| Redknapp on Adel on 13:45 - Aug 1 with 1906 views | queensparker |
| Redknapp on Adel on 13:02 - Aug 1 by paulparker |
Not often I agree with you Dave , but I think Hoddle would be an excellent addition to the coaching team, Hoddles teams always played 3-5-2 system with a ball playing sweeper so who better to have us coaching it
im no HR fan but I will give him credit where its due in the fact he isn't afraid to get named coaches in who are better than him to Assist |
It's a nice idea but I can't see Glenn "The Ego" Hoddle being happy to sit in the background, keep quiet and do the tactics with Harry taking all the credit |  | |  |
| Redknapp on Adel on 13:51 - Aug 1 with 1894 views | PinnerPaul |
| Redknapp on Adel on 16:39 - Jul 29 by PinnerPaul |
Good grief another 6 page debate coming up
 |
We're up to page 5, despite (yet) another thread on the same subject running at the same time - good grief! |  | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 13:52 - Aug 1 with 1885 views | Pommyhoop |
| Redknapp on Adel on 13:45 - Aug 1 by queensparker |
It's a nice idea but I can't see Glenn "The Ego" Hoddle being happy to sit in the background, keep quiet and do the tactics with Harry taking all the credit |
Harrys 68 man.!
You never read Shakespeare? |  |
| |
| Redknapp on Adel on 14:11 - Aug 1 with 1857 views | TW_R |
| Redknapp on Adel on 13:51 - Aug 1 by PinnerPaul |
We're up to page 5, despite (yet) another thread on the same subject running at the same time - good grief! |
Haven't you made a number of posts on this thread? Bizarre post of the day! |  | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 14:16 - Aug 1 with 1840 views | Northernr |
| Redknapp on Adel on 13:45 - Aug 1 by queensparker |
It's a nice idea but I can't see Glenn "The Ego" Hoddle being happy to sit in the background, keep quiet and do the tactics with Harry taking all the credit |
Me neither. These days Hoddle's more a Director of Football prospect than a manager or certainly a coach for another manager. |  | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 14:35 - Aug 1 with 1807 views | Hunterhoop |
| Redknapp on Adel on 12:54 - Aug 1 by daveB |
That's why I was excited about the Glenn Hoddle rumour, I think he could come in and make it work, I'm not so sure it will work with Harry judging by how we played 3 at the back last season |
I agree. Hoddle could really make it work AND he gets his team playing in a way, I think, suits QPR's fans and heritage.
But I can't see him working FOR HR. Just don't see it happening. I can kind of see why, too, tbh. [Post edited 1 Aug 2014 14:36]
|  | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 14:45 - Aug 1 with 1782 views | daveB |
| Redknapp on Adel on 14:16 - Aug 1 by Northernr |
Me neither. These days Hoddle's more a Director of Football prospect than a manager or certainly a coach for another manager. |
your probably right but he's been out of the game a while and coming in and taking the glory for helping bed in a new system whilst taking none of the blame should appeal to anyone |  | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 14:52 - Aug 1 with 1770 views | paulparker |
| Redknapp on Adel on 14:45 - Aug 1 by daveB |
your probably right but he's been out of the game a while and coming in and taking the glory for helping bed in a new system whilst taking none of the blame should appeal to anyone |
exactly, if anything it puts Hoddle in the shop window,
he seems to get on with Jamie Redknapp ok, so I don't see why he wouldn't work for Arry |  |
| And Bowles is onside, Swinburne has come rushing out of his goal , what can Bowles do here , onto the left foot no, on to the right foot
That’s there that’s two, and that’s Bowles
Brian Moore
|
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Redknapp on Adel on 19:20 - Aug 1 with 1709 views | RangersAreBack |
| Redknapp on Adel on 10:07 - Aug 1 by Antti_Heinola |
Would love to know how Redknapp 'outwitted' McClaren. HR picked a terrible first XI, was let off the hook slightly by Niko mercifully going off so we could have a bit of pace in the side, and then as he was about to sub Hoilett, Clint Hill 'encouraged' him to do something different - which was eventually the decision that ended up winning us the game.
I don't think McClaren is any kind of Messiah either - but he got a Derby side on a fraction of the budget we had to play much better, more attacking football and comfortably finished above us. Glad we won in the end, but I'm not about to hail Redknapp as some kind of genius for it. |
I don't have a problem with Harry taking advice from Clint or any other senior player. Brendan Rogers sometimes takes advice from Steven Gerrard before making decisions. Taking advice from your senior professionals is important and the mark of a good manager.
As for the play-off final, McClaren went into the game with a distinct advantage over Harry. Having been part of the coaching set-up earlier in the season, Steve had first hand knowledge of the players strengths and weaknesses as well as the tactics of the manager. Despite this, I thought QPR looked marginally stronger in the first half, with Derby only taking control after the sending off. Even then they rarely looked like scoring and eventually lost to 10 men.
