The Tottenham Thread 13/14 part 3.

[THFC6061]

Sorry to butt in an a nice debate here, but I don't think it's very fair using Harry's first 47 games in comparison to AVB's, because did Harry not inherit a team that were sitting 4th bottom of the league or there abouts? AVB inherited a team that had just finished 4th?!

Very fair point.

It's a very good point. I can't be arsed trawling through his posts(Never been a fan of The Financial Times) but I seem to recall him waxing lyrically about the melting tax dodger before he started auditioning for the England job. Back then, good old 'arry was a combination of the bees knees and the dog bollocks all wrapped up in one droopy looking package. The saviour of Spurs and the greatest manager the game had ever seen.

Until AVB, Harry did have the best statistical record of any Spurs manager since 1908.

Now he doesn't.

 

[stony]

Very fair point.

It's a very good point. I can't be arsed trawling through his posts(Never been a fan of The Financial Times) but I seem to recall him waxing lyrically about the melting tax dodger before he started auditioning for the England job. Back then, good old 'arry was a combination of the bees knees and the dog bollocks all wrapped up in one droopy looking package. The saviour of Spurs and the greatest manager the game had ever seen.

Until AVB, Harry did have the best statistical record of any Spurs manager since 1908.

Now he doesn't.

Which just goes to prove that statistics are a load of bollocks, because 'arry won the square root of fuck all.
Bill Nicholson won the double, I don't give a shite what your dodgy stats say. He was a more successful manager than Redknap could ever dream to be.

And 'arry only has the second best statistical record using your shit points method. Arthur Turner, John Cameron and David Pleat all had better win percentages than 'arry.
If you are using your points things to work it out, don't forget that it used to be 2 points for a win. That's why your method is completely fucking useless.

 

[mcmanus]

It's a very good point. I can't be arsed trawling through his posts(Never been a fan of The Financial Times) but I seem to recall him waxing lyrically about the melting tax dodger before he started auditioning for the England job. Back then, good old 'arry was a combination of the bees knees and the dog bollocks all wrapped up in one droopy looking package. The saviour of Spurs and the greatest manager the game had ever seen.

Until AVB, Harry did have the best statistical record of any Spurs manager since 1908.

Now he doesn't.

Which just goes to prove that statistics are a load of bollocks, because 'arry won the square root of fuck all.
Bill Nicholson won the double, I don't give a shite what your dodgy stats say. He was a more successful manager than Redknap could ever dream to be.

And 'arry only has the second best statistical record using your shit points method. Arthur Turner, John Cameron and David Pleat all had better win percentages than 'arry.
If you are using your points things to work it out, don't forget that it used to be 2 points for a win. That's why your method is completely fucking useless.

BOOM!

 

[THFC6061]

It's a very good point. I can't be arsed trawling through his posts(Never been a fan of The Financial Times) but I seem to recall him waxing lyrically about the melting tax dodger before he started auditioning for the England job. Back then, good old 'arry was a combination of the bees knees and the dog bollocks all wrapped up in one droopy looking package. The saviour of Spurs and the greatest manager the game had ever seen.

Until AVB, Harry did have the best statistical record of any Spurs manager since 1908.

Now he doesn't.

Which just goes to prove that statistics are a load of bollocks, because 'arry won the square root of fuck all.
Bill Nicholson won the double, I don't give a shite what your dodgy stats say. He was a more successful manager than Redknap could ever dream to be.

And 'arry only has the second best statistical record using your shit points method. Arthur Turner, John Cameron and David Pleat all had better win percentages than 'arry.
If you are using your points things to work it out, don't forget that it used to be 2 points for a win. That's why your method is completely fucking useless.

The difference between having the best statistical record and being the most successful manager is obviously lost on you.

And I'm quite aware of how many points are awarded for a win, thank you.

 

[Crouchinho]

I love this website.

If you see this post amongst all the arguing I will give you a million quid *



*GHoddle will square up with you

 

[stony]

Until AVB, Harry did have the best statistical record of any Spurs manager since 1908.

Now he doesn't.

Which just goes to prove that statistics are a load of bollocks, because 'arry won the square root of fuck all.
Bill Nicholson won the double, I don't give a shite what your dodgy stats say. He was a more successful manager than Redknap could ever dream to be.

And 'arry only has the second best statistical record using your shit points method. Arthur Turner, John Cameron and David Pleat all had better win percentages than 'arry.
If you are using your points things to work it out, don't forget that it used to be 2 points for a win. That's why your method is completely fucking useless.

The difference between having the best statistical record and being the most successful manager is obviously lost on you.

And I'm quite aware of how many points are awarded for a win, thank you.

I reiterate, 'arry is only second on your list because of the way you twist the statistics. No one else works it out like that.

Can you do a pie chart for me, showing the amount of trophies each spurs manager has won whilst at your club
Don't bother including the ones who've won fuck all like 'arry and AVB.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Which just goes to prove that statistics are a load of bollocks, because 'arry won the square root of fuck all.
Bill Nicholson won the double, I don't give a shite what your dodgy stats say. He was a more successful manager than Redknap could ever dream to be.

And 'arry only has the second best statistical record using your shit points method. Arthur Turner, John Cameron and David Pleat all had better win percentages than 'arry.
If you are using your points things to work it out, don't forget that it used to be 2 points for a win. That's why your method is completely fucking useless.

The difference between having the best statistical record and being the most successful manager is obviously lost on you.

And I'm quite aware of how many points are awarded for a win, thank you.

I reiterate, 'arry is only second on your list because of the way you twist the statistics. No one else works it out like that.

Can you do a pie chart for me, showing the amount of trophies each spurs manager has won whilst at your club
Don't bother including the ones who've won fuck all like 'arry and AVB.

He'll only include Manager of the fecking month awards.

 

[Crouchinho]

I managed to get a grainy stream on an old desktop in extra time. Soon as I put it on mcshane scores. I think he scored the same time as city did (99 mins)

Nice to see Kane score.

I'm surprised friedel saved two, he was so slow the ball was in the net when he was just falling to the ground.

I think the commentator said that's two defeats in 26. Surely that's wrong!!

 

[City Raider]

i think the main problem with this thread is that thfc is a hard person to like as a poster

he probably doesnt give a shit and may enjoy his constant subtle pops but it makes life harder for the spurs fans who post on here without any edge such as crouchinho and hoddle

 

[THFC6061]

I managed to get a grainy stream on an old desktop in extra time. Soon as I put it on mcshane scores. I think he scored the same time as city did (99 mins)

Nice to see Kane score.

I'm surprised friedel saved two, he was so slow the ball was in the net when he was just falling to the ground.

I think the commentator said that's two defeats in 26. Surely that's wrong!!

I have no idea what that "two defeats in 26" refers to, especially as Spurs didn't lose last night.

Yes, Kane did very well indeed last night - the lad is coming along very nicely.