unlucky with Chelsea winning the Champion's League that year but otherwise a good job. Also for me Portsmouth's problems were caused a lot by their owners not Harry imo. Cesar wasn't doing that well in QPR's goal from what I noticed that year so wasn't surprise3d he got dropped I'd have dropped him as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jiggy said:
Jiggy said:
Lukedfrt said:
Yeah they definitely shouldn't have sacked him, needed another 5 games to settle the players in properly. I'm gutted it didn't work out, he had a real connection with the fans.. I do think he's a bit overrated though, and he has made a few questionable signings that we're now left with.
That's Harry Redknapp in a nutshell, popular figure, but a lousy manager, odd tranfer dealings that can cripple a club for years to come and an overall lousy human being.
I wouldn't say he was lousy  a lot of the time he was working at clubs with pretty limited resources and a lot of the time were facing stuff like relegation and a lot of the time he saved them. As for the weird transfer dealing the people who own the clubs are probably just as much if not more responsible for that than he is.
He relegated Southampton and QPR, ruined Portsmouth and Queens Park Rangers by signing a monster load of odd players on shady contracts with crippling clauses and had a Tottenham with Modric and Bale in them and finished behind an Arsenal led by Song and Benayoun. Former players like Van der Vaart has stated that his tactical prowess and level of professionalism is basically non-existent and that the players basically managed themselves at Tottenham. Horrible manager. Especially at QPR, that was peak Redknapp. One of the highest wage bills in the league, had CL-winners in his side, Julio Cesar at goal, but dropped him for Green and QPR was dead last. Twice.

I also strongly disagree with the idea that the club is more responsible for Redknapp's mismanagement than Redknapp himself. You shouldn't give Redknapp that much liberties, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he misuses them greatly when he gets them. Always finds a way to get "his people" involved. Plus English football culture is about giving the manager lots of freedom to control the technical aspect of the game. I think West Brom a few years ago with Clarke, was one of the few clubs where they didn't had a manager, but a head coach who had zero say in which players came in. Either way, you can at best blame the club for making the appointment, but that doesn't excuse Redknapp's disgraceful wheel-and-dealing ways that's somehow branded as endearing by the media over the years.

Zola was doing a terrible job, so last season was more about getting him out than getting someone in, but Birmingham City should be glad they got Redknapp out as early as they did before he got a chance to sign Niko Kranjcar. Although I still don't get why they got rid of Gary Rowett.

In the case of Southampton and QPR being relegated that was just bad luck and personally I was quite happy with what he did for us at Spurs. Got a bit unlucky with Chelsea winning the Champion's League that year but otherwise a good job. Also for me Portsmouth's problems were caused a lot by their owners not Harry imo. Cesar wasn't doing that well in QPR's goal from what I noticed that year so wasn't surprise3d he got dropped I'd have dropped him as well.
QPR was definitely not bad luck. Bad luck is when Marco Silva got relegated with Hull City. When you've clearly set up a team with a solid organization who impresses in games, but just can't quite get the results needed to stay up. Not the case with Redknapp and QPR. That was mismanagement all over the place. A team that played like a complete mess, horrible team selection, no real mentality in them. And Julio Cesar wasn't doing well (who was), but Green ended up doing even worse.

Missing out on CL-football with Spurs was unlucky and unprecedented in the sense that 4th wasn't enough for CL-qualification that year, but again, they lost a 15-point advantage over Arsenal. Who were a complete meme that season. That capitulation is a direct result of Redknapp's inability to install proper tactics in that team. Of course, it wasn't all bad, he still got them CL. He probably had a role in Spurs' bold approach to games and their offensive drive. However, it was extremely unbalanced. Good managers can do that and still make sure the team can at least defend. But the negative greatly outweighed the positive and Spurs haven't looked back since sacking him.

As for Portsmouth, I can't see how that was not on Harry Redknapp. He's the one who's been given responsibility over their transfer dealings and how contracts are set up. If Redknapp didn't had a say in that, then he wouldn't be able to pocket money every time he signed a player for them. So signing a truck load of players benefitted him financially. It can't be underestimated how much influence types like Redknapp really have at smaller clubs. They get buddy-buddy with owners, get their people and their connections in and basically end up having say over the entire club. It's not like something you see with most PL-clubs nowadays where there's a clear hierarchy between club owners and manager. Bournemouth apparently got ruined in similar fashion in the 80s/90s thanks to Redknapp's ways of managing. When that happens on four seperate occassions, you can definitely point fingers at Redknapp for it. And the worst part about it, is that he knew he was running a club into the ground. Because he fully used that to his advantage when he moved from Portsmouth to Tottenham and then bought Pompey's best players for cheap fees because he knew exactly how much Pompey needed the money. And even at Tottenham, he's had some very dodgy transfers, like Pavlyuchenko, Nelsen, Saha, Khumalo, Pienaar. But it's understandable if Tottenham-fans aren't as negative to Redknapp as fans of most other clubs, he was relatively kept in check there. But again, Tottenham isn't a small club, they had more of a foundation to go their own way.

I do appreciate this discussion though, it's cool to talk with someone with a different viewpoint who doesn't act like a baby when he sees opposing opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hughesy said:
:joy: :joy: :joy:

Talking of overrated managers...                


There's ten teams there so it's hard to know who you're talking about but I'll assume this is another stab at Arsenal and Wenger. 

Not sure how he's over rated though as there aren't many people who rate him whatsoever anymore. He should have called it a day years ago and saved his reputation. 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EUfkdup said:
Hughesy said:
:joy: :joy: :joy:

Talking of overrated managers...                


