The Bill Nicholson Forum



Join the forum, it's quick and easy

The Bill Nicholson Forum

The Bill Nicholson Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
The Bill Nicholson Forum

Spurs Chat

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    WELCOME TO THE BILL NICHOLSON FORUM - SPURS CHAT

Latest topics

» Not been here for a while
Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 EmptyThu Jan 21 2021, 20:01 by BazSpur

» Sky Sports News Links
Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 EmptyThu Oct 29 2020, 18:13 by DJSR

» Hello....the site is still alive!
Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 EmptyThu Oct 29 2020, 18:11 by DJSR

» 17 million deal for Musacchio
Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 EmptyFri Feb 24 2017, 18:39 by souptheyid

» How to Block Adverts on this Site !
Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 EmptyFri Feb 24 2017, 18:36 by souptheyid

» This is Our Season
Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 14 2016, 00:54 by vis

» 'appy New Season
Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 EmptySat Aug 29 2015, 08:09 by BazSpur

»  Time to say goodbye
Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 EmptyFri Aug 28 2015, 21:37 by Maximus

» Crouchinio
Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 EmptyThu Jan 15 2015, 03:00 by vis

Navigation

Spurs Legends



Former Spurs Manager: Keith Burkinshaw

Gallery


Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty

Affiliates

Log in

I forgot my password


+6
anicoll5
ionman34
SuneJim
LOBO
BazSpur
shearspur
10 posters

    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    ionman34
    ionman34
    Champions League
    Champions League


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by ionman34 Sat Jan 15 2011, 12:36

    I've kind of kept away from this debate, after making my feelings felt early doors, as there has been a lot of information coming from both the pro and con sides of the debate, information that I've been chewing over for quite a bit.

    Now where Spurs finally set up shop is pretty much a moot point to me, being out here in Oz, and it was this realisation that finally decided me on just what side of the fence I now find myself.

    As I said, I now live on the other side of the World and yet my love for my club has not diminished in the slightest, if anything it has grown stronger with my enforced estrangement. With this in mind I find that my feelings now resonate with those of Sid, Jim, Dave and those who feel that it is time for us to move out of a Borough that, let's face it, only want the club to remain so that they can continue to milk the benefits from the only cash cow they can get their grubby paws near.
    They don't give a toss about the community, if they did then Tottenham wouldn't be the toilet it currently is. They don't give a toss about the club, aside from keeping it healthy enough that they can carve enough from it without killing it. Even that I'm not so sure about as that would mean they put some forward thinking into their decisions and that is stretching the imagination to breaking point here!

    Personally, I couldn't give a toss about the area itself. My interest in the Tottenham 'community' died when my Nan did. The only link I've ever retained to the place I was born in is the club that I love. In a nutshell I'll carry on loving the club regardless of where it is situated. It won't stop being Tottenham Hotspur, for me, just because the address has changed.

    I didn't stop being who I am moving abroad. I didn't lose my history by moving away from where that history happened. I just opened a new chapter in that history that is me and mine.

    I won't lie to you, it will be hard closing the book on that part of our history, should it happen, but I can't help but believe that the new dawn will bring an unparalleled glory if the move then makes us a European powerhouse.

    Our history is second to none. The history has not been due to our location though has it? It has happened whilst we were situated where we are, in spite of it if you will. The staff and players who have achieved for us would have done so whether we were in Tottenham or not. Let's face it, of the many 'Legends' that have graced the Lillywhite, how many were Tottenham natives? Blanchflower? Mackay? Gilzean? Gascoigne? Ardiles or Villa? lol! Even Hoddle, although he came through the ranks, was not a native.

    How about the greatest legend of them all, Bill Nic himself?

    What of the fans themselves? You would have to go back 30 years or more, to the standing days, when you would see the 'community' walking out the front door to join the throngs marching to the Park Lane, the Paxton and the Shelf. Nowadays the throngs are making their way to the train station, the tube station or to their cars parked on the other side of the park, girding themselves for the battle down the A10 or around the North Circular and M25. I'll take a stab and state that better than 90% of the faithfull don't live in the borough, let alone in Tottenham itself.

    I've undergone some self examination on just why I would feel uncomfortable about the move and have arrived at an honest, if somewhat demeaning, conclusion. It's bragging rights and nothing else. The ability to take the goons to task about their nomadic history. Whilst they're stating 'look at our trophies, we're crowing 'look at our location'.

    Righto, we're bragging about retaining our location in effectively a Third World toilet where most of the community wear Red and White!

    We sure showed them goons hey?


    Having come to this realisation, I now see just how dangerous this unenlightened mindset is to the long term future of the club I love. By spending a substantial amount of extra money to build a stadium in an area that would put a bullet in us itself, if a profit could be made, just so we can say 'This is our Manor' smacks of the most ignorant, archaic thinking. The kind of thinking that stagnates and, ultimately, causes the decay and death of that which we hold dear.

    The epiphany that I have come to is that Spurs have outgrown Tottenham. A previous post stated that we aren't really referred to as Tottenham Hotspur any more, apart from on ESPN that is, we are The Spurs and we will be The Spurs whatever part of London we find ourselves in.

    I see the comparisons with MK Dons here but let me offer you the flip side to that, Manchester United. They moved out of their original home to Trafford Park, giving them the ability to expand. They have over 75,000 at each home game, all of whom can get into and out of the area with relative ease. Their fans are numerous, vocal and come from all parts of the country, the globe even. Has their history suffered in any way shape or form? Having attended league games and cup semi finals there I can attest that it's a doddle. Now that place isn't exactly a tourist haven either but so what? We go there to watch Football so really, who gives a sh*t what it looks like outside the ground so long as it's easy to access and egress, the stadium is large, modern and has all the amenities we require and, most importantly, the team inside it is playing the brand of Football we adore and winnig everything in sight?

