• 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

Harry Kane MBE

Bedfordspurs said:
I didn’t remember Totti winning the league, along with his 2 cups
I had to look it up
The gap in the money in this league is mental. Surely you can see it
Tottenham in our current structure would walk seria A because our real finances are better
We would walk France too (Iexceit PSG are backed by a country) and probably give Bayern a run for their money in Germany again like for like
The game is my favourite buttplug
Money talks
Our owners don’t have the money to compete
We’re fudged
Unless everything lines up in our favour

and I know you will quite Joe Lewis and his £4B but as I’ve said before he is a shareholder in reality, not an owner in the way you would use the term

Unless we’re brought by someone with pockets that can top up our already huge turnover we can’t win the big trophies

that is what Kane has made clear he wants

even if we made loads of right decisions in the last 4 years we wouldn’t have toppled city for the titles.. they would have just spent more like the have done consistently

that’s what has to change, but wont change I’m afraid
Click to expand...

On Totti, it matters what *he* wanted, mate - not what people remember. He won the league, he got his name etched into Roma's history and Italian football history, he then stayed forel his entire career. Ditto De Rossi (minus the league, but with some cups).

Kane could have been our Totti. He should have been. Alas, he was not because Roma had an owner who wanted to make that happen, and did - ENIC does not give a damn about that.

As for our current owners not spending, you're right, but that is the one thing the Trust has not said (yet) - we need new and better, more ambitious owners to compete. They are getting there, but they haven't yet said it.

I hope they do, soon.
 
DubaiSpur said:
Also Totti, De Rossi, and Le Tissier, among others.

Totti and De Rossi are the interesting ones. They won Series A and a few Coppa Italias, which is about the limit for a club like them. They are very, very similar to us.

But that was enough to make Totti and De Rossi stay for the entirety of their careers, or at least the meaningful entirety of it.

Kane seemed to me, and a lot of people, like Totti - he would have stayed at his boyhood club if we could only have given him a team good enough to win a few pots. Not even City-level domination - just something, *anything*.

Levy never did. Because that isn't what ENIC cares about.

*That* is what the Trust is angry about. It is 100% reasonable, mate.
Click to expand...
Le Tissier is considered a failure/martyr for doing so.
So your argument is that these players are incredibly exceptional.
Re: Roma, not a bad comparison, we have very similar histories, with one exception - out of 90 seasons, Roma have qualified for Europe 43 times. Way more than we have. Although from a % point of view, thats gotta be roughly how much we've qualified for Europe under ENIC, right?

The last few years - we appointed Mourinho, Kane publicly backed this appointment.
We appointed Conte - Kane publicly backed this appointment. Your, and THSTs, argument about it a situation we shouldn't have come to and it's all being the boards fault just doesn't stack up. Its fanciful and not living in the real world of modern football.

Equally, I find it highly unlikely that If he'd have gone next year on a free you wouldn't have bemoaned Levy for not cashing and thus losing the club £100m.

World Class players go to world class teams. We are not, and NEVER have been, bar one season under Bill Nic. Or, if you use the CL as a barometer, that one season we made the final.....
 
DubaiSpur said:
They *did* do a survey. That *is* where they are getting their views from.

https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-n...major-concerns-about-clubs-long-term-strategy

They do it every year, mate. Again, people rant about the strangest things when it comes to the Trust, just because they call our our deadweights for what they are based on their own research - not Twitter. It seems like some take Trust criticism of the owners and the club personally, as if *they* are being criticised.
Click to expand...
Er...I said that. Read slower
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Haven't STs prices not gone up for 3/4years?
Click to expand...
They haven’t
And I’m a ST so I’m of the view if anyone should bear the brunt of the cost increases the club is facing it should be the tourists and casual fans
That’s me being honest
I pay in advance for my ticket not even knowing who the manager is, let alone what players and team we will have
I don’t get to pick my games

but of course .. I’m sure some other clubs haven’t put prices up
I don’t know do any off the top of my head m, but some won’t have

but your right
We need to spend more
But can’t bring in more from the fans
So we need to maximise commercial revenue which is generally aligned to on the pitch success or fake deals
And you can’t get that success without spending
And you can’t spend enough because others simply have bottomless pits
It’s actually quite daft
 
DubaiSpur said:
On Totti, it matters what *he* wanted, mate - not what people remember. He won the league, he got his name etched into Roma's history and Italian football history, he then stayed forel his entire career. Ditto De Rossi (minus the league, but with some cups).

Kane could have been our Totti. He should have been. Alas, he was not because Roma had an owner who wanted to make that happen, and did - ENIC does not give a damn about that.

As for our current owners not spending, you're right, but that is the one thing the Trust has not said (yet) - we need new and better, more ambitious owners to compete. They are getting there, but they haven't yet said it.

I hope they do, soon.
Click to expand...
If we had won one title
Kane would still have gone this summer
He wants to be of Ronaldo and Messi stature
We still have people who don’t realise how good he is
That’s what the genuine greats aspire too
What you mean is richer owners
The trust can’t say that because they know that really means dubious countries
Or possibly head cases like Boehly (may be fun whilst it lasts)
 
Bedfordspurs said:
If we had won one title
Kane would still have gone this summer
He wants to be of Ronaldo and Messi stature
We still have people who don’t realise how good he is
That’s what the genuine greats aspire too
What you mean is richer owners
The trust can’t say that because they know that really means dubious countries
Or possibly head cases like Boehly (may be fun whilst it lasts)
Click to expand...
He wants, and deserves CL football. He’s 30, and knows there are t that many left to him, so why stay at a club on ANOTHER rebuild with no CL to play?
 
monkeybarry said:
The last few years - we appointed Mourinho, Kane publicly backed this appointment.
We appointed Conte - Kane publicly backed this appointment. Your, and THSTs, argument about it a situation we shouldn't have come to and it's all being the boards fault just doesn't stack up. Its fanciful and not living in the real world of modern football.

Equally, I find it highly unlikely that If he'd have gone next year on a free you wouldn't have bemoaned Levy for not cashing and thus losing the club £100m..
Click to expand...

On Mourinho and Conte, I, and the Trust (iirc) made the point that appointing a top manager and then not backing him with top players was pointless. That is exactly what happened. The hope when both of them were appointed was that the club would behave like a big club. That did not happen. So, no, it is 100% the board's fault.

On Kane going on a free, I would not have criticised him for it.

Equally, I don't criticise him for selling now. I do revile him for dragging the club to this moment due to his inability to act as anything more than a mediocre moneyless henchman for his criminal boss.
 
DubaiSpur said:
On Mourinho and Conte, I, and the Trust (iirc) made the point that appointing a top manager and then not backing him with top players was pointless. That is exactly what happened. The hope when both of them were appointed was that the club would behave like a big club. That did not happen. So, no, it is 100% the board's fault.

On Kane going on a free, I would not have criticised him for it.

Equally, I don't criticise him for selling now. I do revile him for dragging the club to this moment due to his inability to act as anything more than a mediocre moneyless henchman for his criminal boss.
Click to expand...
On Mourinho I agree he wasn’t backed like a big club, but Conte? We outspent most clubs during his tenure not to mention 150m+ last season net on the likes of Richarlison
 
demotw said:
On Mourinho I agree he wasn’t backed like a big club, but Conte? We outspent most clubs during his tenure not to mention 150m+ on the likes of Richarlison
Click to expand...

https://businessplus.ie/business-insights/highest-transfer-spend-in-2022-top-ten/

No we didn't mate. In his only summer in charge, we were out spent by United, Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Chelsea...Forest...and West Ham.

He wanted Bastoni. We have him Lenglet on loan. He wanted a top right back in the summer. We gave him a Champo nobody, and then Porro too late to matter.
 
DubaiSpur said:
On Mourinho and Conte, I, and the Trust (iirc) made the point that appointing a top manager and then not backing him with top players was pointless. That is exactly what happened. The hope when both of them were appointed was that the club would behave like a big club. That did not happen. So, no, it is 100% the board's fault.

On Kane going on a free, I would not have criticised him for it.

Equally, I don't criticise him for selling now. I do revile him for dragging the club to this moment due to his inability to act as anything more than a mediocre moneyless henchman for his criminal boss.
Click to expand...

Players like Romero, Bissouma, Kulusevki, Porro.
These are all top players.
Who else are you talking about? Are you expecting the top top tier? Are you expecting Haaland? Rodri? Salah? If so, you are supporting the wrong club - irrespective of who the owners are. The number of players of that calibre we've signed in my lifetime is one - Klinsmann.
 