Yes Harry is no genius, far from it. His approach is rather stale when compared to modern managers like Roberto Martinez and Brendan Rogers. However, his track record in football management is strong and he is held in high regard by his peers.
Last season may not have been as captivating as the 2010-11 season but when all is said and done Harry got us promoted and gave us a day at Wembley none of us will ever forget. Given the rabble he inherited, he deserves great credit for this and a modicum of respect from even his harshest critics. To suggest QPR were promoted in spite of him is quite frankly ridiculous. [Post edited 1 Aug 2014 19:22]
|  | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 23:16 - Aug 1 with 1643 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Redknapp on Adel on 19:20 - Aug 1 by RangersAreBack |
I don't have a problem with Harry taking advice from Clint or any other senior player. Brendan Rogers sometimes takes advice from Steven Gerrard before making decisions. Taking advice from your senior professionals is important and the mark of a good manager.
As for the play-off final, McClaren went into the game with a distinct advantage over Harry. Having been part of the coaching set-up earlier in the season, Steve had first hand knowledge of the players strengths and weaknesses as well as the tactics of the manager. Despite this, I thought QPR looked marginally stronger in the first half, with Derby only taking control after the sending off. Even then they rarely looked like scoring and eventually lost to 10 men.
Yes Harry is no genius, far from it. His approach is rather stale when compared to modern managers like Roberto Martinez and Brendan Rogers. However, his track record in football management is strong and he is held in high regard by his peers.
Last season may not have been as captivating as the 2010-11 season but when all is said and done Harry got us promoted and gave us a day at Wembley none of us will ever forget. Given the rabble he inherited, he deserves great credit for this and a modicum of respect from even his harshest critics. To suggest QPR were promoted in spite of him is quite frankly ridiculous. [Post edited 1 Aug 2014 19:22]
|
I don't have a problem with managers taking advice - well, not advice, but hearing opinions would be more accurate, they certainly shouldn't be taking advice - from senior players. But there's a world of difference between that and Clint having to point out the flaming obvious to Redknapp not once but *twice* to the point of almost physically taking himself on the pitch isn't there? Once might be a bit of an oversight. Twice in two games?
But then that was Redknapp last season - I reckon out of 46 games he probably had to do major surgery of his original team selection in at least half of them. In 7 games he had to take O'Neil off at half time because he'd picked such a ludicrously cautious team.
Personally, I think a lot of people completely overstated McClaren's first hand knowledge. It may have been a tiny advantage, but the real advantage McClaren had was that he'd got a better team scoring more goals. I do agree QPR looked better through parts of the first half, but regardless, Redknapp's selection made very little sense given he picked the same team 10 days earlier and it had been a complete disaster that was only rectified by increasingly desperate substitutions.
However, I'd never say we were promoted in spite of Redknapp. Clearly he did plenty of good. But given the players he had and the money he had available (nearly £10m alone on just two players remember - he's spent more than any other manager in QPR history) there was no excuse for the amount of God-awful, turgid football we played for the majority of last season.
For me, we went up because of Austin's reliability in front of goal, the crucial addition of Steve Black at a really vital time when we were wobbling heavily and the fact that, in my opinion, Clint Hill's input in two vital games, not to mention his team talk in the second leg just before extra time, pulled us through. For me, Redknapp looked lost for much of last season. And I expect us to struggle badly this season - but then I'd expect us to struggle under any manager to be fair - all promoted clubs do to some extent. I hope he proves me wrong and we finish a comfortable 12th. But even then I hope he retires next summer.
'The rabble he inherited' stuff has always been nonsense. The worst of them - Bosingwa - he continued to play after we'd been relegated and long after it was obvious he was a cancer to the squad and despised by the majority of fans (rightly or wrongly). An inferior squad, on paper, had stayed up the year before and Redknapp had nearly 7 months and £20m to put it right. He managed 4 wins and just 2 came after spending that £20m. That 'rabble' stuff falls down like a house of cards under even the most cursory examination. Where were Redknapp's fabled man-management skills for those 6 months? |  |
| |
| Redknapp on Adel on 01:03 - Aug 2 with 1603 views | Pommyhoop |
| Redknapp on Adel on 23:16 - Aug 1 by Antti_Heinola |
I don't have a problem with managers taking advice - well, not advice, but hearing opinions would be more accurate, they certainly shouldn't be taking advice - from senior players. But there's a world of difference between that and Clint having to point out the flaming obvious to Redknapp not once but *twice* to the point of almost physically taking himself on the pitch isn't there? Once might be a bit of an oversight. Twice in two games?
But then that was Redknapp last season - I reckon out of 46 games he probably had to do major surgery of his original team selection in at least half of them. In 7 games he had to take O'Neil off at half time because he'd picked such a ludicrously cautious team.
