1. The London based media and cosy sofa-dwelling pundits, who invariably refer to him only as “Harry” like he’s a national treasure, and spout endless guff about what a character he is – based on little more than his willingness to always be interviewed (making their jobs easier) and crack attempted quips about his missus or fish and chips.
2. Sensible objective types like you and me, who judge him instead on a record of one trophy in 30 years, very nearly bankrupting Pompey in the process, and an apparent inability to make do with what he has, instead clumsily tapping up players via the press by talking about how much he “admires” them and either buying or selling Peter Crouch in every transfer window. Oh and we still think he’s a bit dodgy – no smoke without fire and all that.
Thus the F.A.s decision to go instead for Roy Hodgson gets no argument from this particular armchair expert. He may not be absolutely the right man, but he’s not the wrong man. Put him next to ‘Arry and compare his record and the only area in which he is outpointed is the lack of supposed charisma. “The players want Harry” we were told, when Capello resigned. The players (Lamps, JT, Wazza and the rest of the serially underachieving pampered losers) forfeited their right to any say in the matter when they couldn’t beat Algeria. Keegan had charisma and he ended up resigning in the toilets.
At least Redknapp won’t be disappointed at being overlooked, having apparently not thought about the England job at all, not for one little minute. Yeah we believe you.
A sad night in the Redknapp household. Harry's the one on the right.