|
Post by marshbowles10 on Jun 25, 2014 15:37:40 GMT
I think it totally wrong for any sporting manager, let alone our 'Arry to be the 'star' of the new betting company, Bet 666.
The game as we have seen, is open to enough corrupt elements without Rednapp endorsing gambling. Whilst I love a fiver each way bet myself, I just think it wrong for senior football personnel, especially those, with what can we say, a chequered background as Harry's, endorsing a betting company.
Perhaps Tony doesn't pay him enough and he needs extra income? Perhaps the Rednapp dynasty advertising campaigns aren't working?
Yes I know we played in the Sky Bet Championship and every other team seems to be sponsored by a betting company and yes Ray Winston doesn't need to 'ave a bang on that' to pay his mortgage but morally I feel that football professionals endorsing betting should be a no-no.
Plus 666 is the mark of the devil.
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Jun 25, 2014 16:10:34 GMT
Very poor decision and it's not like he needs the money.
He'll be doing payday loan and Christmas Club adverts next.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Jun 25, 2014 16:15:19 GMT
Interesting point (Not so much the 666 "The Number of the Beast" ) Especially given arent they instituting a total ban on footballers betting on games? So maybe technically not applicable, but the spirit?
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Jun 25, 2014 16:19:08 GMT
When 'Arry was at West Ham there was a story doing the rounds regarding time of first throw-in bets.
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Jun 25, 2014 21:31:07 GMT
Very poor decision and it's not like he needs the money. He'll be doing payday loan and Christmas Club adverts next. Pantomimes? Oh no he wouldn't, oh yes he would, oh no he wouldn't, oh yes he would.....
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Jun 26, 2014 12:08:51 GMT
If he can't be expected to pass up an opportunity to make more money for himself, as some would say, why should we be expected to pass up an opportunity to criticise him.
If whatever he is paid is never enough, isn't it reasonable for supporters to feel that whatever he DOES is never enough.
Surely 'gimme, gimme, gimme' and 'more, more, more' cuts both ways.
If it is acceptable for him to say how much he should get out of QPR, why shouldn't we be unsentimental about saying how much QPR should get out of him.
People in his position are bound to get hammered when they want more and more but when it comes to delivery, suddenly 'less is more', and we shouldn't expect too much.
Why not?
If they can't be expected to care about the vast losses the Club is running up supporting him and the equally overpaid players, why should we care what anyone says about them?
Like the Board, they play sentiment and hardball to suit themselves. 'The sky's the limit' when it costs them nothing, then 'be reasonable' when they don't deliver.
Of course, his answer might be 'fine, get someone else'. Not much of a threat on his money, since his replacements are queueing up right now to get so much money for so little old rope.
So it is fair to ask what QPR gets in return. Doesn't sound like much to me. Last season, under his own masterful guidance, he thought they might well be relegated to the third tier.
Seems our impression of how good he is is at variance with his own.
And this is a guy who is one of the highest paid managers in the world, but who thinks that anyone outside the top seven is merely fighting relegation.
What if we put it like that? What if we said 'Redknapp will only ever have QPR fighting relegation, nothing more?' Or 'Redknapp will take us down' last season?
I wonder whether Fernandes picked him up on that. 'If you think you might well take us down, maybe you should be paid on that basis'.
But maybe he didn't put it that way to Fernandes. That was for us.
I think this is honest, and I don't think he is a bad manager, but if he is the best we can get, given our limitations and the way the game is, then a hard time at the hands of frustrated supporters is the best he can expect to get, given his limitations, and the limitations of the game.
|
|
paulmason
Neil Warnock
Enter your message here...
Posts: 711
|
Post by paulmason on Jun 26, 2014 13:33:05 GMT
666 to Harry: Harry, we will pay you X to do Y.
Harry to 666: OK.