Personally, I think a lot of people completely overstated McClaren's first hand knowledge. It may have been a tiny advantage, but the real advantage McClaren had was that he'd got a better team scoring more goals. I do agree QPR looked better through parts of the first half, but regardless, Redknapp's selection made very little sense given he picked the same team 10 days earlier and it had been a complete disaster that was only rectified by increasingly desperate substitutions.
However, I'd never say we were promoted in spite of Redknapp. Clearly he did plenty of good. But given the players he had and the money he had available (nearly £10m alone on just two players remember - he's spent more than any other manager in QPR history) there was no excuse for the amount of God-awful, turgid football we played for the majority of last season.
For me, we went up because of Austin's reliability in front of goal, the crucial addition of Steve Black at a really vital time when we were wobbling heavily and the fact that, in my opinion, Clint Hill's input in two vital games, not to mention his team talk in the second leg just before extra time, pulled us through. For me, Redknapp looked lost for much of last season. And I expect us to struggle badly this season - but then I'd expect us to struggle under any manager to be fair - all promoted clubs do to some extent. I hope he proves me wrong and we finish a comfortable 12th. But even then I hope he retires next summer.
'The rabble he inherited' stuff has always been nonsense. The worst of them - Bosingwa - he continued to play after we'd been relegated and long after it was obvious he was a cancer to the squad and despised by the majority of fans (rightly or wrongly). An inferior squad, on paper, had stayed up the year before and Redknapp had nearly 7 months and £20m to put it right. He managed 4 wins and just 2 came after spending that £20m. That 'rabble' stuff falls down like a house of cards under even the most cursory examination. Where were Redknapp's fabled man-management skills for those 6 months? |
 | |
| |
| Redknapp on Adel on 09:43 - Aug 2 with 1550 views | essextaxiboy |
| Redknapp on Adel on 23:16 - Aug 1 by Antti_Heinola |
I don't have a problem with managers taking advice - well, not advice, but hearing opinions would be more accurate, they certainly shouldn't be taking advice - from senior players. But there's a world of difference between that and Clint having to point out the flaming obvious to Redknapp not once but *twice* to the point of almost physically taking himself on the pitch isn't there? Once might be a bit of an oversight. Twice in two games?
But then that was Redknapp last season - I reckon out of 46 games he probably had to do major surgery of his original team selection in at least half of them. In 7 games he had to take O'Neil off at half time because he'd picked such a ludicrously cautious team.
Personally, I think a lot of people completely overstated McClaren's first hand knowledge. It may have been a tiny advantage, but the real advantage McClaren had was that he'd got a better team scoring more goals. I do agree QPR looked better through parts of the first half, but regardless, Redknapp's selection made very little sense given he picked the same team 10 days earlier and it had been a complete disaster that was only rectified by increasingly desperate substitutions.
However, I'd never say we were promoted in spite of Redknapp. Clearly he did plenty of good. But given the players he had and the money he had available (nearly £10m alone on just two players remember - he's spent more than any other manager in QPR history) there was no excuse for the amount of God-awful, turgid football we played for the majority of last season.
For me, we went up because of Austin's reliability in front of goal, the crucial addition of Steve Black at a really vital time when we were wobbling heavily and the fact that, in my opinion, Clint Hill's input in two vital games, not to mention his team talk in the second leg just before extra time, pulled us through. For me, Redknapp looked lost for much of last season. And I expect us to struggle badly this season - but then I'd expect us to struggle under any manager to be fair - all promoted clubs do to some extent. I hope he proves me wrong and we finish a comfortable 12th. But even then I hope he retires next summer.
'The rabble he inherited' stuff has always been nonsense. The worst of them - Bosingwa - he continued to play after we'd been relegated and long after it was obvious he was a cancer to the squad and despised by the majority of fans (rightly or wrongly). An inferior squad, on paper, had stayed up the year before and Redknapp had nearly 7 months and £20m to put it right. He managed 4 wins and just 2 came after spending that £20m. That 'rabble' stuff falls down like a house of cards under even the most cursory examination. Where were Redknapp's fabled man-management skills for those 6 months? |
Antti , that is so biased and one sided that It is not worth bothering to pick it it apart .
You dismiss every point as nonsense or deluded and you are not the only one
You dont like him . Honestly we get it .
Its hard to see what he could possibly do that could make you change your mind . Everything he says is jumped on and given a negative twist .
Survival ? Top Half ? Europa League ? Champions League , Champions ?
Where is the line drawn where Harry Redknapp has done a good job for you ?
You are not alone , its like a keyboard lynch mob at times . Anyone who even suggests waiting and seeing where we end up or who we sign by Sept gets dug out and a "slaps head" icon "
He may fail this year but I dont think he will . I hope he serves up some humble pie instead.
Although I suppose any success we have now will be down to Hoddle Eh? [Post edited 2 Aug 2014 9:51]
|  | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 10:11 - Aug 2 with 1498 views | essextaxiboy |
| Redknapp on Adel on 14:35 - Aug 1 by Hunterhoop |
I agree. Hoddle could really make it work AND he gets his team playing in a way, I think, suits QPR's fans and heritage.
