As the insult of Tottenham’s thrashing was added to the injury of injustice, the Football Association’s hesitation over Harry Redknapp appeared sage. The way things are going, a season of rich promise could end up producing less joy than the first four months of Juande Ramos.
So is Redknapp destined for uniqueness among England managers in being diminished by the job before he even gets it? Not in reality; his advantages in style of play and man-management endure.
Spurs recovered from a 5-1 defeat by Manchester City and will come back from one by Chelsea. If David Bernstein and Sir Trevor Brooking considered Redknapp the man when Fabio Capello left, they should not waver now.
The FA’s mistake — and discourtesy — has been in not indicating one way or another. The question of whether uncertainty has contributed to Spurs’ decline by taking the eyes of Redknapp and/or his players off the ball is unanswerable by outsiders. But we can legitimately accuse the FA of blighting next season, for key members of the squad need to know who the manager will be in order to weigh their own next moves or otherwise.
The FA can pick whom they like — and the international experience of Roy Hodgson and Glenn Hoddle is persuasive — but delay is unfair.
Although a ghost goal must feel even worse, proportion should be applied. The match turned on two goals, not one. The defensive vulnerability that allowed Juan Mata to set up Ramires vied for significance with Martin Atkinson’s blunder. In any case, blaming the referee is futile when he lacks not only human assistance — the relevant linesman’s view was blocked by players wearing shirts the same colour as the ball — but the second sight enjoyed by millions.
It was yet another reminder that we need a telly for the fourth official — and not expensive gadgets. The FA have been a bit slow on that one as well.
