Tottenham And Tim Sherwood Benefit From One Rule for the Rich…

Smiling Tim Sherwood [Photo: Alan Hill]

Smiling Tim Sherwood [Photo: Alan Hill]

A month ago, I wrote on HotspurHQ concerning the fact that Tim Sherwood hadn’t taken his coaching badges. At that time I wrote,

‘I have just read that Tim Sherwood has never completed his coaching badges, so is not officially qualified to manage Spurs. I was initially comfortable with the idea of him being given the chance to take us through to the end of season, particularly since we didn’t seem to have a succession plan in place.

However, failing to take his qualifications proves Sherwood’s judgement is not up to the mark. He expects Spurs’ owners to back him as a special case to continue to manage whilst he takes the qualifications. The club should not be put in that position. He should have done it in advance. The rules on this issue were settled long ago….’

Now it appears that Sherwood is benefiting from

One Rule for the Rich…

I knew we hadn’t heard the last of this one.

The Guardian has reported that James Beattie has complained about being fined £20,000 (£15,000 of it suspended) for managing Accrington Stanley without the UEFA B qualification.

They said they want to make an example of the club and set it as a precedent. If you go after the smallest club in the league with the smallest turnover and the one with the lowest budget to make a statement then that sort of says it all really.

He pointed out that Tim Sherwood doesn’t have the UEFA Pro licence.

I know people have been given special dispensation. I don’t think Tim has the qualifications to manage Spurs. Nothing has happened there has it?

Be fair, he’s got a point hasn’t he?

Topics: Soccer, Tim Sherwood, Tottenham Hotspur, UEFA Coaching Badges

Want more from Hotspur HQ?  
Subscribe to FanSided Daily for your morning fix. Enter your email and stay in the know.
  • flipper

    No, he doesn’t have a point in any way, shape or form. If you don’t have the qualifications you have to enroll on the relevant course within the first 12 weeks of the appointment. That’s the same for anyone in any pro league. Beattie didn’t have the qualifications and didn’t start the course despite being in charge since last May and by the sounds of things the club didn’t inform the league. If Sherwood fails to enroll within the 12 weeks but is let off without good reason then yes he would have a point, but unless such a time comes he’s talking out of his backside. If anyone’s gotten away with it then it’s Beattie who should have been pulled up on his lack of enrollment back in September and is still being allowed to continue.