Harry’s Gone

Brett Curtis reviews Harry Redknapp’s departure from Tottenham.

 

Despite finishing within the top four in the Premier League for the second time in his full three seasons in charge, Harry Redknapp has been sacked by Tottenham Hotspur.

When presented as the bare bones, the situation appears almost unbelievable; a chance for the anti-modern football brigade to deplore the managerial merry-go-round that England-based owners have undoubtedly contributed towards.

Yet, as surprising as it remains because of Tottenham’s increase in stature under him, there was also an air of relative inevitability about Redknapp’s departure. Two fatal collapses in successive seasons have cost the North London club a place in the Champions League -- and perhaps Harry his job. Some may point towards Chelsea’s unexpected Champions League triumph as making Redknapp and Tottenham joint victims of unfortunate circumstances. Moreover, it was, after all, Redknapp that delivered Champions League football to White Hart Lane for the first time, finally putting to bed the bitter memories of food poisoning-gate that cost them a top four spot in the 2005/06 season. The excuses were seemingly gone – success had replaced them.

He then led his side to famous victories over both Inter Milan and AC Milan before being defeated by Real Madrid in the Quarter Finals. Yet that was largely as good as it got under Redknapp, as in the same season they finished a distant 5^th; whilst this season talks of a title challenge in as late as February somehow resulted in another Europa League place. The excuses subsequently returned to White Hart Lane, as Redknapp’s embarrassing lowering of expectations as the season progressed angered fans: they were being made to feel stupid by the man they had previously respected.

You could argue he has now become yet another manager to be a victim of his own success. But, equally, once you deliver such success to owners and fans alike, you surely must maintain it at a club of Tottenham’s stature to avoid at least pressure. Redknapp narrowly failed to do so – but that is not to say the sacking comes close to being justified based on results alone.

This season’s collapse coincided with his ongoing tax evasion case, of which he was cleared, and the exit of Fabio Capello from the England’s manager job. Redknapp became the “People’s Choice” to replace him, and it shortly become no secret that he wanted the job. I joked on Twitter last night that, “Harry Redknapp must be the first manager in history to buckle under the pressure of the England job without actually having it.” Jokes aside, his entire managerial career was likely geared towards that opportunity – he would not be alone in that regard. However, the FA unexpectedly preferred Roy Hodgson: a man that will crucially carry with him lower expectations from the outset, rather than when results begin to go bad.

A large section of Spurs fans saw this situation as far from ideal, but certainly workable – he could leave Champions League football and a good foundation behind him after a happy four years; before achieving his own dream at the helm of his nation. It appeared as potentially harmonious as any managerial exit could be -- particularly as Redknapp never truly captured the fans’ adulation; made more evident than ever last night, when neutral journalists appeared far more angry than any Spurs fan about his exit. Ultimately, a combination of failure on the pitch, uncontrollable circumstances in Chelsea’s success and the FA’s decision, and a breakdown in relations between Redknapp and his chairman denied any realistic chance of mutual satisfaction.

Indeed, it is the latter that is almost definitely the chief factor in this surprise exit; managers have overcome far worse results or player/fan relations in the past. Redknapp and Daniel Levy’s relationship had reportedly always been lukewarm, with Redknapp joking in December 2011, “Anyone who’s working with Levy would make an odd couple.” He was, of course, alluding to the fact Levy is a notoriously shrewd businessman rather than the “football man” Redknapp portrays himself as. The contrast is obvious – but opposites attracted to form success. After Tottenham’s mostly unsuccessful transfer dealings prior to Redknapp’s arrival, with the likes of Darren Bent, David Bentley and Roman Pavlyuchenko signed for heavy fees in 2007 and 2008, Levy adopted a financial stance not dissimilar to their astute North London rivals.

