Sale of Spurs to Scholar

  • 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...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Bank debts mount to more than pounds 12m over next two years as ground development costs spiral and Hummel leisurewear firm slumps.


Was def the West Stand then. As noted, Shelf side sorted later on. Also I remember the famous 'urban myth' of Alan Sugar pointing at a player on the pitch and saying:

"That Barnaby is going to finance the new East Stand"
 
only working on memory here, so a bit vague but now you mention it, i remember sugar saying the fans wanted the shelf and it was important that he gave them what they wanted. sort of.
if the shelf then the west stand were rebuilt properly, would we have to move ?

btw, north stands 'the paxton' south stands 'the park lane'. can we only use these names, anyone can have a north or south stand only we have the park lane.
west stand always been the west stand but if 1882 got the lower tier [and they should] it should be called 'the enclosure'.
 
Isnt alot of the negative spin on Scholer, Sugar peddled propaganda though?

At the end of the day, he was Chairman through a decade of actual acheivement, where as Sugar likes to talk about saving Tottenham...yet what did he actually do?

Re-negotiated the terms of a 10M pound debt with Midland Bank -

By 1991 it (Spurs) owed £10.5m to Midland Bank (now part of HSBC), a debt which reportedly made the bank transfer the account from the Smithfield branch to its casualty unit in Cannon Street and demand a series of changes including a new chairman and the sale of its then best player Paul Gascoigne. - Financial News

Sugar tries to live off signing Klinsmann (who fucking hated him), and stabilising the club financially (which he did to be fair) yet look at the managers he appointed. He was the chairman that took us into the dark ages on the pitch, and while we couldnt exactly splash the cash in those days, we didnt have to flirt with relegation every season either.

How would that have panned out for his hero status..
 
sammyspurs said:
Isnt alot of the negative spin on Scholer, Sugar peddled propaganda though?

At the end of the day, he was Chairman through a decade of actual acheivement, where as Sugar likes to talk about saving Tottenham...yet what did he actually do?

Re-negotiated the terms of a 10M pound debt with Midland Bank -

By 1991 it (Spurs) owed £10.5m to Midland Bank (now part of HSBC), a debt which reportedly made the bank transfer the account from the Smithfield branch to its casualty unit in Cannon Street and demand a series of changes including a new chairman and the sale of its then best player Paul Gascoigne. - Financial News

Sugar tries to live off signing Klinsmann (who fucking hated him), and stabilising the club financially (which he did to be fair) yet look at the managers he appointed. He was the chairman that took us into the dark ages on the pitch, and while we couldnt exactly splash the cash in those days, we didnt have to flirt with relegation every season either.

How would that have panned out for his hero status..
Not really. Scholar ruined us. Sugar saved us. Then Sugar should have moved over, sure, but without him, we'd have been Rangers.
 
I know someone who had a very high boardroom position at Spurs during the late 80s / early 90s, spoke to him a little bit about those times, a LOT of internal politics.

Sugar had to get the club back on an even keel, which he managed to do. The main reason we fell so far behind everybody at the start of the PL years was the gamble the club had taken in the 80s.
 
Schoolboy'sOwnStuff said:
sammyspurs said:
Isnt alot of the negative spin on Scholer, Sugar peddled propaganda though?

At the end of the day, he was Chairman through a decade of actual acheivement, where as Sugar likes to talk about saving Tottenham...yet what did he actually do?

Re-negotiated the terms of a 10M pound debt with Midland Bank -

By 1991 it (Spurs) owed £10.5m to Midland Bank (now part of HSBC), a debt which reportedly made the bank transfer the account from the Smithfield branch to its casualty unit in Cannon Street and demand a series of changes including a new chairman and the sale of its then best player Paul Gascoigne. - Financial News

Sugar tries to live off signing Klinsmann (who fucking hated him), and stabilising the club financially (which he did to be fair) yet look at the managers he appointed. He was the chairman that took us into the dark ages on the pitch, and while we couldnt exactly splash the cash in those days, we didnt have to flirt with relegation every season either.

