Jump to content
IGNORED

Coventry


Hampshire Red

Recommended Posts

Amongst a wide group of Hampshire based football fans there has been a lot of discussion about which club has been the very, very worst to have supported over the last decade. Ignoring some very biased views about Pompey, the two clubs that always battle it for WORST CLUB are Coventry and Bristol Rovers. Some might argue the recent demise of Lancs clubs, Blackpool, Bolton, Bury but i am happy to go with Coventry (big ground, Top Flight club for ever, solid support - all now gone to rats.. and the gas

Now Cov are top of the third tier is it a shoe -in that being a blue bristolian is the very worst thing in current league football (2013-14 was brilliant for most on here)

I cant think of any club where the current owners have done less for their fans, ground, etc.

Over to you. We are complaining in some parts about not being able to seal 6th place, especially as we have been above that for quite a bit of this season. Am i right in saying gas have NEVER been above 6th in this 2nd tier of football - in their entire history?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hampshire Red said:

Amongst a wide group of Hampshire based football fans there has been a lot of discussion about which club has been the very, very worst to have supported over the last decade. Ignoring some very biased views about Pompey, the two clubs that always battle it for WORST CLUB are Coventry and Bristol Rovers. Some might argue the recent demise of Lancs clubs, Blackpool, Bolton, Bury but i am happy to go with Coventry (big ground, Top Flight club for ever, solid support - all now gone to rats.. and the gas

Now Cov are top of the third tier is it a shoe -in that being a blue bristolian is the very worst thing in current league football (2013-14 was brilliant for most on here)

I cant think of any club where the current owners have done less for their fans, ground, etc.

Over to you. We are complaining in some parts about not being able to seal 6th place, especially as we have been above that for quite a bit of this season. Am i right in saying gas have NEVER been above 6th in this 2nd tier of football - in their entire history?

Somewhere like Bradford City perhaps? The club has a bit of history and the city is pretty large.

Maybe in terms of they were famous but are now nowheresville Notts County even outrank the Blue Few?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hampshire Red said:

Amongst a wide group of Hampshire based football fans there has been a lot of discussion about which club has been the very, very worst to have supported over the last decade. Ignoring some very biased views about Pompey, the two clubs that always battle it for WORST CLUB are Coventry and Bristol Rovers. Some might argue the recent demise of Lancs clubs, Blackpool, Bolton, Bury but i am happy to go with Coventry (big ground, Top Flight club for ever, solid support - all now gone to rats.. and the gas

Now Cov are top of the third tier is it a shoe -in that being a blue bristolian is the very worst thing in current league football (2013-14 was brilliant for most on here)

I cant think of any club where the current owners have done less for their fans, ground, etc.

Over to you. We are complaining in some parts about not being able to seal 6th place, especially as we have been above that for quite a bit of this season. Am i right in saying gas have NEVER been above 6th in this 2nd tier of football - in their entire history?

Don’t think you can look past Pompey (even though you did!) I know you said ‘decade’ but 12 years ago they won the FA Cup and then drew with AC Milan and narrowly lost to Wolfsburg in European competition and 10 years ago they were in the premier league and were also in the FA Cup final again - losing to Chelsea.... their demise has been immense - and before anyone jumps on the tiresome ‘Redknapp bankrupt them’ bandwagon - he brought more money into Pompey when selling players than he spent on buying players - so that tired argument is still bollox, and he did the same at all of his other clubs ... brought more money in than he spent ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

Somewhere like Bradford City perhaps? The club has a bit of history and the city is pretty large.

Maybe in terms of they were famous but are now nowheresville Notts County even outrank the Blue Few?

Decent ground though Robbo (Notts), one that the 15ers could only dream of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Don’t think you can look past Pompey (even though you did!) I know you said ‘decade’ but 12 years ago they won the FA Cup and then drew with AC Milan and narrowly lost to Wolfsburg in European competition and 10 years ago they were in the premier league and were also in the FA Cup final again - losing to Chelsea.... their demise has been immense - and before anyone jumps on the tiresome ‘Redknapp bankrupt them’ bandwagon - he brought more money into Pompey when selling players than he spent on buying players - so that tired argument is still bollox, and he did the same at all of his other clubs ... brought more money in than he spent ...