Perhaps the sentimental signing of a deteriorating Robbie Keane for £15m in January 2009 was the final straw for Levy. Indeed, eighteen months later, it is believed he provided Redknapp with Rafael van der Vaart rather than Luis Fabiano, the number nine he craved to lead his Champions League charge, based on his sell-on fee transfer strategy. In January this year, with Tottenham looking credible dark horses for the title, Redknapp strangely signed Louis Saha and Ryan Nelsen on free transfers. The expectation levels dropped when they should have been rising; Levy would have noted this and feared a repeat next season of the situation that led to Redknapp’s appointment in the first place.

It is this division in ideas, philosophy, and perhaps personality between manager and chairman that ultimately turned from attracted to entrenched. Combined, for example, Saha and Nelsen’s age represents 67, older than Redknapp himself. And one would not be surprised to see a far younger man in Andre Villas-Boas or Roberto Martinez replace him – rather than the highly touted David Moyes, who would arrive with baggage and perhaps an eye on the Manchester United job once Sir Alex Ferguson chooses to retire. Tottenham must now look to become “a Manchester United” in their own right – and keeping players such as Luka Modric, who could feasibly represent a Xabi Alonso-esque hole should he leave, and Gareth Bale this summer will be important in this long-term process.

As for Redknapp, it is Ferguson he has looked towards today, noting, “He is in his seventies yet is still the best manager in the world.” Harry will, of course, never reach that standard, and may look towards the spring and summer of 2012 as the most disappointing time of his career; he entered it with the chance of a maiden Premier League title for himself and his club, and the favourite to assume the role of England manager. Yet he is now without a job, with no obvious vacancy to fulfil. It would be fitting if he could end his managerial career at West Ham United where his playing career first started.

This article was written by Brett Curtis. Check out his work on http://footballspeak.com/71.aspx and be sure to follow his Twitter: @bcurtis92.

Make sure you follow Pundit Watch too, a hilarious Twitter account run by Brett: @PunditWatch_

Chelsea: The Impossible Job?

So, another one bites the dust. Chelsea sack yet another manager. Another Chelsea manager was quickly ushered in and before you know it, he is hastily ushered out. The uncompromising trigger of Roman Abramovic has been pulled yet again.

Chelsea’s have had all sorts of managers under Roman Abramovich reign of the club. The Blues have had Champions League winners, mediocre unknown managers, a World Cup Winner, then an international manager, then back to Champions League Winners, and then to a young, up and coming manager, Andre Villas Boas.

So many have arrived at Chelsea, yet so many managers have failed to deal with huge expectations of the Chelsea owner.

There is a beautiful irony surrounding Chelsea. On one hand you have a selection of fine players, some of whom are arguably world class. While on the other, Chelsea have huge transfer funds, meaning the club can attract the finest players around the globe.

But there is a sting at Chelsea which has caught so many managers out.

There are three elements to this ‘sting’ which make Chelsea the impossible job in club football.

1) The players mentality – (especially the senior players at Chelsea) - It seems the players feel so secure at the club that they feel it is their way or the highway for the manager.

2) Roman Abramovic – The Russian’s susceptibility to pull the trigger when the going gets tough make the job impossible for Chelsea managers to make a real impact on the club.

3) Jose Mourinho (Chelsea’s most successful manager) and his shadow – Whoever comes in at Chelsea will be compared to the great Jose Mourinho. Not only this, people will compare the rapport the new manager has with the players in comparison to the rapport Mourinho had with the Chelsea players.

The Chelsea players should be embarrassed with their application towards Andre Villas Boas. Some of the players put their own interests ahead of the club and the Chelsea fans. The likes of Frank Lampard and Ashley Cole made their frustration very clear to the press. How a legend like Frank Lampard thinks informing the press of his frosty relationship with Villas –Boas is in the interests of Chelsea Football Club is beyond me. These unneeded comments by an experienced international only poured more fuel and cranked up the pressure on Chelsea and Villas –Boas.

Lampard’s unhappiness at being dropped for various Chelsea games lead to him publicly questioning Andre Villas-Boas’ management. But the reality is Frank Lampard is 33. He is no longer the future of Chelsea.