    I don't know if Stratford can offer all of this, but I'm pretty sure that Tottenham can't. Actually I'm pretty sure that Tottenham won't because that would mean Harringey releasing funds that they have been so diligent in fleecing from the area. So if Stratford can offer all of this then my view is that Harringey and Tottenham can kiss my a*se because my affiliation, my love, my hopes and my dreams lie with The Spurs.

    COYS!!

    Think about it, we don't write COYTH do we?




    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Sat Jan 15 2011, 15:57

    VisionarySound wrote:
    lewspurs wrote:
    shearspur wrote:why would you want to walk through there anyway if it wasnt a match day. i only want to go on a match day for the game not a stroll out with my family for a day out, and meeting the natives. you can call it nostalgic or romantic having ideas about where a club should stay but to me if they move out they have sold the soul of the club for monetary gain, which they will get any way if they stay and rebuild. so what if they have to regenerate the area financialy they have bloody earnt well out of it over the years, put a bit back rather than walking away and turning their back on it.

    Well thats the point shear ! why walk through there if it isnt a match day ? so if thats the only attraction move with the club, whats the problem ? because we all have to face it , football isnt the working mans sport anymore..

    The thing is that its a new age, that was the area that spawned the club we support but it doesnt mean we have to abandon it , and we dont have to stay in the victorian era...

    Listen, the local council havent done fck all to improve the amenities of the area, and now its threatened with a big cash cow leaving the area, it doesnt like it.

    I have to say that to take the club to a new level it needs to sell itself, to make itself amenable and to house all its supporters, and make no mistake tottenham hotspur have a massive support country wide.....stuck in a depressed area that is hard to access doesnt help its cause in the slightest.

    If we lose the tottenham name then thats ok...hotspurs will do me.....lets face it most of us are called spurs supporters anyway, so why do i keep hearing stratford mentioned......we will always be spurs.


    Lew if we take the first point of your argument to the extreme let's move the club to Brussels. Centre of Europe, wonderfull transport links & a huge catchment area. Pleasant city as well, worth a vist on non-match days. The idea that you can move anywhere and retain your idenity just dosen't hold water. The first thing to go is your individulism. The one-off identety that is the club you have always supported. From being Tottenham Hotspurs to Franchise FC. You can be born & raised in London and live in Manchester. Yes you are a Londoner but you live & thrive in Manchester. Probably feel homesick & yearn for your roots as well. Fact is you are no longer a part of where you come from, just another stranger in a strange town. Your closing point that we can lose the Tottenham name yet remain essentially the same club is flimsy as well. Ask supporters of FC United & AFC Wimbledon. FC United formed because of corparate geed. Hmm sounds like a club moving grounds to appease shareholders. AFC Wimbledon had their club stolen from them and moved to another area. Hmm that sounds familiar as well . . . . . .

    Vis the whole thing in a nutshell on here is that the team are stuck in a sh*t area because it has the name-----tottenham hotspur, and thats why we are all opposed to moving to a more accessable area, because we identify with the area by the name we have, but ! i would ask you to name one player in our squad who represents the area by birth ? unlike the originators of the club all those years ago, they actually were local lads playing against the local lads of other areas.

    How are we tottenham hotspur anymore anyway, is modric a local lad, is bale ?

    My point is that the club shouldnt be shackled to one area because of its origin, what counted back in the 1890s doesnt count now......things have moved on...all football clubs have moved on, its big business now and its big earnings for players who couldnt give a sh*t about the origin of the club they play for as long as the money rolls into their bank account, you, me, we if you like are shackling the club to exist in a place that will limit its accessability to all its fans, while we want tottenham hotspur up there vieing with the best of them for the best players...case of cake and eat it.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Sat Jan 15 2011, 23:36

    Lew you can't use players to justify a location or a move. Mackay, Gilzean, Jennings,Chivers. Bill Nicholson was a Yorkshireman ! The list is endless. The start of my reply to you was an extreme example but it was used to counter the "We are Spurs and it dosen't matter where we play" attitude that people are using to come to terms with any possible move. The fact is we will be Franchise FC. The MK Dons of the Premier League. We are Tottenham Hotspurs of White Hart Lane because we have been since 1899. Do you really want to see that thrown away ? Franchise FC founded 2013, nomads of no fixed abode . . . . . .
    BazSpur
    BazSpur
    Admin
    Admin


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by BazSpur Sat Jan 15 2011, 23:48

    Ion, you put across your argument very well as usual and there is a lot of sense there but for me a club is defined by it's area and I take on board all that's been said about the people of that area and whether they go to Spurs or not. I am quite sure lots do. I am not sure what the ratio is between home grown supporters and supporters from outside the area is. I am pretty conservative when it comes to my team. It's the only thing I am conservative about as I am certainly not conservative in my political views. I still think we should stay at the Lane. If we move to Stratford what are we? We are suddenly an East end club thrown in to live beside the Spam and Orient. That's not us and you can come up with all the money saving reasons you like it makes not one jot of difference to me. I am clear in my mind. We should stay where we are. We can build a bigger stadium at the Lane. We can become a bigger club at the Lane. We can build a Prem winning team at the Lane. We are Tottenham Hotspur and we come from The lane. Sentimental? Yes, I make no bones about it but I don't care. And before anyone points out I live in Wales and haven't been to the Lane for years, I know but that doesn't stop me from having a voice. After all they are as much my team as anyone elses.


    Last edited by BazSpur on Sun Jan 16 2011, 01:39; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Sun Jan 16 2011, 00:16

    Baz. Top post, it echo's my sentiments entirely REPPED!

    WE ARE TOTTENHAM THE MIGHTY TOTTENHAM FROM THE LANE!!!!!!!!!!!!

