Spurs Show

  • 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

You don't know what you're missing.
This is true. One day I might get past the opening 15 minutes of jovial but aimless banter to find out. Just don't have the time. I rather like the guy that does the youth/loan reports. Keeps it nice and snappy.

And Martin Jol oves Me guy, stay off the dislike button, please.
 
All down to taste, I love the beer, singing and 'happy clappy' ( :baletroll: ) natured stuff.
There's an argument that there's fundamentally no point to the analysis stuff, doesn't make a slight bit of difference but people enjoy it.
 
LOL at the one that played for Tottenham. I remember us 'signing' Terry Gibson. One paragraph in the Daily Mirror. When I brought it up years later (not that long ago in fact), I was told Terry Gibson never played or signed for us. Hence my trolleth question.
 
Ok, so I listened a little more than half of The Fighting Cock episode 19 when the dude started reciting the poem. Will listen to the rest later.

Enjoyed it actually. Jumped right into it which was good. I liked hearing about the 1882 stuff as well.
 
Still, we are not the Spurs Show and we obviously appeal to a different type of Spurs fan. Room for the both of us. They're mainstream, we're left-field.
Zactly, Spooky! This is a show for the baby-boom generation, trenchcoats and ties and pork-pie hats. The Fighting Cock is for the disaffected juvies of N17.

Personally, I like 'em both too, even though Ricky mumbles too much on the Cock-cast. Here's hoping they extend Phil Cornwell's West End Run, his replacement is much better!
 
What they never really made clear on the Spurs Show is that Mike Leigh is Phil Cornwell's agent, and that quite a few of the guests are also his clients.
Hmm, somehow I knew that Leigh was Cornwell's agent within perhaps a few listens of the show. I think I may just have googled him…

It's obvious that SS is part of a larger money-making enterprise. Sure, the "subscriptions" to the show (as well as Amazon referrer fees generated from gift lists on the show's website) probably only cover the cost of hosting and the engineer, but the show is part of keeping Cornwell and others in the public eye. Considering Cornwell's livelihood—and, hence, Leigh's—is tied to his being a known face/voice in the public, then it makes sense to do the show for free.

That is, even if the specific agent/client relationship was not explicit, it's obvious that part of the existence of the SS is future revenue not based on the show directly but, rather, based on the exposure that Cornwell (et al.) get in doing the show. Nothing nefarious or dodgy about that at all, imo. Furthermore, as with any talk show, guests are often booked on a schedule related to something for them to advertise—from having Welch and White on to advertise The Ghost of White Hart Lane (which is how I learned of the book) two years ago to having Martin Cloake on recently to plug his new book.

Finally, it's a "Playback media production", which means it's part of, as one may guess, a stable of football podcasts, including the FM podcast, a Woolwich podcast, and so on. All under the watch of Leigh, and I wonder if FM/etc. don't pay a bit to have the studio, engineer, etc. taken care of for them by Leigh's team.

I mean, I wouldn't hold it against any of the TFC participants if he were to parlay his volunteer work on the podcast into a money-making blog or something like that.
 
Incidentally, I was going to skip this week's SS, but gave it a listen because of the responses here.

Their lazy "it's so Spurs" line sets me off like nothing else that they do (and they're not alone in this). Yes, we've given up a lot of goals in the last ten minutes. Yes, we'd "be first" if we hadn't.

Somehow we bottle it. Typical Spurs.

Like the Spurs who bottled it and threw away a lead at Old Trafford this year? We got three points off the toughest fixture of the year and somehow we have a psychological crisis and have no mettle?

Are these alleged fans saying our job at OT was not a testament to perseverance and chasing a goal, but, rather, an aberrant fluke, because, as we all know, Spurs throw away leads?

Bollocks.

Furthermore, we'd "be first" if not for the tossed points ONLY BECAUSE we've played so well in general and have such a strong baseline of points in the bank. If we were sitting on five points, the 15 (or whatever it is) that we tossed away in the closing ten minutes of matches would matter far less than trying to figure out why we're not winning anything!

I think we are missing a bit of an edge late in games, and I think that that's not because "Spurs will always break your heart." It's because football is tough—and in that sense, the fellow from the Evening Sandard was right. It takes a lot to see a match out.

But to suggest it's destiny or pathology or whatever (like Leigh always does) is just lazy, lazy knee-jerking.
 
Back
Top Bottom