Harry Redknapp on the Class of 92

[SquishyMcSquish]

"Harry Redknapp on..." is enough to stop.

Don't know how the man made it as a football manager when his knowledge of the game is akin to the average bloke down the pub.

Back in his day he was a very good manager. The team we reached the CL quarters with played really, really good football and he constructed several very good teams, albeit with some dodgy financial decisions.

He runs his mouth a lot and like @Grinner says he's long since been on the scrapheap, but he deservedly got some decent jobs because he did good work as a manager.

Undoubtedly he chats a lot of shit but I have no doubt that the man knows his football, far more than your 'average bloke down the pub'.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Not under Harry, but West Ham had a team of Johnson, Defoe, Carrick, Cole, Di Canio, Kanoute in 2002/03.

Relegated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002–03_West_Ham_United_F.C._season

 

[SilentWitness]

Imagine that team with Benjani and Kanu up front. Kranjcar pulling the strings.

 

[FujiVice]

"They talk about the class of 92, but why dont they ever talk about that class that featured Marcus Rashford and George Best?"

 

[the chameleon]

The oldest of the Class of '92 is now 45, the youngest 44. There's a like a year or two between them.

Meanwhile Lampard is 41 and Glen Johnson is 34. Even Defoe is 36.

Exactly, on that logic, we might as well add Wes Brown, Darren Fletcher and Norman Whiteside (after all, he's only 8 years older than Giggs).

Worse non-argument ever by Harry Redknapp.

 

[12OunceEpilogue]

Harry should stick to eating bollocks instead of talking bollocks .

It really is a load of rubbish. There's probably plenty of academies that boast a clutch of fine players who all come through around the same time and go on to establish themselves, but the same year is much rarer.

Not under Harry, but West Ham had a team of Johnson, Defoe, Carrick, Cole, Di Canio, Kanoute in 2002/03.

Relegated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002–03_West_Ham_United_F.C._season

To be fair Glenn Roeder was a nothing manager, maybe 'Arry would have taken them places.

 

[Solius]

Yes, you sound silly.

So's your face.

 

[MyOnlySolskjaer]

Don’t have anything on Beckham, Scholes & Giggs. These three were different calibre to the rest.

 

[SteveJ]

At least he didn't blame the EU.

 

[lysglimt]

The strange thing is that so few players who starred in the FA Youth Cup finals in the 90s went on to have a really good career:
I found the following (excluding United-players)

1990 Ian Walker - Spurs
1991 George Ndah - Palace
1994 Ben Thatcher - Millwall
1995 Stephen Carr - Spurs
1996 Rio Ferdinand and Frank Lampard - West Ham, Jamie Carragher and Michael Owen - Liverpool
1997 Harry Kewell, Jon Woodgate, Alan Smith and Paul Robinson - Leeds, Hayden Mullins and Clinton Morrison - Palace
1998 Richard Dunne - Everton, David Dunn - Blackburn
1999 Michael Carrick, Joe Cole - West Ham - Chris Kirkland - Coventry

 

[11101]

He's forgetting that he's part of the reason they all left.

 

[Art Vandelay]

If I'd been England manager I'd have played the two Charlton's, Shearer and Shilton. We'd have won the World Cup, you're not telling me I'm wrong. I know we would have.

 

[Sandikan]

Ridiculous from Redknapp.

The players he mentions are all different ages for starters, with about 6 years difference oldest to youngster - they never were part of "a" year.
And like he says himself, they all moved on anyway!

The whole point of the Class of 92, is that they were the same year, and stayed together for ages - three of them as one club players!

Any club could pick out 5 or 6 youth prospects over a decade or so, and make the same claim otherwise!

 

[Sandikan]

"Harry Redknapp on..." is enough to stop.

Don't know how the man made it as a football manager when his knowledge of the game is akin to the average bloke down the pub.

I met him once, and for that alone I for some reason like him.

But there's a hell of a lot of farce that goes along with him - from the head out of his car on deadline day nonsense, to the dodgy accountancy and claiming he couldn't read and all that guff.
To this latest nonsense!

 

[Wonder Pigeon]

Well when Ferdinand and Lampard played together West Ham finished 5th and when Cole, Carrick, Defoe and Johnson all played together they finished bottom, so combine the two teams and West Ham probably finish about 10th ie where they fecking almost always are anyway.

 

[Dancfc]

You can kind of see his point to an extent.

Most clubs can't physically have their own class of 92 because if they do bring through players of that calibre they're gone by the age of 22, for example the Ajax boys had class of 92 potential but De Ligt and De Jong are gone and it's only a matter of time until Neres, Van De Beek and Onana follow, similar song with Monaco's CO17. In terms of solely players from the academy and not just timeline Barca under Pep eclipsed the CO92 with Valdes, Puyol, Pique, Busquets, Iniesta, Xavi, Messi and Pedro as starters but had those guys come through at Valencia they would have been scattered all over Europe instead of forming the greatest club side ever.

Basically if another CO92 or a Pep Barca situation comes about it will be at one of the select few clubs. Only Barca, Madrid, Bayern, Juve, Paris, Chelsea, United, Liverpool, City, Arsenal, Spurs and at a push Napoli have the financial resources and/or competitive situation to bring through world class talent and hold onto it. So Arry is sort of right in the sense that if WHU kept those players through their careers they would have been quite the force, but also a lot of clubs/managers could claim similar, Ajax and Monaco being the latest 2.

 

[Megadrive Man]

Nearly all the players he mentioned only became world class after leaving West Ham.
Who's to say if they'd have developed as well if they'd stayed in the safety of a West Ham team?

If Messi had been released by Barcelona in 2004 and joined Redknapp at Portsmouth, would he still have gone on to become such a phenomenal player? I doubt it!

I'd say nearly all of those players mentioned progressed, playing under better managers, alongside better players and that was a really key part of it. Lampard was only seen as an average level player and quite an underwhelming signing at the time of his Chelsea transfer. He could have easily been a Mark Noble level player had he not moved on.

 

[noodlehair]

He's a joke of late but you can't denigrate his career like that.

To be fair, most of the clubs he managed ended up being relegated and in some kind of massive financial crisis either while he was managing them or shortly after. He was a bit shite really.

Weirdly every player he has named here got much better as soon as they weren't being managed by Harry Redknapp...with the exception of Glen Johnson who he's just thrown in there because he ran out of names of actual good players.

 

[Grinner]

To be fair, most of the clubs he managed ended up being relegated and in some kind of massive financial crisis either while he was managing them or shortly after. He was a bit shite really.

Not tooty and it was Roeder what took the Irons down. He was fecking awful. Portsmouth was just a shady situation all round.

 

[Megadrive Man]

Redknapp got a job on the back of being Billy Bonds assistant and just sort of rode his luck from there on in.

His strategy for transfers was just a scatter gun approach of trying to bring in as many players as possible and hoping some would work out.

 

[stepic]

Really don’t get the weird seeming hatred of Harry fecking Redknapp. The guy is a borderline national treasure, some of you have no heart.

Yes of course let’s tear him apart because THEYRE NOT IN THE SAME YEAR but I think if you have two brain cells you can understand his wider point. Smaller teams are forced to sell their players which is a bit shit. Which it is, frankly.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

To be fair, most of the clubs he managed ended up being relegated and in some kind of massive financial crisis either while he was managing them or shortly after. He was a bit shite really.

His management of both Spurs and Portsmouth was exceptional and exceeded expectations. The financial issues at Portsmouth cannot be put down to a manager, the money men at the club had control over whether they spent or not.

Didn't do well at Southampton but did solid jobs at Bournemouth & West Ham. Anything after Spurs he kind of felt apart, but he was easily a very good manager for a decent period.

Far from a 'great' manager but 'a bit shit' or making out he didn't know his stuff is being incredibly harsh. The last English manager to win a major trophy I believe, although admittedly the competition is poor.

 

[Grinner]

It was 'arry being 'arry that ruined West Ham when he got himself fired. He was somewhat fortunate that Tooty were so desperate after a succession of shite managers.

 

[Grande]

If Redknapp’s West Ham United had been Mancester United, and had Old Trafford instead of Upton Park, and if they’d been the biggest and richest club in the world instead of the biggest club in East London, The Class of 01-08 would have been more succesful than the The Class of 92 if it had had better players around them, and if it had been a Class. But only if Harry Redknapp had been Sir Alex Ferguson instead of being, well, you know ...

... if only the players themselves had been better as well.

 

[Ooh2B]

"People always talk about Manchester United producing the 'Class of 92' but they weren't any better than the six boys we produced at West Ham," he told The Athletic .

"If you put those two groups of six against each other, there would be nothing in it.

"Ferdinand went on to win championships, Frank Lampard won everything, Cole won everything and Michael Carrick won everything.

"Then you have Glen Johnson who won Premier League titles and Jermain Defoe who had a terrific career.

"If the kids had stayed at West Ham what a team that would've been. That would've been six England internationals in one team.

"That was the difference. Manchester United kept their youngsters and that's what enabled them to become a great team.

"If I kept those six players together I'm certain I would've won the Premier League."

Thoughts?

The thing is, those “six kids” left WHU and ‘Arry, and went on to win all they’ve won by being coached by some of, and the worlds GOAT manager in some of the worlds best assembled squads.

No freaking way ‘Arry and WHU could have coached and facilitated the success’s they’ve collectively achieved. Not even close.

 

[beergod]

 

[tenpoless]

Yeah because a football team only consisted of 6 players.

 

[noodlehair]

His management of both Spurs and Portsmouth was exceptional and exceeded expectations. The financial issues at Portsmouth cannot be put down to a manager, the money men at the club had control over whether they spent or not.

Didn't do well at Southampton but did solid jobs at Bournemouth & West Ham. Anything after Spurs he kind of felt apart, but he was easily a very good manager for a decent period.

Far from a 'great' manager but 'a bit shit' or making out he didn't know his stuff is being incredibly harsh. The last English manager to win a major trophy I believe, although admittedly the competition is poor.

The dodgy financial issues at clubs more than likely followed Redknapp around for a reason.

He did a decent job at West Ham and for a spell at Spurs (before he got sacked). His success at Portsmouth boiled down to a flukey FA Cup win, and spending money that didn't exist then doing a disappearing act before he could get any blame for it.

The problem with Redknapp is he's an old boys club member more interested in self benefit and his own sense of importance than actually building a successful team. So him moaning about having players as good as the class of 92 is ridiculous. Half the reason they weren't as successful at West Ham is because Harry Redknapp was manager and not Sir Alex.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

The dodgy financial issues at clubs more than likely followed Redknapp around for a reason.

He did a decent job at West Ham and for a spell at Spurs (before he got sacked). His success at Portsmouth boiled down to a flukey FA Cup win, and spending money that didn't exist then doing a disappearing act before he could get any blame for it.

The problem with Redknapp is he's an old boys club member more interested in self benefit and his own sense of importance than actually building a successful team. So him moaning about having players as good as the class of 92 is ridiculous. Half the reason they weren't as successful at West Ham is because Harry Redknapp was manager and not Sir Alex.

You can't give Redknapp free reign in the transfer market, it's simple. You need a strong chairman like Levy capable of handling that side of things, but if you put that aside you have a good football manager.

His job at Spurs was more than 'decent'. He took us from being an absolute mess of a side to two top 4 finishes and a CL quarter final. He got sacked because he did his usual and spouted off about wanting the England job, he finished top four the season he was let go, it wasn't a failure of management.

And he got two strong top half finishes with Portsmouth whilst winning the biggest domestic trophy available, he then received the key to the city for his accomplishments. It was an excellent job by all accounts.

And yes, I agree with you .. he's doing his usual in this case and exaggerating/going for soundbites in the media to make a point. The point he's making is a genuine one (that smaller clubs can't keep together their golden generations) and you have to take his claims with more than a pinch of salt. He's full of stuff like this post-management career, but this shouldn't suddenly mean that people need to pretend he wasn't a good premier league manager for a time.

 

[RochaRoja]

I mean, he is obviously talking pish in as much as the timelines of those players breaking through, but his overall point stands that if he had managed to have a team based around:

David James

Glen Johnson
Rio Ferdinand
???
???

Carrick
Lampard
Cole

Di Canio

Defoe
Kanoute

Then that could have definitely made some noise, Di Canio probably would have aged out too quickly to be really effective but they would have been around that last Champions League spot with pre-season aspirations of mounting a challenge.

Johnson and Defoe made their PL debuts under Roeder (who also signed James).

Redknapp essentially got lucky that four excellent players came through for West Ham while he was there and none of them really kicked on until they left the club. As usual he filled up the squad with foreign nonentities who played about five games before disappearing and English players who were well past their best.

 

[RochaRoja]

I mean they don't even belong to one class. And Defoe and Glen Johnson lower quality significantly. Even Carrick was nowhere near as good as Giggs, Scholes and Beckham.

To be fair, the class of ‘92 also had Butt and Phil Neville who were nowhere near the quality of Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, Carrick, Lampard and Ferdinand.

 

[RochaRoja]

Lampard and Ferdinand playing together at WH for most of the '00s would have turned that club into a temporary Top5 beast, that's for sure.

But as always, Harry talks in hyperbolic half-truths: pretending that WH could have kept their stars in the '00s is like sayin that Sporting could have won a UCL with CR as their main star till 2009.

Lampard and Ferdinand only became top class after they left West Ham. Both would’ve had very different careers if still subject to Redknapp’s “coaching” into their mid 20s.

 

[Ban]

I'd like to try whatever he's taking.