Howaythelads

I assume you're talking about defenders here. Do you really think that signing new defenders to play in a game less than a week away alongside players they have never even trained with before will significantly improve the defense for that game? Is this the same Tottenham who have been able to play their first choice defense for the vast majority of the season and have conceeded the same number of goals as our makeshift one? Its not unknown for professionals who are the top of their game (EPL standard) to be able to adapt quickly in certain situations. I'm sure an experienced defender will be able to put in an astute performance even though he doesn't know his team mates, it happens at NT level all the time, players are in and out of the squad and I'm sure one of these professional athletes with 10 years in the game could easily out perform a 17-19 year old who's played 2-3 games with the senior team, and probably only had 3-4 weeks training with the 1st team under their belt anyway. But on your point, when we do get new defenders in we must wait even longer for them to settle, so end of Feb or March should do it. :roll: I'm sure the current lot will hold out till then. Which other Tottenham do you know of? Well I know he's not a defender, I'm not sure he's even a footballer tbh, but your theory of an experienced player being able to perform this quickly didn't apply to Luque, for example. Two games then injured for some several months will do that tbh, then again, am not talking about buying foreign players either. But lets not turn this in to another Luque thread, i'd rather concede the point than talk about him all day. Why would it turn into a Luque thread unless his rent-boys come screaming to his defence like a load of girls? Fact is he's an experienced player who certainly hasn't been able to do a thing even after all this time, let alone after a couple of days. I'd rather they took their time and bring in the right players. This won't be easy if we're going for the right quality. Getting the right player can take time, and it can take a few days. Just because the club is waiting or hasn't signed anyone doesn't mean the player that comes in is going to be of any better quality than one signed now. It could quite possibly be the other way round as when desperation kicks in, even crap players values start to rise come the window closing. As someone pointed out last week, the really good players may well just be biding their time to see what other offers come along. It's also probable that a club will not want to let a good player go.

By the way, you don't have to link back to something you said earlier, I read it the first time but it isn't an answer to the question. By the way, you don't have to link back to something you said earlier, I read it the first time but it isn't an answer to the question. By the way, you don't have to link back to something you said earlier, I read it the first time but it isn't an answer to the question. By the way, you don't have to link back to something you said earlier, I read it the first time but it isn't an answer to the question. By the way, you don't have to link back to something you said earlier, I read it the first time but it isn't an answer to the question.

I assume you're talking about defenders here. Do you really think that signing new defenders to play in a game less than a week away alongside players they have never even trained with before will significantly improve the defense for that game? Is this the same Tottenham who have been able to play their first choice defense for the vast majority of the season and have conceeded the same number of goals as our makeshift one? Its not unknown for professionals who are the top of their game (EPL standard) to be able to adapt quickly in certain situations. I'm sure an experienced defender will be able to put in an astute performance even though he doesn't know his team mates, it happens at NT level all the time, players are in and out of the squad and I'm sure one of these professional athletes with 10 years in the game could easily out perform a 17-19 year old who's played 2-3 games with the senior team, and probably only had 3-4 weeks training with the 1st team under their belt anyway. But on your point, when we do get new defenders in we must wait even longer for them to settle, so end of Feb or March should do it. :roll: I'm sure the current lot will hold out till then. Which other Tottenham do you know of? Well I know he's not a defender, I'm not sure he's even a footballer tbh, but your theory of an experienced player being able to perform this quickly didn't apply to Luque, for example. Two games then injured for some several months will do that tbh, then again, am not talking about buying foreign players either. But lets not turn this in to another Luque thread, i'd rather concede the point than talk about him all day. Why would it turn into a Luque thread unless his rent-boys come screaming to his defence like a load of girls? Fact is he's an experienced player who certainly hasn't been able to do a thing even after all this time, let alone after a couple of days. I'd rather they took their time and bring in the right players. This won't be easy if we're going for the right quality.

