Coventry

[Pezo]

On 05/03/2020 at 20:12, 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 ...

 

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

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 ...

I have answered your question which was "Have you details of the ‘history of clubs financially struggling as soon as he moves on’ ?".

If you want to change the question to "have you details of the ‘financial pressures’ specifically being down to Redknapp?" then no I don't have that evidence but you have admit there is a pattern? To have the evidence you now want I would have to have documented Harry's life for about 15 years. 

On the £18m\£800k (which I didn't disagree with) I go back to my original point - as long as the players he signed aren't on unsustainable wages and massive signing on fees then it's fine(but they were).