Spurs 2018/19

GlastonSpur said:
All this ignores the fact that (a) we haven't strengthened a rival; (b) we retain one of the best Prem CBs for another season; (c) that United also have to now work with an unhappy player in Martial; and (d) that Martial's sale price now drops for next summer because of his contract running down further.

I don't see how all this equates to a 'bad move' in not selling Toby to United. And besides, we'll still more than double our money if he's sold next summer.
Click to expand...

a) True enough.

b) That's debatable. There was a time when Toby was considered one of the prems best centre-backs, but no one knows for sure how he will turn out this season. Remains to be seen if he is still the player he once was.

c) There is no actual evidence that Martial was actively seeking a move away from United. There would have been far more potential suitors making bids for his services if that were the case. As far as I know, Spurs were the only club to take an interest in him, which makes no sense given the sheer talent of the lad.
 
Last edited:
GlastonSpur said:
Here's one, for example, dated last summer: https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrew...ionary-bubble-and-it-will-burst/#5f7443a1188b
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks. Not necessarily fully on board with the 'its inevitable' sense of the article, but it's good to get another perspective and the guy makes some decent points about some of the more outrageous fees paid for players. Some of his examples were a bit off though, for example he mentions than Mbappe was 'above market value', but the fact is it's entirely possible that if he develops as expected he'll be the world's best (or at least up there) within 4-5 years, and then nobody cares about the fee.
 
Random Task said:
a) True enough.

b) That's debatable. There was a time when Toby was considered one of the prems best centre-backs, but no one knows for sure how he will turn out this season. Remains to be seen as to how he stands up this season.

c) There is no actual evidence that Martial was actively seeking a move away from United. There would have been far more potential suitors making bids for his services if that were the case. As far as I know, Spurs were the only club to take an interest in him, which makes no sense given the sheer talent of the lad.
Click to expand...

I guess, but the same could be said for almost any player, no? I don't see any reason Toby would suddenly have lost ability, his injury wasn't a terrible one and he's a class act, I think it's relatively safe to assume that if he got a run in the side he'd get back to his 16/17 form, he looked good for Belgium to me, and that was when he was probably still a bit rusty. He looked pretty poor in some of his final appearances for us last season, but I think that can be attributed to a total lack of gametime, rather than him having lost it.

He's still only 29 so there's no way he should be declining yet as a CB, and he was class at Southampton/Spurs two seasons running. Don't see why one season marred by disagreements with the club would mean he'd not still be a very good defender.
 
acnumber9 said:
And all their replacements will drop in price too. I simplified it to one for illustrative purposes. The principles remains if it’s one player or ten players. Selling prices dropping means buying prices drop.
Click to expand...

Look, it defies common sense to believe that it's no problem if assets bought at peak-bubble prices suddenly halve in sale-price because the market collapses. You still have to keep paying the instalments for those purchased assets .. and meanwhile your income has reduced.

This outweighs any benefit from lower prices for new or replacement assets.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Look, it defies common sense to believe that it's no problem if assets bought at peak-bubble prices suddenly halve in price because the market collapses. You still have to keep paying the instalments for those purchased assets .. and meanwhile your income has reduced.

This outweighs any benefit from lower prices for new or replacement assets.
Click to expand...
Why is the market collapsing though? How much do you think TV money is going to reduce in the time period of a players contract? The straws you are clutching at are a little out of reach here.

You seem to think that not spending the money means there’s a little pot of gold sitting waiting. This collapse you’re talking about means all assets drop in value. That’s a bad thing for Spurs. Because if TV money is to drop significantly then you have a big debt to pay off with less assets to finance it.
 
SquishyMcSquish said:
I guess, but the same could be said for almost any player, no? I don't see any reason Toby would suddenly have lost ability, his injury wasn't a terrible one and he's a class act, I think it's relatively safe to assume that if he got a run in the side he'd get back to his 16/17 form, he looked good for Belgium to me, and that was when he was probably still a bit rusty. He looked pretty poor in some of his final appearances for us last season, but I think that can be attributed to a total lack of game time, rather than him having lost it.

He's still only 29 so there's no way he should be declining yet as a CB, and he was class at Southampton/Spurs two seasons running. Don't see why one season marred by disagreements with the club would mean he'd not still be a very good defender.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I'm giving his injury last season to much credit, as you say it wasn't too bad and players have come back from far worse. But the way performed for Belgium during the world cup was... average at best (IMO). He is certainly capable of better.

As for his general mood, I think that will depend on how much game time he gets throughout the season. Sanchez and Vertonghen looked pretty comfortable for the most part last season, Toby will have to really impress in order to break it up.
 
acnumber9 said:
Why is the market collapsing though? How much do you think TV money is going to reduce in the time period of a players contract? The straws you are clutching at are a little out of reach here.
Click to expand...

