Kristian writes about how Harry Redknapp has overseen the decline of football clubs then jumped ship – http://www.cherwell.org/content/8249. Certainly, Harry left Pompey at a good time. The financial situation at the south-coast club is disastrous, and will, unless Gaydamak sells or prioritises the club over his other businesses, end up relegating the F.A cup holders. You simply cannot sell Lassana Diarra and hope Richard Hughes will fill his boots.

However, Kristian seems to skip over several large portions of Redknapps illustrious career. In recent years he had spent a lot of money at Portsmouth, but not without delivering the F.A cup, and several top ten finishes. He also, it is important to remember, brought them up from near the bottom of the second tier to the Premiership, playing attractive football, and scoring for fun. Mandaric helped, but how often have we seen teams scrap their way out of the Championship only to collapse in the Premiership (if not in their first season, then definitely in their second). Harry created a stable Premiership football club, who played attacking, pacey football. Every side, including the top four, did not enjoy visits to Fratton Park. It is also important not to forget the miraculous relegation survival when he rejoined the club from Southampton. It really did seem an impossible challenge. But title-winning form towards the back end of the season meant a poor Portsmouth side stayed up.

As for the pattern of financial instability that Redknapp has apparently left behind at clubs, people should not overestimate the role of the manager. It seems somewhat unlikely that Gaydamak, a Russian billionaire who made his money in the murky business world of Russia, and who has an arrest warrant from him in connection with illegal arms-dealing and tax evasion, would be forced into transfer dealings that could not be afforded by good old Harry Redknapp. Harry is a charming cockney, but not that charming.

The only criticism that does seem to stand against Harry, is that he does leave when the going gets tough. Portsmouth were in for a long hard season when he joined spurs, and he left Southampton half-way down the championship. Hopefully, it will never come to this at Spurs. And if he keeps making tactical and motivational decisions like he did on Tuesday against Burnley, then Harry should have a long, successful career in North London.

I’ll admit scoffing loudly when Adam Pearson described picking Nigel Clough as Derby manager as ‘definitely not a sentimental appointment.’ After all, Nigel’s father Brian was unambiguously Derby County’s greatest ever manager – winning their two top flight titles in 1971/72 and 1974/75.

So when Nigel Clough replaced Paul Jewell I presumed it was a weak sop to Derby fans, done for all the wrong reasons. But in the first game since the appointment – albeit with David Lowe managing from the dug out – they were fantastic.

They outran and outpassed a very strong Manchester United side – Vidić, Scholes, Anderson, Tévez and Nani all started, Ronaldo, Rooney and Carrick came on – and deserved at least their 1-0 win.

Derby are still back in eighteenth place, with just 29 points from 26 games. But if they keep on playing like this, and keep hold of Kris Commons and Giles Barnes, we could well see them back in the top flight before too long.

Every music website under the sun is stuffed with ‘Ones to Watch’ for the coming year. Some are great. You know about Florence and the Machine. Empire Of The Sun promise to fill your MGMT-shaped hole. The Big Pink are shoe-gaze-new-gaze goodness and Little Boots is that indie-girl pin up you’ve been sold for years, but better. Lots better.

On the other hand, some are tripe. And dripping. So, before we get back to the round of weekly singles (back in 0th week), I thought it best to warn you off a few potential mistakes.

The Virgins – NME, who really never learn, are drooling over this unintelligent and unprepossessing bunch who sing about cocaine brunches and rich girls in tortured teen drawls. Some cynical marketing exec. has clearly engineered this group by combining the very worst parts of The Kooks, RHCP and Jamiroquai…

White Lies – That bassline. That superhigh, singlenote synth. That voice. Those military stabs of guitar. Heard it before somewhere? Er, Grand National/Interpol/Killers/Editors/JoyfuckingDivision much?

The Soft Pack – the future voice of garage punk? Or just really, really mediocre and unoriginal?

The Chapman Family – OK, they may be the real thing, but the real thing takes itself laughably seriously for a band of such average talent. Hints of Kaiser Chiefs lurking too.

Red Light Company – Their myspace is beautiful, their songs are exultant, their production immense. Yet none of this can save the whining voice, the underlying lack of new ideas, or the uncomfortable closeness to the worst bombastic excesses of Brandon Flowers.

I predict success for all of them. Just don’t get embarrassed in twelve months’ time. Until next week…

Arsenal may have fronted the red (and white) carpet that rolled in 2008 yet they eventually proved that a five point lead and recent championship-winning experience does not equate to success come the season finale. That Liverpool posses a slimmer advantage and only distant recollection of a serious title fight suggests Manchester remains, for the time being at least, the destination for sensible money, contrasting the insensible kind elsewhere in the city.

United have a stronger squad and first team than last season and even assuming their current formation continues to underperform, a return to the tactics of 07-08 remains a feasible plan B. And those last two words have been noticeably lacking in the Chelsea set-up recently. Scolari has overseen a regression towards predictable offensive play with few additions save a couple from his Portugal days; a defender apparently more focused on accruing fantasy football points than defending and a playmaker ageing by the game. Expect the infamous oligarch to be seeking a fourth representative on West London earth by the close of ‘09.

Given the largely woeful and superb half-seasons of Arsenal and Villa respectively, the latter may come to regret their relatively meagre lead of three points. Whilst I’d love to see Villa hang on, if only for the feats of athleticism Martin O’Neill would produce if they did, a slight turnaround for either team will probably see them narrowly drop to fifth, especially with Wenger set to break his ethical code and actually sign someone. Moving down the table, West Brom will surely succumb to relegation, Stoke will follow them after becoming the first team to be crippled by a solitary shoulder injury and John ‘Pompy FC‘ Westwood may finally have to find a new way to get on TV, his love affair with MOTD cameramen cut short.

On the continent, Inter will comfortably retain the scudetto despite underwhelming performances and an inevitable crash out of Europe, infuriated by the triumph of their city rivals in a series of global friendly tournaments designed to cash in on ‘brand-Becks’. This will leave the door open for Barcelona to claim the Domestic/European double this year, a likely feat should they manage to win their way through the lottery of English teams that the latter stages has become. Looking further ahead, October will see the Republic’s qualification hopes entirely dependent on their playoff opponents, whilst England will achieve comfortable qualification, allowing Capello a 2010 of media adulation before eventual World Cup failure. But I’m getting ahead of myself.

Jermaine Defoe will be hoping his second spell at Tottenham is more fruitful than his first.

The England striker has always been popular with the North Londoners and his £15m (after add-ons of course – nothing is paid up front anymore, is it?) move from Portsmouth has been greeted with widespread approval from the White Hart Lane faithful.

But Spurs loyal followers of ‘Arry’s Army should remind themselves exactly why Defoe is returning to their ranks.

A year ago, Portsmouth were a football club enjoying heights they’d never reached before. Acquisitions such as Distin, Kranjcar, Muntari and Diarra helped them to their first FA Cup since 1939. On that occasion, they kept Wolves at bay in a 4-1 win.

Behind the scenes of their latest cup win however, the Wolves knocking at the door did not play in gold and black: the only colour representing them was green.

Portsmouth’s success had come at a price – they possessed one of the highest wage bills in the league. Diarra was reportedly signed on a £100,000-a-week contract, for starters. But surely it was worth it given the success Portsmouth had? You can’t put a price on AC Milan visiting Fratton Park on a blustery Thursday night, can you?

But for every Diarra, there was a David Nugent. The wages that Muntari earnt were merely collected by Milan Baros. This, coupled with some extortionate transfer fees (£7m for John Utaka, anyone?), has left Portsmouth in financial trouble. Harry Redknapp jumped ship as the Titanic sank, ironically a ship which set off from Southampton.

See a pattern emerging? West Ham fans do, as they currently find themselves suffering Pompey’s fate. Of course, this time around it isn’t Redknapp’s fault, but the name Marco Boogers still gets up the nose of many Hammers fans. After selling Rio Ferdinand for £18m to balance the books, Redknapp left six months later. It only took two seasons for West Ham to be relegated – they have never regained financial security since.

As far as I’m concerned, Redknapp is not a good manager. A manager is someone who manages the club; someone who creates an infrastructure within the club that only an earth-shattering earthquake of financial ruin and future incompetence can destroy. Redknapp is a good coach and a very good motivator; but a good manager never leaves a club with debris to be hoovered up by nice guys desperate for a job (Roeder) or a young, untested manager (his very own Rodney, Tony Adams).

But stability doesn’t exist in Del Boy’s world. ‘Arry goes for a machine-gun approach with his transfers as his treble swoop for Defoe, Crouch and Johnson shows. Defoe is fair enough, but Crouch and Johnson would certainly be questionable buys. For me, Hutton – albeit injured at the moment – and Corluka are two of the best defenders in the division whilst Crouch would be an unnecessary luxury.

Jack’s thoughts on his transfer policy correlates with mine. While his new signings propel Spurs to mid-table safety, the Bents and Bales of the squad will eventually rot on the bench by day and a Soho barstool by night, simultaneously eating away at the club’s finances.

Maybe being at a more wealthy club will give him extra license to spend. Perhaps Levy’s millions will give him a bigger margin of error than Lowe’s did. But don’t be surprised if Jermaine Defoe and Michael Dawson move to St. James’ Park in 18 months time.

They’re great players, ‘Arry would love to have them there.

You know what I mean. When a manager barges down the tunnel after a poor performance from his own team, eyes bulging, nostrils flaring, and precedes to point the finger of blame at just about anybody to the nearest man with a microphone. The ref, violent opposition, the pitch; in fact anyone but them or their own team.

In most cases they’re so wrong it’s cringe worthy. Take Southampton manger Jan Poortvliet’s embarrassing ‘performance’ this Sunday. Basically the man failed the acknowledge blatant fact. After the game he said to BBC Sport, “the first goal was offside and the red was just a normal tackle”.