But I can't see him working FOR HR. Just don't see it happening. I can kind of see why, too, tbh. [Post edited 1 Aug 2014 14:36]
|
Maybe Redknapp will step down at the end of the season or when we are safe and Hoddle will take over .Sort of a transition year . I like Hoddle and agree he would fit well . | | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 15:24 - Aug 2 with 1440 views | RangersAreBack |
| Redknapp on Adel on 23:16 - Aug 1 by Antti_Heinola |
I don't have a problem with managers taking advice - well, not advice, but hearing opinions would be more accurate, they certainly shouldn't be taking advice - from senior players. But there's a world of difference between that and Clint having to point out the flaming obvious to Redknapp not once but *twice* to the point of almost physically taking himself on the pitch isn't there? Once might be a bit of an oversight. Twice in two games?
But then that was Redknapp last season - I reckon out of 46 games he probably had to do major surgery of his original team selection in at least half of them. In 7 games he had to take O'Neil off at half time because he'd picked such a ludicrously cautious team.
Personally, I think a lot of people completely overstated McClaren's first hand knowledge. It may have been a tiny advantage, but the real advantage McClaren had was that he'd got a better team scoring more goals. I do agree QPR looked better through parts of the first half, but regardless, Redknapp's selection made very little sense given he picked the same team 10 days earlier and it had been a complete disaster that was only rectified by increasingly desperate substitutions.
However, I'd never say we were promoted in spite of Redknapp. Clearly he did plenty of good. But given the players he had and the money he had available (nearly £10m alone on just two players remember - he's spent more than any other manager in QPR history) there was no excuse for the amount of God-awful, turgid football we played for the majority of last season.
For me, we went up because of Austin's reliability in front of goal, the crucial addition of Steve Black at a really vital time when we were wobbling heavily and the fact that, in my opinion, Clint Hill's input in two vital games, not to mention his team talk in the second leg just before extra time, pulled us through. For me, Redknapp looked lost for much of last season. And I expect us to struggle badly this season - but then I'd expect us to struggle under any manager to be fair - all promoted clubs do to some extent. I hope he proves me wrong and we finish a comfortable 12th. But even then I hope he retires next summer.
'The rabble he inherited' stuff has always been nonsense. The worst of them - Bosingwa - he continued to play after we'd been relegated and long after it was obvious he was a cancer to the squad and despised by the majority of fans (rightly or wrongly). An inferior squad, on paper, had stayed up the year before and Redknapp had nearly 7 months and £20m to put it right. He managed 4 wins and just 2 came after spending that £20m. That 'rabble' stuff falls down like a house of cards under even the most cursory examination. Where were Redknapp's fabled man-management skills for those 6 months? |
As a senior manager myself I often take advice from my staff. After all, they are on the front line and are privy to certain things I won't witness on a day-to-day basis. However their focus is pretty singular whilst I'm responsible for the bigger picture. What appears "obvious" to them can actually be detrimental to the organisation. If, after careful consideration, it becomes clear that the risks outweigh the benefits then the idea will be rejected. If the reverse is true and it's a viable proposition then I will recommend it.
Harry had a very difficult decision to make in the play-off final as QPR had 1 change remaining and potentially 1 hour left to play (including extra time). What do you do? Do you sacrifice an attacking player and defend for an hour hoping to make it to penalties? Do you leave an attacking threat at the expense of defensive cover? Do you keep one sub in your pocket as an injury could leave you down to 9 men? Could Charlie effectively cover at left midfield having never played there before? If you make it to penalties who is going to take them? Lots to consider in a short space of time within a highly charged, challenging atmosphere. My personal belief is Harry was considering that change as an option and Clint simply helped him make up his mind.
This belief is supported by Clint's confirmation of a discussion Harry had with him at half-time of the play-off semi-final second leg. Rather than make the switch immediately Harry decided to wait and see whether Rosler would alter his tactics before deciding upon the substitution. As this change was clearly pre-meditated in the semi-final and repeated in the final, your assertion that Clint had to point out the obvious to Harry is clearly wrong.
As for Steve McClaren, it would be churlish to underestimate the advantage he had going into the play-off final. Derby were the form team and McClaren knew our players inside out. Harry wouldn't have known much about the Derby players other than the matches we'd played against them and the usual homework conducted on the opposition. No matter how thorough his preparation this simply can't compare with Steve coaching our players for 3 months.
I do agree that Harry could have done better in his first stint with QPR in the Premier League but it's a complete fallacy that he inherited a decent squad. What he did inherit was a toxic dressing room filled with disinterested, demotivated and largely average players (as confirmed by Ryan Nelson). In any normal organisation this culture is very difficult to change overnight. In football this can prove doubly difficult if under-performing players are awarded ridiculous contracts by the board and refuse to take a pay cut to move on (Cesar, SWP, etc). Once they decide to sit on watertight, expensive contracts, the manager is left with less budget to source replacements, if indeed the right sort are even available.