What has he done wrong?
|
|
|
Post by marshbowles10 on Jun 26, 2014 20:42:41 GMT
666 to Harry: Harry, we will pay you X to do Y. Harry to 666: OK.But first I must ask a question. Football and betting have come in for a bit of disrepute recently. Should a football manager that has 'inside information' on stuff like transfers or who is going to take a penally really be the spokesperson for a betting site? What has he done wrong? By accepting whatever fee he gets for promoting a gambling site he has legally done nothing wrong. Morally he has done everything wrong. Read more: qprreport.proboards.com/post/new/39458#ixzz35mPVaRuj
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Jun 27, 2014 8:43:17 GMT
You can bet on it.
|
|
paulmason
Neil Warnock
Enter your message here...
Posts: 711
|
Post by paulmason on Jun 27, 2014 9:19:06 GMT
666 to Harry: Harry, we will pay you X to do Y. Harry to 666: OK.But first I must ask a question. Football and betting have come in for a bit of disrepute recently. Should a football manager that has 'inside information' on stuff like transfers or who is going to take a penally really be the spokesperson for a betting site? What has he done wrong? By accepting whatever fee he gets for promoting a gambling site he has legally done nothing wrong. Morally he has done everything wrong. Read more: qprreport.proboards.com/post/new/39458#ixzz35mPVaRuj“Our plan is to truly shake up the betting market and we’re absolutely thrilled that Harry is our brand ambassador. He’s the perfect fit for us and I’m sure everyone will love our TV adverts with him.” Harry is the face of 666 launch promotion and adverts, thats all, he does not set the markets, advise them in any capacity but I guess you know that and I think you have a problem with him earning a bit more on the side, more than anything else.
|
|
|
Post by blatantfowl on Jun 27, 2014 11:17:01 GMT
Harry was proved innocent of previous allegations of financial irregularities.
Betting is legal and accepted as a pastime for millions of consumers. To some it is immoral but that is a very puritanical view. I do not believe there are many who can make that judgement with credibility as they would have to be morally untouchable themselves.
Someone who advertises betting does not influence the results or the odds. I no more think Harry would be party to such matters than Ray Winstone is.
I do not think Harry's commitment to QPR is diluted by taking this role with 666.
So, take gossip and the moral sniffyness out of the argument and it's not a problem in my opinion.
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Jun 27, 2014 11:25:55 GMT
Good question, and well put, but it depends on what you mean by 'on the side'? If you mean that QPR is his main job, and 666 is just a little pin money on the side, why should anyone believe that? Why shouldn't we think that 666 and whatever other means he has of making money are more important? And if his performance doesn't influence the markets 666 perform in, why is he 'their face'? Surely he is their face in ORDER to influence their market? In their favour. Assuming he already has plenty of money (he may go through it quickly, but that's his business), why would anyone think that QPR is anything other than a nice little earner 'on the side' for him? Any supporter could retire on what he's earned in one season at QPR. Why tell ourselves he's hungry or dedicated or talented? Why should we be any more convinced by him than he is? He thought he could keep us up, but he took us down. He now tells us he thought his talents might well take us down again, but he took us up. Doesn't seem to have much idea, does he? And how surprised he must have been! We went down, I thought we'd stay up! We've gone up, I thought we'd go down! Now he tells us that any Club outside the top seven is fighting relegation. So mere survival is success. Surely that isn't how 666 see it? I don't think it is Redknapp's fault that the whole conception of Harry managing anything at QPR, influencing anything at QPR, or setting standards for others to comply with at QPR, is meaningless. But isn't that what we're told a manager does? So let's just see them all as self-interested, and admit that it makes sense for the players and managers and directors to keep on taking the money while the Club keeps on losing it. Because that is very good, and very profitable for THEM. 666 will do everything they can to ensure that they MAKE money out of Redknapp, but there is no-one at QPR who does the same for the Club. QPR is money in his pocket, and 666 is money in his pocket. Why should we imagine that QPR is any more important to him than 666?
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Jun 27, 2014 11:38:14 GMT
|
|