WTFiGO!?! Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 13 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said: Nothing to do with Harry - he generated huge profits for Pompey, took them into the Premier League, kept them up and won the FA Cup for them.....sold players for lots more than they were signed for....did a great job.... They went into administration and had a transfer embargo put on them shortly after he left. Staff weren't paid. They subsequently got relegated to the bottom flight and have been bought out by supports. Lots of players were hastily sold in a desperate attempt to save the club. Whatever transfer fees were or weren't made profits on (there are conflicting accounts in this thread) there has not been any mention of players' salaries or whatever else it was that sent the club under. No doubt the defence will be that it wasn't HR who wrote the cheques. He did however have a professional duty to safeguard the long term future of the club and that was neglected. The bloke divides opinion to this day between Pompey supporters. He received the Freedom of the City to a mixed reception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 56 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said: Think you've got that the wrong way round - he spent £68m and sold players for over £100m in his second spell at Pompey... His transfer dealings are another myth with lots suggesting he ruins clubs and leaves them drained financially...have a look at these stats: As Bournemouth boss he bought players for £1.12m and sold players for £1.77m As West Ham boss he bought players for £52m and sold players for £77m As Pompey boss first time around he bought players for £7.65m and sold players for £5.4m As Southampton boss he bought players for £2.5m and sold players for £16m As Pompey boss second time around he bought players for £68m and sold players for £100m As Spurs boss he bought players for £227m and sold players for £230m I will bow to your knowledge then. Transfer market suggests differently for his second stint at Portsmouth, although because he didn't see out full seasons in his first & last season, some deals could be attributed to other managers. Going into administration after making £32 million on players would seem rather questionable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTone Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 1 hour ago, BS4 on Tour... said: Think you've got that the wrong way round - he spent £68m and sold players for over £100m in his second spell at Pompey... His transfer dealings are another myth with lots suggesting he ruins clubs and leaves them drained financially...have a look at these stats: As Bournemouth boss he bought players for £1.12m and sold players for £1.77m As West Ham boss he bought players for £52m and sold players for £77m As Pompey boss first time around he bought players for £7.65m and sold players for £5.4m As Southampton boss he bought players for £2.5m and sold players for £16m As Pompey boss second time around he bought players for £68m and sold players for £100m As Spurs boss he bought players for £227m and sold players for £230m The crooked despot !!! Harry Out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTone Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 20 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said: Going into administration after making £32 million on players would seem rather questionable. A question to be posed to the clubs owners I would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinmans Love Child Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 Why do people blame Redknapp for spending a clubs money? It's the clubs money not Redknapps, if the club couldn't afford to buy somebody then they should have closed the cheque book, that's not Redknapps problem! If a kid asked his mum for pocket money, and she gives him £10 a week, then a few months later the bailiffs come knocking, you can't blame the kid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 4 minutes ago, Tinmans Love Child said: Why do people blame Redknapp for spending a clubs money? It's the clubs money not Redknapps, if the club couldn't afford to buy somebody then they should have closed the cheque book, that's not Redknapps problem! If a kid asked his mum for pocket money, and she gives him £10 a week, then a few months later the bailiffs come knocking, you can't blame the kid! There are ways of spending money though. I'd far rather have LJ, investing SL's money and developing young talent, than Redknapp, splashing big money on big name players, on huge contracts and then jumping ship as soon as the next better offer comes along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leveller Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 I see from Points West that Yeovil have - not surprisingly - taken up the offer of free help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 What ****** planet is he on?? ******* RETIRE!!!! tfj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 7 hours ago, Bar BS3 said: I will bow to your knowledge then. Transfer market suggests differently for his second stint at Portsmouth, although because he didn't see out full seasons in his first & last season, some deals could be attributed to other managers. Going into administration after making £32 million on players would seem rather questionable. No worries mate, in his second spell at Pompey Harry actually managed to sell our very own Gary O'Neil for £5m...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leveller Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 40 minutes ago, Taxi for Johnson said: What ****** planet is he on?? ******* RETIRE!!!! tfj Uber for Redknapp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 9 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said: Think you've got that the wrong way round - he spent £68m and sold players for over £100m in his second spell at Pompey... His transfer dealings are another myth with lots suggesting he ruins clubs and leaves them drained financially...have a look at these stats: As Bournemouth boss he bought players for £1.12m and sold players for £1.77m As West Ham boss he bought players for £52m and sold players for £77m As Pompey boss first time around he bought players for £7.65m and sold players for £5.4m As Southampton boss he bought players for £2.5m and sold players for £16m As Pompey boss second time around he bought players for £68m and sold players for £100m As Spurs boss he bought players for £227m and sold players for £230m @nickolas @ScottishRed @pongo88 - you all 'liked' triumphed in Bar BS3's erroneous post when he incorrectly stated that Harry spent £45m more than he recouped in his second spell at Pompey...have a look at the post above....just wondering why you chose to instantly knock an experienced, successful English manager with no knowledge of the facts?