UK time is: 05:19:55
Vital Login
Social Login

Choose your club

Other Sites

Network Navigation

Vital Partners

'If It's Football, It's Vital'

Do owners of Prem Clubs know what they are doing?

'After just seven months of the Al-Hasawi's tenure a third manager has been sacked.

Alex McLeish, after 41 days and seven games at the City Ground helm, manager Alex McLeish gave his notice of resignation, stating 'a difference in the understanding of the development strategy'. For that, we can read that he felt his bosses had left him in the lurch somewhat, particularly over their stance on transfers' 'The American owners of Manchester United pocketed 75million as Manchester nited was floated on Wall Street. Co-chairmen Avram and Joel Glazer added to their fortune as Man Utd sold millions of shares to new investors on the New York Stock Exchange. The float raised 150million and the Glazers took 75 million, with the other half going to cut the club's debts of more than 423million.

The way the cash was split enraged the fans. After costs, only around 65million came off the club's debts. For fans, there aren't equal rights in shares, they only get a tenth of a vote so the Glazers retain power. No dividend is paid, so it doesn't appeal to investors. 'The Glazers are using Manchester United as a cash cow and this flotation is milking time. They're sucking the life force out of the club' said the supporters.

Blackburn's owners invited suspicion and ridicule as they revealed their reasons for sacking manager Sam Allardyce. Chairman John Williams and managing director Tom Finn stopped short of quitting and sending the club into meltdown over the controversial decision by Indian chicken farmers Venky's to end Allardyce's two-year reign. But there was a sense of bewilderment as the new owners began their search for a replacement and said the new man will be expected to put the club in contention for a Champions League place. Steve Kean is appointed as caretaker Manager. Steve Kean says he has been 'forced to resign' as manager of Championship side Blackburn Rovers. The Scot, 44, has left with immediate effect, saying his position had become 'untenable', and assistant boss Eric Black will now take charge of the team.

Chelsea sack Di Matteo. Chelsea's statement read: 'Chelsea football club has parted company this morning with manager Roberto Di Matteo. The team's recent performances and results have not been good enough and the owner and the board felt that a change was necessary now to keep the club moving in the right direction as we head into a vitally important part of the season.

Martin Jol has been sacked as manager of Spurs after three years in the job. Reports swept around White Hart Lane as Jol presided over Tottenham's 2-1 Uefa Cup defeat by Getafe, but the club only confirmed the news after the match. 'Tottenham Hotspur have appointed former Portsmouth boss Harry Redknapp as their new manager after sacking Juande Ramos late on Saturday night' Tottenham also axed sporting director Damien Comolli and first-team coaches Gus Poyet and Marcos Alvarez following their worst start to a season.

When you lump all the headlines together it doesn't make much sense or very good reading. In fact the new foreign owners that have recently arrived to take over some of our most famous clubs appear to have completely no understanding of the game. It seems that no one at Board level in any football club can be really trusted and you have to feel that, after yet another transfer window going by without any marquee signing for Spurs, that AVB has been left to manage a one legged arse kicking competition.

The way in which our Board dealt with Martin Jol, Ramos and then Harry you have to wonder what AVB has to do to stay in his job, what are Levy's expectations of AVB? Should owners of Football clubs have at least a Footballer on the Board or should a Board be more remote from the day to day running of a Football club and would the last high profile sackings and appointments have been better handled by a DOF who would sit between the Board and the day to day Management?

Written by OyVeh Maria




Use your social login to comment on front page articles. Login using you Facebook, Twitter, Google or LinkedIn accounts and have your say!



Click here to join in the debate on the club forum.

The journalist

Writer: OyVeh Maria Mail feedback, articles or suggestions

Date:Thursday February 7 2013

Time: 5:54PM

Your Comments

firstly what a great article
onlyonegreavesie
i think they all want the short cut to the top but as you can see with man city and chavski its all built on sand and easily falls down.The only way is slowly with good foundations ie, us, the mancs and sorry to say the goons. vast amounts of money creates the wrong type of players coming to your club, and owners sacking managers at a whim just creates instability.COYS
onlyonegreavesie
Stop it Greavesie!
Durbanspur
The game is no longer the beautiful game, it's the money game!
Durbanspur
You can add Southampton and aston villa to the list all think they know more about football than real football people.the game is on a slippery slope
rustyruss67
Jol and Ramos - absolutely embarrassing behaviour by the powers that be at ENIC. Harry? Not so much. He is as much to blame as anyone for his own dismissal. In fact the club stuck by him even though the Court process and the England self publicity was taking a toll on him and the team. He'd never had it so good.

As for many of the other owners, yes, there are issues. I think they all see the possibilities of huge riches and an ability to use the forum to cross merchandise their other interests. All well and good but the reality of the riches is that many clubs with huge resources are fighting over those same dollars. Clubs like ManU and Liverpool have huge advantages. Have their new owners helped or hindered their advantages? Time will tell. For the moment ManU seem to still be slowly growing while Liverpool seem to be stagnating. Chelsea and City can buy themselves out of whatever messes they choose. But even they have seemed more restrained of late. I believe that the FFPR and/or the global economy is slowing their largesse. But can they help themselves? One wonders if the super-rich clubs (Anzhi, Shakhtar, Milan, AC, PSG, Barca, RM, Bayern and others), who all generally seem willing to spend money, will curtail themselves going forward or will they just do the same old same old? It is expected that there will be a huge fight for Suarez, Falcao and Cavani. This will be inflationary and will leave a huge vaccuum (funny how just 3 years ago Dzeko, Suarez and Falcao were all on offer for less than 20M each - now numbers bandied about are in the 40-60M range). What does that do to the "nouveau venu" owners, like Fernandez? Do they now fill the void and sign the 30M striker (who right now is worth 18M)? What does Liverpool do if Suarez decides more money and CL makes sense? Do they spend 40M to try to land a player like Demba Ba or better still 55m to buy back Torres? Does Leandro become a 30M talent? It is crazy. Regardless of what PSG win this season and regardless of whether QPR stay up, I cannot fathom how either club offsets their spends and the salary commitments. Sure Remy and Samba can leave, but who is going to pay the reported wages? Harry says both can be sold at a profit. Robbie Keane and other similar signings suggest otherwise. They will not leave on lower wages and clubs will be unlikely to pay anything more than a nominal fee to get them because of the infalted salaries and the selling club may even have to pay the player off to get them to go (see Adebayor or Crouch).

As I see it the FFPR are what is needed to protect clubs and the fans from owners that just can't help themselves. The thing is, I doubt whether there is sufficient "desire" to get the job done. I haven't seen the final decision by the EPL clubs, but they seemed to be leaning to allow clubs a 105M overspend over three years. What kind of a message does this send? Why not 110% of revenues on all club expenses. So a team can only ever run a 10% loss. Then make it so that a club has 3 years to make up for that loss in profits. No one wants to stop clubs going for it, or shoring up where needed, what we don't want is clubs owners, who care not about the club or the fans, going all in and then walking away when it stopped on red, leaving the club and the fans in the wilderness for years. If it is not curtailed, eventually the system will come down around itself and some other sport or League will walk in to take the limited, but vast, resources that are out there. European Hockey League anyone? COYS
peterballb
Agree completely greavesie, tycoon* clubs are embarrassing, even for their fans, spurs have managed to maintain club stability the old fashioned way (amongst others) n I'm glad to be a spurs fan because of it, I'd hate a sugar daddy chairman dictating to our manager who spurs are signing! Unfortunately there is a growing trend for large organisations to buy-out competition, and throwing money at things hoping they stick, this seems to be reflected within football clubs aswell I'm afraid
sirlordos
all in all, I wouldn't swap ENIC and Levy with any other owners currently out there. not saying they are perfect, but I am not worried as I most certainly would be with most other owners. I didn't like the way Jol was dealt with, but I wouldn't necessarily want him back either. The whole Ramos experiment was the right thinking but the wrong man or time. harry was always going to be a short term solution because his approach to buying players was at a complete opposite to what the clubs approach absolutely must be over the longer term. My support of ENIC is based on a few assumptions that they have yet to deter me from. Firstly that AVB is a long term manager. I think Levy has sought a long term manager from the beginning, but it has to be the right man who can approach the development of the whole club in the right way and fully utilise the new facilities. AVB is that man IMO, Harry with his transfer target list compiled in 2002 and old school approach to bull***** dossiers etc was never going to be. secondly, that they hold true to the promise that the stadium and the first team finances will be kept separate and they continue to invest in the first team. I don't read too much into the lack of a striker in january, they took a risk, we will see if it will pay off, but the right player was not available at a reasonable price and that is the way we work, which is fine with me. I think the wage increases shows a massive degree of intent that this squad will essentially be maintained and improved upon over the next years, bale's possibly inevitable departure aside, while we have brought in players that are of so much higher quality than we were dealing with just a few years ago in the summer window alone, lloris, vertonghen, dembele and adebayor are all fantastic players. People can espouse their asset stripping conspiracy theories all they like, it seems to me that AVB is being supported in the sense that he will be given the time to slowly shape the club over the next few windows without rashly changing too much or buying players that don't fit his system and vision. i believe we will see more comings and goings in the summer, I think we may well operate the markets with a slight loss unless we don't get cl and bale wants to leave and i believe that even if we finish 8th, AVB's job is safe. until i see anything that suggests otherwise, i look at other owners and quietly smile because, personally, in an age of club madness everywhere, I think we got lucky... over to you pelebre ;) try and keep it decent fella, there could be kids reading too
Guernman
Do the owners know what they are doing? I suspect most do but the fans don't know what their objectives are...unfortuantely sometimes what they are doing is not to the fans/team benefit...look at manu....do they know what they are doing? Keeping 75m! of course, that's like a huge lottery win, it's brilliant. As for the 'real football' people most are dinosaurs who quite frankly wouldn't make much more than an average wage in any other industry- they are lucky and I feel no pity for them. The FFP rules look like they're there to preserve status quo...they just want to make barrier to entry too high...I'm not sure it's a good thing. After all if a billionaire wants to propel his team to the prem why shouldn't he? And if the owners get it wrong and bankrupt a club, so what? Look at Rangers 3 years and they'll be back....what it can and should do is lead to more clubs siezing ownership in the long run....and the fans need to put pressure on the owners to do right by the team.
shedboy2
Football is now just full of exploitation .

Most things in life you can shop around if you feel you`re being ripped off .Football is different ,they know fans have a club & stick by that club ,abusing the fans loyalty to a point it`s getting ridiculous .
Even some players are doing it ,which is why the relationship between fans & players is forever widening .Football will destroy itself if it`s not careful .IMHO if i just started watching football this year ,i wouldn`t like the sport .
big cockeral
BC- like the saying 'capitalism will eat itself' so could football...
shedboy2
shedboy, what is to stop a billionaire from doing that within FFPR? They can still build a training ground and grow revenues, build a stadium, get players, get promoted and continue to build. What it does do (and I agree the FFPR were designed to maintain the status quo - ergo not a peep of dissent from Chelsea, City etc) is limit the growth and stop someone from coming in and buying a title. You say Rangers will be back in three years. With what money? They are skint. Yes, they have 49k fans that show up at the IBROX, but they still need 2 more promotions to start getting revenues in line with expenditures. This is a much greater task than the one that was demanded of Juventus where they were able to ask their players to remain for 1 year as there was little doubt they could get promoted (Buffon, Nedved etc). They have lots of money compared to any League three team, but even with three successive promotions, it is not a guarantee that they vault their way up to the top of the SPL.