Frank Lampard should do his talking on the pitch, rather than vent his anger to the media. Lampard already has ammunition to do his talking on the pitch. Frank Lampard has created the second highest amount of chances for Chelsea (41). While the 33 year old is Chelsea’s top goal scorer in the Premier League with 10 goals. Lampard statistics prove his value to the Chelsea side. The stats show Lampard is contributing and does make a difference to the side.

One can’t deny Villas-Boas didn’t handle some of the senior players brilliantly. He seemed to alleinate and unsettle a number of them. However, did the Chelsea players really make an effort to warm or conform to the Portuguese manager’s philosophy? Perhaps we will never know. But it seemed the players were incredibly unwilling to conform to his ways.

But it seems the Chelsea players have this mentality whereby they know they will outlive their manager at the club. This poor mentality has unfortunately lead to some of the players being unwilling to adhere to the new managers style of management, if it doesn’t suit them. This is what’s sad about Chelsea. The mentality of some of the players typifies everything what’s wrong with player power in the modern game. As Chelsea’s player power hasn’t led to sustained success, it has led to hefty pay outs and abrupt seasons.

Whoever becomes the next full time manager at Chelsea, face the same the issues Carlo Ancelotti and Andre Villas-Boas faced. The same arrogant players control and dominate the dressing room. While restricting the new manager from being able to fully implement their own style and mentality on the club.

The problem at Chelsea is that the managers aren’t given time, and if they try to change things too quickly, it can lead to serious decline, as the team have to develop cohesion and understanding, without unsettling and alienating the existing players . Another crucial point, especially at Chelsea, is most players have been at the club longer than manager, meaning they will oppose the changes as it would be against their interests and their way of doing things. Perhaps this was Andre Villas-Boas mistake at Chelsea. Changing too much too quickly.

Andre Villas –Boas is a talented manager. He is a manager who will go onto achieve great things. The sad thing is it is reported Villas-Boas often slept at Chelsea’s training ground. Its regrettable, a man this committed, this passionate about his job was not given the time to see the job through. It’s also a shame that the former managers determination didn’t rub off with his players.

Chelsea is the impossible job in club football. The shadows of Jose Mourinho are still ever dominant, no matter whom the manager is.

Look at Carlo Ancelotti. In his first season, he won the double. While in his career overall, the guy has won four European cups. Yet he was shown the door for coming second. This demonstrates the sheer monstrosity of the job. It shows the magnitude of this gig. It shows how fine the line is between success and failure at Chelsea.

The impossible nature of the Chelsea job has and will continue to put off the finest managers across the globe. The likes of Pep Guaridola have quickly distanced themselves away from the job. While former Chelsea coach Brendan Rodgers when asked if he was interested in the Blues job, he said wisely he wanted to ‘build’ his career, rather than ‘destroy’ it. Rodgers comments superbly define the issues surrounding the Chelsea managers job. It doesn’t lead to great success, it leads to condemnation, it leads to humiliation and it leads to utter emotional pain.

For the Chelsea job to be viewed as possible, the culture surrounding the club’s hiring and firing policy must change. Changes have to be made at Chelsea. There is no other way around it. The Chelsea team needs fresh players, fresh ideas and a fresh mentality. At the moment, the old guard’s mentality is rife at the club and instead of improving the club, it is actually leading to the club’s decline.

What’s sad is Andre Villas-Boas often insisted Chelsea’s needed to be rid themselves of the club’s existing culture of sacking and the players controlling the dressing room. Villas Boas spoke of his desire to create a new cultural identity at the club.

Regrettably, the same culture Villas –Boas was looking to eradicate, ended up getting him the sack.

Why West Brom have put themselves in far more danger of being relegated due to the sacking of Roberto Di Matteo

West Brom are the Premier League’s yo-yo team. In the last 5 years they have spent three of those years in the Premier League. But this season West Brom have looked a far better Premier League side. They are a team who look comfortable with the ball and they look far more assured against their Premier League oppositions. But a potential spanner has been thrown into the works. A decision which could even see West Brom falling through the precarious trap door. Roberto Di Matteo has been sacked.

