Home
Arry Out, Guus In For Tottenham...
Posted 15/02/10 09:39EmailPrintSave
This weekend some important news was confirmed but was largely overlooked. Guus Hiddink will leave his job as Russia's coach in the summer and apparently wants to return to the Premier League.
Liverpool might like him but their lack of stability and financial constraints make him an unlikely appointment on Merseyside.
Manchester City will doubtless get rid of Roberto Mancini this summer and have the money but who wants to work somewhere where you'll be out after six months if you don't match up to Garry Cook's targets. In fact, who would want to work with Garry Cook, period?
With the Chelsea, Manchester United and ars*nal gigs not available, the ideal club for Hiddink is clearly Spurs. They are the biggest club he could realistically take over in the Premier League.
They spend more money than anyone except Chelsea and City. They have a very good squad already in situ and they currently have a manager who is increasingly looking as though he's done as much as he can for the club.
For some reason I know a lot of Spurs fans. To a man and woman, they have little or no affection for Redknapp. Indeed, many actively dislike him being in charge, which is odd considering the obsequious media coverage that follows Harry around. These fans don't buy it. They don't think he makes many glaring errors - though they cringe at some of his interviews - rather, they think he just doesn't do enough. After yesterday's game, two cited his use of subs as consistently poor, subbing like for like or not subbing at all even when a win is needed.
Interestingly, they would all still rather have had Martin Jol in charge who quietly achieved two fifth-place finishes for the club in his second and third seasons. Can you imagine how great Redknapp would be painted by his press mates if he had done that? It would be nauseatingly fawning.
I remember Harry as a nippy winger at Upton Park. I remember him as Bournemouth and West Ham manager. These days, he actually looks bored by the football while on the touchline. He sits hunched up in a big coat, his body language suggesting a man turned in on himself. He rarely seems to even speak. He used to be much more animated. Fans should be asking if the issues he's dealing with off the pitch are impacting on his performance.
At times he appears to look sleepy and ready for retirement. Look at Sir Alex Ferguson; he's a few years older but still full of energy for the fight, punching the air at every goal. Look at Giovanni Trappatoni, he's 70 but prowls the technical area like a white leopard. Bobby Robson at 63 was exuberant pitch side. Wenger, just three years younger, restlessly prowls around like a stick insect, perhaps more animated now than ever before. All seem more full of football passion than Harry.
Is Redknapp really the inspirational character we're told he is? Perhaps he used to be, but in 2010, at a club as big and cosmopolitan as Spurs, is he anymore? It looks doubtful. The foreign lads don't even do the golf, after all.
If the club did make it to the Champions League, Redknapp has very little European experience, so could he cope? Indeed, in last year's UEFA Cup, many said he all but threw in the towel. This despite Spurs' great traditions in that competition. And there were no signs of disappointment at finishing outside the Europa League places for this season. So fans are right to at least doubt his European credentials.
Hiddink on the other hand, knows world football comprehensively. Could Redknapp have taken South Korea as far in a World Cup? Come back when you've stopped laughing.
A closer look at his long record as a manager reveals little success in his 27 years; one third-tier title, one second-tier win and an FA Cup victory that was acquired largely because the club was prepared to bankrupt itself to buy and pay players.
It's not a stellar record of silverware from a 27-year career, and especially poor for a manager who has acquired such a glowing reputation in the press. His credentials rest on a couple of very good seasons at West Ham at the end of the 90s and for resurrecting Portsmouth in the Championship. While this is far from terrible and shows him as a decent manager, Spurs need much better and they can afford it. Hiddink must be their man.
They need a clever, intelligent, proven, top-class manager to elevate them. There is no chance of Redknapp doing that. Indeed, I think he doesn't even believe he can. He has an air of careless resignation about him and doesn't seem comfortable not being the underdog anymore.
Spurs' money has largely bought quality. While such things are always debatable, the squad looks as good if not better than City and Villa, better and with more depth than Liverpool. They have less significant long-term injuries than ars*nal, a better keeper and more striking depth. They have a better defence - conceding four less goals so far. With this in mind, surely they should be closer than nine points to ars*nal, in a season where the Gunners have lost six games. It suggests that the talent is there but the extra sparkle, motivation and creativity that a brilliant manager gives to a team simply isn't.
In yesterday's cup game, his side were surprisingly out-fought and out-played by Bolton and Kevin Davies' bottom in the first half. That doesn't suggest a manager able to get his team properly up for the cup. The second half was much better, as it should have been with the quality players Spurs have. But afterwards, can anyone say what Redknapp did to help Spurs win that game other than just hope his talented players pulled it out the bag?
We hear from ex-players and press mates that he's a good man-manager, good at motivating. While that may work in the lower leagues or for a club in the doldrums, depressed by defeat, you need much, much more than that at the highest level. Wheeling and dealing and fire-fighting is not needed at Spurs, innovative, progressive coaching and inspirational leadership most certainly is. Does any Spurs fan think they're getting that from Redknapp, Bond and Jordan?
His allies speak of the progress Spurs are making, citing their improved position this year over last. However, that is only progress from a year-long nadir. Prior to that, Spurs were actually really good under Jol and did well in the UEFA Cup too. Redknapp has returned them to being contenders, well done Harry, but that's as much as he's ever going to do. One win in the last six in the league shows a team in a slump and in danger of finishing outside the UEFA Cup places again at a time when the top four has been, for once, achievable.
In Jol they had a media-friendly, charming, well-rounded manager who the fans loved. Disposing of him so rapidly after a bad start to a season still smacks of unjustified panic but sticking with Redknapp, if they could get Hiddink, would be an even bigger act of lunacy.
It's time for Spurs to once again go Dutch.