Harry did spend £10million on 4 or 5 players but all performed admirably. Compare this to the millions wasted by Warnock and Hughes on average players and I would say Harry has delivered better value for money. Some of his loan signings were questionable, but his permanent transfers hit the mark. Austin, Simpson, Phillips and Henry all played a part in our promotion. He also turned Joey Barton around and finally manged to get the best out of Zamora for the final 2 months, culminating in THAT goal.
For the record, Bosingwa (who incidentally Harry didn't sign) did not continue playing for QPR long after we were relegated. He left the club by mutual consent in July 2013.
It strikes me that some people judge managers on personality rather then results. Ian Holloway had several months to prevent QPR from being relegated from the championship but failed. It then took him 3 full seasons to bounce back from League One. Holloway occasionally made odd team selections and, at times, triple substitutions to correct them. Despite this his stock is high amongst QPR fans because they recognised the challenge of rebuilding our club.
By contrast Harry also inherited a car crash of a team, failed to prevent relegation from the Premier League but bounced back at the first attempt despite clear and obvious challenges. Nevertheless some fans refuse to give him a break and are quick to give the credit for his success to others less deserving, like Fernandes, McClaren and Hill.
Yes, Harry is by no means perfect but results currently show that he is not as bad as some make out. He deserves another crack at the Premier League on the proviso that QPR put a clear succession plan in place. Whether that is Hoddle or not is a key question the board needs to think about now irrespective of where we finish next season. | | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 16:17 - Aug 2 with 1403 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Redknapp on Adel on 15:24 - Aug 2 by RangersAreBack |
As a senior manager myself I often take advice from my staff. After all, they are on the front line and are privy to certain things I won't witness on a day-to-day basis. However their focus is pretty singular whilst I'm responsible for the bigger picture. What appears "obvious" to them can actually be detrimental to the organisation. If, after careful consideration, it becomes clear that the risks outweigh the benefits then the idea will be rejected. If the reverse is true and it's a viable proposition then I will recommend it.
Harry had a very difficult decision to make in the play-off final as QPR had 1 change remaining and potentially 1 hour left to play (including extra time). What do you do? Do you sacrifice an attacking player and defend for an hour hoping to make it to penalties? Do you leave an attacking threat at the expense of defensive cover? Do you keep one sub in your pocket as an injury could leave you down to 9 men? Could Charlie effectively cover at left midfield having never played there before? If you make it to penalties who is going to take them? Lots to consider in a short space of time within a highly charged, challenging atmosphere. My personal belief is Harry was considering that change as an option and Clint simply helped him make up his mind.
This belief is supported by Clint's confirmation of a discussion Harry had with him at half-time of the play-off semi-final second leg. Rather than make the switch immediately Harry decided to wait and see whether Rosler would alter his tactics before deciding upon the substitution. As this change was clearly pre-meditated in the semi-final and repeated in the final, your assertion that Clint had to point out the obvious to Harry is clearly wrong.
As for Steve McClaren, it would be churlish to underestimate the advantage he had going into the play-off final. Derby were the form team and McClaren knew our players inside out. Harry wouldn't have known much about the Derby players other than the matches we'd played against them and the usual homework conducted on the opposition. No matter how thorough his preparation this simply can't compare with Steve coaching our players for 3 months.
I do agree that Harry could have done better in his first stint with QPR in the Premier League but it's a complete fallacy that he inherited a decent squad. What he did inherit was a toxic dressing room filled with disinterested, demotivated and largely average players (as confirmed by Ryan Nelson). In any normal organisation this culture is very difficult to change overnight. In football this can prove doubly difficult if under-performing players are awarded ridiculous contracts by the board and refuse to take a pay cut to move on (Cesar, SWP, etc). Once they decide to sit on watertight, expensive contracts, the manager is left with less budget to source replacements, if indeed the right sort are even available.
Harry did spend £10million on 4 or 5 players but all performed admirably. Compare this to the millions wasted by Warnock and Hughes on average players and I would say Harry has delivered better value for money. Some of his loan signings were questionable, but his permanent transfers hit the mark. Austin, Simpson, Phillips and Henry all played a part in our promotion. He also turned Joey Barton around and finally manged to get the best out of Zamora for the final 2 months, culminating in THAT goal.
For the record, Bosingwa (who incidentally Harry didn't sign) did not continue playing for QPR long after we were relegated. He left the club by mutual consent in July 2013.
It strikes me that some people judge managers on personality rather then results. Ian Holloway had several months to prevent QPR from being relegated from the championship but failed. It then took him 3 full seasons to bounce back from League One. Holloway occasionally made odd team selections and, at times, triple substitutions to correct them. Despite this his stock is high amongst QPR fans because they recognised the challenge of rebuilding our club.
