Bye arry

[Torvald Utne]

So how does 'talking about spending money' equate to actually spending it without the owner \ chief exec sanctioning it?

 

See replies from Jairzinho and Whelan.

 

It seems if you hate Redknapp which a lot seem to - he is a tax dodging destroyer of footballing clubs

 

If you don't particularly mind the guy, or like him(dare i say it) you can be logical and reasoned in looking at all the facts rather than those that back up above opinions!!!!!

 

I don't like him at all, find him very distasteful.

 

I do think the blame lies ultimately with the owners but I do think Redknapp contributes....but maybe I only think he contributes cos I don't like him...

[Major Tom]

I do think the blame lies ultimately with the owners but I do think Redknapp contributes....but maybe I only think he contributes cos I don't like him...

 

You are using plural there, fungus. Has Redknapp been involved in more than one club who has struggled financially? Pompey is the only one I can of. Saints? What happened to them?

[Babb'sBurstNad]

My intention wasn't to be condescending in my original post, it was my frustration at people making assertions about Harry without backing it up-so i am hypocrite as well now too. I promise i will think and engage my brain before posting in the future. Perhaps i could send my posts to you first for approval?

 

Your assertion that i live in a monochrome world based on 1 post was way off the mark too. Apology accepted in advance.

 

Haha, touche.

 

But you may be waiting a while for that apology, because the pedant in me has to point out your further mistake. I never said you lived in a monochrome world, i said in the "monochrome world you perceive", you'll no doubt note the difference, the latter clearly backed up by your post in which you split a plethora of opinions into an over simplistic either/or equation.

 

Don't worry, it happens to the best of us.

[Sandford]

Haha' date=' touche.

 

But you may be waiting a while for that apology, because the pedant in me has to point out your further mistake. I never said you lived in a monochrome world, i said in the "monochrome world you perceive", you'll no doubt note the difference, the latter clearly backed up by your post in which you split a plethora of opinions into an over simplistic either/or equation.

 

Don't worry, it happens to the best of us.[/quote']

 

Doh!! Guilty as charged!! You win!!

[RobbieOR]

I dont buy this redknapp ruined Portsmouth. An owner's or chief exec's job is to watch the finances and ok transfers and wages. Clearly, redknapp identified the players he wanted but, it was up to the owners \ chief exec to say no to both transfers and wage demands.

 

The plain fact is neither the owners \ chief exec did that. When Portsmouth fell out of the PL, their financial situation dragged them down. This was then compounded by the FL and its laughable 'fit and proper' test of new owners not once but two or three times!

 

Blame redknapp all you want but that's just making a judgement on falsehoods.

 

It doesnt help when he is taking bungs and getting a cut when players are sold.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

Doh!! Guilty as charged!! You win!!

 

Wooohooo!

 

It's just a bit of fun though, i wasn't having a proper go, and i can understand where you're coming from.

 

Redknapp is a polarising figure, he seems to draw hatred from some which is often quite over the top, but i don't think he's quite the manager he rates himself as either. His persona grates and the manner in which he discusses transfer targets is always annoying.

 

Having said that, he doesn't scuttle clubs single handedly, but his style of short term success has lead many to question his methods, particularly when he isn't kept in check by a strong chairman.

[Glen C]

It doesnt help when he is taking bungs and getting a cut when players are sold.

 

I thought he was found innocent of that? Either way the fact is redknappy hasn't ruined any clubs, the owners have. managers always want more and more money, but its up to the owners to stop it. Same thing happened to leeds under O'Leary, he just wanted more and more and they kept on giving it to him gambling on champions league. Don't they have like a 25 year loan they took out gambling on the gate receipts or something like that. Fact is though the owners fuck up. Levy has said no and have parted ways.

[Sandford]

Wooohooo!

 

It's just a bit of fun though' date=' i wasn't having a proper go[/b'], and i can understand where you're coming from.

 

Redknapp is a polarising figure, he seems to draw hatred from some which is often quite over the top, but i don't think he's quite the manager he rates himself as either. His persona grates and the manner in which he discusses transfer targets is always annoying.

 

Having said that, he doesn't scuttle clubs single handedly, but his style of short term success has lead many to question his methods, particularly when he isn't kept in check by a strong chairman.

 

I'm a newbie so ill get used to the etiquette, just may take a while.

 

If i was scared of a bit of banter or took offence to people sharing their views with me-a football forum is the last place id go!!

 

I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong - my therapist says its good for me!!!

[Alan Sex]

No wonder he's in the fucking reserves.

[xerxes]

It doesnt help when he is taking bungs and getting a cut when players are sold.