Why are you asking me what criteria should be used? As I've already pointed out.... I'm NOT a man paid millions to make these decisions so therefore Shepherd should know what criteria should be used to appoint a successful manager. Afterall, the Liverpool board can do it, and Shepherd is higher paid so he should know what criteria to use. Why should I be able to identify the criteria? I'm not paid millions? Why should Shepherd be able to identify the criteria? Because he's paid millions to do so. How many times must I say this before it sinks in. I'll explain that when you explain where I've indicated such. Boring. So we shouldn't want a new board in case they're also incompetent at managerial appointments? Maybe we shouldn't have hated Souness "because the new manager might be shit too"? Unlikely when you consider the figures that would have to be invested for a takeover, if the new board didn't back their managers it would be a disasterous business decision as their investment would fail, they'd lose millions and millions. Would somebody clever enough to be able to raise £100m+ to buy the club be stupid enough not to invest after a takeover? I doubt it. You're being critical of managerial appointments by the Board by applying hindsight. We could all do that. I want you to tell everybody the right way to do it, a way to select a manager that will guarantee success. By the way, you don't have to link back to something you said earlier, I read it the first time but it isn't an answer to the question. I'm still waiting for you to tell me how it's guaranteed a replacement Board will be any better at selecting a manager than the current Board has been. Perhaps that will become clear when you state what the criteria is. The stuff you've posted so far seems to be a long-winded way of saying, "select the right man". bluelaugh.gif Good example there using Liverpool, by the way. This was a Board that also appointed Souness, a Board that then put in place a system of 2 people acting as joint managers. Great work that. Can't imagine what the reaction would be on here if our Board appointed a double act as "manager".

But...but....but no one actually said that! :jesus: HTL claiming people said something they didn't SHOCKER! Pots....kettles..... Nice to see you admitting it at least, guess it would be too much to expect you not to say EXCATLY the same thing again in some other post. I admitted it days ago, it's just as per normal you didn't understand it.

I assume you're talking about defenders here. Do you really think that signing new defenders to play in a game less than a week away alongside players they have never even trained with before will significantly improve the defense for that game? Is this the same Tottenham who have been able to play their first choice defense for the vast majority of the season and have conceeded the same number of goals as our makeshift one? Its not unknown for professionals who are the top of their game (EPL standard) to be able to adapt quickly in certain situations. I'm sure an experienced defender will be able to put in an astute performance even though he doesn't know his team mates, it happens at NT level all the time, players are in and out of the squad and I'm sure one of these professional athletes with 10 years in the game could easily out perform a 17-19 year old who's played 2-3 games with the senior team, and probably only had 3-4 weeks training with the 1st team under their belt anyway. But on your point, when we do get new defenders in we must wait even longer for them to settle, so end of Feb or March should do it. :roll: I'm sure the current lot will hold out till then. Which other Tottenham do you know of? Well I know he's not a defender, I'm not sure he's even a footballer tbh, but your theory of an experienced player being able to perform this quickly didn't apply to Luque, for example.

