• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Daniel Levy - Chairman

Bishop said:
Liverpool, Chelsea, Leicester ad nauseam.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

I meant us as fans, would we want the club taking a punt on players x, y and z if it risked financial issues down the line.

Winning trophies is easy if you don’t care about 10, 20 years down the line.

Also, examples above, what cost to the health of the Liverpool players pumped full of PED’s, what financial cost to the Chelsea earners, when will they see their money again, what chance of any sustainable future for them, and as for Leicester, they might get relegated again, no thanks.
 
Baleforce said:
I meant us as fans, would we want the club taking a punt on players x, y and z if it risked financial issues down the line.

Winning trophies is easy if you don’t care about 10, 20 years down the line.

Also, examples above, what cost to the health of the Liverpool players pumped full of PED’s, what financial cost to the Chelsea earners, when will they see their money again, what chance of any sustainable future for them, and as for Leicester, they might get relegated again, no thanks.
Click to expand...

Again that is not the standard just because those clubs went through that ...
 
Gazza said:
Again that is not the standard just because those clubs went through that ...
Click to expand...

The money has to be there first, we know we spend what we can afford, the numbers are out every year, the club isn’t hiding money and the ownership isn’t taking any out.

Which club has massively overspent, without the safety net of a state backed shell owner, and got away with it?
 
Baleforce said:
I meant us as fans, would we want the club taking a punt on players x, y and z if it risked financial issues down the line.

Winning trophies is easy if you don’t care about 10, 20 years down the line.

Also, examples above, what cost to the health of the Liverpool players pumped full of PED’s, what financial cost to the Chelsea earners, when will they see their money again, what chance of any sustainable future for them, and as for Leicester, they might get relegated again, no thanks.
Click to expand...

Also the successes are the extremes here. Emirates Marketing Project and Chelsea have required well documented billions to sustain their success, even if thats your thing you need a well heeled owner to be able to do so. They certainly not the "norm" Liverpool are closer to us in terms of they financially recycled their talent and spent well (We did that for a while) but as with us they have shown plateaus because of the restrictions they have compared to the others and before anyone says I know they have had more successes....

You either need loads of money OR loads of time, or both, more don't have them all than do TBH
 
AdamB said:
I liked Mason's comments after the game today about the club needing to decide who/what it wants to be and getting back to having an identity:

https://www.football.london/tottenham-hotspur-fc/news/mason-levy-kane-porro-lucas-27011652

I assume he'll speak to Levy as a wrap-up after the season so would repeat these messages to him
Click to expand...

Mason is a club man so all he said in that interview would be aligned if not sanctioned by levy and Co.

We are after unity. And GHod knows we need it.
 
metalgear said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1664364448264650754

Tim describing a situation with Levy back then. Kudos to Tim he insisted on playing Kane or he would have been sold to Leicester then.

Sent from my SM-T865 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

I've no time for Tactics Tim but I've no reason to doubt this is true. I'm not even worried about the opinion on Kane - let's be fair, a lot of us thought he wasn't Premier League standard.

But when an owner is interfering in the team, no matter how passively aggressively, it's a problem. When he's clearly doing it motivated by economic factors, it's unacceptable. And, yes, it was nearly 10 years ago. But a lot of the noise around the club suggests that he hasn't changed too much from those days.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. Levy's last roll of the dice for me was Conte. That failed - his credibility is gone. Levy should go. It's his club and he can't be forced out but he's holding us back.
 
metalgear said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1664364448264650754

Tim describing a situation with Levy back then. Kudos to Tim he insisted on playing Kane or he would have been sold to Leicester then.

Sent from my SM-T865 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...
I don't doubt that questions get asked on why a youth team player is playing ahead of players worth nearly 100m and change in wages. Also this seems to be Tim playing off the back otlf success of Kane now to make a conversation back then before he even scored a goal seem worse than it is. No one knew Kane was going to be this good then, Tim always wanted the credit for his development so I take the embellished parts with a pinch of salt rather than this billy big potatoes act he proclaims here.

Tim was hounded out of Swindon for being a wally, he is still a wally

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
 
billyiddo said:
Taking/considering advice from the DoF and then discussing with the coach (and vice/versa) is part and parcel of the footballing setup I'd have thought.
Click to expand...

Grays_1890 said:
I don't doubt that questions get asked on why a youth team player is playing ahead of players worth nearly 100m and change in wages. Also this seems to be Tim playing off the back otlf success of Kane now to make a conversation back then before he even scored a goal seem worse than it is. No one knew Kane was going to be this good then, Tim always wanted the credit for his development so I take the embellished parts with a pinch of salt rather than this billy big potatoes act he proclaims here.

Tim was hounded out of Swindon for being a wally, he is still a wally

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

He may be a wally. But he's been questioned on his team selection out of the blue because of the inclusion of one player. It obviously wasn't a standard/routine question. And the motivation was economic.

That's all sorts of wrong.
 
DeanoAustin said:
I've no time for Tactics Tim but I've no reason to doubt this is true. I'm not even worried about the opinion on Kane - let's be fair, a lot of us thought he wasn't Premier League standard.

But when an owner is interfering in the team, no matter how passively aggressively, it's a problem. When he's clearly doing it motivated by economic factors, it's unacceptable. And, yes, it was nearly 10 years ago. But a lot of the noise around the club suggests that he hasn't changed too much from those days.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. Levy's last roll of the dice for me was Conte. That failed - his credibility is gone. Levy should go. It's his club and he can't be forced out but he's holding us back.
Click to expand...
I don't see the problem here. He asked why he was playing Kane instead of an established player.
When Dim Tim asked was he being told not to play Kane Levy said no. So he was leaving it up to the manager.
Baldini thought we should sell Kane, Levy got the mangers input.
What is wrong with any of that?
 
DeanoAustin said:
He may be a wally. But he's been questioned on his team selection out of the blue because of the inclusion of one player. It obviously wasn't a standard/routine question. And the motivation was economic.

That's all sorts of wrong.
Click to expand...

If the DOF has spent all summer bringing in players and the clubs spent I think its reasonable to discuss why they might not be playing for at the time a kid with a poor record. As I have said it sounds embellished for me as does the portrayed hard man act that goes with the story.

Also the reason I don't buy the whole tone is that Tim was a club man at the time, was very close to Levy, used that influence and relationship to get the job, that only broke down when he had his time cut short and it soured. But till then he had Levys ear. As I say, some truth no doubt, fully true? Hmmmm not too sure
 
DeanoAustin said:
He may be a wally. But he's been questioned on his team selection out of the blue because of the inclusion of one player. It obviously wasn't a standard/routine question. And the motivation was economic.

That's all sorts of wrong.
Click to expand...
How do you know it was economic? He has a DoF telling him a player isn't good enough and then he's in the team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back