Martin Jol was interviewed in 2006

[Guest sicko2ndbest]

Ramos 'the gentleman' had to go, says Levy TELEGRAPH

 

Daniel Levy does not much care for the public inquests into Tottenham's latest managerial shambles but give the man his due yesterday – he faced the music at last. When Juande Ramos was appointed 12 months ago there was an empty seat where the Spurs chairman should have been; yesterday Levy uttered in person the truth that was evident in the dying days of the Spanish coach's regime: his players had lost faith in him.

As a man who chooses his words carefully, Levy evidently took no pleasure in having to fire Ramos – "an absolute gentleman" – on Saturday, but he said he could not ignore what he knew from his players about the team's dire situation. "For a club of this size to be in the position we were in until a week ago," he said, "when we weren't scoring goals and there were clearly some issues in the dressing-room, between the manager and some of the players, we could not allow this situation to go on for long.

"I think it was plain to see that some of the players weren't performing as well as you'd expect them to perform. Certain players were perhaps being more publicly vocal than you'd expect. The fact we were getting all those red cards [three in total against Stoke and Udinese] and we weren't scoring, losing games – all those things were having an impact and clearly it wasn't helping."

Levy was indignant at what he perceived as the unfair verdict that his sporting director-head coach system had completely failed, arguing instead that it has simply not been about using the right people. And he completely refused to accept that he should step down as chairman after the latest disappointments. Given that Enic, the investment company where he is one of the key figures, own 80 per cent of the club, Levy does not have to pay too much notice of mutiny in the stands.

Pragmatic and unsentimental, Levy also does not spend much time agonising over decisions he has made in the past and he has little time for criticisms made with the benefit of hindsight. He has, he said, always made what he believed were the right decisions for the club at that time. As for his own position, did he ever fear that he might be the problem? "No," Levy said. "The answer is I employ the managers, I indirectly employ the players, and when things don't go well, obviously I have to take responsibility but I also have to take responsibility for changing it around."

In his defence of the sporting director system, which was pioneered with David Pleat and Frank Arnesen and then floundered with Damien Comolli, Levy simply said that it was the people, not the system, that let him down. "I think everyone makes a big thing about this structure: we must not lose sight of the fact that we have had European football for three years under the structure. It's nothing to do with the structure, it's about the people. If we had brought in a different type of manager [to Harry Redknapp], if we had brought in a foreign coach, maybe the structure would have stayed."

It was just a case, Levy said, that Redknapp did not require a director of football. Later he suggested that it was just the job title that carried the stigma and "if you called him 'chief scout' or 'chief executive of football' you wouldn't have all the negativity that you have around it."

He denied that Comolli had hastened Martin Jol's exit by buying players – most notably Darren Bent – that the Dutch coach did not want. In fact, Levy was more cutting about the Spurs manager who achieved two fifth-place finishes than any other of the coaches, directors and managers he has sacked over the last 12 months. Evidently still hurt by the criticism of Jol's shoddy treatment, he questioned the Dutchman's integrity.

Asked whether it was appropriate for Spurs officials to be pictured speaking to Ramos in August last year in a hotel in Seville while Jol was still manager, Levy said that the Dutchman had done much the same himself. "You guys mention that, but you don't say anything about the fact about how Martin went for a job interview at Newcastle [in May 2006] while he was employed by us," Levy said. "Martin did it in a hotel in the centre of town."

He also attacked the suggestion that players had been bought in the summer of last year against Jol's wishes. "You guys write articles about [Jol] not wanting [Younes] Kaboul for instance, but I can tell you when Martin Jol went to Hamburg he wanted Kaboul. You get all these stories bouncing round, but I can assure you with every player that has been signed, the coach has approved the transfer."

Even with a new stadium in the pipeline and a new training ground in Enfield – not to mention a new manager – it is still not improbable that Levy and Enic will sell the club if they get the right offer. He would not say what price he would accept nor would he reveal why he rejected the offer made to him this summer. But he did have a word of warning for any potential new owner.

[Dave]

Would surely have been a better bet than Roeder.

[Guest sicko2ndbest]

I think Jol has a soft spot for us, and would definately be worth pursuing once the ownership isue is sorted out!

 

I know hes on a good thing at Hamburg but money talks

[TRon]

I am 100% certain that Jol would have loved to get the Newcastle job. I did think when he was sacked that it was partly his own fault for building such a lop-sided squad. He bought some great attacking players though.

 

Incidentally, am i the only one who thinks it's quite funny that 'arry has been told he won't have any money to spend in January? 

[Disco]

I am 100% certain that Jol would have loved to get the Newcastle job. I did think when he was sacked that it was partly his own fault for building such a lop-sided squad. He bought some great attacking players though.

 

Incidentally, am i the only one who thinks it's quite funny that 'arry has been told he won't have any money to spend in January? 

 

Spurs have a lot of players who have sale value though so can wheel and deal like the cunt he is

[Guest Stephen927]

This is what I like to see. A chairman communicating with the fans.

[NG32]

OH its all coming out now.

[olliemort]

This is what I like to see. A chairman communicating with the fans.

Exactly

[Guest]

This is what I like to see. A chairman communicating with the fans.

 

How much communication was coming out when things were going t*ts-up down there, Berbatov & Keane were being sold, etc? It's easy to to that stuff when things are going ok again.

[Guest Stephen927]

This is what I like to see. A chairman communicating with the fans.

 

How much communication was coming out when things were going t*ts-up down there, Berbatov & Keane were being sold, etc? It's easy to to that stuff when things are going ok again.

 

Fair point.

[junkhead]

yeah, I remember this mentioned around here before

[Guest]

Did MJ tell us this in May 2006?

[Yorkie]

Jol would be nothing without a Director of Football pulling the transfer strings.

 

Can open. Worms everywhere.

[Skirge]

Would havce been great had we got him, a good manager and is proving that again at Hamburg.

[OzzieMandias]

Jol would be nothing without a Director of Football pulling the transfer strings.

 

Can open. Worms everywhere.

 

I found this interesting:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2008/oct/30/tottenhamhotspur-premierleague

 

Spurs' decision to give Comolli's responsibilities to their new manager, Harry Redknapp, has been hailed as proof that American-style structures have no place in English football. In fact, the opposite is true. The clubs that are most successful in English football are those that have embraced continuity, that have sensibly divided up managerial responsibilities between individuals, that have refused to squander vast sums of money on replacing one manager, and his entourage, with another.

[Dave]

They mention continuity in an article promoting a system that fails spectacularly on that front. Strange.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

They mention continuity in an article promoting a system that fails spectacularly on that front. Strange.

 

The problem is the individuals involved.

 

Look at Man Utd, they have the ultimate Director of Football in Alex Ferguson, he picks and chooses who he wants in the key positions and then strategically runs the club.

 

He will be involved in appointing his successor and said successor will be integrated into the club fabric before Fergie says his final goodbye.

 

Where Spurs and we went wrong was appointing a DoF with no real history in football in terms of the directives of the role they were fulfilling. Its no surprise that when you have a DoF like Comolli dictating the role to a manger such as Jol or Ramos who have more experience than the DoF could dream of that it would fail.

 

Now put SBR (five years ago) in a DoF role above someone like Shearer or even Keegan then it may well of worked.

 

Same in any job, you would not appoint me (a 28 yr old) in a position where I get to dictate to a 50 year old MD what he is to do

[themanupstairs]

 

I think he's a very good manager personally. Top class in fact. However, with NUFC it's all about the marriage between club and manager, and I would say Martin Jol lacks a certain je ne sais quoi to deal with a club like this. All good and well for a meh club like Tottenham, but not up here 

[UV]

Jol would be nothing without a Director of Football pulling the transfer strings.

 

Can open. Worms everywhere.

 

I found this interesting:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2008/oct/30/tottenhamhotspur-premierleague

 

Spurs' decision to give Comolli's responsibilities to their new manager, Harry Redknapp, has been hailed as proof that American-style structures have no place in English football. In fact, the opposite is true. The clubs that are most successful in English football are those that have embraced continuity, that have sensibly divided up managerial responsibilities between individuals, that have refused to squander vast sums of money on replacing one manager, and his entourage, with another.

 

Success leads to continuity far more than continuity leads to success.

 

 

I'm in a minority I know, but I think Jol is a poor manager, and we dodged the bullet there.

[OzzieMandias]

Jol would be nothing without a Director of Football pulling the transfer strings.

 

Can open. Worms everywhere.

 

I found this interesting:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2008/oct/30/tottenhamhotspur-premierleague

 

Spurs' decision to give Comolli's responsibilities to their new manager, Harry Redknapp, has been hailed as proof that American-style structures have no place in English football. In fact, the opposite is true. The clubs that are most successful in English football are those that have embraced continuity, that have sensibly divided up managerial responsibilities between individuals, that have refused to squander vast sums of money on replacing one manager, and his entourage, with another.

 

Success leads to continuity far more than continuity leads to success.

 

 

 

But we can surely agree that sacking the manager and the entire management structure a few games into every season is going to be bad for business?

[themanupstairs]

Jol would be nothing without a Director of Football pulling the transfer strings.

 

Can open. Worms everywhere.

 

I found this interesting:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2008/oct/30/tottenhamhotspur-premierleague

 

Spurs' decision to give Comolli's responsibilities to their new manager, Harry Redknapp, has been hailed as proof that American-style structures have no place in English football. In fact, the opposite is true. The clubs that are most successful in English football are those that have embraced continuity, that have sensibly divided up managerial responsibilities between individuals, that have refused to squander vast sums of money on replacing one manager, and his entourage, with another.

 

Success leads to continuity far more than continuity leads to success.

 

 

 

But we can surely agree that sacking the manager and the entire management structure a few games into every season is going to be bad for business?

 

No it isn't Ozzie! It's professional 

[OzzieMandias]

Jol would be nothing without a Director of Football pulling the transfer strings.

 

Can open. Worms everywhere.

 

I found this interesting:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2008/oct/30/tottenhamhotspur-premierleague

 

Spurs' decision to give Comolli's responsibilities to their new manager, Harry Redknapp, has been hailed as proof that American-style structures have no place in English football. In fact, the opposite is true. The clubs that are most successful in English football are those that have embraced continuity, that have sensibly divided up managerial responsibilities between individuals, that have refused to squander vast sums of money on replacing one manager, and his entourage, with another.

 

Success leads to continuity far more than continuity leads to success.

 

 

 

But we can surely agree that sacking the manager and the entire management structure a few games into every season is going to be bad for business?

 

No it isn't Ozzie! It's professional 

 

The very hallmark of a well-run club?

[themanupstairs]

Jol would be nothing without a Director of Football pulling the transfer strings.

 

Can open. Worms everywhere.

 

I found this interesting:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2008/oct/30/tottenhamhotspur-premierleague

 

Spurs' decision to give Comolli's responsibilities to their new manager, Harry Redknapp, has been hailed as proof that American-style structures have no place in English football. In fact, the opposite is true. The clubs that are most successful in English football are those that have embraced continuity, that have sensibly divided up managerial responsibilities between individuals, that have refused to squander vast sums of money on replacing one manager, and his entourage, with another.

 

Success leads to continuity far more than continuity leads to success.

 

 

 

But we can surely agree that sacking the manager and the entire management structure a few games into every season is going to be bad for business?

 

No it isn't Ozzie! It's professional 

 

The very hallmark of a well-run-down club?

 

agreed

[UV]

Jol would be nothing without a Director of Football pulling the transfer strings.

 

Can open. Worms everywhere.

 

I found this interesting:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2008/oct/30/tottenhamhotspur-premierleague

 

Spurs' decision to give Comolli's responsibilities to their new manager, Harry Redknapp, has been hailed as proof that American-style structures have no place in English football. In fact, the opposite is true. The clubs that are most successful in English football are those that have embraced continuity, that have sensibly divided up managerial responsibilities between individuals, that have refused to squander vast sums of money on replacing one manager, and his entourage, with another.

 

Success leads to continuity far more than continuity leads to success.

 

 

 

But we can surely agree that sacking the manager and the entire management structure a few games into every season is going to be bad for business?

 

Better to sack a manager who is clearly failing and showing no sign of knowing how to turn the situation around than to stick with him for the sake of continuity.

 

Even the best looking appointments on the face of it can fail for reasons we can't really fathom. I don't think there were many who thought Ramos was a bad appointment for Spurs (the reason most of our alleged targets ended up at Spurs was because of Ramos and how well they were going to do according to some). So should Spurs have stuck with him? We can't say for sure what would have happened had he stayed, but it didn't look like anything was going to change anytime soon with him in charge, and Spurs could easily have found themselves in a position from which they couldn't recover.

 

Of course those who use hindsight to judge decisions made in the past would probably say Ramos was a bad appointment from the start.

[Guest Heneage]

Seems a nice bloke but I remember chatting to Spurs fans on trai nhome after his last game against us 3-1 with Martins Milner and Cacapa goals. They said hes an average manager good motivator, but was only really there because he was a media darling.