    N17 not E15
    ionman34
    ionman34
    Champions League
    Champions League


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by ionman34 Sun Jan 16 2011, 00:40

    BazSpur wrote:Ion, you put aross your argument very well as usual and there is a lot of sense there but for me a club is defined by it's area and I take on board all that's been said about the people of that area and whether they go to Spurs or not. I am quite sure lots do. I am not sure what the ratio is between home grown supporters and supporters from outside the area is. I am pretty conservative when it comes to my team. It's the only thing I am conservative about as I am certainly not conservative in my political views. I still think we should stay at the Lane. If we move to Stratford what are we? We are suddenly an East end club thrown in to live beside the Spam and Orient. That's not us and you can come up with all the money saving reasons you like it makes not one jot of difference to me. I am clear in my mind. We should stay where we are. We can build a bigger stadium at the Lane. We can become a bigger club at the Lane. We can build a Prem winning team at the Lane. We are Tottenham Hotspur and we come from The lane. Sentimental? Yes, I make no bones about it but I don't care. And before anyone points out I live in Wales and haven't been to the Lane for years, I know but that doesn't stop me from having a voice. After all they are as much my team as anyone elses.

    I fully understand and respect your reasoning Baz. It's just that, after careful consideration of all points of view voiced, I no longer agree with it.

    From everything I know it no longer makes sense to stay at the Lane as it offers us absolutely nothing for the future.

    Seriously mate, what advantage does staying at the Lane offer us?

    I can see where Vis is coming from but I just don't buy into it. The club is, and always will be, the fans, and very few live anywhere near Tottenham any more. We are vocal and produce one of the best atmospheres found anywhere in Football. I don't see this changing, particularly if the stadium is designed correctly.

    I accept your viewpoint but stand firm on my belief that staying in Tottenham will be a hindrance rather than a help in our quest to be a dominant force in European Football.
    shearspur
    shearspur
    Champions League
    Champions League


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by shearspur Sun Jan 16 2011, 00:43

    yeah rep from me to baz, you have summed up exactly the way i feel.i got a horrible feeling their gonna do it no matter what, just praying west ham win the bid mate.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Sun Jan 16 2011, 01:17

    Ion as ever you make your views clear & consice. Your self-appraisal & honesty about your stand point is refreshing to say the least. Like you part of my stance against a move is the rivallry with our "neighbours" (how many grounds in a 100 years ?). The rivalry that is part of the fabric & culture of our club throughout it's long & illustrious history. Should we move this would become diluted. Who would our new rivals be ? Leyton Orient ? I think we all agree that we respect Levy's financial stewardship of the club but his eagerness to 'up-sticks' seems like nothing more than short term appeasal of the share-holders rather than long term investment in the club. A move to a new stadium does not guarantee sucsess. In fact look at our "neighbours" to see what a ground move can cause. The idea of a Faustian pact when selling your soul is for instant gratification to off set the eternity of misery which will be the ultimate price payed. I also have to add the fact that the Olympic Stadium would not be solely ours. AEG would be co-owners and you can bet that a company like that will have it's own plans and financial models for what they wish to see from any deal . . . . . .
    BazSpur
    BazSpur
    Admin
    Admin


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by BazSpur Sun Jan 16 2011, 01:55

    ionman34 Wrote:

    I fully understand and respect your
    reasoning Baz. It's just that, after careful consideration of all points
    of view voiced, I no longer agree with it.

    From everything I know it no longer makes sense to stay at the Lane as it offers us absolutely nothing for the future.

    Seriously mate, what advantage does staying at the Lane offer us?

    I
    can see where Vis is coming from but I just don't buy into it. The club
    is, and always will be, the fans, and very few live anywhere near
    Tottenham any more. We are vocal and produce one of the best atmospheres
    found anywhere in Football. I don't see this changing, particularly if
    the stadium is designed correctly.

    I accept your viewpoint but
    stand firm on my belief that staying in Tottenham will be a hindrance
    rather than a help in our quest to be a dominant force in European
    Football.

    That's fair enough fella. Where would the World be if we all agreed? It would be boring. I fully respect your views too as always.
    BazSpur
    BazSpur
    Admin
    Admin


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by BazSpur Sun Jan 16 2011, 02:01

    Rep for Vis, Max and Shear.
    ionman34
    ionman34
    Champions League
    Champions League


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by ionman34 Sun Jan 16 2011, 02:29

    VisionarySound wrote:Ion as ever you make your views clear & consice. Your self-appraisal & honesty about your stand point is refreshing to say the least.

    Thank you mate. Believe me it's not a decision that I came to easily, but it is one that I see as being the most logical. Now I know that passion has a far bigger part to play in the game than logic, most of the time, but I can't see that the passion will be lost. As I said, I am half way around the World now and, if anything, my passion for Spurs has increased. Where we play has had absolutely no bearing on this.
    Easy to say, I know, when I'm not there but the passion is for the team, not the venue and I believe that the passion will be there wherever we play.


    Like you part of my stance against a move is the rivallry with our "neighbours" (how many grounds in a 100 years ?). The rivalry that is part of the fabric & culture of our club throughout it's long & illustrious history. Should we move this would become diluted.

    And for me this is not enough of a reason to pass up the opportunity to improve our lot. Like I said in the previous post, we have goons reciting their list of titles whilst our comeback is that we've been based in one spot during their wanderings.

    Doesn't really stack up in the bragging rights stakes does it? Particularly when you consider that goon shirts are a far more common sight around Tottenham than Lillywhite shirts are, except on match day that is.


    Who would our new rivals be ? Leyton Orient ?

    Our rivals would remain the same, with Utd added to the mix. Do you honestly believe the passion and hatred of a Spurs goon derby would diminish just because we moved a few miles down the road?
    Not even close, if anything the hatred would increase. We hate them because they are cheating scum, not because they're Pikeys.

    Let the Scum get their 'wanderers' digs in, as long as it costs them 3 points I'll smile along to their bleating.


    I think we all agree that we respect Levy's financial stewardship of the club but his eagerness to 'up-sticks' seems like nothing more than short term appeasal of the share-holders rather than long term investment in the club.

    That is just your interpretation Vis. He has had to get the bid in fairly quickly because that is the nature of what the sellers want. Fast or slow though, the proposal appears to be a sound one and is extremely viable financially.


    A move to a new stadium does not guarantee sucsess.

    No it doesn't, but the move can set us up for further expansion, further revenue and a greater financial grounding to build toward more success.

    In fact look at our "neighbours" to see what a ground move can cause.

    Well, as you said earlier, how many grounds in the last 100 years? Ask further how many trophies, in comparison to us, they've had in that time too.


    The idea of a Faustian pact when selling your soul is for instant gratification to off set the eternity of misery which will be the ultimate price payed.

    LOL. A tad melodramatic there Vis. Moving to new premises, in order to improve our financial acumen, is hardly Faustian and involves selling nothing. As for the eternity of misery, how so? I doubt we'd see too many tears of angst were we to lift the Prem trophy in our shiny new stadium.
    Alternatively we spend an extra 200 million to stay in Tottenham, put ourselves under financial pressure, thereby opening the door for the likes of Utd to buy our better players, see results drop off as a result and witness the inevitable slide into mediocrity as a result.

    But at least we'd be deliriously happy as we managed to stay in Tottenham to be further fleeced by the Harringey leeches.



    I also have to add the fact that the Olympic Stadium would not be solely ours. AEG would be co-owners and you can bet that a company like that will have it's own plans and financial models for what they wish to see from any deal . . . . . .

    Now this is the one point that really puts the fly in the ointment of the deal, the fact that we may well lose our autonomy. However, we don't know the details of the partnership so it is all just speculation. I have no problem with the venue being used for other things such as concerts, they bring additional revenue, using the stadium at times when it would otherwise just lie 'fallow' and the pitch would suffer not at all.

    It certainly wouldn't end up as the 'Cow pasture' you claim.

    Be that as it may though, this is still the one aspect that I agree with you on. I don't want us part owning the venue, it should be ours in its entirety. Anything else, I believe, is unacceptable.

    I certainly don't want us going the way of Leeds.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Sun Jan 16 2011, 02:46

    Very good points as ever Ion. LOL I went melodramtic as an excuse to bring Faust into a football debate, never seen it done before. Will come back to some of the other points later on . . . .
    BazSpur
    BazSpur
    Admin
    Admin


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by BazSpur Sun Jan 16 2011, 02:52

    Vis Wrote:

    I went melodramtic as an excuse to bring Faust into a football debate,

    Lol Vis, However AEG could well turn out to be the devil in this pact.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Sun Jan 16 2011, 03:05

    VisionarySound wrote:Lew you can't use players to justify a location or a move. Mackay, Gilzean, Jennings,Chivers. Bill Nicholson was a Yorkshireman ! The list is endless. The start of my reply to you was an extreme example but it was used to counter the "We are Spurs and it dosen't matter where we play" attitude that people are using to come to terms with any possible move. The fact is we will be Franchise FC. The MK Dons of the Premier League. We are Tottenham Hotspurs of White Hart Lane because we have been since 1899. Do you really want to see that thrown away ? Franchise FC founded 2013, nomads of no fixed abode . . . . . .

    Vis ! you are supposing we wont be able to use the title tottenham hotspur if we move on, but i suppose thats an arguable point, so lets move on from that one.

    You know what i am sick about, those people saying they live in bedford or somewhere really close who say they can get to whl easily..no problem,of course they dont want to move, well what about people like myself who have hell of a train ride and numerous tube changes to get up there to see the club i support.



    Stratford is 6 stops along from my local station, but i am not basing my opinion of moving on that simple fact, my opinion is that the local council dont want to improve the area, so fcuk "em" you dont have a goose that lays a golden egg and leave it cack to clear up itself.

    All those thousands of fans descending on whl on a match day bring the locals lots of business, and the council are happy for it to just ride on and then speak up when the golden goose wants to spread its wings.

    As for players vis, a non footballing mate of mine summed it up when he said to me one day that football is a joke, it isnt the local lads of tottenham playing the local lads of arsenal, its who has the most money can buy the best players.

    So its all big business vis, football as a whole, and i want my team to compete with the best, a big ground to bring in more revenue so we can attract the greediest (but best) players on offer.

    Vis my memories will always be from the time i spent seeing spurs at whl, from boy to man i saw the best players from the late 60s to the early 80s, those memories will stay with me, but its all big business now, its changed, it isnt the local lads of tottenham vs whoever, that was the origin of the club and tottenham hotspurs wont lose me as a fan if it moves with the times.
    BazSpur
    BazSpur
    Admin
    Admin


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by BazSpur Sun Jan 16 2011, 04:20

    We're damned if we do and damned if we don't according to this article.

    The Battle for Statford


    Posted on January 15, 2011

    Tottenham Hotspur’s controversial bid for the Olympic Stadium
    is a fascinating insight into how the worlds of football, business and
    politics can collide. It raises the very pertinent questions about the
    Olympic legacy as well as the conundrum of “What is modern football?”.
    Seems as good a place as any to start this blog on then. Using a bit
    of expert help, I hope to raise some issues that aren’t getting airtime
    in the current media debate.