How would that have panned out for his hero status..
Not really. Scholar ruined us. Sugar saved us. Then Sugar should have moved over, sure, but without him, we'd have been Rangers.

I accept he stabilized us but I dont buy the line "Scholar ruined us. Sugar saved us."

Sugar could have kept the club well on the pitch too without some of the absolute shit he signed. We were not in 100M debt.
 
If Sugar had appointed good managers we wouldn't have been in decline for so long. We were on the same level as the scum in 95, they had Bruce Rioch as manager. They signed Bergkamp and Sugar wouldn't as he didn't want another "Carlos Kickaball"
 
Flannerz said:
If Sugar had appointed good managers we wouldn't have been in decline for so long. We were on the same level as the scum in 95, they had Bruce Rioch as manager. They signed Bergkamp and Sugar wouldn't as he didn't want another "Carlos Kickaball"

He also appointed the man who turned down Zidane for being "too wooden"..

:wall:
 
sammyspurs said:
Flannerz said:
If Sugar had appointed good managers we wouldn't have been in decline for so long. We were on the same level as the scum in 95, they had Bruce Rioch as manager. They signed Bergkamp and Sugar wouldn't as he didn't want another "Carlos Kickaball"

He also appointed the man who turned down Zidane for being "too wooden"..

:wall:
And laughed along with the other directors at the name of a German footballer who it was recommended that we sign. Needless to say, Steffen Effenberg did not join us.
 
Flannerz said:
sammyspurs said:
Flannerz said:
If Sugar had appointed good managers we wouldn't have been in decline for so long. We were on the same level as the scum in 95, they had Bruce Rioch as manager. They signed Bergkamp and Sugar wouldn't as he didn't want another "Carlos Kickaball"

He also appointed the man who turned down Zidane for being "too wooden"..

:wall:
And laughed along with the other directors at the name of a German footballer who it was recommended that we sign. Needless to say, Steffen Effenberg did not join us.

Steffen Effenberg is a cunt though. So I'm not too bothered about that.
 
I thought Klinsmann was a cunt before he signed for us...and Adebayor.

This thread just highlights how minute the time line is from being a club of great success to being one who were cast adrift for so long. There were a couple of seasons where both ourselves and Everton probably could have just as easily gone down as stayed up.

My first memory of crushing disappointment are both losing to Coventry in the cup and Woolwich in the League Cup semi final - it seemed to prepare me for what has been a pretty arduous time as a Spurs fan
 
sammyspurs said:
I accept he stabilized us but I dont buy the line "Scholar ruined us. Sugar saved us."

Sugar could have kept the club well on the pitch too without some of the absolute shit he signed. We were not in 100M debt.

Whilst clubs nowadays have plenty more debt than the 10 million we were in debt in 1991 it was different times of course. no sky money back then, tv deals a relative pittance and the 10m debt was seen as astronomical. It was another (unwanted) first for Spurs.

We went into the 1991 cup final with a small bit of our minds worrying that it was going to be the last match we played before being wound up.

Scholar has a lot to answer for, and I would argue that he did ruin the club, as he brought us to the brink of extinction. We could have done a Rangers 20 years before Rangers
 
Yes we were in the shit, and Scholer was in charge.....but its more the notion that "Sugar saved us" that irks me. He did some fantastic things financially, but held us back woefully with his awful "on the pitch" decisions.

The two cant just willfully be separated. The worst era of football for Spurs came under him.
 
It's funny how views about a decade appear later on. 20 years from now will Harry be fondly remembered?

Anyway the 90s were strange when you look at managers. Venables, Ardiles, Francis. All some form of terrace favourite.
Then Gross.... and then one of the most successful club managers of the recent times - The man in the raincoat. To me that always seemed like Sugar just thinking fuck it and acting like a businessman rather than a football chairman.

Sugar had a lot of people advising him, who knows which decisions were his and which were mainly others. Plus money was tight. I don't think you can underestimate how much trouble we were in during the early 90s.
 
Back
Top Bottom