Harry Redknapp is too long in the tooth to change, so hoping that he’ll add humility to his list of personality traits is rather futile.
It’s always somebody else’s fault with Redknapp – there’s always a referee, an opposing player, an individual error, or a circumstance to which blame can be attached.
When Tony Fernandes changed his manager earlier in the season, it was the right move. QPR were left in trouble by Mark Hughes’ calamitous reign, but there was no miracle needed to keep this side in the Premier League – or at least not within the context of the resources which were available in January.
I maintain my support for Fernandes, and admire his ambition and financial commitment to his football club, but Redknapp should have achieved far more than he has with that kind of backing. What we’ve heard over the last couple of days, and what there will presumably be much more of, is the start of Redknapp’s age-old habit of using the media to protect his own reputation. He’s slagging off his players, worrying about their sell-on values, and questioning their ability and commitment.
Same old, same old.
That’s the problem with Dear Old ‘Arry; he’s a master at taking complete ownership of collective success, but also of removing himself entirely from the equation of failure.
Because of the many Redknapp-apologists in the media, there will doubtless be an airbrushing of his rather average job performance and the narrative will be suitably corrected to suggest that Rangers never had a chance of staying up.
“Harry Houdini would have saved the day, but nobody could have kept QPR in the Premier League this year”. That will be the party line, get used to it.
He’s the footballing equivalent of Boris Johnson – behind that cuddly public image lies an astute self-promoter, and someone who’s willing to throw anyone under the bus for the sake of preserving his own image.
Follow The Premier League Owl on Twitter and Facebook.
Did he actually take charge of that United game, though? Thought he was sat in the stands for it.
Actually its 20 points from 21 games, Harry was apointed before the United game.
Thats 0.95 points a game so if Harry had been in charge for 33 games that would be around 31 points so 2nd or 3rd from bottom.
Even if you say 20 points from 20 games its a point a game which is 33 points and in still the bottom 3.
20 points from 20 games, it’s better than it was but still relegation-worthy. Can’t find the form comparison from that range.
Are they not in the top half on form since he took over?