Aye mate, and who will be responsible for that failure should it happen? Abramovich for backing Mourinho or Mourinho for not getting it right? Or is it just one of those things where there are so few trophies and no matter what happens you always need a bit of luck? Mourinho has already won a trophy. If he had appointed Mourinho and he didn't win anything before f***ing up, it'd be Abramovich's fault. Boring as F***, tbh. I expected better from you, even though we don't agree I know you're not stupid. Is that your reply? Abramovich has appointed a manager that has won him trophies. This confirms that Roman has appointed a manager capable of winning him trophies therefore he has done his job correctly. If it goes pearshaped from there it's Abramovich's job to either keep faith with him or replace him with a manager to take the club forward. If Abramovich decided to keep faith and it didn't work out, then it would be his fault. If he decided enough was enough and appointed Souness and Chelsea won nothing and finished 14th, it'd surely be his own fault? On what evidence did he make that appointment? He probably assessed his football club and assessed Mourinho's personality and character and decided that the two were compatible. Competence! Are we going to compare this to appointing Dalgleish, the defensive style manager, to manage the most attacking team in English football? What do you know about the Liverpool team managed by Dalglish? Or are you basing everything on his time at Blackburn? I see him as a very experienced and successful manager of 2 football clubs, success achieved under entirely different circumstances that indicated AT THE TIME that he could be a very good choice for us. Apart from the liar, I don't know anybody who thought this was a crap appointment at the time. So your defence of Shepherd is that he once made an appointment that people thought would be good but wasn't? So you don't think a manager who had won premiership titles with 2 clubs, 2 FA Cups and 3 manager of the year awards is qualified enough :lol: Not the right man for the job, as he proved to be a FACT. Right? so what would your criteria be - apart from hindsight At that time it would have been not to appoint a manager with a preferred defensive style to manage the, at the time, most attacking team in english football. I've already said that. I know you find it outrageous that anybody feels that Dalglish wasn't the man for the job, but he proved he wasn't, therefore I can't understand that you seem to still think he was the ideal appointment. Also, if Dalglish was so awesome, why didn't he win anything for us like he was able to at the other clubs he managed? The manager had a proven track record, so there must have been something else holding us back. What was it? Of course, we didn't have a devine right to trophies because he was the manager, so don't throw that old line in, but if success isn't achieved there's a reason for it somewhere along the line, and as you're so adamant that Dalglish was the man, where does the blame like for our failures in that period? The idea was that, at the time, Keegans team needed "tactical astuteness" - not that I believe that sort of crap myself because I think teams should play to their strengths and that is "tactical astuteness" - but the ability to defend a lead etc etc was generally presumed to be the reason we didn't win the title and so a person who had done that and had the track record to back it up was the ideal replacement. We weren't to know that he was going to rip the team apart. Even then, if he had had time, who knows what would have happened. He also wasn't "my man", my man was Keegan. But the club had to move on. As you admit we don;t have a divine right to trophies, accept he came close. He was 90 minutes from winning the FA Cup. We have only done that 3 times since the 1950's. 90 minutes from being a legend. :winking: Would you turn down Wenger, Mourhino etc today, if so why and on what basis, would you not think their track record was relevant ? No I wouldn't turn down Wenger or Mourinho. Then again I'm not a premiership level chairman but if I was, I'd expect myself to be educated enough not to just chase any manager with the best trophy record. Why do you think Man Utd wanted O Neill when it looked like Fergie was going to retire? There are certainly bigger names that have won more trophies around. They could have even chased old Kenny D themselves, he certainly has a better 'track record'. I'll tell you why they wanted O Neill. Because if you're a capable premiership level chairman you're expected to make appointments based on character and attempt to judge their compatibility with a club. It's like on the pitch, look at Real Madrid in recent years. You can have the best footballers in the world, but if you stick them on the pitch it means nothing unless they gel. The same applies when appointing a manager to a football club. A good manager builds a team that gels on the pitch. A good chairman appoints a manager that gels with the club and the club's character. Are you learning yet? so you think that a manager who had won all the honours he won at a big city club like Liverpool, with fanatical fans just like us, didn't have the right character to repeat that success at Newcastle ? What about Benitez, does a dour character like him have the "right character" or do you think he's an extrovert like Shankly was ? Dalglish was a players manager in the dressing room and on the training ground, just like Keegan was, he had coped with pressure and the demands of a club always in the spotlight. You are simply applying hindsight. With hindsight he could have actually been given more time ........ and if he had won one single huge game he would have had more time. Why are you asking me questions about Dalglish's credentials for the job? I'm not running a premiership football team and I'm not pretending that I'm any more capable than Shepherd is? It's ok for me and you to discuss Dalglish and his record but can you sympathise with Shepherd for getting it wrong just because you or me thought it was a good appointment? He's a premiership level chairman, he should be more qualified than you or I at appointing managers, but the way you break it down is like "well if me and you thought it was a good appointment then how can we critisise Shepherd". Because Shepherd is paid millions to make these decisions so should therefore be better than yourself and I when it comes to identifying appropriate managers. Is it sinking in yet? why should he know better than me just because he had the money to buy himself a position on the board of the football club ? To date, the board have made on bad appointment that I can't figure out why they did it. Take note, THE BOARD. is it sinking in yet ? And, as we have been 5th best in our field over the course of a decade, I don't think its too bad. Is it sinking in yet ? Because if he didn't know better than you then surely he'd have the sense to hire a director of football, in order to protect his investment better? He's made several poor appointments, not one, because as I explained earlier none of the appointments paid off with a trophy. We should expect to have won a trophy, as expectations are set by the amount of money spent. We established this by pointing out that Man Utd/Chelsea both consider 2nd place failure. Therefore, as the next highest spending club, 5th should be considered failure. Right? But wait, we haven't been 5th since Bobby left. So we're currently even lower than our under achieving average. Appointing a manager with a good history with a good record doesn't make it a good appointment. A good appointment is only a good appointment when it pays off. Has any of the appointments Shepherd has made paid off, when you consider the high expectations (which relate to the money spent)? NE5? No response? Appointing a manager with a good history with a good record doesn't make it a good appointment. A good appointment is only a good appointment when it pays off. So explain the criteria for appointing a manager that will definitely pay off. You can also explain why it is guaranteed a replacement for the current Board will appoint this manager who will pay off. While you're at it you can also explain what happens if any new Board does appoint the right manager but that manager isn't backed by the new Board to build his team.

