That was a completely different situation and in no way applies to the Villa game in my opinion.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Think he made the right call but should have been more decisive with it.
The point had to be preserved and had he have pushed for the win only get sucker punched and loose he would have got slated for that too. He was put in a no win situation by Rose's stupidity, he is the one that should be shouldering the blame for yesterday.
I'm in agreement with sammy here, Harry is getting unfair stick for this.
The point had to be preserved and had he have pushed for the win only get sucker punched and loose he would have got slated for that too. He was put in a no win situation by Rose's stupidity, he is the one that should be shouldering the blame for yesterday.
I'm in agreement with sammy here, Harry is getting unfair stick for this.
Thelonious said:
Yeah fair enough, but my point is that I could absolutely guarantee that had he made the subs, and we drew or lost, the very same subs would be getting coated off.
On a rather ironic note, yes we played with ten men up there last year and won.....without Defoe, who was sent off. VDV with two.....but Redknapp should have subbed VDV for Defoe otherwise he's a bottle job?
Sometimes, its just how the cookie crumbles, and while I feel the subs have every right to be questioned and crtiqued, I dont see the need for the blame vibe this time out. Just my view.
) we would've lost 4/5-0
Thelonious said:
And we have the worst record against arguably 'down on their form' teams. Disconcerting yes but when their goal went in I feared a loss come 90 minutes, another one of those games where bugger all went right and a deflected goal did for us.
i had a discussion with my mate during the game yesterday. i believe harry has taken us as far as he can, and when a more suitable replacement becomes available we should get rid of him. (may be a long time till somebody better becomes available). my mate believes harry should stay and we should rather be looking for 1 or 2 better coaching staff. what do you guys make of that? could improving on the coaching staff make that big an impact on our team?
Oh good. Another Harry thread in the making 
durbanspur said:
Could go either way though, we all thought Oneday Ramos was the messiah, but all he did was fuck everyone off and demotivated them.
I don't believe Harry has taken us as far as he can, and if we get 4th he has achieved his objectives and deserves another season.
For many though, he had taken us as far has he can as soon as he got here. They just dont like him.
I'm fucking sick of us changing managers all the time, it's unsettling and halts progression. It's no coincidence that the two most successful sides of the PL era have had consistency in their management, and whether you like him or not HR is our manager now, and our most successful in terms of results in a long long time. So while he's here I'm behind him.
every thought he has results in another thread 
I just think the hesitation of the substitute was a bit odd. Parker didn't have any time to effect the game and it seemed more of a time wasting substitution rather than a positive one, which isn't very 'Spurs'.
Regardless though, away from home with 10 men and a goal behind I would of settled for a point until Villa started to bend over and let us dominate possession, could of done with a long ball option yesterday for the last 20 minutes
but we haven't got that option anymore 
Keeping the faith anyway, and iv'e just bought this years Bayern Munich kit for £20 for the 4th place capability and the sheer amount of pain it will cause my many many Chelski fwends, definately am not tempting fate :niko:
Regardless though, away from home with 10 men and a goal behind I would of settled for a point until Villa started to bend over and let us dominate possession, could of done with a long ball option yesterday for the last 20 minutes
but we haven't got that option anymore Keeping the faith anyway, and iv'e just bought this years Bayern Munich kit for £20 for the 4th place capability and the sheer amount of pain it will cause my many many Chelski fwends, definately am not tempting fate :niko:
Ben said:
i dont take that away from him at all and even though i dont particularly think he will take us much further, credit where credit is due. he has done a good job and now that we arent forced to find a new manger because he is off to england i dont see why we should replace him just because. there is nobody available who would be a big step up from him as far as manager goes. so as much as i hate to admit it im happy for him to stay on until there is somebody far superior to replace him. but that doesnt mean for 1 second im not gonna slate him for stupid decisions, be it on the field or in front of the media cameras.
Thelonious said:every thought he has results in another thread
well seeing as you guys are the only spurs fans i can thrash it out with... sorry... he he
I think we all know who I would have brought on when...Gio! 