Apart from Brum.....or was that his dog? ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Don’t think you can look past Pompey (even though you did!) I know you said ‘decade’ but 12 years ago they won the FA Cup and then drew with AC Milan and narrowly lost to Wolfsburg in European competition and 10 years ago they were in the premier league and were also in the FA Cup final again - losing to Chelsea.... their demise has been immense - and before anyone jumps on the tiresome ‘Redknapp bankrupt them’ bandwagon - he brought more money into Pompey when selling players than he spent on buying players - so that tired argument is still bollox, and he did the same at all of his other clubs ... brought more money in than he spent ...

As long as those players didn't take a massive wage well above what the club could afford your position stands up quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Pezo said:

As long as those players didn't take a massive wage well above what the club could afford your position stands up quite well.

As Harry has stated time and time and time again - the chairmen and owners at his clubs negotiated salaries with the agents and players, he didn’t know how much they were earning and he didn’t care - Daniel Levy for one corroborated this - so your comment is irrelevant...it always amazes me that people think the managers/head coaches are responsible for the players’ salaries - it’s got nothing to do with them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Hampshire Red said:

Amongst a wide group of Hampshire based football fans there has been a lot of discussion about which club has been the very, very worst to have supported over the last decade. Ignoring some very biased views about Pompey, the two clubs that always battle it for WORST CLUB are Coventry and Bristol Rovers. Some might argue the recent demise of Lancs clubs, Blackpool, Bolton, Bury but i am happy to go with Coventry (big ground, Top Flight club for ever, solid support - all now gone to rats.. and the gas

Now Cov are top of the third tier is it a shoe -in that being a blue bristolian is the very worst thing in current league football (2013-14 was brilliant for most on here)

I cant think of any club where the current owners have done less for their fans, ground, etc.

Over to you. We are complaining in some parts about not being able to seal 6th place, especially as we have been above that for quite a bit of this season. Am i right in saying gas have NEVER been above 6th in this 2nd tier of football - in their entire history?

Slightly longer than a decade but it's Wimbledon for me. First they lose their ground/club in south west London then they see a plastic club formed some 60  miles away but rather than accept their club had gone for good a new one was formed and they at to start 9 tiers below the football league which is simply amazing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Notts County supporters have had a roller coaster ride over the last few years.  In 2009 (slightly more than a decade ago) a Middle Eastern consortium started take over proceedings. There was talk of multi million pound backing with links to the Qatari royal family (sounds like Bristol Rovers). Sven-Göran Eriksson was appointed manager and the only way was up. The club is now in 10th place in the National League 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Not sure that’s true Dave - he was only at Brum from mid April 2017 to mid Sept 2017 - so effectively about 2 months across 2 football seasons ... 

That was long enough to plunge them into ffp trouble.  Read the EFL paper on their points deduction, but here’s a good link re transfers :

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/birmingham-city/transfers/verein/337/plus/0?saison_id=2017&pos=&detailpos=&w_s=

Those loans and wages ???

From Guardian:

 

In January Birmingham posted a £37.5m loss in the 12 months to the end of June 2018, largely a result of their wage bill rising from £22m to almost £38m after an extensive, board-approved recruitment drive in the summer of 2017 when Redknapp signed nine players and acquired a further five on loan for a total cost of £23.75m.

In January 2017 Zola had introduced four players for £7.45m and the commission heard how wages had risen from 120% of turnover in 2016-17 to 195% of turnover in 2017-18. Over the same period net debt increased from £31.7m to £71.1m.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

That was long enough to plunge them into ffp trouble.  Read the EFL paper on their points deduction, but here’s a good link re transfers :

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/birmingham-city/transfers/verein/337/plus/0?saison_id=2017&pos=&detailpos=&w_s=

Those loans and wages ???

From Guardian:

 

In January Birmingham posted a £37.5m loss in the 12 months to the end of June 2018, largely a result of their wage bill rising from £22m to almost £38m after an extensive, board-approved recruitment drive in the summer of 2017 when Redknapp signed nine players and acquired a further five on loan for a total cost of £23.75m.

In January 2017 Zola had introduced four players for £7.45m and the commission heard how wages had risen from 120% of turnover in 2016-17 to 195% of turnover in 2017-18. Over the same period net debt increased from £31.7m to £71.1m.

Thanks for the extensive research Dave, but do you think Redknapp was solely responsible for every single transfer fee and every single player’s salary etc?! As I stated above, Redknapp has stated over and over and over that he wasn’t involved in players’ transfer fees and salaries negotiations - that was down to the clubs’ owners and chairmen ... do you think LJ is solely responsible for every transfer fee in and out of Bristol City and every City player’s salary? Or do you think Mark Ashton and Jon Lansdown and Steve Lansdown may have some input? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Thanks for the extensive research Dave, but do you think Redknapp was solely responsible for every single transfer fee and every single player’s salary etc?! As I stated above, Redknapp has stated over and over and over that he wasn’t involved in players’ transfer fees and salaries negotiations - that was down to the clubs’ owners and chairmen ... do you think LJ is solely responsible for every transfer fee in and out of Bristol City and every City player’s salary? Or do you think Mark Ashton and Jon Lansdown and Steve Lansdown may have some input? 

So by your argument:

and before anyone jumps on the tiresome ‘Redknapp bankrupt them’ bandwagon - he brought more money into Pompey when selling players than he spent on buying players - so that tired argument is still bollox, and he did the same at all of his other clubs ... brought more money in than he spent”

your own argument is bollox?

You can’t give him credit in one sentence and absolve him in the next for the same thing!!  Come on.  If you want to give him credit for Portsmouth, criticise him for Brum.

Do I think Redknapp or LJ get involved in the “financial element” of every deal?  No.  But I bet they badger the CEO / owner / whoever for more players!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

. do you think LJ is solely responsible for every transfer fee in and out of Bristol City and every City player’s salary? Or do you think Mark Ashton and Jon Lansdown and Steve Lansdown may have some input? 

Isn't LJ solely responsible for everything? ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

So by your argument:

and before anyone jumps on the tiresome ‘Redknapp bankrupt them’ bandwagon - he brought more money into Pompey when selling players than he spent on buying players - so that tired argument is still bollox, and he did the same at all of his other clubs ... brought more money in than he spent”

your own argument is bollox?

You can’t give him credit in one sentence and absolve him in the next for the same thing!!  Come on.  If you want to give him credit for Portsmouth, criticise him for Brum.

Do I think Redknapp or LJ get involved in the “financial element” of every deal?  No.  But I bet they badger the CEO / owner / whoever for more players!

I gave him credit for all his clubs - the ‘popular view’ is that Redknapp moved around English football leaving all his clubs in dire financial straits - the facts show that during his tenure at all his clubs, they received more in transfer fees than they paid out - Redknapp was not responsible for the players’ salaries, that has been made clear, and even if he wasn’t responsible for any transfer fees, it’s also clear he did not leave any club in financial ruin ... and he was at Brum for just two months, if you think he can ruin a club in that incredibly small time frame, then fill yer boots ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

I gave him credit for all his clubs - the ‘popular view’ is that Redknapp moved around English football leaving all his clubs in dire financial straits - the facts show that during his tenure at all his clubs, they received more in transfer fees than they paid out - Redknapp was not responsible for the players’ salaries, that has been made clear, and even if he wasn’t responsible for any transfer fees, it’s also clear he did not leave any club in financial ruin ... and he was at Brum for just two months, if you think he can ruin a club in that incredibly small time frame, then fill yer boots ...

But the facts show Brum did pay out significantly more than they received in the one summer window he was in charge, so your first bit is completely wrong.  That “overspend” contributed to them breaking FFP.

Birmingham not in financial ruin, but have significant debts.  I’ve not mentioned financial ruin....purely “he” / “they” / whatever, spent more than they received in the one window he was in charge.  That is 100% undeniable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Don’t think you can look past Pompey (even though you did!) I know you said ‘decade’ but 12 years ago they won the FA Cup and then drew with AC Milan and narrowly lost to Wolfsburg in European competition and 10 years ago they were in the premier league and were also in the FA Cup final again - losing to Chelsea.... their demise has been immense - and before anyone jumps on the tiresome ‘Redknapp bankrupt them’ bandwagon - he brought more money into Pompey when selling players than he spent on buying players - so that tired argument is still bollox, and he did the same at all of his other clubs ... brought more money in than he spent ...

Pompey  have some trophies and top flight football better to be a ‘ has been ‘ than a ‘ never was ‘ . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/03/2020 at 22:28, BS4 on Tour... said:

As Harry has stated time and time and time again - the chairmen and owners at his clubs negotiated salaries with the agents and players, he didn’t know how much they were earning and he didn’t care - Daniel Levy for one corroborated this - so your comment is irrelevant...it always amazes me that people think the managers/head coaches are responsible for the players’ salaries - it’s got nothing to do with them...