By contrast Harry also inherited a car crash of a team, failed to prevent relegation from the Premier League but bounced back at the first attempt despite clear and obvious challenges. Nevertheless some fans refuse to give him a break and are quick to give the credit for his success to others less deserving, like Fernandes, McClaren and Hill.
Yes, Harry is by no means perfect but results currently show that he is not as bad as some make out. He deserves another crack at the Premier League on the proviso that QPR put a clear succession plan in place. Whether that is Hoddle or not is a key question the board needs to think about now irrespective of where we finish next season. |
I actually agree with a fair amount of that, but disagreeably violently with others. Your experience as a senior manager in your business has nothing to do with managing a football team. Zamora played well for a combined total of about 100 minutes last season. If you want to credit Redknapp with that, please go ahead. That's a pretty meagre compliment. I'm not sure Redknapp had anything to do with Barton. He really didn't do much different to how he's always played for us and often he wasn't that good at all - and he still got sent off for a stupid reason. The Clint stuff we'll have to agree to disagree on - whatever it happens it doesn't alter the fact that Redknapp's 2 selections for those last 2 play-off games were nothing short of gutless. We almost lost it in the 2nd leg before we'd even started - there was one moment when the team looked utterly lost and bereft. Easy to forget given the result, but his over-caution came extremely close to costing us very, very dear. The fact is, Clint had to tell him at HT about the space in front of him that he couldn't exploit (mainly because of Kranjcar's total lack of mobility) - the fact that Redknapp didn't spot that was dreadful. As for Wembley, everyone knew Hoilett was coming off - it was clear. There's no way he would have changed his mind without Clint.
Let's not start comparing Warnock and Redknapp in terms of signings - Warnock had about a week to make his decisions and in a higher league. Redknapp had more money and was in a league below and had a whole summer (before loaning a third left back on transfer deadline day when we desperately needed a striker). It's not even remotely comparable.
I never said Redknapp invented a decent squad. I said an inferior squad (on paper) stayed up the previous season. And that Redknapp won just 2 games after he'd spent £20m to revamp the squad.
Bosingwa - although we weren't relegated until the Reading game, we were down for all intents and purposed after the Wigan draw. Continuing to play someone who was clearly the worst offender in terms of toxicity - when he should have been forgotten about three months earlier - in four of our last six games was flabbergasting in its naivety.
Comparisons with Holloway are hardly applicable. Holloway had no squad at all that first summer and had to operate on a tight budget for years with the threat of admin and bankruptcy at every turn. He once spent two hours in the back of the car on a rainy day begging David Davies to find the money to loan Lee Cook for a bit. Harry Spent £30m in 6 months. £30m. Middlesbrough, Watford, Bournemouth and even Sheff Wed scored more goals than us. It wasn't so much that he made mistakes, but that he made the same ones over and over and over again. Play off semi and play off final being the absolute nadir of that.
But I do give him credit for getting us up - not a lot, because he absolutely should have got us up with that squad. You talk about the squad he inherited - what about the one Warnock inherited?! And look what he did - a season of wonderful, attacking, exciting football.
Hoddle would be a poor decision IMO, but Harry obviously needs a proper, decent coach with him. | |
| |
| Redknapp on Adel on 19:01 - Aug 2 with 1339 views | RangersAreBack |
| Redknapp on Adel on 16:17 - Aug 2 by Antti_Heinola |
I actually agree with a fair amount of that, but disagreeably violently with others. Your experience as a senior manager in your business has nothing to do with managing a football team. Zamora played well for a combined total of about 100 minutes last season. If you want to credit Redknapp with that, please go ahead. That's a pretty meagre compliment. I'm not sure Redknapp had anything to do with Barton. He really didn't do much different to how he's always played for us and often he wasn't that good at all - and he still got sent off for a stupid reason. The Clint stuff we'll have to agree to disagree on - whatever it happens it doesn't alter the fact that Redknapp's 2 selections for those last 2 play-off games were nothing short of gutless. We almost lost it in the 2nd leg before we'd even started - there was one moment when the team looked utterly lost and bereft. Easy to forget given the result, but his over-caution came extremely close to costing us very, very dear. The fact is, Clint had to tell him at HT about the space in front of him that he couldn't exploit (mainly because of Kranjcar's total lack of mobility) - the fact that Redknapp didn't spot that was dreadful. As for Wembley, everyone knew Hoilett was coming off - it was clear. There's no way he would have changed his mind without Clint.
Let's not start comparing Warnock and Redknapp in terms of signings - Warnock had about a week to make his decisions and in a higher league. Redknapp had more money and was in a league below and had a whole summer (before loaning a third left back on transfer deadline day when we desperately needed a striker). It's not even remotely comparable.
I never said Redknapp invented a decent squad. I said an inferior squad (on paper) stayed up the previous season. And that Redknapp won just 2 games after he'd spent £20m to revamp the squad.
Bosingwa - although we weren't relegated until the Reading game, we were down for all intents and purposed after the Wigan draw. Continuing to play someone who was clearly the worst offender in terms of toxicity - when he should have been forgotten about three months earlier - in four of our last six games was flabbergasting in its naivety.