WHAT?! yeah...instead of bringing Parker on for VDV. this is the only time I honestly thought GDS would have actually helped. We were going forward fine before bringing Parker on with ten men. Someone else who can get on the ball in the final third with a good first touch, speed and the ability to finish might have helped in our counterattack. And this will most likely be my last post in favor of GDS...until Fulham. :harryfacepalm:
WHAT?! yeah...instead of bringing Parker on for VDV. this is the only time I honestly thought GDS would have actually helped. We were going forward fine before bringing Parker on with ten men. Someone else who can get on the ball in the final third with a good first touch, speed and the ability to finish might have helped in our counterattack. And this will most likely be my last post in favor of GDS...until Fulham. :harryfacepalm:
I think I would've found someone to take off for JD for the last 10 minutes, even if Parker came on as well. I felt like it was the kind of game where we had a lot of pressure on the edge of the box but not many clear cut chances, and Defoe's as good as any at making a little space for a shot on the edge of the box.
I wouldn't say it was a game-changing decision though. The only thing I would seriously question is why more subs weren't made. Harry doesn't use all 3 changes a lot of the time, but with 10 men for half the game, surely we should've replaced three of the tiredest players and got some fresh legs on? Would've made us less likely to get caught at the back, and possibly more likely to get a second. Sounds like VdV only came off because he picked up a knock...
I wouldn't say it was a game-changing decision though. The only thing I would seriously question is why more subs weren't made. Harry doesn't use all 3 changes a lot of the time, but with 10 men for half the game, surely we should've replaced three of the tiredest players and got some fresh legs on? Would've made us less likely to get caught at the back, and possibly more likely to get a second. Sounds like VdV only came off because he picked up a knock...
GDS for VDV at the 80 minute mark, then Defoe for Lennon at the 82nd minute.
I would have also had Nelsen warm up and then sit back down.
I would have also had Nelsen warm up and then sit back down.
Thelonious has already nailed this in my opinion...
The constant dithering and mind-changing that was going on from before the penalty until the ridiculous timing of the substitution was far more telling than any change that was eventually made!
Parker on didn't necessarily have to be a negative change (see De Jong on for Silva in the City game - released Yaya Toure further forward = 2 goals) if we ignore any comments about a point being OK afterwards, but the 15 minutes prior to the change were by far the most worrying in my opinion...as a management team Redknapp, Bond and Jordan didn't seem to know what to do and rather than going with a gut/decisive decision they waited, changed their mind several times and then made a change far too late by which time any positive impact Parker may have been able to have (had he been brought on with 20 to go) was completely negated.
But then at the same time I've never even managed a lump of shit so I don't have all the answers (or any in fact!)
The constant dithering and mind-changing that was going on from before the penalty until the ridiculous timing of the substitution was far more telling than any change that was eventually made!
Parker on didn't necessarily have to be a negative change (see De Jong on for Silva in the City game - released Yaya Toure further forward = 2 goals) if we ignore any comments about a point being OK afterwards, but the 15 minutes prior to the change were by far the most worrying in my opinion...as a management team Redknapp, Bond and Jordan didn't seem to know what to do and rather than going with a gut/decisive decision they waited, changed their mind several times and then made a change far too late by which time any positive impact Parker may have been able to have (had he been brought on with 20 to go) was completely negated.
But then at the same time I've never even managed a lump of shit so I don't have all the answers (or any in fact!)
Again though, you are overlooking the position we were in.
1st choice LB out injured. 2nd choice sent off. Ten men.
Look at the thread about what we should do for the left side against Fulham...nobody really knows. Redknapp had to make that decision mid-game, 1-0 down, away from home against a team fighting for survival.
You wonder why he dithered, and changed his mind several times?
1st choice LB out injured. 2nd choice sent off. Ten men.
Look at the thread about what we should do for the left side against Fulham...nobody really knows. Redknapp had to make that decision mid-game, 1-0 down, away from home against a team fighting for survival.
You wonder why he dithered, and changed his mind several times?
We were down to 10 men away to Inter, VDV missed the game, Redknapp managed to think on his feet and get a credible result. In the past he's shown many times that he can make a decision (rightly or wrongly) and stick to it. At the point at which he made that sub, it had no real impact on the game. Did it take VDV being injured (I think?) to make that change?
Not sure about all the Inter comparisons to be honest.
Its easier to sub a keeper for a keeper, than a LB when you dont have one. We also let in another 3 goals that half, before playing well with nothing to lose in the second half.
We had alot to lose against Villa, but we actually salvaged something from it
Its easier to sub a keeper for a keeper, than a LB when you dont have one. We also let in another 3 goals that half, before playing well with nothing to lose in the second half.
We had alot to lose against Villa, but we actually salvaged something from it
The point wasn't about the Inter game, the point was that in the past we've had men sent off and Redknapp has adjusted......sammyspurs said: