Seasidesage
New member
Surely that's the board of directors job not the Manager? His job is to win football matches and that is generally done by the teams with the highest budget...
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
More Redknapp stupidity
- Thread starter Simster
- Start date
Surely that's the board of directors job not the Manager? His job is to win football matches and that is generally done by the teams with the highest budget...
Redknapp has a mixed view by Spurs fans.
Best Squad Spurs ever had and didnt win anything.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Peter Storrie and 'Arry had quite a cosy arrangment between them at Portsmouth of skimming a bonus % for themselves from the proceeds of all player sales at Pompey. Its not illegal, they weren't breaking any rules (as it came out in the court case, the tax on this was paid). But with that in mind, its not overly surprising that there was such an ENORMOUS and constant turnover of many high-profile players at Fratton Park under Redknapp. That "wheeler dealer" reputation was certainly well earned, but then when you're trousering a bonus from each sale, its definitely in your wallets interests to encourage a revolving door policy on the dressing room.
Like I say, not illegal. But I'm not sure its particularly ethical. Put it this way, I wouldn't be overly happy if Sami and Barber were personally coining it from player sales.
Like I say, not illegal. But I'm not sure its particularly ethical. Put it this way, I wouldn't be overly happy if Sami and Barber were personally coining it from player sales.
Last edited:
Beach Seagull
New member
- Jan 2, 2010
- 1,310
Fair point although HR did achieve CL qualification which no other spurs manager has ever achieved.
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 9,651
A club who'd avoided relegation the season before and acheived promotion with a wage bill of £78m, while playing incredibly boring football and squeezed through in the play-offs.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,221
QPR should have smashed the Championship with the squad they had. The fact that they didn't, and scraped up with an ugly, undeserved win against Derby says plenty about the manager to me. Ok, they got there in the end, which is what counts, but a trained monkey would have expected top six with the players they had.
Beach Seagull
New member
- Jan 2, 2010
- 1,310
His brief was to get QPR promoted which he did. Doesn't matter how. The record books show QPR 1 Derby 0 they make no mention of 'ugly and undeserving.'
GoingUp
Well-known member
Plus he had to cut out the poor attitude of the squad, when he got there none of the high paid players gave a sh!t about the club. IMO Harry done well to ship them out turn the team around.
Beach Seagull
New member
- Jan 2, 2010
- 1,310
The court case focused on Mandaric and HR. When HR joined Pompey was as 'director of football' with a brief amongst other things of player recruitment for which a bonus was agreed of 10% of any profit paid to him for a player he brought to the club. Not unreasonable at all, in the city 'bonuses' linked to performance are widespread. Why should it not apply in football? In fact I'm sure there are plenty of managers with 'profit on transfer dealings' clauses in their contracts. But because it's 'Arry the cockney' it's seen as wrong on here. If was some foreign coach at arsenal I doubt he would be labelled a 'wheeler dealer' on here.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the aaa arrangement both Mandaric and HR were acquitted of all charges.
Beach Seagull
New member
- Jan 2, 2010
- 1,310
Sorry for the 'aaa' just a typo it's not an acronym.
GoingUp
Well-known member
I think you find that was only Peter Crouch. And the reason behind it was to do with Pompey owing Harry money or something like that.
Beach Seagull
New member
- Jan 2, 2010
- 1,310
Correct it was Peter crouch. As dir of football his cut was 10% when made manager went to 5%. So Mandaric made a pymnt to him to make up the shortfall. Like I said I'm sure plenty of managers are entitled to a cut of profits in their transfer dealings. I'm sure it's not just exclusive to HR. If it transpired that Wenger had such a clause would he get criticised on here in the same way H R is?
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Was it JUST Peter Crouch" then, or 5% / 10% (depending on his role) of profits on all player sales ? I don't recall the exact percentage he was entitled to, but I do recall hearing about this arrangement coming out during the 'troubles' - it was one of the (many) reasons Storrie was so despised by the Pompey faithful, as quite apart from Storries catastrophic incompetence as a chief exec, him and Redknapp were actually profiting personally from these deals.
Perhaps managers further down the scale operating in the lower leagues would be more entitled to a cut of the profits if a player they sold on brought in a decent fee for the club. But for a millionaire managing in the PL ? Like I say, nothing illegal doing, but given the monolithic shambles Portsmouth ended up in, primarily due to the mind-boggling deals players were signed up on there (many under Redknapps watch), I can't say I'd hold him in as high regard as some on here.
Perhaps managers further down the scale operating in the lower leagues would be more entitled to a cut of the profits if a player they sold on brought in a decent fee for the club. But for a millionaire managing in the PL ? Like I say, nothing illegal doing, but given the monolithic shambles Portsmouth ended up in, primarily due to the mind-boggling deals players were signed up on there (many under Redknapps watch), I can't say I'd hold him in as high regard as some on here.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Arsenal did not go bust, neither are they likely to.
Do you not find it distasteful that Redknapp was in a position to personally profit from the business dealings of Portsmouth whilst they were busily sowing the seeds of a financial calamity which resulted in millions being written off, creditors being stiffed out of money they were owed, and people at the club losing their jobs ?
I'm not laying the blame for all that exclusively at the door of dear old Harry. But I'm sure he did alright out of it.
Beach Seagull
New member
- Jan 2, 2010
- 1,310
No. He signed a contract that was offered to him. I'm sure if a thorough a analysis of pompeys finances during redknapps time was carried out any profit he made would probably be a tiny percentage of the millions Pompey owed. The main problem was the transfer fees and wages paid. Sanctioned by chief exec not the manager.
GoingUp
Well-known member
[MENTION=70]Easy 10[/MENTION]
it was only peter crouch, he wasnt scamming players and brining 10's of players in and letting them go just for personal gain. it was offered to him (the crouch) deal to make up for something that mandaric man had messed up for harry (financially wise).
it was only peter crouch, he wasnt scamming players and brining 10's of players in and letting them go just for personal gain. it was offered to him (the crouch) deal to make up for something that mandaric man had messed up for harry (financially wise).
GoingUp
Well-known member
[MENTION=70]Easy 10[/MENTION]
it was only peter crouch, he wasnt scamming players and brining 10's of players in and letting them go just for personal gain. it was offered to him (the crouch deal) to make up for something that mandaric man had messed up for harry (financially wise) i believe.
it was only peter crouch, he wasnt scamming players and brining 10's of players in and letting them go just for personal gain. it was offered to him (the crouch deal) to make up for something that mandaric man had messed up for harry (financially wise) i believe.
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 9,651
Wasn't his brief to keep them up?