I kind of agree with you in terms of the financial buck stops with the owner but I don't think it's irrelevant because I belive its greyer than the way you are saying. The fact that you believe everything the owner of the millionaire dog says is interesting - there are questions like if he didn't care about the wages then how was he a competent manager of the club? Surely cost is part of managing in any other profession. 

You seem extremely "pro Harry" (and I am as well) but there is a history of clubs financially struggling as soon as he moves on, is it just a coincidence? Do you think there is anything negative about him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me redknapp has to be partially responsible for the way he left clubs. He had a squad full of multi million pound internationals, and a stadium of about 20000 at Portsmouth. The sums clearly werent going to add up, just like at Bournemouth up the road, but at least howe is progressive and isn’t encouraging the things that redknapp did. 
 

if harry says he didnt know the wages they were on then he’s negligent, the continued sustainability of the club is far more important than trying to sign niko krancjar again. And im not suggesting lj is innocent in that either,,,, the amount of players signed who have barely played but have been on fantastic contracts is rediculous. If it was me i would be asking for an explanation of how he intends to use some of the existing squad members before sanctioning any further signings, 2 if not 3 of this windows signings have made very little impression yet more wages are going in their pockets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pezo said:

I kind of agree with you in terms of the financial buck stops with the owner but I don't think it's irrelevant because I belive its greyer than the way you are saying. The fact that you believe everything the owner of the millionaire dog says is interesting - there are questions like if he didn't care about the wages then how was he a competent manager of the club? Surely cost is part of managing in any other profession. 

You seem extremely "pro Harry" (and I am as well) but there is a history of clubs financially struggling as soon as he moves on, is it just a coincidence? Do you think there is anything negative about him?

Daniel Levy confirmed that Harry had no involvement in the players’ salaries and bonuses when he was Spurs manager so it wasn’t necessarily Harry I was believing. It was also all in Harry’s autobiography and those are scrutinised by a team of lawyers before they are allowed to go to print these days - so no real reason to disbelieve the contents. 

Have you details of the ‘history of clubs financially struggling as soon as he moves on’ ? Not saying you are incorrect but it would be good to see your evidence of this statement. There must be some very weak owners and CEO’s out there if Harry has been allowed to ruin all the clubs he managed while they just stand aside and let him do what he wants ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2001 to 2017 was poor - then we appointed Mark Robins

2017 we were as good as relegated when he arrived, but still won the Checkatrade

2018 Promotion from League 2

2019 Stability in league 1

2020 Running away with League 1

 

he had a spell as manager a few years back also, and each time his win stats have been amazing

Our problem is we have a council who dont want the football team in town, but the support is the strength driving this club forwards.  Whilst our home crowds are poor (due to playing in Birmingham) our away crowds would put us in the top 6 in the championship - and would be higher but we sell out our allocations most weeks at small grounds

Just like Bristol, a team like us - a little bit of success is celebrated so much more than the premier league prima donnas, who moan at finishing 5th in the premier league

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Daniel Levy confirmed that Harry had no involvement in the players’ salaries and bonuses when he was Spurs manager so it wasn’t necessarily Harry I was believing. It was also all in Harry’s autobiography and those are scrutinised by a team of lawyers before they are allowed to go to print these days - so no real reason to disbelieve the contents. 

Have you details of the ‘history of clubs financially struggling as soon as he moves on’ ? Not saying you are incorrect but it would be good to see your evidence of this statement. There must be some very weak owners and CEO’s out there if Harry has been allowed to ruin all the clubs he managed while they just stand aside and let him do what he wants ...

nearly all of them, here are the most notable:

1983–1992 AFC Bournemouth

Redknapp remained at the club for two more seasons, both of which ended with the club falling three points short of the play-offs. However, mounting financial pressures caused him to resign his position at the end of the 1991–92 season, and he subsequently rejoined former club West Ham United as a coach. He was replaced by Tony Pulis, who built a much cheaper squad that could only manage two consecutive 17th-place finishes before Pulis walked out of the club, blaming financial pressures.[citation needed]

1994–2001 West Ham United

Things began to falter for Redknapp with the sale for £18 million to Leeds of Rio Ferdinand in November 2000. Redknapp used the transfer money poorly with purchases such as Ragnvald Soma, who cost £800,000 and played only seven league games, Camara, and Song. Redknapp felt he needed more funds with which to deal in the transfer market.[54] Chairman Brown lost patience with Redknapp due to his demands for further transfer funds. In June 2001, called to a meeting with Brown expecting to discuss contracts, he was fired.

2004–2005 Southampton

In the 2007–08 season, George Burley revealed that players such as Bale and Kenwyne Jones had to be sold to stop the club going into administration and that failing to achieve promotion had put the club in serious financial difficulty.

2005–2008 Portsmouth

During the 2009–10 season, it had become apparent to the club's new owner Balram Chainrai that Portsmouth were approximately £135 million in debt[53] so to protect the club from liquidation, Chainrai placed the club into administration on 26 February 2010

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pezo said:

nearly all of them, here are the most notable:

1983–1992 AFC Bournemouth

Redknapp remained at the club for two more seasons, both of which ended with the club falling three points short of the play-offs. However, mounting financial pressures caused him to resign his position at the end of the 1991–92 season, and he subsequently rejoined former club West Ham United as a coach. He was replaced by Tony Pulis, who built a much cheaper squad that could only manage two consecutive 17th-place finishes before Pulis walked out of the club, blaming financial pressures.[citation needed]

1994–2001 West Ham United

Things began to falter for Redknapp with the sale for £18 million to Leeds of Rio Ferdinand in November 2000. Redknapp used the transfer money poorly with purchases such as Ragnvald Soma, who cost £800,000 and played only seven league games, Camara, and Song. Redknapp felt he needed more funds with which to deal in the transfer market.[54] Chairman Brown lost patience with Redknapp due to his demands for further transfer funds. In June 2001, called to a meeting with Brown expecting to discuss contracts, he was fired.

2004–2005 Southampton

In the 2007–08 season, George Burley revealed that players such as Bale and Kenwyne Jones had to be sold to stop the club going into administration and that failing to achieve promotion had put the club in serious financial difficulty.

2005–2008 Portsmouth

During the 2009–10 season, it had become apparent to the club's new owner Balram Chainrai that Portsmouth were approximately £135 million in debt[53] so to protect the club from liquidation, Chainrai placed the club into administration on 26 February 2010

Bournemouth - nowhere have you shown their ‘financial pressures’ were down to Redknapp

West Ham - they sold Ferdinand for £18 million and one of the examples you’ve used as a signing in the aftermath was Soma who cost the Hammers £800,000 - woeful financial mismanagement?! ?

Saints - nowhere have you shown that financial pressures were down to Redknapp. You’ve also failed to mention that Redknapp wasn’t sacked by Saints, he left when they appointed a non-football man as DoF

You’ve highlighted a time period of 2005-2008 at Pompey yet you then talk about the 2009/2010 season - when Redknapp was at Spurs.

I say again, were ALL the club owners and CEOs etc etc at ALL his clubs so weak that they simply stood aside and let him do whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted regarding the dosh? Of course not ...

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got to be Darwin F C for me. An early pioneer of professional football, a football league member for 8 seasons from 1891 even reaching the semi final of the FA Cup in the 1890-1 season before even being in the league. Tried re applying a few times but never got back in. 

Darwin's James Love and Fergus Suter were supposedly the first professional players of the game. Darwin's William Brindle also played for England but he left the Lancashire town where he was born to seek his paper mill fortune in Pennsylvania. Darwin went downhill not long after. Darwin today could have been a Bolton or a Blackburn. So the poor, long suffering fellows from Darwin get my vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all of his success, Redknapp doesn't appear to be in demand these days. Maybe he's had enough of the daily management pressures or maybe owners/CEOs are wary of his approach including signing players.

If he was that good for Portsmouth and Spurs, why weren't the big clubs of the day queueing up for his services?

It's categorically true that he set Birmingham on a path to near meltdown in just a few months. Even with just a casual eye on other Championship teams, it was obvious that he was signing players for big money on big wages.

Does anyone believe that this only happened at Birmingham?

How many fans of his ex-clubs hold him in high regard?

He left a trail of chaos behind him at nearly every club and I'm really pleased he didn't get a chance to interview with us. We're not far from that multi-million pound house he owns in Sandbanks so had the stars aligned, it could have happened.

Happy to give credit to anyone who's earned it but this bloke is just a chancer with expensive tastes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...