There's ten teams there so it's hard to know who you're talking about but I'll assume this is another stab at Arsenal and Wenger. 

Not sure how he's over rated though as there aren't many people who rate him whatsoever anymore. He should have called it a day years ago and saved his reputation. 


Wait, do you support Arsenal too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jiggy said:
Jiggy said:
Jiggy said:
Lukedfrt said:
Yeah they definitely shouldn't have sacked him, needed another 5 games to settle the players in properly. I'm gutted it didn't work out, he had a real connection with the fans.. I do think he's a bit overrated though, and he has made a few questionable signings that we're now left with.
That's Harry Redknapp in a nutshell, popular figure, but a lousy manager, odd tranfer dealings that can cripple a club for years to come and an overall lousy human being.
I wouldn't say he was lousy  a lot of the time he was working at clubs with pretty limited resources and a lot of the time were facing stuff like relegation and a lot of the time he saved them. As for the weird transfer dealing the people who own the clubs are probably just as much if not more responsible for that than he is.
He relegated Southampton and QPR, ruined Portsmouth and Queens Park Rangers by signing a monster load of odd players on shady contracts with crippling clauses and had a Tottenham with Modric and Bale in them and finished behind an Arsenal led by Song and Benayoun. Former players like Van der Vaart has stated that his tactical prowess and level of professionalism is basically non-existent and that the players basically managed themselves at Tottenham. Horrible manager. Especially at QPR, that was peak Redknapp. One of the highest wage bills in the league, had CL-winners in his side, Julio Cesar at goal, but dropped him for Green and QPR was dead last. Twice.

I also strongly disagree with the idea that the club is more responsible for Redknapp's mismanagement than Redknapp himself. You shouldn't give Redknapp that much liberties, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he misuses them greatly when he gets them. Always finds a way to get "his people" involved. Plus English football culture is about giving the manager lots of freedom to control the technical aspect of the game. I think West Brom a few years ago with Clarke, was one of the few clubs where they didn't had a manager, but a head coach who had zero say in which players came in. Either way, you can at best blame the club for making the appointment, but that doesn't excuse Redknapp's disgraceful wheel-and-dealing ways that's somehow branded as endearing by the media over the years.

Zola was doing a terrible job, so last season was more about getting him out than getting someone in, but Birmingham City should be glad they got Redknapp out as early as they did before he got a chance to sign Niko Kranjcar. Although I still don't get why they got rid of Gary Rowett.

In the case of Southampton and QPR being relegated that was just bad luck and personally I was quite happy with what he did for us at Spurs. Got a bit unlucky with Chelsea winning the Champion's League that year but otherwise a good job. Also for me Portsmouth's problems were caused a lot by their owners not Harry imo. Cesar wasn't doing that well in QPR's goal from what I noticed that year so wasn't surprise3d he got dropped I'd have dropped him as well.
QPR was definitely not bad luck. Bad luck is when Marco Silva got relegated with Hull City. When you've clearly set up a team with a solid organization who impresses in games, but just can't quite get the results needed to stay up. Not the case with Redknapp and QPR. That was mismanagement all over the place. A team that played like a complete mess, horrible team selection, no real mentality in them. And Julio Cesar wasn't doing well (who was), but Green ended up doing even worse.

Missing out on CL-football with Spurs was unlucky and unprecedented in the sense that 4th wasn't enough for CL-qualification that year, but again, they lost a 15-point advantage over Arsenal. Who were a complete meme that season. That capitulation is a direct result of Redknapp's inability to install proper tactics in that team. Of course, it wasn't all bad, he still got them CL. He probably had a role in Spurs' bold approach to games and their offensive drive. However, it was extremely unbalanced. Good managers can do that and still make sure the team can at least defend. But the negative greatly outweighed the positive and Spurs haven't looked back since sacking him.

As for Portsmouth, I can't see how that was not on Harry Redknapp. He's the one who's been given responsibility over their transfer dealings and how contracts are set up. If Redknapp didn't had a say in that, then he wouldn't be able to pocket money every time he signed a player for them. So signing a truck load of players benefitted him financially. It can't be underestimated how much influence types like Redknapp really have at smaller clubs. They get buddy-buddy with owners, get their people and their connections in and basically end up having say over the entire club. It's not like something you see with most PL-clubs nowadays where there's a clear hierarchy between club owners and manager. Bournemouth apparently got ruined in similar fashion in the 80s/90s thanks to Redknapp's ways of managing. When that happens on four seperate occassions, you can definitely point fingers at Redknapp for it. And the worst part about it, is that he knew he was running a club into the ground. Because he fully used that to his advantage when he moved from Portsmouth to Tottenham and then bought Pompey's best players for cheap fees because he knew exactly how much Pompey needed the money. And even at Tottenham, he's had some very dodgy transfers, like Pavlyuchenko, Nelsen, Saha, Khumalo, Pienaar. But it's understandable if Tottenham-fans aren't as negative to Redknapp as fans of most other clubs, he was relatively kept in check there. But again, Tottenham isn't a small club, they had more of a foundation to go their own way.

I do appreciate this discussion though, it's cool to talk with someone with a different viewpoint who doesn't act like a baby when he sees opposing opinions.
My point is though the Porttsmouth owners could have still said no we can't afford it after all that is their job. So in my view it still makes them just as guilty for their demise in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
West Ham went and appointed Moyes, which I would put down as a move ensuring relegation if there weren't at least four other teams being abysmal around them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flashback to when a guy I used to play football with down the park who is a goalkeeper, scored from a corner  :D

https://twitter.com/YTFC/status/929044228180672512?s=09

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For crying out loud, we must be the only club in history to have their caretaker manager walk out to join another club!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×