Under Di Matteo West Brom flourished. The team sailed through the Championship last season, to instantly return to the Premier League. Upon their return, West Brom started the season with good form. Okay, yes they were hammered by Chelsea in their opening game. But after that result they went on a good run. They beat Arsenal at the Emirates and are the only team this season to pick up any points from Old Trafford. They also smashed Everton by 4 goals to 1 at Goodison Park.

West Brom under Di Matteo have been far more dynamic and attacking. Something which they were lacking the last time they were in the Premier League. Furthermore, their attacking guile has made them a far more difficult opposition to beat. Di Matteo has shaped his team effectively. In Chris Brunt they have a playmaker and a competent set piece taker, who in fact has assisted 10 of West Brom goals. While in Peter Odemwingie, they have a pacey centre forward who has shown his clinical ability. Arguably, Di Matteo’s most successful acquisition is Jerome Thomas. The free transfer has been something of a revelation. Thomas has shown his brilliant pace, trickery and great distribution to assist West Brom with 6 goals. These players have been integral to everything good about West Brom this season. Di Matteo has played a crucial role in getting these players to play effectively at the Premier League level.

Di Matteo’s tactical strategy of keeping the ball and progressively going forward has made West Brom a far more competent and threatening side. Yes, there form has declined since December. But the team clearly has enough character and quality to stay up. Look at the way West Brom play, there is a strong sense of confidence and self belief in their abilties. Something which the serious relegation candidates lack.

What frustrates me so much about the sacking of Di Matteo. Is that this West Brom team are far far better than the previous West Brom sides, who have failed in the Premier League. The success of the current team is down to Roberto Di Matteo. The facts prove this too.

Season	Points	Goals Scored	Goals conceded
2004/05 (finished 17th)	34 points	36	61
2005/06 (finished 19th)	30 points	31	58
2008/09 (finished 20th)	32 points	36	67
Current season – 2010/11 – 25 games played (on 06/02/11)	26 points	31	48

The stats for this season show a telling story. West Brom have already scored the same amount as they did in the 2005/06 season. In addition to this, in the 2008/09 season under Tony Mowbray, West Brom were praised for being a relegation candidate who played ‘football’ even if it meant being relegated. Di Matteo has done the same. His strategy is also to keep the ball on the ground and play progressively. But Di Matteo has tweaked the system and made it even better. As his team are more expansive and threatening. The stats prove this too. This season West Brom have already scored 31 goals. While Mowbray’s West Brom (2008/09) scored 36. With 13 games remaining it’s very likely that West Brom will score more than 5 goals. This proves that under Di Matteo West Brom side are far more of an attacking threat.

A continuous criticism of the relegated West Brom sides were their lack of goals. Di Matteo has rectified that issue to an extent this season.

Furthermore, even though West Brom have 13 more games to play, they are only 7 points behind the 34 points (gained in the 2004/05 season) the highest earned by a West Brom side in the Premier League. And that was the season when they managed to stay in the Premier League. It’s fair to say this West Brom team will achieve more than 7 points by the end of the season. After all, it’s two wins and a draw. Thus meaning it will be the highest points tally achieved by a West Brom side in the Premier League. Something which Roberto Di Matteo has played a crucial role in.

But one must consider, that the Premier League this season has been generally far more inconsistent than previous seasons, thus meaning team’s are dropping points more often. That taken into consideration, West Brom today find themselves with a precarious 24 points. Joint with Wigan who are in 18^th. West Brom are in a dangerous position. But is sacking a manager who has done far better than his predecessors the right answer?

West Brom kept strongly faithful to Tony Mowbray in the 2008/09 season, when they pathetically finished 20th. While West Brom under Roberto Di Matteo have been far more effective in terms of getting results. Yet Di Matteo finds himself out of a job? Its just crazy.

One thing football results strive on is stability. With Di Matteo they had a sytem which yes, wasn’t going through the best form, but it was a system which was accumulating more points than any other West Brom manager in the Premier League. Have the West Brom board seriously thought this through?

The fact the league is so unpredictable and inconsistent surely maintaining your playing style and management style, will help your team get results?

Roberto Di Matteo stated today ‘I was extremely surprised and disappointed to be relieved of my duties.’ I think everyone is surprised that he has been sacked. Arguably their most effective manager has been shown the door. Senseless.

West Brom’s next four games are against; West Ham (H), Wolves (H), Stoke(A) and Birmingham (A). Arguably, these are winnable games. Especially the two home games. Winning those two home games will have only move them upwards. I’m sure Di Matteo targeted the two home games as ‘vital must win games.’ And West Brom would have probably bagged 6 points against Wolves and West Ham. Who have both been woeful on the road Yet now, this shock sacking, could provide instability and see West Brom lose all of these games.

The West Brom board haven taken a risk. A risk which could seriously back fire on them. They have shown the door to a man who has given West Brom so much.

Why the appointment of King Kenny Dalglish is the right move by Liverpool

The appointment of Kenny Dalglish is probably the appointment most Liverpool fans would have wanted to see in the summer of 2010. This was fuelled by the fact Dalglish made it clear that he was seriously interested in taking the reigns left by Rafa Benitez. However, the board opted to pick the LMA manager of the year, Roy Hodgson. And in hindsight this saw the club take to another level of decline. Within 6 months, Hodgson was kindly shown the door.

To most fans Dalglish is the perfect appointment. He is a man who cares so dearly about the club. He is a man who has won virtually every trophy with the club. And a man who has and knows how to inspire both players and fans. Fenway Sports Group have made an incredibly logical decision in their appointment. The continuous chanting of ‘dalgish’ a chant which foreshadowed the beginning of the end of Roy Hodgsons stint as the Liverpool manager. However, the chant clearly showed John Henry and Thomas Werner what the Liverpool fans wanted. And that was King Kenny Dalglish. This was the right move by the owners. As the owners in various interviews have spoken of the importance to listen to the Liverpool fans. The appointment clearly shows to the Liverpool fans they are listening to the demands of the fans. Even though the owners reportedly feel Dalglish has been away from the game for too long. Kenny Dalglish symbolises to the Liverpool fans that they have their club back. After all the turmoil with the two fools of Hicks and Gillett and the failure of Hodgson’s tenure, the fans feel that the individual at the helm cares and will do anything to see the club being successful.

One word which sums up the last two years of Liverpool Football Club is ‘insecure.’ The tensional battles off the field regarding the debt leveraged against the club and the brittle displays shown by the team have seriously hurt the Liverpool fans. The fans felt they were losing grip on their club, as the club was becoming a shadow of its former self. However, the appointment of Kenny Dalglish makes the fans feel a sense of security. As they know that the club is in the right hands. Dalglish offers the Liverpool fans a certain expectation. The fans know Dalglish is deeply embedded in everything that was right during Liverpool’s glory days in the 70’s and 80’s. Dalgish is fully aware of the dna which makes Liverpool successful. He understands the club and the fans understand him. This will motivate fans, and get them behind the team.

The Fenway Sports Group (FSG) has gained a lot of credibility by their decision to appoint Dalglish. Ive discussed the idea of the owners listening to the fans demands, but the group have taken an intelligent gamble. If Dalglish actually improves the fortunes of the club it could pave the way for Dalglish to have a period as Liverpool boss. After all, Damien Comolli confirmed he is a candidate for the permant role. And it seems apparent the club are unwilling to spend this January. If Dalglish can get this underachieving squad to fulfil its potential, he surely has to be a strong contender for the job- for the long term. Which im sure the fans would be more than happy to back. However, if Dalglish is unable to progress the team the owners can look to appoint someone who they feel is suitable for the permanent role. The fans would be far more supportive than they were of Roy Hodgson’s tenure. As they know that their first choice was given the chance at the helm.