-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Corrected for you mate
To a degree, yes......... But they've had a massive amount of blunders in the trf market too over the last decade; the blow for which would have been cushioned by Suarez & Sterling + the fact they've been getting crazy money for players like Solanke and others in more recent times.
Two in a row... Prior to that you had Dalglish & Hodgson.
Eriksen >>>>>>>>>>> Coutinho IMO. Borderine Ozil/luxury player IMO.
The £5 pie (sausage roll) and pint deal has been irretrievably compromised by the blatant reduction in size particularly of the sausage (how can this go unnoticed?) roll and an indicator that football as a product is and always has been riddled with corruption and immorality.
Therefore the question on whether a single owner's morals is cause for concern is superfluous, blindingly so when one considers the whole sport has been run by money grabbing crooks ever since Noah was a boy?
The Coutinho money was directly responsible..... They've been rocking a near net spend budget too for some time.
It brings into focus we were financing the kickstart of our stadium project.... I know people are bored of hearing it; but it's a huge difference maker during that time-frame.....
My point is that they receive the same criticism as ours do....... Even now they're being criticised for not being bold enough to build upon their recent trophies.
Remains to be seen of course, but just imagine what's gonna happen up there if they decide they can't meet Salah's huge new wage demands..... Riots!
But that's moneyball, selling players but replacing them well. We did that terribly with Bale and then not at all recently with Kane. Losing Suarez, Sterling, Coutinho etc could have seen them plummet down the table but they had the right coach & transfer strategy to improve despite losing them. And selling players who the club identifies to be deadwood but other clubs haven't worked that out yet is also smart. There's also a great degree of luck in all of this (even the best scouts/data analysts are wrong a lot) but these people will always be judged on results.
My bad, for some reason I thought their first appointment was Dalglish and they took over with Hodgson in charge. I'd say Dalglish at least wanted to implement good football but was hampered by a very poor squad. Following Brendan with Klopp was smart though, although again you could say it was very good luck that a man like Klopp was available at the time.
And I'd tend to agree. Although Coutinho in that half season for Liverpool was on fire. Eriksen perhaps a less exciting player at their peaks, but a more reliable one. But Barcelona saw a young, exciting South American and lost their heads.
If you want to do something about this without just screwing over players and fans do something like this:
All revenue for kit deals and stadium sponsorship deals that exceed 1/10 of the league total for the year are pooled together
All ticket revenue per ticket above a given reasonable inflafion-adjusted amount is pooled together
All PL and, say, 50% of CL TV revenue is pooled together.
And that total pool is combined and split into 30 shares, one each for every PL team, three each for the three Football League divisions, and one for the WSL.
Then limit aggregate net transfer fee expenditure of any club that qualified for Europe to the highest net spend the previous season of any club that didn’t.
Teams are free to spend as much money and demonstrate as much ambition as they like and there are no American-style rewards for failure or enforced parity. But there are also strictly limited financial rewards for dominance and barriers to distorting the competitive integrity of the game. And all structured so the necessary reform does not just get rolled onto the backs of players and supporters.
These rules mean every pound a sugar daddy lavishes serves primarily to strengthen the rest of the league and pyramid.
precisely
what to do - find a sheik for the 87-90 clubs without a "money no object" bank balance or donor who shovels in money that wasn't earned through on pitch attainment
or strip the clubs that cheat to win?
The whole essence of sport - is a level playing field
trying to ignore the fact that City and the chavs have spending powers that yield an unfair advantage is ludicrous, as is ignoring the financial injections into wolves, Leicester and Liverpool.
Think of what Manure would have won, had it not been for the cancerous Glazers asset stripping them?
I just wish the authorities that run the leagues would simply have the balls to start docking massive points tallies off the clubs that fiddle the system, simply to prevent them winning, until their predatory or vanity project owners just fuck off and leave the game alone
That answer is the opposite of the reply to the original thread title.
not sure that questioning the morals of our current owners is relevant
The direction they are taking, with regards to the football team is shit
But by and large they're not morally ambivalent, just totally profit and business orientated. Just a pity that it's the business of making money and not the business of making successful football teams
To compete with the chavs and city will mean that Lewis will have to find out he only has one year to live and he decides to spunk his wealth on the team.
But then we become as bad as them, morally
Football's fucked
Sorry, I thought there was a strong degree of stat-based recruitment attached to a so-called money-ball model.... (or alternatively in some quarters just another name for being a cheque-book club).... Anyway; the terminology is less important I guess....
Not as badly as it first looked..... Eriksen was massive VFM which balanced things out over time once a few of the others were sold. Thought Chadli was a good deal too.
Brenton's reign saw a succession of duffers brought in and in Keita & Ox-Chamberlain you've got 100m of bust under Klopp right there..... It's closer than one might think and it's also fair to add that none of those sales were by design or part of a pro-active strategy.
True; I guess by the same token we did great out of the Kane, Bentaleb, Andros, Mason, Carrol, Winks, Pritchard era of the academy sales-wise .
Results: Definitely.... Circumstance vs strategy quickly becomes the discussion at that point... See above ramblings. LOL
Nah, you may well be right... I'm not aware of the exact time-frames either.....
....And some terrible transfer activity. He was a relic though..... Didn't have a clue anymore.
Anyway.... I guess there's a more fitting thread for this.... Somewhere!
I don’t find the morals of Joe Lewis to be particularly impressive considering he’s profited on the downturn or the British economy and also fucks off the Caribbean to dodge taxes and I still support Tottenham and feel reasonably morally superior to other clubs.