Further, such a situation for a PL club is not in any way comparable. Leeds are not finding it easy. Pompey, West Ham, Blackburn. There is a long list of teams that have overspent and been burnt. Much of it was obvious bad planning. Yet, do not be surprised if QPR go down when people are shocked at the ramifications. I have no problem with Fernandez trying to spend to improve, but what is the backup plan? Go down, and then what? He says he's in it for the long haul, but he does not have billions. Not even half a billion as I understand it. 60M, 70M or even 100M might be too much for an owner to swallow when it comes out of their pocket. How do you get planning approval and financing for stadium improvements when that is your plan? All seems folly to me. That aren't the only ones. Southampton are also hugely at risk. Imagine having to sell 2 brilliant young fullbacks to cover some of that as they are the prized assets. You mortgage the future to gamble for today. Villa will be ok, but a drop will be very hard on the fans and the bottom line. Not my money, so I shouldn't care, but I believe it all hurts the game as a whole. COYS
peterballb
Would love to see owners/boards have to sit down say once a month with a representitives from supporters groups and sites like this and face so real questions from some real fans....would be interesting. You up for it OX?
Underspur
We are led to believe by some financial whiz kids on here, that the only football club owners that know what they are doing, are ENIC in the guise of Lewis/Levy. It all depends what your perception of what being a football club is about, what it's objectives are/should be, and what you expect from the ownership. Of course there have been disasters, but there have also been successes. Some are still waiting for Chelsea to come unstuck, or go under, but there is as yet no sign of it happening, several trophies after Abramovich took over a club with a less than impressive history in terms of success on the pitch, they are still going strong, and will continue to do so. Man Utd although some of their supporters are unhappy and in spite of them carrying huge debt, continue to win trophies and titles and are unlikely to go into melt down. Man City always a poor relation and an up and down club over the years are suddenly competing for honours due to huge investment from the Mansours. Of course there are teams where owners have got it wrong i,e Blackburn, A. Villa, Portsmouth, Leeds and the previous regime at Liverpool come to mind, but if there is a combination of huge resources, willingness to invest, and a genuine desire to be successful and winners, then clubs are transformed into winners. As Peterbalb says there is a history of clubs "overspending" and getting burnt, usually because either they haven't really had the resources (multi millionaires trying to act like billionaires) or they lack the real determination to go all out to succeed as Abramovich and the Mansours have, and Usmanov would if given the chance at Arsenal. We on the other hand have a totally different objective, that is to run the club frugally so that it is always in a financial position to be attractive to a buyer. In our case events on the pitch take a definite second place (1 trophy in the 12-13 years of the ENIC reign) to success at the bank ( the value of the business doubled and more during the same period). Some say we are right, some even say we are the only club that are right, all the rest are wrong, but I don't think that is necessarily how football history will see it. The only teams, clubs, or individuals that are remembered into posterity in sport, are winners, not how, or why, or how much it took to become winners. I am afraid that we are unlikely to interest football historians either now or into the future under the current regime, but will be remembered with affection by shareholders and those benefiting from the financial success of the business, notably it's two owners and their fellow billionaire board members. The average fan with no financial interest in the club save his investment in tickets and merchandise and gaining no benefit whatsoever(unless he is a shareholder) will simply be left wondering what might have been.
Frank
Frank, I just don't think we can begrudge anyone for not throwing hundreds of millions at the club to buy success. Just because lewis could do it, doesn't mean he is a bad owner if he doesn't. if abramovich had bought spurs, then yes we would have the full trophy cabinet and chelsea would still be poor relations, Ironically if ENIC had been running spurs at the time he probably would have bought us. I don't think you can hold chelsea and city as examples of how clubs should be run though, that would be madness IMO, they are anomolies in a crazy world where men like abramavich have accumulated insane wealth in often highly dubious circumstances, then choosing to throw it away at a new toy football club. and that is what they have done, thrown millions and millions away in order to prove that money can buy success, throwing the transfer market and wage bills into complete meltdown while at it. this is not investment, there is zero possibility of profit or recouping those losses, it is just a complete disregard for money and what it could do in other circumstances. football is not the be all and end all, and I commend other wealthy individuals like warren buffet, bill gates or george soros who turn to philanthropy rather than billion dollar toys. While Lewis may not have done that, i certainly can't blame him for not throwing all his wealth at the club just to play who can spend the fastest with city and chelsea. Nobody is stopping another multi billionaire from coming in and buying the club to fulfil your dreams, they just aren't knocking at the door yet, and to be honest I am not sure I want them to.
Guernman
Nicely said Guernman
Underspur
Out of all the names mentioned the two sackings which i think were the unfairest were Poyet and hughton, i and probably most of us tipped them for sucess, both are the definition of loyalty. in terms of jol an manager saying we could not be top four and attended an interview at Newcastle should have been sacked but certainly not the way he was. For 'arry and most managers in fainess he has earned 20m out of the game, its difficult to feel too sorry for these guys
troffer2
Agree totally with troffer, Levy proved by sacking Hughton and Poyet that he couldn't spot an excellent football coach when one stared him in the face i.e. Levy knows nothing about football, not a good thing if you are a chairman of a football club. His sacking of Jol and Hughton is also evidence that he is "a nasty bit of work". Excellent article Oyveh. Perhaps one of the best management regimes at a football club were the Cobbold brothers at Ipswich, They let Ramsey and Robson in sole charge of the football matters while they just pi$$ed it up in the club bar.
matt hoten
Yes, they're trying to make money.
TopSpur13
Nonsense Guernman. ENIC hasn't fulfilled the potential of this club on or off the pitch. That is a disgrace, and it didn't mean Lewis had to use his own money. As for Abramovitch, look what he's delivered in the last 10 years, and say with a straight face you're glad it wasn't us who had all those trophies. By the way, Soros is a complete see you next tuesday, and dangerously political to boot
lordjohnny
"tycoon** clubs are embarrassing, even for their fans," wrote sirlordos.

