Their worst side in years is doing better than us you have to love progression.
-
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
Worst squad / team but yet they have spent about £150million more than us over the last 5 years.
So what’s the solution? Who’s doing what right?
Same timeframe and Everton Have spent more than them as well.
Based on what? Their victory against Norwich?
They were terrible against City and Brighton when they first came back, needed two brutal mistake from Southampton to win that game in which they were outplayed, needed a lot of luck to get by Sheffield in the FA game.
They are "ahead" of us because of games played and it is our worst season in awhile as well. If you want to read a lot into a game against Norwich go right ahead but Woolwich are certainly not playing better than us at all.
i don't think it is obvious at all. No matter how much money we have made Levy has always shown that he is more than happy to not spend it on improving the club. As long as they are good enough to make him a profit and allow him to be a big shot (in his tiny little mind) with his NFL pals he doesn't care at all about our club winning or losing.
As for a specific striker I do not know as I am not in the footballing world so do not know who is or isn't available but I have a very hard time believing that there were zero strikers available that we could have added. I think there were plenty of strikers available that Levy wouldn't buy because he is a cheap POS.
Based on their attitude. their accurate passing , their very fast breaks and some excellent goals.
Depressing isn't it. But a win today will deal with that.
Well that hasn't happened except in the one game against last place Norwich.
They didn't have any of those things in their other 3 games. You seem to be putting a lot of weight on one game against a last place team that has given up, while ignoring 3 poor games against the other 3 teams they have played.
Which strikers were these then, that were available?
4 or 5 teams were after one and only Utd got one. A Chinese league reject who isn't good enough to start in the PL.
I'd love to see the list of strikers "available"
Just to be clear your argument is that there were zero strikers available?
Spurs are supposedly a top club in England with Cl aspirations and they can't get a striker either in the summer or in winter?
United needed a striker and they got one. That is what top teams do. Who are these other clubs that needed a striker and were left with zero? We had zero replacements when Kane is injured.
I don't have a list of specific guys because I do not work for a football team but I have to say that is seems impossible that there are zero strikers available. No not seems it was impossible that there were zero strikers available.
What about the other top teams that were after one?
Why didn't they get one?
Explain that and I'll agree with you
Which other top teams were after one that didn't get one and didn't have a back-up striker?
United needed one and got one.
Posted this way back, all those teams were after a striker.
Only Utd got one. The type of signing that Jose specifically said he didn't want.
What do you mean by list of strikers available?
The transfer window isn't like a classified ad circular where clubs list the players they'd like to sell.
It's up to the buying club to go out and get the player they need. It's why the window exists.
One thing we can't dispute. We were the only major club, to go into the transfer window with no fit striker, and come out the other side still with no fit striker. Seemingly prepared to wing it through the season with square pegs in round holes.
Would this have happened anywhere else? I think we both know the answer to that one.
Well you were wrong then and wrong now.
United got what they needed, a guy that would have been a much better option than what we had available when Kane went down.
Chelsea had a back-up striker so didn't need one like we did. Barca as well did not need one as they had back-up options so they are totally irrelevant to the discussion.
You haven't yet to show a single club that needed a back-up striker because they didn't have one and didn't get it. Who else are playing with no back-up striker like we have been all season long?
So it comes back to the fact that you must believe that in all of football for the first time in history there were zero strikers available, ignoring the ones that were sold, for us to purchase. Also ignores the guy who was available and we reportedly made a low ball offer on.
We don’t need to make big changes apparently
think they have taken us as far as they can. we need investment
Cunts been here almost 20 years now.
Enough is enough.
Enough is enough.