At the same time, I wouldn’t feel incredibly comfortable with the very public knowledge that the owner of my club ordered the murder and dismemberment by bonesaw of a journalist. Plus all the myriad of other things that come with being owned by the Saudi state.
So I don’t know, maybe there’s some sort of middle ground there?
At the same time, I wouldn’t feel incredibly comfortable with the very public knowledge that the owner of my club ordered the murder and dismemberment by bonesaw of a journalist. Plus all the myriad of other things that come with being owned by the Saudi state.
So I don’t know, maybe there’s some sort of middle ground there?
Don't worry; I'm sure some shit-house will try and manipulate this against you at a later date.....
I guess you have to choose where the line is. Want the club to be owned by Jimmy Saville? I'm guessing no.
It's only billionaires that are going to buy a club like Spurs from Enic. We are owned by a billionaire. They are all going to sit on a sliding scale of scumbag, seems to be a big part of being stupidly rich. I'm pretty sure our owner is less scummy than the Saudi regime. But that doesn't mean he's not a scumbag in his own way, and you probably don't have to search very hard to find something shitty Joe Lewis has done when it comes to money. But going back to the start, it's choosing where the line is. That's up to each individual.
Football is now owned, lock stock and barrel, by rich, corrupt arseholes. Even if your club isn't, it belongs to a league that is run by these people, the same with the federations of UEFA and FIFA. I don't think you can decide our/your club is somehow separate from all this, just because the owner is less of a scumbag than some of the other owners.
So if you accept that the club is going to be owned by some billionaire scumbag of some kind, and that the game is run by these people regardless, then ask yourself who, as a fan, do you cheer on? It's not the owner. It's the players and the manager and the club as it used to exist when it was rooted in local community. And as a fan cheering on players, it's not unreasonable to be excited to cheer for better players to represent your team, than worse players under an owner like Mike Ashley, who didn't give a single fuck about the club or the fans beyond his own pocket.
Frankly, if people are that disgusted with these types of owners, they'd jack the whole game in because there is no getting away from it. And yet here we are, we know it's all wrong, we know City/Chelsea/PSG are bullshit, and we are still here. And we want money from these clubs ("sell Kane for £150m!") and then want to spend that money to get better players, we won't give it to charity. We still want to beat these clubs and play in the same competitions as them, we don't want to withdraw because we have a higher moral standard. And Joe Lewis doesn't "do things the right way" to make anybody feel better, he does things his way because it suits his pocket, which is what matters to him. Same as Mike Ashley did at Newcastle.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. The game, or any sense of morality within it, died a long time ago. Which is why I didn't really understand all the fury at the ESL. For me it was like "NOW you want to be angry?" The time has passed. And I feel the same about the people who own the clubs now. If some rich tyrant owned Spurs, I'd enjoy watching the team stacked with great players and I'd think the owner was a horrible cunt. For me, it wouldn't be much less hollow than the ENIC pretense of doing things 'the right way.'
It's only billionaires that are going to buy a club like Spurs from Enic. We are owned by a billionaire. They are all going to sit on a sliding scale of scumbag, seems to be a big part of being stupidly rich. I'm pretty sure our owner is less scummy than the Saudi regime. But that doesn't mean he's not a scumbag in his own way, and you probably don't have to search very hard to find something shitty Joe Lewis has done when it comes to money. But going back to the start, it's choosing where the line is. That's up to each individual.
Football is now owned, lock stock and barrel, by rich, corrupt arseholes. Even if your club isn't, it belongs to a league that is run by these people, the same with the federations of UEFA and FIFA. I don't think you can decide our/your club is somehow separate from all this, just because the owner is less of a scumbag than some of the other owners.
So if you accept that the club is going to be owned by some billionaire scumbag of some kind, and that the game is run by these people regardless, then ask yourself who, as a fan, do you cheer on? It's not the owner. It's the players and the manager and the club as it used to exist when it was rooted in local community. And as a fan cheering on players, it's not unreasonable to be excited to cheer for better players to represent your team, than worse players under an owner like Mike Ashley, who didn't give a single fuck about the club or the fans beyond his own pocket.
Frankly, if people are that disgusted with these types of owners, they'd jack the whole game in because there is no getting away from it. And yet here we are, we know it's all wrong, we know City/Chelsea/PSG are bullshit, and we are still here. And we want money from these clubs ("sell Kane for £150m!") and then want to spend that money to get better players, we won't give it to charity. We still want to beat these clubs and play in the same competitions as them, we don't want to withdraw because we have a higher moral standard. And Joe Lewis doesn't "do things the right way" to make anybody feel better, he does things his way because it suits his pocket, which is what matters to him. Same as Mike Ashley did at Newcastle.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. The game, or any sense of morality within it, died a long time ago. Which is why I didn't really understand all the fury at the ESL. For me it was like "NOW you want to be angry?" The time has passed. And I feel the same about the people who own the clubs now. If some rich tyrant owned Spurs, I'd enjoy watching the team stacked with great players and I'd think the owner was a horrible cunt. For me, it wouldn't be much less hollow than the ENIC pretense of doing things 'the right way.'
Yeh, I don't think the question was 'do you want great owners and trophies with no morally dubious undercurrent?'.....
Pretty one-sided discussion that.
Yeah, but you didn't say "hypocritical of Spurs as a club", you said "hypocritical of Spurs fans", which isn't the same at all.
One is a ultra capitalist that profited on the misery of others.
The other one actively persecutes and causes the misery of others.
I used to like and have compassion for Newcastle United. Not any more.
My point being Spurs fans on here saying stuff like “ I’m glad we are run the way we are” what a load of horse shit.