Actually Jan, the first goal was perfectly legitimate and the red card couldn’t be much more deserved for a frankly disgusting tackle by Matt Paterson on Nemanja Vidic. His rant wasn’t just reserved for full time either; referee Mike Reilly received the full brunt of his fury in the tunnel in addition to sarcastic applause as the man in black left the field.

At such times managers are often just angry and Poortvliet is hardly alone (Newcastle manager Joe Kinnear referring to Sun hack Shaun Custis as a ‘c***’ in his comeback press conference is just one memorable example). Yet are these rants just public explosions of anger or do they serve some other purpose?

Take Arsene Wenger, famous for his inexplicable post match bollocks. Just last week he managed to blame a conversation between match officials and opposition staff at half time, rather than the fact that his team were just rubbish, to explain their failure to beat Aston Villa. Naturally there was a scathing reaction in forums and press around the land but one contradictory theory was rather interesting.

The argument is that the most media-savvy managers deliberately push blame away from their side and even onto themselves especially to protect younger players. So in Wenger’s case all the talk was of his rant and not on pressuring his team.

This theory is obviously flimsy, especially given the amount that all of the top managers are clearly just furious, but the benefits of their labours are evident when laid against a counter example. Roy Keane as Sunderland manager very rarely blamed anyone but himself. The buck stopped firmly with him. Of defeat by Bolton towards the end of his reign he said, “whatever the punters thought last weekend when we lost, multiply that by a thousand for what was going through my head.”

This is why Keane and his side couldn’t succeed. The intensity which made him such a great player caused him to implode as a manager and his side with him. Conversely all of the other top managers, deliberately or not, relieve the pressure all the time in the media and so can be happy in the job and so can their players.

Keane may share a barbed tongue with men like Ferguson and Mourinho, but he thoroughly failed to deal with the pressure as well. Managerial rants can be embarrassing, even amusing, but most importantly they are necessary.

In his YouTube address this week, President-Elect Obama kicked off his economic programme. The announcement spoke to his determination to enter the Oval Office on January 20th with his first major piece of legislation ready (almost) to be signed: a large stimulus bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan. It will be the principal business for the first week of the 111th Congress: a large package, probably worth around $800bn, designed to make any forthcoming recession less harsh and less lengthy.

It forms the latest step in the US government’s response to the current economic climate, and the Obama administration’s first major initiative. The President-Elect had remained pretty quiet on the economy (with the exception of a very general discussion of FDR-style public works initiatives), perhaps (understandably) preferring to allow a clear division to be formed in the minds of the public between President Bush’s economic legacy and his own.

Obama’s team should be careful to draw lessons from the current administration’s handling of the Wall Street bailout process back in October. Happily, it seems they have.

What went wrong back then? The major criticism of the Bush administration was that, whilst they were ultimately successful in passing a bailout bill, it took too long. The mainstream American press contrasted Gordon Brown’s approach with Bush’s, concluding the former had responded far better, chiefly because his response was faster. That’s perhaps unfair, and a little too simple — of course Bush wanted to act fast, but Congress, in an election year, prevented him from doing so. A consequence, perhaps, of the difference between the British and American systems of government.

That said, the Bush administration made Congress’ mischief more probable. The White House sold the bill as a “bailout”, emphasising its size, “$700bn”, and that the recipients would be “Wall Street”. A Congressman in a tight re-election race can’t sell a “$700bn Wall Street bailout” to his or her constituents. That led to opposition, and votes against.

It’s all semantics, of course, but it’s massively important stuff. There was a poll the other day asking respondents whether or not they’d support two policies. The two policies were precisely the same, but the first was described as a bailout, the second as a stimulus. The second was supported by twice as many respondents.

Obama’s new stimulus bill is about “job creation”, “strategic investment”, “economic recovery”, “bipartisan solutions”, and will involve “vigorous oversight”. The big figure is never in the headlines, because they’ve been vague about how much it’ll be — which was smart, because the public will have been warmed to the idea of a stimulus (and its necessity) before they hear how much it’ll cost. Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster, yesterday told Politico.com that “Obama’s team are the best linguists I’ve ever seen. Republicans aren’t in his league right now.” If politics is about perception, the Obama team’s adeptness at shaping the wider narrative will pay dividends.

I tend to think a government stimulus package is a strong case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t — if government does nothing, the economy craters, and people hate the government; if government intervenes, opposition parties yell about debt, and the squandering of tax money. And it’s one of those issues, I think, where picking a position in the middle is not really an option: a small stimulus package will do very little, but still give opposition parties an opportunity to scream. Not wishing to oversimplify, but governments have to make a choice something like “all or nothing”.

Obama has picked the former, so the stimulus should be large, done fast, and, crucially, sold well. The American people have to think it’s the right thing to do; that it’ll make them and their economy better off. Only then will they start to spend again.

—

A final note, if only for the sake of humour. President George H. W. Bush conducted a rare interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday. His message: Jeb for President.