• 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

DubaiSpur said:
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.
Click to expand...

-One of the highest rated young defenders in Europe.
-The best central midfielder in the lge the season before we brought him - the same as Caicedo is this summer.
-One of the hottest prospects in Europe.
-Highly sought after and probably best player in Portugal.
That is backing the managers. And it's what's, £130-150m ish for the 4?

Edit. "The kind of players we've always had access to" and "have brought since the late 2000s"......erm .....who were the owners in the late 2000s?!
They are certainly a cut above the kind of players we "always had access to" pre ENIC. Back then the likes of Rebrov and Les Ferdinand were a coup. The likes of Moussa Saib, Allan Nielsen, Ruel Fox, Steffen Iversen, Steffen Freund were the norm. Hell, we got excited when we signed Bobby Zamora from the Championship.

Skriniar - I agree.
Bastoni - decided to stay in Italy. We are buying people, not tins of beans - you can't always have the one you want.

Re; Conte. He was backed. His style was so different to the squad he inherented that he knew it would be a minimum three year cycle to transform..... until he forgot that and threw his toys out of the pram.

Honestly, you are supporting the wrong club.
You'd be far better off supporting Chelsea.
 
Last edited:
DubSpur said:
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.
Click to expand...

I always reply to their open surveys.
 
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...
I know what I said. I acknowledged they do their own surveys in my original post. Obviously missed by you as you repeated exactly the same point in your response.

Indeed they are influenced by Twitter, that is my opinion, you think they are not. We agree to disagree.
 
DubaiSpur said:
Well, their statement says the following -

"It should never have come to this. This is a watershed moment, and a clear and painful indictment of the on-field development of the Club over the last four years. We have lost a generational talent who, by his own words, only wanted to see the Club progress. But the lack of a coherent and consistent football strategy from the Board has seen significant on field regression since 2019, leading to One of Our Own feeling he had no viable option but to leave."

They are not criticising Levy for selling him now. They are criticising him for failing to build a team that made Kane want to stay. What Kane wanted wasn't unreasonable, wouldn't have been for any owner instead in building a winning team - it's all Kane wanted, it's all the fans want.

It was only an unreasonable demand for Daniel Levy and Joe Lewis. That is what the Trust is saying.

And, given that their previous public release was based on a survey of fans that indicated clear concern about the direction of the club, it was valid to bring up, imo.

In general, they can only engage with the club on what their members want them to engage in, mate. If the members are angry about the state of the club and want it raised, the Trust then cannot let the club just ignore it and engage with them on, say, the colour of the seats,cor something similarly meaningless. They have to bring it up - that's what they charge a membership fee for. No matter how much it upsets ENIC, or their most vocal defenders.
Click to expand...

No, they absolutely are criticising Levy/the Board for selling him now, if you pasted the full statement : "And we are owed an explanation on exactly who sanctioned the sale and why it happened a matter of hours before the season kicks off. "

Look, the Trust can say whatever they want, but couch it around "our members say/feel/etc" not "the fans say/feel etc." as they don't have the remit of anywhere near the whole fanbase. Stick to their constituency and all is good.
 
On the bench tonight for Bayern Munich. Trophy incoming on his first appearance?

If he comes on with 5 mins to go does it really count?
 
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...
Interesting as it differs to this which has us 4th last season on net spend.
https://www.teamtalk.com/news/ranki...fers-net-spend-2022-liverpool-11th-leeds-17th
 
Glenda's Legs said:
No, they absolutely are criticising Levy/the Board for selling him now, if you pasted the full statement : "And we are owed an explanation on exactly who sanctioned the sale and why it happened a matter of hours before the season kicks off. "

Look, the Trust can say whatever they want, but couch it around "our members say/feel/etc" not "the fans say/feel etc." as they don't have the remit of anywhere near the whole fanbase. Stick to their constituency and all is good.
Click to expand...

It is not 'our members'. If you read the post about their survey (which I linked a little earlier to @ricky2tricky4city , I think?), the survey they are basing their concerns and criticism on was open to both THST members and general fans. It's a fair cross-section of Spurs fans, imo.
 
DubaiSpur said:
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.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it is if it’s a survey that mainly is their own members
It’s like Tory party running a survey on robbing the country
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
I know what I said. I acknowledged they do their own surveys in my original post. Obviously missed by you as you repeated exactly the same point in your response.

Indeed they are influenced by Twitter, that is my opinion, you think they are not. We agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

But that's the thing. You said they act as a megaphone for Twitter, and should stick to their own surveys.

This is them sticking to their own surveys. So why would you allege that they are acting for a megaphone for Twitter?

(Btw, I'm not seriously pushing you on this point mate - I know what you meant, though I disagree. I just get enough similar nitpicking from the pro-Levy majority that it's fun to reverse it sometimes ;) )
 
Glenda's Legs said:
No, they absolutely are criticising Levy/the Board for selling him now, if you pasted the full statement : "And we are owed an explanation on exactly who sanctioned the sale and why it happened a matter of hours before the season kicks off. "

Look, the Trust can say whatever they want, but couch it around "our members say/feel/etc" not "the fans say/feel etc." as they don't have the remit of anywhere near the whole fanbase. Stick to their constituency and all is good.
Click to expand...
1. They know the answers to most of their questions. Or can make a reasonable educated guess.
2. The same questions have been answered before. The replies will be the same.
3. It's emotional nonsense, and hindsight verdicts.
4. What evidences this. Results are good or we make a couple of signings ...it dies down. Emotional needs are being met.

'It should never have come to this. This is a watershed moment, and a clear and painful indictment of the on-field development of the Club over the last four years. We have lost a generational talent who, by his own words, only wanted to see the Club progress. But the lack of a coherent and consistent football strategy from the Board has seen significant on field regression since 2019, leading to One of Our Own feeling he had no viable option but to leave.

The Board are merely temporary custodians of this Club. If this Board doesn’t share the ambition of one of our greatest players, then how can fans feel reassured in the direction of this football club?

Fans are angry and hurt; our loyalty is being tested to breaking point. We must question the Club’s strategy and ambition. And we are owed an explanation on exactly who sanctioned the sale and why it happened a matter of hours before the season kicks off.

The Club Board must make a public statement, respond to questions on their stewardship and show that it knows what putting football first means.


THST Board
12 August 2023
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Yeah
Their website
So their channels
It nah be open
But it doesn’t mean it includes
Click to expand...

It is open, and hosted on SurveyMonkey. It isn't on channels only their members can access - anyone can answer it, you don't need access of a membership or anything. Think you're reaching a bit, mate.

Where were they supposed to host it, if not their website?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back