We were discussing, I thought, a hypothetical case in which the transfer market does collapse. Whether it will or not is a different discussion. But the cause wouldn't have to necessarily be simply from a decline in TV money.
 
He does have a point with regards to brexit. A minor collapse of the pound could make an 850m project very very expensive.
 
GlastonSpur said:
We were discussing, I thought, a hypothetical case in which the transfer market does collapse. Whether it will or not is a different discussion. But the cause wouldn't have to necessarily be simply from a decline in TV money.
Click to expand...
We were but it begs the question as to why it will and to what degree it will. The article you linked gives no reason for it to burst other than another financial crash. This ignores that it didn’t burst the bubble the last time. The article itself also talks about increasing revenues in TV deals and more heavy investors. I’m not sure what logic is being applied to the argument.

The high tranfer fees keeps the money sloshing around. The Neymar deal meant money going to Barcelona, which meant money going to Dortmund and Liverpool which meant money going to Southampton and so on.
 
Last edited:
What do spurs fans think about Eriksen’s current contract situation?

I could see him not signing a new contract, and then go to a club with bigger chances of winning titles. Signing a new contract with Tottenham would make it very difficult for him to leave, as Levy won’t sell him for under 100m. He will be 27 next year, so it will probably be then or never.
 
After reading all these post is it so hard to believe that maybe Spurs are just broke?

Let's look at the money trail. They offered a huge raise to Kane and kept their best manager in recent times very good business for them. Now i can assume that in both these contracts you have bonuses and add-ons that have to be factored into the clubs operating cost and is only natural that after a huge contract signing your transfer budget would decline a bit.

Lets factor now that Spurs commercial revenue is the lowest of the top 6 so unlike the other clubs they rely heavily on TV money brought in from competing in all the cups.

Now they did a massive stadium upgrade which should help them with match day income and other little things that can help them raise money they can also look for a proper name sponsor the problem with this is that Spurs had to use loans to build this new stadium and they have to pay it off that loan which i believe is gonna be levys main priority.

So with all this massive cash outlay inthis current market average players are going for 30m+ and good to great players are going for 50m up and world class is 70m up. Like someone said, 50 is the new 30.

So let's say Spurs bought a player for 30m then we have to factor in their wage, their bonuses, agent fees signing on fee loyalty bonuses and all of that other stuff that goes into making a transfer. Without knowing the details this might be too much for Spurs to consider, not that they can't do the purchase but is this purchase a must? Would spurs be buying players to replace persons in their starting 11 which realistically would help them towards winning a trophy? The answer is no because unlike United, Chelsea City and Liverpool and Arsenal to an extent they don't have the resources to go after a great to world-class player.

Spurs a think for the next couple of seasons won;t be active much and would really be selling to buy in the transfer market to service their stadium debt and relying on poch coaching ability to bring through players and help them improve so as to stay competitive and in the top 6 ideally in top 4 as to get the extra revenue from CL. I also believe Spurs need to start winning trophies, that's the only way your gonna increase your brand awareness and be able to attract better sponsorship deals.
 
SquishyMcSquish said:
How realistic even is it that the bubble is going to 'burst' ? I know you said you had some articles etc to share Glaston, I'd genuinely be interested to read them. To me it seems like the money in the sport is only going to increase, with new markets still to be explored etc, at least for the forseeable future it looks to me like we're set for transfer fees etc to get progressively more ridiculous.
Click to expand...

In truth transfer fees are actually lower in comparison to clubs' net profits compared with 16-20 years ago.

For example United's gross profit the year that we bought Ferdinand was around £35m whilst we spent over £30m on him (85%). Last year United's gross profit stood at £200m.

Therefore Ferdinand in today's market as a % of EBITDA would have cost us around £170m. Veron and Van Nistelerooy combined would have cost us around £350m

Transfer prices being somewhat low is obvious though considering wages have increased substantially.
 
Random Task said:
69 Million?

No, seriously. What bothered me most about the potential transfer of Martial to Spurs was the Poch factor. I'd bet my right arm that Poch would get the best out of Martial and turn him into a superstar. I can't help but wonder if Woody felt the same way. Perhaps I'm thinking too much from a fans perspective, I don't know.

*edit*

Sorry I had a meltdown moment with my laptop. Must stop drinking.
Click to expand...

I do think there is something in that. While the board clearly don't want to fire Mourinho imminently or anything, they may see that a manager (who is still regardless one of the best in the world) who has averaged 2 and a half years per club he's managed over his career and has a maximum of 3 and a half at any one club, may generally have slightly more short term thinking than them. And that Martial, who may have fallen foul of Mourinho, was one of the most highly rated players in the world when he signed and from what I remember, was the most expensive teen until quite recently?

