Via The Secret Footballer's blog:
I have been told by more than one player at the club that one decision in particular last season angered Daniel Levy, the club chairman, beyond redemption. After Norwich City had held Arsenal 3-3 at the Emirates Stadium, Tottenham needed to beat Aston Villa to all but secure third spot.
With the score at 1-1, Redknapp made a change. But instead of the extra striker that was needed to grab a vital winner, he threw on Scott Parker and played for the draw. A few people have told me that there were strong words in the Tottenham camp after that incident and that relations between manager and chairman were never quite the same again.
Full article here.
Can't disagree with the fact the substitution was a negative one lacking fortitude and desire for victory. It's about glory and there would have been plenty of it with an attacking substitution even if we went on to lose the game. Would Levy truly blow his top and have words with Redknapp over this? Strong words is a touch ambiguous though. There's no suggestion there was a face off or angry text messages exchanged. Strong words amongst the board of directors? They probably had a good moan. We weren't happy. Why should they be? Everything we had built was being demolished from within.
The game cited might have been the catalyst. They're have been plenty of questionable tactics since February that you could argue as being instrumental in the failure to consolidate 3rd spot. Point being, there were several occasions during the course of the season that would have seen Levy pulling metaphorical hair out. The Villa game was the final opportunity to take control of our destiny and in that moment Redknapp turned his back on it. Pragmatism, safety, consolidating a single point. Whatever the reasons it was his choice. In the manager we trust until that manager has been removed.
Beyond redemption sounds about right if a little dramatic and harsh in relative terms (the damage was done long before the Villa game, as stated, the Villa game was the final straw). But that's the beauty of hindsight and circumstance. It adds weight or removes it from the shoulders that hold it. Micro-analysis of tactical shuffles and substitutions can be long forgotten (even if they warrant more discussion) if all goes well in the end. It didn't end well. So as long as Harry continues to perpetuate a paragon of perfection regarding his tenure at Spurs, we'll have to make do with these lesser scraps that wont be appearing in a tabloid column any time soon.