 

He has never been convicted of the former, and the latter is a feature of some managers contracts.In principle it is a good thing. It is up to the club to get the salary/incentive balance right and no manager can call a sale independently.

 

At Spurs he has had no involvement in transfers either in fees or wages, had no profit share, and spent an average of £12m a year net during his tenure there. A figure FSG would admire.

[Major Tom]

No wonder he's in the fucking reserves.

 

haha.

 

Being able to scone someone from 50 yards warrants a promotion to the firsts.

 

No wonder 'Arry was sacked.

[RobbieOR]

He has never been convicted of the former, and the latter is a feature of some managers contracts.In principle it is a good thing. It is up to the club to get the salary/incentive balance right and no manager can call a sale independently.

 

At Spurs he has had no involvement in transfers either in fees or wages, had no profit share, and spent an average of £12m a year net during his tenure there. A figure FSG would admire.

 

I dont care if it wasnt proven, it was clear on the Panorama program 7 years ago when he was caught red handed on camera.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

He has never been convicted of the former, and the latter is a feature of some managers contracts.In principle it is a good thing. It is up to the club to get the salary/incentive balance right and no manager can call a sale independently.

 

At Spurs he has had no involvement in transfers either in fees or wages, had no profit share, and spent an average of £12m a year net during his tenure there. A figure FSG would admire.

 

If he's had no involvement surely it should read "Levy has spent" an average of £12m a year?

[Jairzinho]

You are using plural there, fungus. Has Redknapp been involved in more than one club who has struggled financially? Pompey is the only one I can of. Saints? What happened to them?

 

[Anubis]

Redknapp is the Leland Gaunt of the football world.

[Major Tom]

not sure if serious

 

Dead set!

 

I don't hold Redknapp responsible for Pompey's financial woes. And I struggle to understand the logic of those who actually blame him for them. if I'm honest.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

Redknapp is the Leland Gaunt of the football world.

 

*Quickly Googles Leland Gaunt*

 

Yep, that's exactly what he is.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

Dead set!

 

I don't hold Redknapp responsible for Pompey's financial woes. And I struggle to understand the logic of those who actually blame him for them. if I'm honest.

 

I think he was on about the other part of the quote, where you asked if any other clubs he's managed have had financial difficulties.

 

In short, they all have to one degree or another.

[Major Tom]

I think he was on about the other part of the quote' date=' where you asked if any other clubs he's managed have had financial difficulties.

 

In short, they all have to one degree or another.[/quote']

 

OK.

 

The probable thing they will all have in common is weak chairmen and incompetent owners. As I said, I don't get the logic of blaming the manager when a club is struggling financially. I have read people's arguments and, as cogent as they are, I just don't see it personally.

[TheHowieLama]

Because he has always worked for shoestring clubs, cuz he really is a shoestring gaff. The fella has win % of barely over 40 and has one trophy to his name - he makes Hodgson look like an international calibre manager.

All while exhibiting a total lack of commitment to every club he has ever been with.

[smilezzz]

OK.

 

The probable thing they will all have in common is weak chairmen and incompetent owners. As I said, I don't get the logic of blaming the manager when a club is struggling financially. I have read people's arguments and, as cogent as they are, I just don't see it personally.

 

I think what a lot of people, myself included, are doing is basing this on his snide remarks when we ousted the previous owners. In his own word he said that he doesn't blame the owners for us nearly going extinct, it was due to the prior manager (please lets not get into that debate), who bought shite on inflated contracts.

 

Now this was highly ironic considering his history, and if we judge him by his own words, he caused the downfall of Southampton and Portsmouth.

 

Ergo, it's his fault, because he said it is. Not us, we just agree with him.:whistle:

 

I still agree with the incompetent board point we both raised earlier, just pointing out how I came to my simple conclusion of pointing blame, simply because I love the irony in his own words.

[xerxes]

If he's had no involvement surely it should read "Levy has spent" an average of £12m a year?

 

Fair comment.

[ngogswilly]

As some people have already pointed out, I've always thought its hard to point the finger of blame solely at him for what went on at Pompey and some of the other clubs that were in financial trouble when he left.

 

At the end of the day, surely its the financial people who run the club who ultimately are responsible if the club ends up in the shitter.

 

On the other hand though, its happened at 3/4 clubs now where when hes been in charge they've somehow ended up financially banjaxed. It an undeniable pattern at least. So chances are hes partly to blame.

[Torvald Utne]

Fair comment.

 

[moof]

The fuck is with this Redknapp sympathy? He's a bung taking, tax dodging, wheeling dealing, bag puss lookalike cunt. According to him the shit we were in was our fault and we should have been grateful to Tom and George for buying us Torres. In short he's a massive know-nothing gobshite. His son can fuck off too, vacuous moron.