If the fans had more sense, it would be more embarrassing for them than for anyone else. Their affections are being bought, which makes them parallel to hookers. The gods forbid that such will ever happen at Spurs. Surely some supporters would succumb, and therein would lie the true embarrassment for our club. It's one thing to be propositioned by a john, it's another to sell one's affections to a john. Pity the foolish supporters of Chelsea who cheer the money being spent by their Russian gangster to gain their affections and who then provide it. The depths of a depraved Faustian bargain. I will always love our club, but I hope I find the strength to resist giving my affections to someone who will treat us like trollops.

Total knobhead
"Yes, they're trying to make money," wrote TopSpur13.

But there a ways to make money and ways to make money. When someone comes in via a highly leveraged buyout of a club, that is, with borrowed money, watch out for the financial future of the club. Typically, the buyer is assuming the he (possibly she) has not intention of paying back to loan out of their pockets. They could pay off the loan by selling off bits and pieces of the club, such as player contracts. They can churn loans, using new loans to pay off old loans, paying themselves massive fees for each go round. They can jack up prices for the supporters to levels that surely approach robbery. They can pretend to sell shares in the club to supports, making sure that the supporters never get a penny of their investment back and making sure that their new partners never have any say in control of the club. And when this new money comes in, only a fraction of it will go to paying off the debt the club holds that was used to buy the club for the financier owners (like the Glazers have done). With a clumsy owner, after pocketing their fees and the profits from sales of contracts and the like, the owners can send the club to receivership and walk away richer than when they arrived. These ways of making money by equity companies is not limited to buying of football clubs, but companies of almost any sort, leaving the investors rich and the company in tatters, and the workers, communities, an supporters left high and dry. Pension funds usually are empty at the end of the process, protected by a corrupt political system that they helped set up with other investments. (Who can deny the massive extent that Ruppert Murdoch has bought British politicians and government officials?).

ENIC surely wants to make money from their investment in Spurs and in N17. So far I haven't seen evidence that their behaviors have been as base as those of owners at Man U or Liverpool or Birmingham. For this we can thank the stars, for we did nothing to merit avoiding these predatory owners, and Liverpool, Birmingham, and Manure did nothing in particular to merit such a blight.

Some rich owners are not buying club to get rich. They spend the money for the same reason that a man pays a prostitute: to feel powerful and successful and for a thrill. I'm not at all sure that that fate is better than being gutted by equity owners who arrive not to own but to pillage.

Total knobhead
Hope you get better soon Gazza !
Madaboutspurs
OyVeh Quincey as good as sacked himself mate & in case you've forgotten your history, Levy isn't foreign & is/was a co-owner of ENIC when he bought 29.9% of Sugar's shares back in 2001. ENIC is just one of Lewis' many companies, it's not like Lewis has a sole interest in Spurs as an individual.

I'm waiting for the usual childish bile to come spilling on this article from a certain quarter. YYYAAAAAAAAAAWWWWNNN.