    Athletics Legacy
    On the Today Programme this week, Ed Warner was incredulous that
    anyone would knock down a stadium that cost 500m of taxpayers money to
    build
    The questions I find myself asking are
    1) How can Spurs pay just half that amount to build a similar capacity
    stadium? It suggests a terrific waste of money on the governments part.
    2) How in god’s name was £500m spent on a stadium with little or no
    thought into its future legacy? The demolition of the Olympic Stadium
    would not be a signal of a greedy premier league club defying the
    Olympic legacy, but a scandalous lack of foresight from the
    government.Surely Greece 04 provided plentiful examples of White
    Elephant facilities becoming a useless drain on the public purse? Even a
    child could see that a 60,000 seater stadium is far too large for the
    irregular and poorly-attended UK athletics schedule. Why is this debate
    happening with the Olympic Stadium half-built, instead of planning for a
    sustainable and profitable future beforehand?
    3)Why is this alternative Crystal Palace stadium being dismissed out
    of hand? If the Olympic Legacy company are going to risk millions in
    taxpayers money by choosing West Ham – the riskier financial option –
    then they at least need to provide reasons why this alternative stadium
    is inappropriate. The original plan when the Olympic Stadium was
    constructed, was to reduce capacity to 25,000 after the Olympics
    (http://www.cslondon.org/sustainable-games/venues/). Why exactly would a
    similar capacity stadium in Crystal Palace be such an insult to UK
    Athletics?
    (4) Finally it seems to me that as a lobby group, Athletics has some
    prominent individuals who can easily use their profile to attack the
    Spurs bid. But what about ordinary tax payers who simply want the
    monstrous costs of the Olympics repaid as much as possible? The West Ham
    bid is risky and almost certainly less lucrative for the public purse
    than seeing the combined clout of Spurs and AEG filling the stadium, as
    well as bankrolling a more sustainable Athletics legacy out of their own
    pocket. In this time of supposed austerity, I find it remarkable that
    nobody is speaking up against the public paying tens – or even hundreds –
    of millions to subsidise UK Athletics’ delusions of grandeur.

    The Northumberland Park Project
    Last year Tottenham Hostpur revealed its plan for Northumberland Park
    – a 60,000 seat stadium on the same site. Spurs fans accuse their board
    of betrayal by switching to the cheaper option at the Olympic site,
    seemingly unaware of how remote and risky the Northumberland Park scheme
    would really be. I asked a senior surveyor with a tack record of large
    development projects for his opinion;
    Since it was announced, there has been raised eyebrows in the
    industry about how a company with an annual profit averaging £10
    million, can afford a £450 million stadium. Their owner Jo Lewis doesn’t
    have that kind of capital anymore, so it would be funded by a little
    sponsorship and equity, plus a vast amount of debt secured against
    future revenues from tickets and property development. In the present
    climate, even the largest property developers are having trouble
    securing credit, and are understandably squeamish about starting large
    projects, yet you’re telling me this is the time for Spurs -a football
    club – to try their hand? For these reasons, there has been a lingering
    suspicion that Levy is getting these designs and plans into place for a
    new equity-rich owner, so he can sell Tottenham as a ready-to-assemble
    superclub.

    Yet despite reaching the promised land of Champions League, no potential buyers have emerged. Worse still new problems emerged;
    The Northumberland Project is a key regeneration project in a
    deprived ward that has been repeatedly prioritised for development by
    the government and the LDA. Spurs would have reasonably expected
    Northumberland Park to be green-lighted with minimum fuss, and perhaps
    even received Government support and CPO powers like neighbouring
    Arsenal’s new stadium did. Instead, they faced ludicrous protests from
    English Heritage and CABE insisting on “protecting“ the architectural
    integrity of the High Road. Tottenham is fairly universally agreed to be
    one of the most ugly areas of London, and it is starving for investment
    – where on earth was the crusading David Lammy when these petty
    concerns jeopardised the whole development? Instead Spurs had to go
    through an expensive redesign and sacrifice a lot of the apartments that
    would make the scheme affordable. Finally TfL delivered the knockout
    blow by refusing to commit any funding to the Victoria Line Extension –
    without which a 60,000 seater stadium simply cannot be supported. Just
    like at Battersea Power Station , TfL are treating Section 106
    agreements with developers like cash machines to cover infrastructure
    improvements they should be making themselves. In my professional
    opinion, it is this utter lack of Government support that has made the
    Northumberland Park design unfeasible, and compelled Spurs to look
    elsewhere.

    By combining the bid for the Olympic site with equity-rich AEG, Spurs
    would stand to save an estimated £200 million on the bid, which could
    be used to keep their squad competitive throughout the move. It also
    removes the difficult issue of rebuilding the stadium on site, which
    would mean playing in half a stadium during construction. The debate
    among Spurs fans doesn’t seem to have accounted for the fact that unless
    a rich Sheik or Oligarch rides to the rescue, its likely to be
    Stratford or no new stadium at all.

    David Lammy
    David Lammy is an intelligent man, but his behaviour is increasingly
    petulant and unprofessional. After the election he finds himself
    relegated from ministerial positions to the humdrum of an MP’s routine.
    My suspicion is that he has seen this campaign as an easy home run, to
    solidify local support and to court the kind of press attention he needs
    to keep his profile up.
    Why has he done nothing to speak up against the Northumberland Park
    proposal getting beaten up in the planning process? Surely he has much
    more jurisdiction there, than in telling a private business where it can
    and cannot move to?It’s hard to tell to what extent his motivations
    come from sentimental attachment to White Hart Lane, or from more
    cynical motives, but he is surely intelligent enough to know that his
    argument that Tottenham will become a ‘dustbowl’ is very, very weak.
    As our Surveyor explains;
    “If Spurs left Tottenham in 2015 then the old White Hart Lane
    area would be quickly be developed. Without the need to fit a stadium
    into the site, this site would be perfect for a large mixed use scheme
    of housing, offices and leisure. By waiting until their new stadium was
    built and the financial climate improves, Tottenham would stand to make a
    huge windfall by selling their stadium as one huge piece of development
    land in 2015. The implications of this for the Tottenham area itself
    would be;

    a) The scheme would be much more lucrative than a stadium, and
    the Section 106 agreement could include much bigger contributions to the
    local community or the extension of the Victoria Line. The mandatory
    addition of affordable homes and social housing would be a big relief on
    Tottenham’s stretched public services.

    b) A large mixed use scheme would offer far more value to the
    area than a stadium only used 18-30 times per year. The taxable value of
    a stadium is tiny compared to the bonanza of council taxes and business
    rates from a large new development. Let alone the effect of thousands
    of new residents on local shops and businesses – compared to a few hours
    business a month as the football crowds grab a kebab and a pint on
    their way home.”

    Lammy must know this full well, yet has decided there is
    significantly more political capital in jumping on a populist bandwagon.
    I expected better of him, quite frankly.