Comparisons with Holloway are hardly applicable. Holloway had no squad at all that first summer and had to operate on a tight budget for years with the threat of admin and bankruptcy at every turn. He once spent two hours in the back of the car on a rainy day begging David Davies to find the money to loan Lee Cook for a bit. Harry Spent £30m in 6 months. £30m. Middlesbrough, Watford, Bournemouth and even Sheff Wed scored more goals than us. It wasn't so much that he made mistakes, but that he made the same ones over and over and over again. Play off semi and play off final being the absolute nadir of that.
But I do give him credit for getting us up - not a lot, because he absolutely should have got us up with that squad. You talk about the squad he inherited - what about the one Warnock inherited?! And look what he did - a season of wonderful, attacking, exciting football.
Hoddle would be a poor decision IMO, but Harry obviously needs a proper, decent coach with him. |
Some good points raised there Antii. Agree with some, disagree on others but none I "violently" disagree with. 
I agree about Holloway having less to spend than Harry and working under more difficult circumstances. However, comparisons between the two requires some context. We were in league 1 so we were the big fish in the small pool. Despite the club's financial difficulties, Holloway had a larger budget than many of his peers. Where Holloway did shine was the championship years following promotion. He managed to keep our heads above water despite having a smaller budget than many of our competitors.
By contrast, in the Premier League we are a small fish in a big pond. The best players will not be attracted to QPR, despite the owners' riches. Until we have a decent infrastructure in place these riches will attract the wrong sort looking to top off their pensions. You only have to look at the respective transfer dealings of Warnock and Hughes in this division to see how easy it is to spend lots of money on garbage.
I also agree that Warnock did a better job than Harry in the championship but I think it was easier to turn that squad around. For a start Warnock benefited from Amit's shrewd chairmanship. Secondly, the dressing room was not full of toxic characters holding the club back with long contracts earning huge wages. Warnock essentially had a clean slate with which to spend Mittal's money. Nevertheless, I do believe that Warnock is a better manager than Harry in the championship.
However when we were promoted Warnock's inexperience at premier league level told. Personally I don't completely buy the Warnock had little time to prepare argument. QPR went up as champions so Neil had more time than Harry to plan even if he was unsure whether his targets would ultimately be sanctioned. A decent manager will have several plans to cater for different forecasts. Warnock knew he would get a decent budget; it was just a question of from whom, when and how much. If he was canny he would have set the ball rolling on negotiations based on projected budget then finalised deals once the budget was set. Indeed Tony was already swanning around our pre-season tour of Italy 2 weeks before the deal was ratified. Surely he could have had a word in Neil's ear encouraging him to chase targets as the takeover was just a matter of time? Worse case scenario planning could have seen Neil targeting the pick of the championship but instead he was hell bent on signing household names. He also continued to base the team around Adel, a tactic he could get away with in the championship but was never going to cut it in the premier league.
Having said this, I am willing to cut Warnock some slack given the uncertainty over ownership and the tremendous season in the championship. Hughes, however, has no excuses whatsoever. With plenty of time and plenty of money to spend he just made an absolute pigs ear of the job. The fact that even today he refuses to hold his hands up speaks volumes for the man and I, for one, can't wait for him to return to Loftus Road so he can hear exactly how we feel about that. [Post edited 2 Aug 2014 19:06]
| | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 23:12 - Aug 2 with 1280 views | hoops_legend |
Warlock had no money to spend over the summer so there was no prep time at all - they ruined his chance. Even then we were 8th at one stage and when he left we were 17th
So I can't say he failed.
He also didn't base the team around taarabt-in fact one of his mistakes was not trusting him a bit more |  |
| |
| Redknapp on Adel on 08:03 - Aug 3 with 1181 views | RuislipHoop |
I wonder what the other players think of him, that could have a say on what happens to him.
Obviously Clint doesn't think that much of him. | | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 10:22 - Aug 3 with 1084 views | PinnerPaul |
| Redknapp on Adel on 08:03 - Aug 3 by RuislipHoop |
I wonder what the other players think of him, that could have a say on what happens to him.
Obviously Clint doesn't think that much of him. |
Yeah you could see how much Clint thought of him at Wembley!
There's some serious history re writing going on here.
As I said last week Pommy. Anti and others if we had lost at Wembley 11 v 10 you would have absolutely slated Harry, yet SMc made some obvious mistakes and its Harry (who won) - your/our team - and its Harry who you spend the summer slating - free country/board and all that but I don't get it, I really don't. | | | |
| Redknapp on Adel on 12:04 - Aug 3 with 1055 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Redknapp on Adel on 19:01 - Aug 2 by RangersAreBack |
Some good points raised there Antii. Agree with some, disagree on others but none I "violently" disagree with.