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bard Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 10 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said: Think you've got that the wrong way round - he spent £68m and sold players for over £100m in his second spell at Pompey... His transfer dealings are another myth with lots suggesting he ruins clubs and leaves them drained financially...have a look at these stats: As Bournemouth boss he bought players for £1.12m and sold players for £1.77m As West Ham boss he bought players for £52m and sold players for £77m As Pompey boss first time around he bought players for £7.65m and sold players for £5.4m As Southampton boss he bought players for £2.5m and sold players for £16m As Pompey boss second time around he bought players for £68m and sold players for £100m As Spurs boss he bought players for £227m and sold players for £230m It's not about the transfer fees is it? Everytime a player is bought and sold, a number of people make money. Players get a nice contract, agents a nice fee. The clear suspicion with Redknapp is that he actively greases the wheel and that his main motivation isn't just to 'get a few new faces in'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo88 Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 1 hour ago, BS4 on Tour... said: @nickolas @ScottishRed @pongo88 - you all 'liked' triumphed in Bar BS3's erroneous post when he incorrectly stated that Harry spent £45m more than he recouped in his second spell at Pompey...have a look at the post above....just wondering why you chose to instantly knock an experienced, successful English manager with no knowledge of the facts?! Anyone who visits Monaco to open a bank account in the name of his dog and then can’t remember anything about it, and claims “ I write like a two-year-old and I can't spell" deserves a knock. The FA made some crazy decisions in recent years, but avoiding appointing Harry as England manager, when he was favourite for the job, was the right one. Redknapp is the Arthur Daley of the football world, always looking for “a nice little earner”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 3 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said: @nickolas @ScottishRed @pongo88 - you all 'liked' triumphed in Bar BS3's erroneous post when he incorrectly stated that Harry spent £45m more than he recouped in his second spell at Pompey...have a look at the post above....just wondering why you chose to instantly knock an experienced, successful English manager with no knowledge of the facts?! I may have been wrong (read wrong info) about the sums involved in his second stint, but he is certainly not someone I'd want here. He needs massive money, he's a short term plan, with contracts that he dishes out and despite not questioning that he's a nice enough bloke, there is something dodgy about him. No smoke without fire etc. The success he does bring (sometimes) is usually at a hefty price, that the clubs often can't actually manage. That IS poor ownership, yes. But it's also wreckless management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTFiGO!?! Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 22 hours ago, Tinmans Love Child said: Why do people blame Redknapp for spending a clubs money? It's the clubs money not Redknapps, if the club couldn't afford to buy somebody then they should have closed the cheque book, that's not Redknapps problem! If a kid asked his mum for pocket money, and she gives him £10 a week, then a few months later the bailiffs come knocking, you can't blame the kid! A manager has a professional duty to not bankrupt the company they are managing. This was neglected in Redknapp's case, he is not entirely responsible but is partially. It also seems that he is a highly persuasive character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinmans Love Child Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 52 minutes ago, WTFiGO!?! said: A manager has a professional duty to not bankrupt the company they are managing. This was neglected in Redknapp's case, he is not entirely responsible but is partially. It also seems that he is a highly persuasive character. No the owner of the football club has this responsibility, nobody else. If the manager wants to bring in players on fees and contracts that could potentially bankrupt the club, should things go wrong, then the owner of the club should be doing their due diligence and weighing up the risks, and saying yes or no. The owners are the custodians and long term investors, managers are very very short term. Managers will have no loyalty to football clubs or even care about the impact of finances, because they get shown zero loyalty in return when a few games are lost. If Redknapp is very persuasive and owners fall for it then that's their problem for being weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 13 hours ago, pongo88 said: Anyone who visits Monaco to open a bank account in the name of his dog and then can’t remember anything about it, and claims “ I write like a two-year-old and I can't spell" deserves a knock. The FA made some crazy decisions in recent years, but avoiding appointing Harry as England manager, when he was favourite for the job, was the right one. Redknapp is the Arthur Daley of the football world, always looking for “a nice little earner”. That story was embellished a bit....his dog's name was the password for his online account, the account wasn't opened in his dog's name. Milan Mandaric put Harry in touch with his bank manager in Monaco who handled all his business. It wasn't like Harry furtively crept over there to do something wrong. Anyway, he was found not guilty of all financial misdemeanours levelled against him so it isn't relevant anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 29 minutes ago, Tinmans Love Child said: No the owner of the football club has this responsibility, nobody else. If the manager wants to bring in players on fees and contracts that could potentially bankrupt the club, should things go wrong, then the owner of the club should be doing their due diligence and weighing up the risks, and saying yes or no. The owners are the custodians and long term investors, managers are very very short term. Managers will have no loyalty to football clubs or even care about the impact of finances, because they get shown zero loyalty in return when a few games are lost. If Redknapp is very persuasive and owners fall for it then that's their problem for being weak. Spot on...Harry has admitted that he had no idea how much his players were earning at Pompey and Spurs - all those negotiations were handled by Milan Mandaric, Peter Storrie and Daniel Levy....if they chose to pay a player an exhorbitant salary then that's up them as owners and MDs of their football clubs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 On 04/10/2017 at 06:12, Raging_Robin said: It annoys me too @BS4 on Tour.... My bosses sister is Harry Redknapp PA so we tend to get involved with Harry Redknapp a lot and sponsor his charity events. We recently sponsored an event he put on for a lad that was terminally ill. Literally spent a few evening with him and you honestly couldn't meet a nicer guy. People will just read the media and run with it. Fantastic man who does a lot in his spare time for charity. He genuinely loves the game and people tend to forget that he doesn't actually sign the cheques!!! Top bloke. No, his dog does To be honest, this squares with other accounts I've had from people who know Harry or have met him. A nice man. He's at the Glovers on a temporary basis to impart some managerial advice and look over the squad for Darren Way - and to be honest, he needs all the advice he can get. This isn't about Yeovil spending money: they haven't got any. Harry knows that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.