Spuds-U-Like
I still don't get the outrage from some fans about us getting caught head-hunting Ramos. In every walk of life you proactively find a replacement in the same process as letting the incumbent go. The top and bottom of it was that Jol was not performing. The team was disorganised, the defence leaking goals and we were not moving forward as a club under him. He was out of his depth and Levy took the only decision available for Spurs. Of course, we were unlucky getting caught head-hunting but should remember that every club in the world does it and it is common place in any business. We can hold sympathies for a likeable Jol and by all means question who we targeted as a replacement, Ramos, but lets not cry fowl on a managing director doing what is very, very normal practice. That's just naive.
muttley
TK... the Man Utd. share floatation result in USA was to be expected. As you rightly say, high leveraged buy ins are questionable... this was a typically American Business deal, and the Glaziers got their target, and are enjoying their returns on the aquisition. We are lucky in that ENIC are English and Joe Lewis & Daniel Levy are fans. It is very difficult to run any business over the last 5 years or so of the worldwide recession.. So lets be thankful we have a state of the art training ground of 30m and a new 400m stadium being built. THFC are making progress, and Daniel Levy is trying to balance all this mega millions of expenditure and keep a profitable balance sheet is very difficult.... As any SME owner will readily confirm in this UK (and European) financial difficult times... We are a big club, and will get bigger, the fans need to be patient a bit longer.. THFC sliverware success WILL happen soon... COYS
Block D Spurs
Spuds... a brief insight, from my ITK...Joe Lewis is from N / E London, and still has small business interests in Bow East London..this was before he made his fortunes on the FX.. Levy was a student and Joe who knows Levy Snr, financed the young Daniel Levy through College, and employed him in his business, after Daniel Levy presented Joe with a business plan on property development.... so their association is of many years.. i.e. stability, and it is this which Levy has been trying to establish for THFC, and why he said we wanted to go in a new direction last year after Harry departed.
Block D Spurs
one assumes if they have the capital available in the first place to buy a prem club they know what they are doing
tophobunty
oh Maybe not ours santioned the signing of Demsey and Makepeace
tophobunty
Cheers for that Block D, the relationship is a little bit clearer now. I agree totally with your view that stability is the primary factor in Levy's actions, something a lot of fans don't seem to be aware of or don't think is relevant. In their apparent naivety, some fans seem to think there's a bottomless pit of funds available to buy just about any player in the world & to have built the stadium years ago. OK, not any player, but almost any player.

I do think however, that Levy has, at times, played it just a little bit too safe & possibly wasted a lot of time & energy pursuing the ridiculous OS venture which was never going to work.

Spuds-U-Like
They should have built/rebuilt the stadium years ago. They said it was their PRIORITY in 2001, when they arrived. To lock out paying fans makes no economic or business sense. They'd have paid for it by now, and we'd be far better off. No excuses. How many more times does it have to be said? 12 years and counting.
lordjohnny
Sure, buying up dozens of property, getting all the necessary planning consents, meeting all covenants & conditions, complying with all rules & regulations at local & national government level, putting in place plans & getting consents for changes to local transport infrastructure, putting in proper financial plans & obtaining funding for them only takes 6 months. FFS, what a bunch of morons we have running our club!

Spuds-U-Like
Glad you agree.
lordjohnny
Block D Spurs, I would question two of the points in your last post. 1) Lewis and Levy are fans, where is the evidence for that or indeed that either have any football knowledge or even interest, if Lewis were a fan he could have loaned the club the funds required to build the stadium long ago, they are simply business men running a property port folio that happens to include a site where football is played, end of. 2) That a new stadium is being built, that is patently untrue. Yes the site may have been purchased, and cleared, but until a brick is laid and construction is underway, the "new stadium is not being built", there are some of us that doubt that it will be at, least before the business is sold.
Frank
Frank, I won't presume to speak for Block D. I will say that Levy spends far too much time at games, home and away to not be a fan. Just my opinion. Lewis, nothing tells me that he is watching Spurs matches from his locations in warmer climes. Whether they are fans first or business men first is I guess what you are alluding to. In that we can probably both agree that their own interests are certainly tied in with those of the club. So it all goes hand in hand, but as business men they are not going to throw money at problems just for the sake of it. The plan seems to be balanced books on a yearly basis, and they do that. On the stadium, absolutely, it is not being built until it is being built. Hoarding etc, does not mean construction. I saw no evidence of a build in August when I was there (lots o hoarding though). Planning permission was granted a year ago, so I cannot fathom what the delay is, but then none of us have all the details. I do know contracts and tenders have been submitted and awarded for many services and other interests. Perhaps that is all part of the necessary funding. I don't know. More statements from the club would certainly be welcome and a ceremonial shovel and first brick seem long overdue. COYS
peterballb
Frank & Peterb... when I went to the recent Man Utd game, i saw the site of the new stadium, plied high with mounds of earth etc. So this alludes to ground works in progress. As to Daniel Levy, he still has his season ticket which is I think is the East Stand.. so he has been a fan for a long time... Joe Lewis is as far as I am aware a spurs fan, as my ITK source, has known him, d. levy and levy snr. many years..
Block D Spurs
I can just imagine Joe Lewis on the end of his sun bed kicking every ball of our games every week, some hope. I dare wager he wouldn't be able to name 10 Spurs players off the top of his head. Levy may well be at every game, probably as a symbolic presence by the chairman as it's a bloody long time since his gaffer showed his face.
Frank
sydqcb5
sydqcb5
sydqcb5
 

Have Your Say

Log in...
with your social network     OR     with your Vital account

Recent Articles

Moyes? (Thursday April 24 2014)

Options to replace Lloris? (Thursday April 24 2014)

Where are we? (Thursday April 24 2014)

Summer Targets (Wednesday April 23 2014)

TIM OUT NOW! (Wednesday April 23 2014)

Moyes ruins Levy`s plan? (Tuesday April 22 2014)

A Different Way (Tuesday April 22 2014)

Spurs slip up in race for 7th (Monday April 21 2014)

Spurs v Fulham: The Report. (Sunday April 20 2014)

Tottenham Hotspur Vs. Fulham. (Friday April 18 2014)

Archived Articles

List All Vital Spurs Articles
Have your say
Click here to suggest an article
Click here to suggest a poll

Vital Members League (view all)

1. Highgatespur 1285
2. MAN ON! 445
3. 80deg16minW 307
4. griddo 288
5. Spursex 278
6. Real Deal 263
7. spurdon 263
8. spur67 233
9. oxfordspur 205
10. Dublin Hotspur 203

League Results (view all)

Latest Results
Spurs 3 - 1 Fulham
WBA 3 - 3 Spurs
Spurs 5 - 1 Sunderland
Liverpool 4 - 0 Spurs
Spurs 3 - 2 Southampton
Spurs 0 - 1 Arsenal

League Table (view table)

Team P W D L GD Pts
3. Man City 34 23 5 6 56 74
4. Arsenal 35 21 7 7 21 70
5. Everton 35 20 9 6 23 69
6. Spurs 35 19 6 10 2 63
7. Man Utd 34 17 6 11 16 57
8. Southampton 35 13 10 12 5 49
9. Newcastle 35 14 4 17 -15 46

Breaking League News

Michu Set To Miss Aston Villa Game
Swansea : 24/04/2014 22:58:00
Mel Not Phased By The Pressure
WBA : 24/04/2014 21:16:00
West Ham Injury News For Albion
WBA : 24/04/2014 21:10:00
Jedinak - We Won't Relax Off
Crystal Palace : 24/04/2014 20:56:00
Pulis Now Looking To The Future
Crystal Palace : 24/04/2014 20:51:00
We Need Mutch Belief, Not Fear
Cardiff : 24/04/2014 20:26:00
Lambert Confirms What You All Thought About Me
Aston Villa : 24/04/2014 20:00:00

Current Site Poll (view all polls)

Spurs MOTM against Fulham?
Suggested By:  Vital Spurs
Lloris 45%
Naughton 0%
Kaboul 0%
Fryers 1%
Rose 0%
Paulinho 1%
Chadli 0%
Lennon 1%
Eriksen 41%
Kane 7%
Adebayor 0%
Dembele 0%
Soldado 4%
Townsend 0%