Posted 15/02/10 09:39EmailPrintSave
This weekend some important news was confirmed but was largely overlooked. Guus Hiddink will leave his job as Russia's coach in the summer and apparently wants to return to the Premier League.
Liverpool might like him but their lack of stability and financial constraints make him an unlikely appointment on Merseyside.
Manchester City will doubtless get rid of Roberto Mancini this summer and have the money but who wants to work somewhere where you'll be out after six months if you don't match up to Garry Cook's targets. In fact, who would want to work with Garry Cook, period?
With the Chelsea, Manchester United and ars*nal gigs not available, the ideal club for Hiddink is clearly Spurs. They are the biggest club he could realistically take over in the Premier League.
They spend more money than anyone except Chelsea and City. They have a very good squad already in situ and they currently have a manager who is increasingly looking as though he's done as much as he can for the club.
For some reason I know a lot of Spurs fans. To a man and woman, they have little or no affection for Redknapp. Indeed, many actively dislike him being in charge, which is odd considering the obsequious media coverage that follows Harry around. These fans don't buy it. They don't think he makes many glaring errors - though they cringe at some of his interviews - rather, they think he just doesn't do enough. After yesterday's game, two cited his use of subs as consistently poor, subbing like for like or not subbing at all even when a win is needed.
Interestingly, they would all still rather have had Martin Jol in charge who quietly achieved two fifth-place finishes for the club in his second and third seasons. Can you imagine how great Redknapp would be painted by his press mates if he had done that? It would be nauseatingly fawning.
I remember Harry as a nippy winger at Upton Park. I remember him as Bournemouth and West Ham manager. These days, he actually looks bored by the football while on the touchline. He sits hunched up in a big coat, his body language suggesting a man turned in on himself. He rarely seems to even speak. He used to be much more animated. Fans should be asking if the issues he's dealing with off the pitch are impacting on his performance.
At times he appears to look sleepy and ready for retirement. Look at Sir Alex Ferguson; he's a few years older but still full of energy for the fight, punching the air at every goal. Look at Giovanni Trappatoni, he's 70 but prowls the technical area like a white leopard. Bobby Robson at 63 was exuberant pitch side. Wenger, just three years younger, restlessly prowls around like a stick insect, perhaps more animated now than ever before. All seem more full of football passion than Harry.
Is Redknapp really the inspirational character we're told he is? Perhaps he used to be, but in 2010, at a club as big and cosmopolitan as Spurs, is he anymore? It looks doubtful. The foreign lads don't even do the golf, after all.
If the club did make it to the Champions League, Redknapp has very little European experience, so could he cope? Indeed, in last year's UEFA Cup, many said he all but threw in the towel. This despite Spurs' great traditions in that competition. And there were no signs of disappointment at finishing outside the Europa League places for this season. So fans are right to at least doubt his European credentials.
Hiddink on the other hand, knows world football comprehensively. Could Redknapp have taken South Korea as far in a World Cup? Come back when you've stopped laughing.
A closer look at his long record as a manager reveals little success in his 27 years; one third-tier title, one second-tier win and an FA Cup victory that was acquired largely because the club was prepared to bankrupt itself to buy and pay players.
It's not a stellar record of silverware from a 27-year career, and especially poor for a manager who has acquired such a glowing reputation in the press. His credentials rest on a couple of very good seasons at West Ham at the end of the 90s and for resurrecting Portsmouth in the Championship. While this is far from terrible and shows him as a decent manager, Spurs need much better and they can afford it. Hiddink must be their man.
They need a clever, intelligent, proven, top-class manager to elevate them. There is no chance of Redknapp doing that. Indeed, I think he doesn't even believe he can. He has an air of careless resignation about him and doesn't seem comfortable not being the underdog anymore.
Spurs' money has largely bought quality. While such things are always debatable, the squad looks as good if not better than City and Villa, better and with more depth than Liverpool. They have less significant long-term injuries than ars*nal, a better keeper and more striking depth. They have a better defence - conceding four less goals so far. With this in mind, surely they should be closer than nine points to ars*nal, in a season where the Gunners have lost six games. It suggests that the talent is there but the extra sparkle, motivation and creativity that a brilliant manager gives to a team simply isn't.
In yesterday's cup game, his side were surprisingly out-fought and out-played by Bolton and Kevin Davies' bottom in the first half. That doesn't suggest a manager able to get his team properly up for the cup. The second half was much better, as it should have been with the quality players Spurs have. But afterwards, can anyone say what Redknapp did to help Spurs win that game other than just hope his talented players pulled it out the bag?
We hear from ex-players and press mates that he's a good man-manager, good at motivating. While that may work in the lower leagues or for a club in the doldrums, depressed by defeat, you need much, much more than that at the highest level. Wheeling and dealing and fire-fighting is not needed at Spurs, innovative, progressive coaching and inspirational leadership most certainly is. Does any Spurs fan think they're getting that from Redknapp, Bond and Jordan?
His allies speak of the progress Spurs are making, citing their improved position this year over last. However, that is only progress from a year-long nadir. Prior to that, Spurs were actually really good under Jol and did well in the UEFA Cup too. Redknapp has returned them to being contenders, well done Harry, but that's as much as he's ever going to do. One win in the last six in the league shows a team in a slump and in danger of finishing outside the UEFA Cup places again at a time when the top four has been, for once, achievable.
In Jol they had a media-friendly, charming, well-rounded manager who the fans loved. Disposing of him so rapidly after a bad start to a season still smacks of unjustified panic but sticking with Redknapp, if they could get Hiddink, would be an even bigger act of lunacy.
It's time for Spurs to once again go Dutch.
» Sky Sports News Links
» Hello....the site is still alive!
» 17 million deal for Musacchio
» How to Block Adverts on this Site !
» This is Our Season
» 'appy New Season
» Time to say goodbye
» Crouchinio