Quote'I think far too much value is rested on speculations about isolated incidents, blown up out of all proportion, in order to explain a managererial cold shouldering'
Andy Reid
I agree with Elroy but I can't help thinking Keane's flippant and careless attempt at backheeling the ball in at Atletico Madrid (attempting to get his first for Liverpool?) infuriated Benitez. It was all downhill from there.
'I think far too much value is rested on speculations about isolated incidents, blown up out of all proportion, in order to explain a managererial cold shouldering'
Andy Reid
double standards...Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...hotograph.html
It sure is double standards by Redknapp, but Keano would be foolish to use it as an excuse. Maybe Redknapp needed an excuse to offload him, but the point is Robbie gave him that excuse.
You'd have to feel for Robbie, he's been excellent for us more often than not, and he has put his country first when he could have been grieving. He's another player I reckon that still would have plenty to offer on the continent, but with a young wife and new child he probably doesn't want the upheaval. There was a decent rumour doing the rounds that he turned down Besiktas in the summer, a move that would have suited him well I would have thought, and given that his wife is both glamourous and smart, she could have ecked out a decent career too.
He still is good enough for decent EPL teams, but West Ham are not one of these. This move needs to be a good one Robbie, it will be tough to get a decent move in the summer if you go to West Ham and they go through the trapdoor.
Here they come! It’s the charge of the “Thanks” Brigade!
Hardly.
Last time out, Redknapp gave specific instructions that there was to be no Spurs players Christmas Party (there had been a whole load of sh1t about the one at Man U etc, inc. false rape allegations). Yet (Team Captain) Keane invited 15 other players to Dublin, under the guise of a "Golfing Trip", without Redknapp's knowledge. This was three days before a home game with Wolves, which Spurs lost.
Whereas this time, it was an officially sanctioned party, four days before their next game (which was always a good bet to be cancelled, since Blackpool do not have undersoil heating). Moreover, King is injured for another few weeks anyhow, so was hardly making himself "unfit" through boozing.
That said, whilst King is a player whom Harry admires (when fit, the best Centre Back in the entire EPL imo), Harry is no mug, either. With Keane, he has continued to involve him whilst he has no other option, but will offload him as soon as he can get enough money for a replacement.
Therefore I suspect similar with Ledley - if/when Harry can find a suitable replacement, he'll do so, which will mean he's no longer dependent on Ledley. As it was, signing Willie Gallas was a (rather inspired) stopgap.
In the end, Harry's something of a pragmatist, in which regard he will also be aware that Ledley is a real legend at Spurs, immensely popular with the fans, and whose career has essentially been blighted through no fault of his own (injury), unlike others who've been the architect of their own downfall.
But Harry's no soft touch, either. In the circumstances, it may be that he has decided not to humiliate the guy publicly but still bollocked him in private.
I said I "quite liked" him i.e qualified approval, and on the basis of regular reading of his stuff. Had you even heard of Olley before I posted the link?The article is quite poor really, includes an amount of edging towards cynical surmises,
in order to support the Journo's viewpoint.
No wonder EG likes the journalist James Olley
Hmmm. What exactly is Tardelli trying to say? That Keane's exit from Inter was nothing to do with him? On the basis that club coaches in Italy have little or none of the say over transfers which their counterparts usually do in England, that would appear very plausible.
Yet the club did not actually sell Keane straightaway; rather he was sent out on loan - something which a coach should have more say over. And if it is any guide (OK, it's probably not!), Keane's wiki entry states: "However, Keane's dream move to Italy soon soured when Lippi was sacked. Lippi's successor, Marco Tardelli, deemed Keane to be surplus to requirements"
My guess is that for whatever reason, Tardelli didn't rate Keane at Inter, so agitated to move him on. But now when he finds the player is his star striker for ROI, he has to finesse that earlier episode, hence the "straight bat".
On a more general note, Keane has always been one of my favourite players at WHL, both for his style of play, and his ability. But I have to say that I have had to revise my opinion of his true ability somewhat since Spurs signed Van Der Vaart. For VDV is a very similar type of player, but also so much better, that maybe I overrated Robbie somewhat?
Tbf, it is not just with Keane that I've had cause to reappraise my opinions. In fact, when I look at how competitive* the present Spurs team is, compared with what it was like even a couple of seasons ago, I now begin to appreciate why we were never real contenders then, rather we just "flattered to deceive". I suspect that Redknapp spotted the difference straightaway, including that players of Robbie's calibre may be very good, but aren't quite top quality?
* - Still not making any predictions, mind!
not sure thats a risk harry would take to be honest.
would ledleys hangover not affect his rehab?
not an identical situation to robbie but not far from it so I stand by my assertion
Of course it is double standards. Harry Redknapp said before that drinking at WHL was a no-no.
"I'll implement a strong rule next season that drinking is a no-no here. Footballers should not drink. You shouldn't put diesel in a Ferrari. I know it's hard but they are earning big money, they are role models to kids. We wouldn't get these problems if the players weren't drinking. There's still too much of a drinking culture in English football but it's not as bad as it used to be. At Tottenham we do a lot with kids, a lot of them underprivileged. We have to set an example. Too much drinking goes on in this country. Too many people are not happy unless they have had a drink.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/foot...ur/8045213.stm
Alcohol and fitness certainly don't mix generally, but in King's particular situation, he is still weeks away from returning, so his midweek p1ss-up will NOT have affected his availability for the Blackpool game in any way.
The difference that Xmas parties were specifically banned by HR last year, but permitted this year. However, we can be certain that "permission" to attend a party is not the same as permission to get p1ssed at one.
And we can be quite certain that had other Spurs players been similarly p1ssed, we'd have heard about it, therefore we must assume that none was.
Anyhow, I suspect HR's reasoning this time was that by permitting an official party, a degree of scrutiny could be maintained, for in the end, if players really want to sneak off for a sly session, even at home, that can always be arranged.
As for his treatment of Robbie and Ledley, if you look at the facts, they are not so different. When HR heard about Robbie's episode, he initially "hit the roof" - I suspect it was sprung upon him in an interview. But when next interviewed, he was much more conciliatory ("it's sorted", "he's still our Captain" etc etc).
Yet as subsequent experience shows, "Robbie's cards were marked" from that day on. I suspect that the same may apply in Ledley's case i.e. officially it's "not a problem", but behind-the-scenes it's entirely different.
In fact, thinking about it, you can add David Bentley to the list of "problems" Harry has had to deal with at Spurs. DB is known for having an "attitude" (Wenger didn't stick with him for long, for instance). Tbf, he's not a complete wrong 'un like Joey Barton, say, but he has his moments. But when i saw it was DB who tipped a big bin of water over HR on live TV (after the Man city game last season which clinched CL qualification), thereby drenching his smart suit, I wondered how HR might react. Publicly, at least, HR has never slagged off DB or his ability and he made a joke about auctioning the suit for charity etc. But neither is he the sort to accept a player questioning his authority, even in jest. Therefore I think it not coincidental that he hasn't picked him since, other than in an emergency or for a "dead" game.
Therefore if Harry can persuade Levy to stump up the necessary cash in January, I can easily see him signing a striker as back-up to VDV, a right-sided midfielder* as back-up to Lennon and a Centre-back, as back-up to Dawson/Gallas. In which case, that would be three more blows to the prospects at WHL of Keane, Bentley and King (though Ledley will probably be retained out of respect for what he's done for the club).
* - David Beckham on loan from LA Galaxy, perhaps?
As I said above, permitting a party is not the same as granting "carte blanche" to get p1ssed.
Some of the Spurs players are teetotal and it seems certain that Ledley was the only one of the remainder who overdid it at the party, otherwise the papers would at least have hinted at it.
But as I've tried to argue, just because Harry hasn't slagged off Ledley publicly, we should not assume that he's not taking further action privately.
I've seen a little of what goes on at football clubs, including Spurs, for myself. Which is why I don't always take what I read in the papers at face value.
my initial thoughts when reading about this was that it smacked of double standards but its not really. The difference is in the deception that Keane employed in organising the Dublin trip. Im with Ealing Green on this one (crikey).
I like high energy football. A little bit rock and roll. Many finishes instead of waiting for the perfect one.
he banned the party last year as he doesnt want his players drinking. He has come out many times complaining about the drinking culture in football and says he doesnt want his players drinking. Yet his club captain falls around the place drunk this year and unlike last year when keane got major grief he lets king off the hook. double standards to most id say.
king has a glass knee / knees. i would have thought the chances of him doing further damage to his injury would increase hugely while stumbling around drunk.
careful jbyrne, you'll take someones eye out with that post!
I like high energy football. A little bit rock and roll. Many finishes instead of waiting for the perfect one.
This is of course the same Harry Redknapp who once mused about the difficulty of bonding woth foreign players....
"With the foreigners it's more difficult. Most of them don't even bother with the golf, they don't want to go racing. They don't even drink."
There is no comparison with King being drunk this year though, Robbie took it upon himself to go directly against instructions last year re their Christmas Party, EG is right on this (never thought I'd type those words....).
I think a Villa is the best he can hope for now, West Ham would be a graveyard. Shame he didn't tough it out at Liverpool, he'd be playing regulalry there now no doubt and would probably be doing alright. Even under Benetiz I reckon he'd have got back in the way their injury and general squad issues went in Benetiz's last year in charge.
He brought 16 players to Dublin on a golfing trip in December. What exactly did Redknapp think a golfing trip to Dublin in December would entail? Strolls along frosty fairways with cups of tea and biscuits afterwards?
Last edited by ifk101; 22/12/2010 at 1:11 PM.
The 'golfing' trip wasnt sanctioned either though - so not sure what your point is ifk?
I thought you were off the drink Ronnie?
"No, I drink to help me mind my own business....can I get you one? (c) Ronnie Drew
It was "sanctioned". The other 15 players went on the golfing trip of their own accord knowing full well what they were buying into.
Those who consider Harry is employing double standards are going by what he is quoted as saying in the Press. So that when King was reported to be drunk in midweek and Harry didn't "slam" him, they contrast this with what occurred with Keane.
My point is to judge HR not by his (reported) words, but by his actions, for with RK, though his initial reaction was to give out against him, he almost immediately retracted this, claiming that his "fitness" (both senses of the word) to play was not impaired by the Dublin trip, so that he picked Keane to play the next game (against Wolves), including retaining the captaincy.
On the face of it, therefore, there is not that much difference between the (public) treatment of the two players. However, whilst HR was soon conciliatory towards RK in the Press, in practice, RK's "cards were marked" at WHL from that moment. As such, I have no doubt whatever that if HR could have got rid of him in January for a suitable replacement, he would have gone. He couldn't (no doubt because the figures didn't suit Levy), so instead he "exiled" him to Celtic for a period on loan. And since then he has only ever featured when it has suited Harry.
I suggest that we wait and see how HR deals with Ledley over the next year or two, to see his real (as opposed to newspaper) reaction. On which point, it may not be entirely coincidental that Dawson (CB and occasional captain) has just come back after 3 months out and it was announced today that Woodgate (CB) might even make a surprise comeback "soon".
It's all a bit reminiscent of when Ferguson took over at MU. They had a reputation of being a "drinking club" under Atkinson, led by the "Three MustGetBeers", Robson, Whiteside and McGrath. Although it was nothing personal, Fergie soon got rid of the last two, but kept Robson. I'm sure this was purely from pragmatism i.e. he needed Robson, despite his excesses.
I suspect (hope, actually) that HR will take "the Robson approach" with Ledley, since on his day, he is up there with VDV & Modric (and eventually Bale?) as being arguably world-class.
Forget the press. The facts that matter are;
Harry took issue with the drinking on the golfing trip.
Harry took issue with King getting hammered at the Christmas party.
There's your double standard.
You don't need to suspect or hope anything. Spurs won't get rid of King for the reason you state (plus his popularity with Spurs and Glentoran fans alike). Robbie isn't world-class (and with the Liverpool episode no longer a fan favourite) i.e. expendable.
Btw There's nothing unusual here. Double standards are applied at other clubs. Certain players will always be more expendable than others.
Move to West Ham is being held up by bonus demands.
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks