Tim sherwood sacked

Anyone

Anyone wrote: »

BBC reported it as "Tottenham have parted company with manager Tim Sherwood after the club finished sixth in the Premier League". Says it all really.

Not really, They could have been expecting Champions League football.

You say he got sacked because he failed to keep them out of Europa.

Anyone

M!Ck^ wrote: »

You say he got sacked because he failed to keep them out of Europa.

I said it was a rumour.

grumpymunster

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Not really, They could have been expecting Champions League football.

You say he got sacked because he failed to keep them out of Europa.

Anyone wrote: »

I said it was a rumour.

Puts me in mind of yes minister

Bernard Woolley: Minister, I've heard something quite different.
Jim Hacker: What?
Bernard Woolley: That there is £1 million worth of diamonds from South Africa in a Downing Street safe, but of course it's only a rumour.
Jim Hacker: Is that true?
Bernard Woolley: Oh, yes.
Jim Hacker: So, there ARE all those diamonds in Downing Street!
Bernard Woolley: Are there?
Jim Hacker: You just said there were.
Bernard Woolley: No, I didn't.
Jim Hacker: Yes, you did! You said you'd heard this rumour, I said is it true, you said yes!
Bernard Woolley: I said yes, it was true that it was a rumour.
Jim Hacker: You said you heard it was true!
Bernard Woolley: No, I said it was true that I heard it!

Owen_S

He wasn't qualified for the job, but his results and actions don't warrant being sacked. He showed just how ludicrous AVB was for banishing Adebeyor from the first team. The only things he can be faulted on are his interviews and the peculiar obsession with playing Bentaleb.

M!Ck^

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Source?

I don't believe that at all.

Wooooosh!

Ormus

Owen_S wrote: »

He wasn't qualified for the job, but his results and actions don't warrant being sacked. He showed just how ludicrous AVB was for banishing Adebeyor from the first team. The only things he can be faulted on are his interviews and the peculiar obsession with playing Bentaleb.

Adebayor started trying so that AVB would look bad, not because he was inspired by Sherwood

Sherwood didn't have a clue about tactics, was an embarrassment in interviews, fell out with several of the players and had a habit of riling the board in public. Those are the reasons why he is gone.

He was given an 18 month contract with a break clause at the end of the season because he wasn't expected to be the long term manager of Spurs. He was a short term appointment.

He did ok results wise against smaller clubs, mainly because Adebayor was playing like a man possessed and because his simplistic tactics worked well against weaker teams. Spurs got hammered against the better teams because of tactical naivety.

rarnes1

rarnes1 wrote: »

Wooooosh!

Yawnnnnn!!

LuckyLloyd

grumpymunster wrote: »

He wouldn't be my cup of tea but he tried and he seemed to have a genuine feeling for the club so sorry for him on that front.

Kudos LL on managing to integrate your hatred of all things Chelsea into a thread which has nothing to do with us. 8788 days and counting :pac::pac:

I actually don't hate Chelsea that much, relatively speaking. Have a huge respect for the old core of the current squad.

Richard Hillman

Gringo180 wrote: »

Spurs are a joke with managers. Who in there right mind will want to go there with Levys track record of giving coaches the bullet prematurely?

You could say the same about Atletico Madrid and they aint doing too bad at the moment.

DeanAustin

Ormus wrote: »

Adebayor started trying so that AVB would look bad, not because he was inspired by Sherwood

Sherwood didn't have a clue about tactics, was an embarrassment in interviews, fell out with several of the players and had a habit of riling the board in public. Those are the reasons why he is gone.

He was given an 18 month contract with a break clause at the end of the season because he wasn't expected to be the long term manager of Spurs. He was a short term appointment.

He did ok results wise against smaller clubs, mainly because Adebayor was playing like a man possessed and because his simplistic tactics worked well against weaker teams. Spurs got hammered against the better teams because of tactical naivety.

Go on. Do tell us what the simplistic tactics were and why he was tactically naive (what should he have done differently and why)...

ben.schlomo

DeanAustin wrote: »

Go on. Do tell us what the simplistic tactics were and why he was tactically naive (what should he have done differently and why)...

Well constantly holding a high line with a centre half pairing as slow and cumbersome as Kaboul and Dawson didnt work great at Anfield.

Mr.Nice Guy

I thought he was hopelessly out of his depth. The press liked him because he was good for a few quotes but he doesn't even have his coaching badges and for all the talk of his win percentage, hasn't he lost like ten games as well? You can manipulate stats for a multitude of uses.

I'd also add that stunt at the weekend where he allowed a fan to sit at the dugout was cringeworthy stuff. It was as if he was trying his own take on that occasion when Redknapp invited a fan to play a half for, I think, West Ham. It was him saying, 'look at me I'm a mad geeza'. Who would want a football club treated like that? You'd never see that at another big club.

He was too big for his boots and never took responsibility for his own poor decisions. It was always the players and their lack of heart. He was never going to get the job with that attitude and his jibes at the board.

I thought Levy's comments in his statement were very deliberately chosen: 'I should like to state our thanks for all his efforts'.

In other words I should 'like to thank him' but I don't!

Dempsey

Daniel Levy is the reason spurs have not progressed as a club and actually gone backwards and gone through 2 managers in a season and are now in another period of instability.

Sherwood did well despite having no badges, a faltering and undermining chairman and several players unwilling to give their all for the club.

I seen more reputable managers with all the badges do worse under more favourable circumstances

djPSB

Dempsey wrote: »

Daniel Levy is the reason spurs have not progressed as a club and actually gone backwards and gone through 2 managers in a season and are now in another period of instability.

Sherwood did well despite having no badges, a faltering and undermining chairman and several players unwilling to give their all for the club.

I seen more reputable managers with all the badges do worse under more favourable circumstances

One would wonder if a top manager would be reluctant to work under Levy now considering the rate at which he is sacking managers.

geeky

I agree that Sherwood seemed a bit out of his depth tactically - there were some puzzling selections and, whenever he went up against a wilier manager, he was consistently outdone. So, even though he came into a chaotic situation and delivered slightly better-than-expected results, I wouldn't be surprised at all if he's found out in his next job.

The press liked him because he gave good quotes, and called out gutless performances when they occurred. I'll miss the last month of his reign, where he knew he was going and clearly did not give a fupp.

population

grumpymunster wrote: »

Could be a job for the interim one, if he wants to get back into English football and leave Napoli.

He's fine where he is thank you.

Ormus

DeanAustin wrote: »

Go on. Do tell us what the simplistic tactics were and why he was tactically naive (what should he have done differently and why)...

For instance, his disregard for holding midfielders meant we played with two attacking midfielders to protect the back four....at Anfield....against a Liverpool side who were averaging about 4 goals a game at the time.....I actually think football is often not too complex a game, but that was possibly the worst line up I've ever seen a manager put out. Naive is an understatement.

Ormus

djPSB wrote: »

One would wonder if a top manager would be reluctant to work under Levy now considering the rate at which he is sacking managers.

I wouldn't even count Sherwood as a sacking. He was given an 18 month contract but we all knew he was an interim manager unless he did something remarkable. That's why there was a break clause at the end of the season.

Top managers know that sackings are part of the job. The Premiership average managerial tenure, excluding Wenger, is under a year. Spurs average is closer to 2 years.

DeanAustin

Ormus wrote: »

For instance, his disregard for holding midfielders meant we played with two attacking midfielders to protect the back four....at Anfield....against a Liverpool side who were averaging about 4 goals a game at the time.....I actually think football is often not too complex a game, but that was possibly the worst line up I've ever seen a manager put out. Naive is an understatement.

Yeah wrong selection at Anfield. He should have started Sandro. But Sandro aside, he didn't have much in the way of options and he was hardly in world beating form.

I also saw a lot of people slate him and call him naive for fielding a central midfield of Chadli and Paulinho against Sunderland, Stoke etc. and we won those games.

On another note, for all the having a pop at Levy for being too trigger happy, he did give Martin Jol three years and Harry four years which, by today's standards, are decent stints in charge. I agree he needs to step back a bit from the football side but if a manager is getting it right, he does give them a chance.

Ormus

DeanAustin wrote: »

Yeah wrong selection at Anfield. He should have started Sandro. But Sandro aside, he didn't have much in the way of options and he was hardly in world beating form.

I also saw a lot of people slate him and call him naive for fielding a central midfield of Chadli and Paulinho against Sunderland, Stoke etc. and we won those games.

On another note, for all the having a pop at Levy for being too trigger happy, he did give Martin Jol three years and Harry four years which, by today's standards, are decent stints in charge. I agree he needs to step back a bit from the football side but if a manager is getting it right, he does give them a chance.

He should have started Sandro and/or played 3 in midfield. That line up lost the game before it started.

Sunderland and Stoke are not top teams. It's possible to get away with things against them. It's risky, but it's possible.

I agree with you about Levy, he does give them a chance sometimes.

Playboy

Good riddance. He was sht. Highest loss percentage of any spurs manager in recent memory, big gob constantly spouting cliched crap to the media, alienated lots of players, run around a bit tactics etc etc. Hoping Poch gets the job and hope Levy leaves Baldini and him to get on with running the football side of the club.

upstairs for coffee

Levy spent 50 million on Lamela, Chichres and Capoue. A grand total of 32 appearances between them.

Ormus

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

Levy spent 50 million on Lamela, Chichres and Capoue. A grand total of 32 appearances between them.