DubaiSpur said:
https://businessplus.ie/business-insights/highest-transfer-spend-in-2022-top-ten/

No we didn't mate. In his only summer in charge, we were out spent by United, Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Chelsea...Forest...and West Ham.

He wanted Bastoni. We have him Lenglet on loan. He wanted a top right back in the summer. We gave him a Champo nobody, and then Porro too late to matter.
Click to expand...
Conte is and always be a clam
He is unemployed because his demands are not what a club that may want him can offer
Think about that …
He got what he asked for but didn’t use what he had
The guys a dingdong with a great record when the circumstances align
 
DubaiSpur said:
You said they act like a megaphone for Twitter folks.

They don't - everything they just said is backed up by their own survey highlighting that people are unhappy with the direction of the club. So, why the assertion?
Click to expand...
The survey of how many fans?
No spurs fan is happy that the club have gone backwards
If they are…they might be a bit bonkers
But … any sensible football fan can see the game is farce now and we are just willing participants
In fact if we ended up eventually with even more US owners it would at least be competitive
 
monkeybarry said:
Players like Romero, Bissouma, Kulusevki, Porro.
These are all top players.
Who else are you talking about? Are you expecting the top top tier? Are you expecting Haaland? Rodri? Salah? If so, you are supporting the wrong club - irrespective of who the owners are. The number of players of that calibre we've signed in my lifetime is one - Klinsmann.
Click to expand...

They are the exact same calibre of players we *always* had access to, mate. In turn, they were -

1) young defender from Atalanta:
2) midfielder from Brighton with one year left on his deal;
3) struggling young winger on loan from Juve;
4) young wing-back from Portuguese league.

We've bought players like that since the late 2000s. The only 'out of the ordinary' transfer throughout Conte's era was, ironically enough, Richarlison - a Premier League starter on a long deal for 60m.

And then, as I outlined elsewhere, look at the players we didn't get. Mourinho wanted Milan Skriniar. We gave him Joe Rodon. Conte wanted Bastoni. We gave him Lenglet on loan. He wanted a top right back. We gave him a Champo nobody and then Porro too late to matter.

You say that buying top tier players is not the club we are. Well, that is why Conte and Mourinho were never more than cheap half measures - you get a top 'results' manager and then give them nothing of their level to work with. All a sham.
 
DubaiSpur said:
On Totti, it matters what *he* wanted, mate - not what people remember. He won the league, he got his name etched into Roma's history and Italian football history, he then stayed forel his entire career. Ditto De Rossi (minus the league, but with some cups).

Kane could have been our Totti. He should have been. Alas, he was not because Roma had an owner who wanted to make that happen, and did - ENIC does not give a damn about that.

As for our current owners not spending, you're right, but that is the one thing the Trust has not said (yet) - we need new and better, more ambitious owners to compete. They are getting there, but they haven't yet said it.

I hope they do, soon.
Click to expand...

Totti stayed because of threats of physical violence if he didn’t.

Similar situation to Gerrard, just better dressed criminals.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
The survey of how many fans?
No spurs fan is happy that the club have gone backwards
If they are…they might be a bit bonkers
But … any sensible football fan can see the game is farce now and we are just willing participants
In fact if we ended up eventually with even more US owners it would at least be competitive
Click to expand...

They say it in the article, mate. 5019 fans, which is more than enough for a statistically representative sample.

I'm not saying anyone is happy about going backwards. No one here is. I am saying the Trust is vocalizing that to the Board, as is their duty to do. Not worth getting upset that they reflect the fans' views, based on their own research.

Don't disagree on wider football, as you know. But we are hobbling ourselves with the owners we have - in an arms race, we are standing with a squirt gun in the form of ENIC.
 
DubaiSpur said:
They *did* do a survey. That *is* where they are getting their views from.

https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-n...major-concerns-about-clubs-long-term-strategy

They do it every year, mate. Again, people rant about the strangest things when it comes to the Trust, just because they call our our deadweights for what they are based on their own research - not Twitter. It seems like some take Trust criticism of the owners and the club personally, as if *they* are being criticised.
Click to expand...
Can guarantee that the majority of those that would be bothered replying to a THST survey are those that are members and follow what they say like sheep.
Those that have different opinions to THST are not going to follow anything they do and take the survey.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back