    What is modern football?
    Perhaps the most interesting issue here is the crisis of identity
    that a move five and a half miles up the road looks set to cause among
    Tottenham fans. Are football clubs firmly rooted in their immediate
    community, or has the widening of their appeal in the Premier League
    changed this? Does a club’s history live in the soil or in the hearts
    and minds of supporters? I certainly find it hard to disagree that there
    is something sad about a 127 year old football club upping sticks to
    chase success, especially since Tottenham are one of the few successful
    clubs who operate within their means, and haven’t sold out to become a
    billionaire’s plaything. They are a North London club, and moving to
    East London – deliberately near the corporate Canary Wharf crowd – would
    be a indication of how business and football are increasingly one and
    the same.
    The benefits of Stratford should not be ignored though. The 34,000
    reputedly on the waiting list would finally get to see their team play,
    and see their support reaping financial benefits for the club. The
    larger capacity would mean that cup games and less glamorous fixtures
    would have to drop steeply in price to achieve full capacity crowds. The
    majority of home and away fans would find the appallingly difficult
    journey to White Hart Lane replaced with the best infrastructure
    connections in the country. The fans of Arsenal, Manchester City and
    Bayern Munich would all contest that their history has been in any way
    spoiled by moving to new stadiums. What better way to honour Spur’s
    proud history than to repeat it, some will ask. With the revenues from
    Stratford and the acumen of Levy, Spurs would become an irresistible
    force in Premier League and European football. A sleeping giant would be
    awoken, but would it’s heritage and pedigree be left five miles up the
    road?
    What it comes down to is that Spurs fans need to make an informed
    choice. They shouldn’t assume that losing in the Olympic bid will see
    their club press on with Northumberland Park – the figures don‘t stack
    up in the current climate, and the club will either have to take a huge
    gamble or shelve the project indefinitely. They also can’t demand
    Champions League football, and then refuse to allow the club to take
    steps necessary to deliver it.
    If Spurs fans went into this with their eyes open, and wanted to keep
    their proud history intact at the expense of their ability to compete at
    the highest level, then I would applaud them. It wouldn’t be
    sentimentality – it would be an informed choice to put the traditions of
    their club above the lure of money.
    But football fans want it all. The same fans that want to stay in
    White Hart Lane will be the first to complain if Tottenham fall behind,
    and their stars like Modric and Bale move to clubs like Manchester City
    who are willing to buy success at any price. It is lose-lose for the
    Tottenham board.

    The Media
    The media will play a huge part in this process, as underlined by
    Tottenham’s appointment of PR supreme Mike Lee to aid their cause.
    Spurs has a difficult case to make both in the bid process, and to
    their own fans. Although their bid is vastly superior economically, they
    have to make sophisticated arguments in an arena where the simple ones
    tend to win. Fans will say “Tottenham Hotspur belongs in Tottenham’,
    whilst the powerful Athletics lobby will say ‘What sense in destroying a
    £500 million stadium?’. Both are compelling enough arguments to win
    the debate, even if the opposing arguments are better.
    Already there are signs that the tabloid press are siding against
    Tottenham’s board, and they are rarely known to make u-turns once they
    settle on an editorial angle. The public are going to be loath to see
    their expensive stadium torn down, and it will be a brave politican to
    speak up for the longer term benefits to London. Braver than David
    Lammy, certainly. Yet unlike the mouthy owners of West Ham, Tottenham’s
    board have yet to really press their case, and it would be foolish to
    write off their bid before they do so.
    The Battle For Stratford begins. Can intelligence prevail in sport? I’m on the edge of my seat…





    Posted in: Uncategorized
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Sun Jan 16 2011, 04:27

    Lew, like Ions post's you make some fine & incisive points. When I have some time I will answer them with my own thoughts in more detail. The one I will raise now is the local lads Vs local lads one. I would imagine the last time that scenario happened was before the second world war. As I've said before this is an issue that will divide us as fans and one which should be discussed, debated and argued over in great depth as it represents the future dirction of OUR club. We the fans (Ion has mentioned this) are the club. We are it's life blood, history, present & future . . . . .
    seebee1944
    seebee1944
    Premiership
    Premiership


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by seebee1944 Sun Jan 16 2011, 05:39



    I've said on here on a previous thread that I would not go if Spurs move to Stratford and I'll say it again. Even if I wanted to I wouldn't have time except on Sundays. The extra time it would take to get there would prevent it because I work on Saturday mornings and for evening games I go staight to work from the game. It also seems to me that those who watch the games on TV are the ones who don't care if we move and thats fair enough but I want to go. My reason for supporting this club for over 50 years is because my family supported them. Now they were from Wood Green and Spurs weren't eve the easiest to get to but if Spurs had been in Stratford in those days I would have been a Gooner by default.
    Ion I have the greatest respect for you and your reasoned arguments but one thing I don't agree with you about is that you are the same person despite your move to Australia.
    I believe that because we are all influenced by our environ and the people within that you are the person you are because of your move to Oz and the same thing would apply to Spurs going to Stratford not the same club at all.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Sun Jan 16 2011, 09:11

    VisionarySound wrote:Lew, like Ions post's you make some fine & incisive points. When I have some time I will answer them with my own thoughts in more detail. The one I will raise now is the local lads Vs local lads one. I would imagine the last time that scenario happened was before the second world war. As I've said before this is an issue that will divide us as fans and one which should be discussed, debated and argued over in great depth as it represents the future dirction of OUR club. We the fans (Ion has mentioned this) are the club. We are it's life blood, history, present & future . . . . .



    Vis ! thats the whole point of using the local lads vs local lads equation is that it doesnt exist anymore and as you say quite rightly the last time it applied to spurs was probably before the 2nd world war, but that was the origin of tottenham hotspur, but i will repeat that scenario doesnt exist anymore, so to shackle a club to an area because it began life from there doesnt make good business sense particularly as football has now become massive business.

    What do we bleat on about on here,? how we want to be cl regulars, how we want to win the prem, how we yearn to get in the worlds best players and can only dream of players like messi ! and yet when the chance exists, no we dont want to move from whl, its our historical home, its where it all began etc etc, no non no ! and so players like bale and modric (from baz,s article) might end up at wealthier clubs because we cant provide them with regular cl football because we are stuck at whl.

    Vis ! i want spurs to be one of those wealthier clubs, i want us to compete on the highest level football can offer and if it means moving from whl to achieve it then so be it, i want to see spurs graced with the finest footballers without worrying that the barcelona,s man utd,s and real madrids might prove too much an attraction for those players, i want spurs to be on a level playing field with those clubs finacially and we certainly already have the historical past those clubs can boast of, to have all that i realise it could be at a price, and thats loss of an ancestral playing arena, a place where i stood as a kid and cheered on greaves,chivers and peters et al, it is sad.........and that takes us back to where i started, namely football is now big business, as i said it isnt local lads vs local lads anymore, that was the start all those years ago and i will always respect where we came from whether we stay or go.

    ionman34
    ionman34
    Champions League
    Champions League


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by ionman34 Sun Jan 16 2011, 16:39

    seebee1944 wrote:

    I've said on here on a previous thread that I would not go if Spurs move to Stratford and I'll say it again. Even if I wanted to I wouldn't have time except on Sundays. The extra time it would take to get there would prevent it because I work on Saturday mornings and for evening games I go staight to work from the game. It also seems to me that those who watch the games on TV are the ones who don't care if we move and thats fair enough but I want to go. My reason for supporting this club for over 50 years is because my family supported them. Now they were from Wood Green and Spurs weren't eve the easiest to get to but if Spurs had been in Stratford in those days I would have been a Gooner by default.
    Ion I have the greatest respect for you and your reasoned arguments but one thing I don't agree with you about is that you are the same person despite your move to Australia.
    I believe that because we are all influenced by our environ and the people within that you are the person you are because of your move to Oz and the same thing would apply to Spurs going to Stratford not the same club at all.

    I'm not the same person since my move? Pray tell what sort of person I have now developed into as you have such an insight into my persona that even I have missed.

    You'll also find that you have misquoted me. I said that I have not lost my history because I moved, I have merely opened a new chapter in it.

    The same will be true for Spurs, there are plenty of clubs out there to back that claim. Moving doesn't change your history, that is the past and is immutable. Moving merely alters the path of your future history and it is this change that so many fans fear.

    Embrace or reject the change as you see fit.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Sun Jan 16 2011, 20:00


    Double blow could leave Spurs with nowhere to go
    Tottenham face missing out on Olympic Stadium while White Hart Lane plans may be scrapped

    By Andrew Warshaw


    Tottenham Hotspur may not be able to sustain their growing status if they are refused permission to turn the Olympic Stadium in Stratford into their new 60,000-capacity home after the 2012 Games. Despite a growing rebellion among fans over a potential move to east London, The Independent on Sunday understands the alternative of a redeveloped White Hart Lane as part of the Northumberland Park Development is gradually being considered a less viable option because of costs involved and demands being put on the club by the local authority.

    Planning permission has already been given for turning the Lane into a 56,000-seater state-of-the-art stadium on neighbouring land, and a majority of supporters believe Spurs should honour the club's long tradition and remain where they are.

    Tottenham's anti-Stratford lobby are planning more protests at today's game with Manchester United, but if Spurs eventually decide they have to scrap the NPD project, there are increasing worries the club may have to remain at their inadequate 36,000-capacity ground. That would mean sliding backwards, no longer being able to invest at the current rate and failing to compete on the pitch with their rivals. Spurs are vying with West Ham to take over the Olympic Stadium. The Olympic Park Legacy Company is due to decide by the end of this month which of the two should be granted the venue.

    http://www.footballeconomy.com
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Tue Jan 18 2011, 03:16

    Leaving White Hart Lane would betray values on which Spurs were built
    Jason Cowley
    17 Jan 2011

    The great Christian social reformers of the Victorian age believed in the virtue of organised games as a means through which to build moral character. Team sports could teach us discipline, self-control, organisation, humility and a sense of virtuous competition.

    It was a group of muscular Christians, regulars at the All Hallows church in Tottenham, who founded Hotspur football club in 1882 (the name was changed to Tottenham Hotspur two years later). They believed that a football club should not be apart from but an expression of the aspirations of the local community from which it came.

    Nowadays most fans have little interest in the origins of the clubs they support. Their interest is in the here and now, in the next game, the latest signing, and so on. But following the bid by Spurs chairman Daniel Levy to move the club into the Olympic Park at Stratford, east London, the origins of Tottenham Hotspur are again being urgently discussed.

    David Lammy, Labour MP for Tottenham since 2000, is leading a campaign against the club leaving the borough of Haringey. A lawyer by training and with an expertise in intellectual property rights, Lammy believes he has a strong case to prevent the club from using the name “Tottenham” if they moved to Stratford. “They can take the Hotspur but not the Tottenham,” he told me.

    Lammy, who was born in Tottenham, is a long-standing supporter of Spurs. Over the years he has been close to Levy and his family. The two men have given presents to each other's children, and Lammy has acted for the club on immigration issues involving foreign players.

    He has intervened on numerous occasions to ease relations between Spurs and Enfield Council, and with Haringey Council, which used to complain that the club were too aloof from the local community. He advised the club when they were setting up the Tottenham Foundation, which undertake charity and community work, and during discussions over plans to relocate the training ground to Enfield.

    On 25 November, London Mayor Boris Johnson announced that he would not overrule the decision by Haringey to grant planning permission to Tottenham to redevelop the area around White Hart Lane and build a new 56,000-capacity stadium on the existing site. The long struggle to create a stadium commensurate to the club's ambitions seemed to be over.

    Planning permission was also granted for residential housing, a hotel and a Sainsbury's superstore to be built on a 20-acre site around the stadium — which, according to my sources, is owned by Levy.

    This is where the paranoids and conspiracists enter the story. The feeling among some of those close to the club is that Levy's ultimate ambition, if he can successfully relocate to east London, is to sell Spurs to the nation state of Qatar, hosts of the 2022 World Cup.

    The plan goes something like this: Spurs, backed by US venue operator AEG and Goldman Sachs, escape from the Northumberland Park ward of Tottenham, with all its problems of urban deprivation and unemployment. They move into the Olympic Stadium and sell naming rights to the Qataris. Later, the club are also sold to Qatar.

    This would open the way for a new global super club to be created, one as wealthy as Manchester City but located in London, and in a part of the capital, because of its sophisticated post-Olympics transport links and infrastructure, that has the potential to attract a far larger fan base than Tottenham in Tottenham ever could.

    In the process, West Ham are all but destroyed by the club that have moved into their manor and, because of their wealth, glamour and power, have begun attracting a whole new generation of fans from east London, Essex and beyond.

    Lammy believes what is happening at Spurs is a test case for the future direction of English football.

    He told me: “If Spurs move out of the borough this will be the first major club to have moved out of its footprint, as it were. We've seen this happen with Wimbledon when the club moved to Milton Keynes — but the club had to change their name. They ceased to be Wimbledon, in effect.

    “I know the direction for Big Football is for clubs to become all-purpose franchises. I know that Daniel Levy wants Spurs to become a global franchise and he feels he can achieve this by moving. But I say this: Tottenham cannot leave Tottenham and still be the same club. They cannot take the name.”

    I'm sympathetic to Lammy. Like the old muscular Christians of All Hallows, I believe a football club should be rooted in and an expression of the local community. The true supporters of the club we once called Wimbledon are not those who followed MK Dons to Milton Keynes but those who stayed behind in south London to help create a new community club, AFC Wimbledon.

    For these fans the love of football is an expression of the love of place, as it always has been for those who support, say, Newcastle or Liverpool or even West Ham.

    On 28 January, the Olympic Park Legacy Company will deliver their recommendation to the Mayor on whether West Ham or Spurs should play at the Olympic Stadium. He is expected to act on their recommendation.

    Boris Johnson has said of the Olympic Stadium that, after the Games, “we need a big tenant in there”. Spurs, so impressive this season, would be that big tenant, though their intention would be to demolish the Olympic Stadium and build an all-purpose football stadium on the same site.

    Spurs would honour the athletics legacy by redeveloping the Crystal Palace athletics stadium.

    London 2012 chairman Sebastian Coe is believed to favour the West Ham bid because it would retain the running track. But what demand would there be for a 60-000-capacity athletics stadium when Crystal Palace cannot sell even 17,000 tickets when Usain Bolt is in town?

    In 1913, Woolwich Arsenal made the journey from south of the Thames to a new home at Highbury in north London. It proved to be a successful makeover: we all know what became of the new Arsenal, even if the old Woolwich Arsenal disappeared into history.

    Could something similar now happen to Tottenham Hotspur? Could the club founded at All Hallows in 1882 leave Tottenham and still be “Tottenham” in any recognisable sense? Or will they be forced to revert to their original name as they seek to remake themselves as a global super club, out there in the sprawling cockney hinterland where the East End merges into Essex?

    We shall know soon enough.

    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk
    cynicsid
    cynicsid
    1st Division
    1st Division


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by cynicsid Tue Jan 18 2011, 04:22

    If we stay now, do we not become Lammy's Hotspurs???????????
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Tue Jan 18 2011, 06:19

    NO! We remain The famous Tottenham Hotspur, As opposed to Stratford Pikey Hotspur!
    avatar
    spursphil
    Conference League
    Conference League


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by spursphil Tue Jan 18 2011, 09:32

    It looks like the legal opinion Lammy got is out of step with reported case law.
    Tottenham have defended their name against allegations it is just descriptive of an area and Tottenham won the case. Opening the way for Spurs to use it elsewhere.

    http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/tm/t-os/t-find/t-challenge-decision-results/o15002.pdf

    At first i was against a move away from Tottenham, but now i have seen how all the vested interest groups have all tried to get their pound of flesh from the club, I am more than happy to move to Stratford.

    Also i think the extra costs imposed on the club with the changes made to the plans have put the club in a very difficult position.
    I don't think the club would admit it, but i think they could well be having trouble getting finance to cover the increased costs of the NDP.

    The costs of developing the OS being much lower would appear to be a no brainer for the board.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Guest Tue Jan 18 2011, 10:12



    Well there are those that are for and against the move, and those suspicious of levy,s intentions of selling the club once it (or if it) all gets completed, with qatar connections being named as possible buyers.

    You know it amazes me that so many spurs fans want success because we have been under the shadow of the goons for so long that when an opportunity comes along we name all sorts of evils and ifs and buts.

    Abramavitch hasnt exactly done chelsea any harm, and the owners of man city are spending so much to get success at the club and the fans there seem to welcome it, but spurs fans dont, it almost seems that some underlying evil will beset tottenham hotspur if we get the go ahead on the 28th jan.

    I personally am open minded about it all, the roots of the club are at tottenham so i know where some fans are coming from, for me also personally i dont go to the matches any more but stratford is 6 stops on from my nearest railway station, at a cost of approx £20 railway fare i might start attending matches again simply from the self interested point of view that i can get home easier than i would via the northern line tube, then change for another tube and another before i hit the main line home.

    Personally, i dont think it is going to happen, i think we are going round in circles here and demolishing the arena and removing the track will be a big sticking point for those voting, the old delapidated crystal palace planned revamp by levy is also a no goer, simply because just like whl its hard to access .

    Lammy doesnt want spurs to leave but doesnt want to improve the accessability of tottenham hotspur to its fans, and i think he will get his wish ! where it all goes from there is anyones guess, with a reported waiting list of 34,000 possible fans, something needs to give.


    Sponsored content


    Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster - Page 3 Empty Re: Lammy slams Olympic move at Westminster

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Oct 06 2024, 14:05