I don't get your point?

upstairs for coffee

Ormus wrote: »

I don't get your point?

That he's sacking Sherwood even though he hasn't done a good job himself this season. Sacked AVB, Tottenham's best manager in years.

Why any manager would go to Tottenham especially under the helm of Levy is beyond me. Oh wait, the inevitable compensation package is worth taking the job for.

Ormus

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

That he's sacking Sherwood even though he hasn't done a good job himself this season. Sacked AVB, Tottenham's best manager in years.

Why any manager would go to Tottenham especially under the helm of Levy is beyond me. Oh wait, the inevitable compensation package is worth taking the job for.

Baldini, Levy and AVB signed the players on Baldini's recommendation. Admittedly Baldini was signed by Levy and the Board.

Managers go to Spurs to get paid, same as they go to any other club.

Ormus

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

Levy spent 50 million on Lamela, Chichres and Capoue. A grand total of 32 appearances between them.

Lamela was injured most of the season

Capoue and Chiriches also spent a lotta time out injured

Capoue fell out with Sherwood

If you wanna point to bad signings, Paulinho is the worst of them, went missing in every big game and looked a shadow of the player who starred for Brazil

DeanAustin

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

That he's sacking Sherwood even though he hasn't done a good job himself this season. Sacked AVB, Tottenham's best manager in years.

Why any manager would go to Tottenham especially under the helm of Levy is beyond me. Oh wait, the inevitable compensation package is worth taking the job for.

Ah hear.

Spurs finished 6th this season. That's about our level to be fair if you look at what clubs spend on wages which is usually a good indicator of where clubs will finish.

Just to give that a bit of context - until Martin Jol in 2006, we hadn't finished in the top 6 in about 15 years. Now it's seen as disappointing. We've finished top 6 in 7 of the past 9 seasons. This in an era where Chelsea and City have won the lottery.

The reason this season is seen as disappointing is because of the great job Levy has done. He's made mistakes, some massive ones, but on the whole he has us pretty much where we should be and, now and again, punching above our weight. Unless we are taken over by oil money, there is no reason to get rid of Levy. Suggesting we should is akin to Charlton suggesting they should get rid of Alan Curbishley in 2006 because he'd taken them as far as he could. How did that work out for them?

That sort of attitude is exactly why so much of modern day football is all about the short term.

eagle eye

I don't think Sherwood did a great job myself but he did do some good things there. He got Eriksen playing like people expected and he brought Adebayor back in from the cold and he played well for them and gave Harry Kane his chance and that worked out too. He had a good few injuries to deal with for most of his time in charge too.

His personality didn't do him any favours though. He was too often giving out to officials and he looked like he was finding it difficult to control his temper at times. This stuff doesn't come across well and it will affect your players too.

I'm not surprised he got the axe as most people expected it to happen but he leaves there with a better win percentage than the previous couple of managers even if its only over a small sample size. He will probably get an opportunity at some stage in the not too distant future somewhere else and we'll see what he is made of. If he got another season there you'd never know how things would have turned out and for that reason you really couldn't expect him to be kept on.

upstairs for coffee

DeanAustin wrote: »

Ah hear.

Spurs finished 6th this season. That's about our level to be fair if you look at what clubs spend on wages which is usually a good indicator of where clubs will finish.

Just to give that a bit of context - until Martin Jol in 2006, we hadn't finished in the top 6 in about 15 years. Now it's seen as disappointing. We've finished top 6 in 7 of the past 9 seasons. This in an era where Chelsea and City have won the lottery.

The reason this season is seen as disappointing is because of the great job Levy has done. He's made mistakes, some massive ones, but on the whole he has us pretty much where we should be and, now and again, punching above our weight. Unless we are taken over by oil money, there is no reason to get rid of Levy. Suggesting we should is akin to Charlton suggesting they should get rid of Alan Curbishley in 2006 because he'd taken them as far as he could. How did that work out for them?

That sort of attitude is exactly why so much of modern day football is all about the short term.

All very good points and you would know more than I would about Spurs.

However sacking AVB was a very strange decision. There were some poor results but I don't think Spurs benefited by sacking him and placing Sherwood in charge. Sacking AVB smacks of the short-termism you cite above.

DeanAustin

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

All very good points and you would know more than I would about Spurs.

However sacking AVB was a very strange decision. There were some poor results but I don't think Spurs benefited by sacking him and placing Sherwood in charge. Sacking AVB smacks of the short-termism you cite above.

There is a lot of talk that AVB wanted to go so it might not be as straightforward as Levy wanting him out. The relationship had turned sour and I don't think it was going to get any better. I agree Sherwood didn't radically change anything but he would have had to produce title winning form to get Spurs 4th and that was never going to happen through Sherwood or anyone else.