Glad you agree with me as well, Thompers. Good one.

Maybe not his natural position but he's hardly new to it, having played there apparently numerous times before he signed for us. That's not backing up Carr btw. Solano is just a far superior footballer to Carr and is in fact a very, very highly skilled footballer blessed with a quality football brain too. I think he played wingback for Peru - don't know if he played at the back much for Boca when he was there. Whatever the case he seems to look more the part than Carr has recently. Oh aye. As far as I'm concerned Solano is now our first choice RB.

I think organising the back four and controlling the box are equally as important as shot stopping, tbh.

So do I. It just has to be.

How the F*** does that automatically make him one of the best in the league now. Just speaks volumes for how shit our keepers have been. Sima Given is a good keeper with a couple of weaknesses. These are weakness I don't like to ignore, but not saving many penalties isn't something I hold against him. Organising the back four and controlling the 18 yard area are weaknesses that have always bothered me. However, it wouldn't be easy to replace him with someone better imo. I'd say he's the best keeper we've had in my lifetime, can't think of anyone better.

Bullshit How to argue your point, backing up your opinion....... Can't kick, can't command his box, absolutely F***ING WOEFUL at penalties and in general no presence whatsoever. He's just a shot-stopper, that's it. I've made my feelings on Given heard pretty often. So have I. I don't disagree with you too much, his command of the 18 yard box and organising of the back 4 has never been brilliant.

Maybe not his natural position but he's hardly new to it, having played there apparently numerous times before he signed for us. That's not backing up Carr btw. Solano is just a far superior footballer to Carr and is in fact a very, very highly skilled footballer blessed with a quality football brain too.

But...but....but no one actually said that! :jesus: HTL claiming people said something they didn't SHOCKER! Pots....kettles.....

Bullshit How to argue your point, backing up your opinion.......

But..but..but...Roeder said he rated him, so we were definitely in public negotiations to sign him. Apparently.

and all the great boards have spent millions in the last 3 days :lol: As they all spend more than we do Brilliant. None of them have half their team injured. We need bodies, we've had injuries since the summer, we've had them piling on top of each other for about the last two months, it hasn't got any better, its actually getting worse. We should of had players signed before the window opened, you can actually do that you know, its not illegal to plan ahead, its not that difficult to understand. Well its taken Shay Given 3 days before he's felt the need to say something as he knows the extent of the injuries we have, and he also knows what kind of c*** is in charge of the club. Amazing stuff.

He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... I suggest you start thinking of more than one or two games and a couple of incidents. Think Big Picture. What, like last season where Parker was our best outfield player by a country mile? OMG. Graft and sweat. That's all he was last season too. Not much point in me posting about Parker anymore. Some of us can see the reality and others can't. I expect a load of u-turns when he eventually leaves, as we saw when Jenas left. Cheers

Jenas for £9m as well. And a crocked Woodgate. But keep it quiet.........

Out of interest, how old do you think Butt is?

Don't rate Harper, tbh.

He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... I suggest you start thinking of more than one or two games and a couple of incidents. Think Big Picture.

You can't win if you don't score, and it's better to win 1 game and lose 2 than draw 2 games and lose only 1. Plus we're a long way off needing a good defence to win the league! The defence we have may not be great but it is easily good enough for a European place finish. Even this season where the defence has been absolutely decimated by injury, the reason we're in the lowly position we are now is because at the start of the season we weren't even looking like scoring in some games, much more than because of defensive frailties. Before December we only scored more than 1 goal in the league twice in 14 games. A number of our injured defenders are close to regaining fitness, but we only have 2 fit forwards for the next 3 months minimum (I'm not counting Luque, and Dyer is no more a forward than Nicky Butt is a central defender). Our priority has to be to get at least 1 more forward in (if only to give us an option on the bench to change a game). Personally I don't mind if it's only a loan, but we need someone. PS Where's the "We can't afford to spend anything, the club's hemorrhaging money, we're doomed" option for Macbeth and everyone who usually agrees with him? All of it. I've been wondering about Macbeth and those who back him up as well. He (and his puppet mainly) should have been on here shooting people down for wanting the club to spend any money at all, given the debt the club is in and how poorly it's being run. No doubt they're waiting to see which way it falls so they can adjust their criticism of the club accordingly. :winking: