The legacy of Martin O'Neill

[Monty]

What made the difference was a magic spell from one player, which stretched the whole of the pitch as teams previously focusing their attention on one wing (Lennon) suddenly had a whole new threat opening up on the other side. Over 38 games they earned it, of course, but it can hardly be denied, surely, that Liverpool's catastrophic demise had left the door open for someone. It wasn't us because of MON's various deficiencies, it wasn't Man City's because, crucially I think, Mancini was so timid in going for results - and of course the thousands of consecutive draws under Hughes. As for tactically inept, Redknapp's hardly alone in that in England, we're hardly renowned throughout the world for our innovative tactical thinking in this country, are we? So that deficiency of Redknapp's, that would be highlighted abroad and internationally, is diminished here - not least by the quality of player he inherited as well. And I never said his man-management skills are limited, just similar to MON's, and he was famous for his. A transfer policy consisting mainly of buying back players the club had sold for more than they sold them for is not what I call value for money, nor is Peter Crouch at £11m, Palacios at £15m and Sandro at £10m+. 

He's not a bad manager, but he should hardly be exalted as much as he is. It would be a bit like if PSG won the league - their manager wouldn't necessarily have to be a genius, he'd just have to be competent enough to prevent the usual fuck-ups that characterise that club, and the same applies to Redknapp and Spurs. They got their first competent management structure since Jol was in charge without Comolli, Liverpool had a colossal disaster bigger than Arsenal's in the two years Spurs were fifth and they took full advantage. Not genius, just competence.

[hilts_coolerking]

He's not a bad manager, but he should hardly be exalted as much as he is. It would be a bit like if PSG won the league - their manager wouldn't necessarily have to be a genius, he'd just have to be competent enough to prevent the usual fuck-ups that characterise that club, and the same applies to Redknapp and Spurs. They got their first competent management structure since Jol was in charge without Comolli, Liverpool had a colossal disaster bigger than Arsenal's in the two years Spurs were fifth and they took full advantage. Not genius, just competence.

I don't think anyone has called him a genius; I certainly haven't. But he deserves more credit than he's getting from you.

[KevinGage]

Tottenham at key stages of the campaign last year stepped up, found an extra gear.

Previously they had been a bit of a soft touch on the road, but last year they actually performed like a big club. Going to opposition grounds and controlling the game.

Lennon started the season like a house on fire, but was injured for a good chunk of the campaign. Bentley came in and provided a useful contribution. When the goals were drying up  just after new year Pavlyuchenko came in and bagged a few in crucial games.

Then Bale's good form for the final run-in when they faced the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea and Man Citeh. 

They fully earned it - no luck involved. Unless it's lucky to keep fringe players involved and motivated enough to provide a winning contribution when they get a taste of the action. Lucky to have more than one way of playing. Lucky to have a manager who can get the maximum out of his available resources.

I also don't buy into any suggestion that Redknapp is in someway tactically deficient. That would indicate that he gets by by bluster and motivation alone. Watching how his teams play I find that very unlikely.

He even mentioned today that part of their failing was not keeping the ball and creating space. Odd to offer a comment in his defence after his side barely got away with a point against a side as poor as Olbiyun but this:

"Possession is what it's all about. If you keep the ball you make the other team chase but if you give it away, you have to chase it yourselves and that's a lot harder.

"In the first half we kept it well and made them chase us for 45 minutes.

"In the second half we turned the ball over too easily. We didn't work hard enough to make angles for each other and suddenly we had to chase and that's when it became more difficult."

offers an insight into his philosophy and how he sets his teams up play.

Maybe it's not full of imaginative buzzwords like pivot, trequartista and all the other bobbins. But it sounds like a bloke who knows how football should be played. The very mention of keeping the ball, making angles and working openings is light years away from what we've been doing these past few years.

[Monty]

Tactics isn't just philosophy, it's about application and what you want your players to do in specific areas. Because we're used to MON and his neolithics, hearing things like that from Redknapp are a breath of fresh air. But you'd hear Keegan, or Hoddle, or even dear old Ollie at Blackpool saying things like that, and it hardly makes them good at tactics - just lovers of good football. Look at Mourinho - 87% possession conceded against Barca and won through because of specific tactical plans for different players, areas of the field, stages of the game and so on. Everything was meticulously planned. Talking about keeping the ball and making angles and all that is an admirable philosophy - and like you say, miles away from ourselves last season - but it's not tactics. A good tactician would not have lost to Wigan in the manner that they did. He strikes me as an old-fashioned 'focus only on what we do' manager, in the Clough mould. You can't do that anymore. Good philosophy, decent man-management, but still tactically behind the curve.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

...

How far back do we take the net spend to make any comparison worthwhile?

I did a back of the envelope working of Mon's ins and outs and came up with about £60m. Does that sound about right?

Yes that's right. We've spent approx. £60m net.

Which includes the Milner money received from Man City..

[Monty]

...

How far back do we take the net spend to make any comparison worthwhile?

I did a back of the envelope working of Mon's ins and outs and came up with about £60m. Does that sound about right?

Yes that's right. We've spent approx. £60m net.

Which includes the Milner money received from Man City..

Not even counting the bizarre wages some players were/are on.

[eamonn]

Wigan beat them largely because Martinez played a 3-5-2, a tactic specifically invented to thwart open 4-4-2s - in the mid-80s.

Didn't we play a 5-3-2 (3-5-2 when attacking) to great effect with Sir Brian of Little from 1995-'97? (I seem to remember Collymore's arrival leading to a disastrous flirtation with 4-3-3 and the infamous four defeats in a row at the start of '97/98).

[Chris Smith]

However you try to dress it up it isn't "working wonders" to finish 4th with the squad of players he has to choose from.

It certainly is, particularly if your idea of a good job is finishing no higher than 6th after spending £120M.

As Ron has pointed out he's got a squad that cost almost twice as much as ours. He's done well, if he wins something then he'll have done very well but it still won't be working wonders.

You don't seem to understand the concept of net spend.  Yes their squad cost more, but then they've also had an awful lot of high profile sales as well.

Totally irrelevant other than from an accountants point of view.

Redknapp has a squad of players to choose from that cost £190m to assemble.

Our manager, when he finally arrives, will have a squad of players to choose from that cost £109m to assemble.

Do you not understand? They have a stronger squad than us as they've spent more on it because whereas we've only been investing for 4 years they've been at it for much longer.

[Chris Smith]

He's not a bad manager, but he should hardly be exalted as much as he is. It would be a bit like if PSG won the league - their manager wouldn't necessarily have to be a genius, he'd just have to be competent enough to prevent the usual fuck-ups that characterise that club, and the same applies to Redknapp and Spurs. They got their first competent management structure since Jol was in charge without Comolli, Liverpool had a colossal disaster bigger than Arsenal's in the two years Spurs were fifth and they took full advantage. Not genius, just competence.

I don't think anyone has called him a genius; I certainly haven't. But he deserves more credit than he's getting from you.

You said he worked wonders which is the phrase that sparked my interest in this.

It's a sad commentary on how some people view football these days that finishing 4th with such an expensively assembled squad is considered a major achievement.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

It's a sad commentary on how some people view football these days that finishing 4th with such an expensively assembled squad is considered a major achievement

Chris.
Haven't you in the past said that 4th is more important than silverware?

[Chris Smith]

It's a sad commentary on how some people view football these days that finishing 4th with such an expensively assembled squad is considered a major achievement

Chris.
Haven't you in the past said that 4th is more important than silverware?

Not to me personally but I accept that getting into the CL is more important to the club in terms of development than winning say the Carling Cup but that still doesn't mean that I think a manager who does it with such an expensive squad has worked wonders. If Mick McCarthy got the Dingles there then that would be working wonders.

It's the over the top language that I object to. He'd done a decent job, as did MON, but it's not the remarkable achievement coolerking tries to pretend it is.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

It's a sad commentary on how some people view football these days that finishing 4th with such an expensively assembled squad is considered a major achievement

Chris.
Haven't you in the past said that 4th is more important than silverware?

Not to me personally but I accept that getting into the CL is more important to the club in terms of development than winning say the Carling Cup but that still doesn't mean that I think a manager who does it with such an expensive squad has worked wonders. If Mick McCarthy got the Dingles there then that would be working wonders.

It's the over the top language that I object to. He'd done a decent job, as did MON, but it's not the remarkable achievement coolerking tries to pretend it is.

http://cdn.sheknows.com/articles/fudge(1).jpg

[Chris Smith]

It's a sad commentary on how some people view football these days that finishing 4th with such an expensively assembled squad is considered a major achievement

Chris.
Haven't you in the past said that 4th is more important than silverware?

Not to me personally but I accept that getting into the CL is more important to the club in terms of development than winning say the Carling Cup but that still doesn't mean that I think a manager who does it with such an expensive squad has worked wonders. If Mick McCarthy got the Dingles there then that would be working wonders.

It's the over the top language that I object to. He'd done a decent job, as did MON, but it's not the remarkable achievement coolerking tries to pretend it is.

http://cdn.sheknows.com/articles/fudge(1).jpg

So do you think Harry Redknapp has worked wonders at Spurs? Even given his own love of self promotion I doubt he'd have the cheek to call it that himself.

It is just doing what a decent manager should do given the investment. If MON had another £80m worth of players then we would have been right to expect the same from him.

[jembob]

Monty's point has been the best made so far. Spurs success was much to do with Rednapp failing to screw up. Our failure to succeed at reaching CL last season was to do with MON's poor decisions in formation, tactics and personnel while Rednapp was able to organise a team which had been a shambles for a few seasons. Rednapp had more strength in depth than MON, but he had more injury problems and in some some instances was forced to utilise squad players. MON on the other hand, played players who were clearly unfit while very competent replacements sat on the bench frustrated.

Rednapp is on the up at Spurs. MON in my view, was in the process of failing quite badly at Villa. The rot had set in and I wasn't looking forward to this season at all as it promised to be dull and repetitive, and I can't see that he would have lasted the season anyway.

[ozzjim]

Net spend is relevant of course - if a club have spent a lot through recouping a lot it means their manager is decent at getting players who he doesn't want in the shop window, performing and generating revenue if sold. As such they can then spend more to buy other players.