I agree about Holloway having less to spend than Harry and working under more difficult circumstances. However, comparisons between the two requires some context. We were in league 1 so we were the big fish in the small pool. Despite the club's financial difficulties, Holloway had a larger budget than many of his peers. Where Holloway did shine was the championship years following promotion. He managed to keep our heads above water despite having a smaller budget than many of our competitors.
By contrast, in the Premier League we are a small fish in a big pond. The best players will not be attracted to QPR, despite the owners' riches. Until we have a decent infrastructure in place these riches will attract the wrong sort looking to top off their pensions. You only have to look at the respective transfer dealings of Warnock and Hughes in this division to see how easy it is to spend lots of money on garbage.
I also agree that Warnock did a better job than Harry in the championship but I think it was easier to turn that squad around. For a start Warnock benefited from Amit's shrewd chairmanship. Secondly, the dressing room was not full of toxic characters holding the club back with long contracts earning huge wages. Warnock essentially had a clean slate with which to spend Mittal's money. Nevertheless, I do believe that Warnock is a better manager than Harry in the championship.
However when we were promoted Warnock's inexperience at premier league level told. Personally I don't completely buy the Warnock had little time to prepare argument. QPR went up as champions so Neil had more time than Harry to plan even if he was unsure whether his targets would ultimately be sanctioned. A decent manager will have several plans to cater for different forecasts. Warnock knew he would get a decent budget; it was just a question of from whom, when and how much. If he was canny he would have set the ball rolling on negotiations based on projected budget then finalised deals once the budget was set. Indeed Tony was already swanning around our pre-season tour of Italy 2 weeks before the deal was ratified. Surely he could have had a word in Neil's ear encouraging him to chase targets as the takeover was just a matter of time? Worse case scenario planning could have seen Neil targeting the pick of the championship but instead he was hell bent on signing household names. He also continued to base the team around Adel, a tactic he could get away with in the championship but was never going to cut it in the premier league.
Having said this, I am willing to cut Warnock some slack given the uncertainty over ownership and the tremendous season in the championship. Hughes, however, has no excuses whatsoever. With plenty of time and plenty of money to spend he just made an absolute pigs ear of the job. The fact that even today he refuses to hold his hands up speaks volumes for the man and I, for one, can't wait for him to return to Loftus Road so he can hear exactly how we feel about that. [Post edited 2 Aug 2014 19:06]
|
Warnock did try to get in the pick of the Championship, but was blocked at every turn - Graham, Routs, Williams - and he did get DJ and Bothroyd in, who were both seen as decent cheap buys under the circumstances. He was completely stymied by Flavio and you can't go around lining up players and saying it'll be ok if some takeover might or might not go through - the fact was that by the time TF did come in, his targets had gone elsewhere. It had nothing to do with him not planning properly and to say otherwise is extremely harsh.
Even then, the four plays he bought were not too bad considering the time he had left. Barton was a real coup, Anton was actually pretty good for us until he got injured around Xmas, Young was excellent until after Warnock had gone - people were even suggesting he'd be player of the season, and SWP started really well before tailing off. Three of the four were eventually proved to be poor signings, but I don't really think you could accuse any of them, except possibly SWP, as coming for a last pay day. | |
| |
| Redknapp on Adel on 17:39 - Aug 3 with 1004 views | ingeminate |
| Redknapp on Adel on 12:04 - Aug 3 by Antti_Heinola |
Warnock did try to get in the pick of the Championship, but was blocked at every turn - Graham, Routs, Williams - and he did get DJ and Bothroyd in, who were both seen as decent cheap buys under the circumstances. He was completely stymied by Flavio and you can't go around lining up players and saying it'll be ok if some takeover might or might not go through - the fact was that by the time TF did come in, his targets had gone elsewhere. It had nothing to do with him not planning properly and to say otherwise is extremely harsh.
Even then, the four plays he bought were not too bad considering the time he had left. Barton was a real coup, Anton was actually pretty good for us until he got injured around Xmas, Young was excellent until after Warnock had gone - people were even suggesting he'd be player of the season, and SWP started really well before tailing off. Three of the four were eventually proved to be poor signings, but I don't really think you could accuse any of them, except possibly SWP, as coming for a last pay day. |
SWP tailed off about 5 games in from memory -amazing against newcastle though!
Agree about warnock - blaming him for his transfer dealings is mystifying given the circumstances ESP as pointed out that many of his original targets had been snapped up by the time he was given money. |  |
| |
| Redknapp on Adel on 18:15 - Aug 3 with 947 views | EalingRanger |
| Redknapp on Adel on 17:39 - Aug 3 by ingeminate |
SWP tailed off about 5 games in from memory -amazing against newcastle though!
Agree about warnock - blaming him for his transfer dealings is mystifying given the circumstances ESP as pointed out that many of his original targets had been snapped up by the time he was given money. |
SWP tailed off really badly after that goal he scored against West Brom at home was wrongly disallowed for offside. I think Warnock was very very unlucky with results in the two months before he left. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