I'd want to keep that player at the club. I'd also not be too eager for him to go to another club in the same league.


As for the Toby thing, I don't think Levy did too much wrong there tbh. By all accounts, you either didn't offer anything at any point all summer or seemingly offered 40 million. Seeing as the clause for next season is still 25 million, I don't see 15 million as enough to warrant an early transfer there tbh.

And I'm pretty sure he will knuckle down. Otherwise he won't play very much. And he'll suddenly find himself 30/31 and having barely played for 2 years. Which is hardly going to endear him to the top clubs.
 
I am a constant lurker of this forum but very rarely post, I feel compelled to have my say as a Spurs fan.

I actually quite like Lamela, and although I wouldn’t say he was “outstanding” before his injury, I felt he was developing into a very good player. I am unsure how Lamela will perform this season, but I have no concerns about our attacking areas this season.

Aurier was terrible for the majority of last season (minus a great debut against Dortmund), he did improve as the season went on, and feel he will improve this season (as Pochettino has a proven track record for developing full backs) but I’m currently not confident in him.

I’m glad we kept Alderweireld, he’s our best centreback by far and enables us to play a back 3; playing a back 3 pushes Trippier into a WB position where he is far more effective. If we get top 4 this season, it will justify losing money on him.

I don’t think Spurs needed wholesale changes but the centre midfield is injury prone, and a Dembele replacement is needed for the near future. My issue with this window was all the talk of signing players early, being brave etc and then nothing happening. Had the club turned said before the window that we were looking to keep our squad together, and unlikely to sign a player then the majority of fans would be a lot more calm. Rose is still linked with a loan move away, he was fantastic a few seasons ago, but unsure if he can get back to his best (this is an area we could potentially improve).

I really like our current squad but it’s worrying because United, City and Liverpool have improved, Chelsea are always a wild card and Arsenal have improved (although I still think they are too far away). Top 4 will be a battle, and it’s possible we fail to get top 4, and not win a trophy, this would be a disaster.

One last thing, I’m 30, I’ve been watching Spurs throughout the 90s, and although we had far more quality under AVB than the decade prior, the football was really hard to watch. We never played good football under AVB, it was painful sideways passing and hope Bale would do something on his own. That said Sherwood was more entertaining, but was more painful to watch for other reasons, so I tend to criticise him more.
 
finneh said:
In truth transfer fees are actually lower in comparison to clubs' net profits compared with 16-20 years ago.

For example United's gross profit the year that we bought Ferdinand was around £35m whilst we spent over £30m on him (85%). Last year United's gross profit stood at £200m.

Therefore Ferdinand in today's market as a % of EBITDA would have cost us around £170m. Veron and Van Nistelerooy combined would have cost us around £350m

Transfer prices being somewhat low is obvious though considering wages have increased substantially.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, thanks mate. I'm not going to pretend I'm particularly financially savvy or have any idea about football economics, but it has always seemed to me like wishful thinking that the bubble will just 'burst', although the article Glaston linked was interesting. I can see it maybe one day happening, but right now interest in the sport just seems to be growing, especially since there are still markets that have barely been tapped which possibly could be in the future.

Good point about transfer fees, makes total sense that with club profits skyrocketing the transfer fees would rise, with the money for transfers not really being game changers for clubs like they used to be. Do you/anybody that knows much about this stuff have any ideas/ theories about how big footballers wages could possibly get in the next ten years or so?
 
africanspur said:
I do think there is something in that. While the board clearly don't want to fire Mourinho imminently or anything, they may see that a manager (who is still regardless one of the best in the world) who has averaged 2 and a half years per club he's managed over his career and has a maximum of 3 and a half at any one club, may generally have slightly more short term thinking than them. And that Martial, who may have fallen foul of Mourinho, was one of the most highly rated players in the world when he signed and from what I remember, was the most expensive teen until quite recently?

I'd want to keep that player at the club. I'd also not be too eager for him to go to another club in the same league.


As for the Toby thing, I don't think Levy did too much wrong there tbh. By all accounts, you either didn't offer anything at any point all summer or seemingly offered 40 million. Seeing as the clause for next season is still 25 million, I don't see 15 million as enough to warrant an early transfer there tbh.

And I'm pretty sure he will knuckle down. Otherwise he won't play very much. And he'll suddenly find himself 30/31 and having barely played for 2 years. Which is hardly going to endear him to the top clubs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if the offer was 40 million then Levy did the right thing turning it down. I could definitely see that if they'd come out with an offer of around 60+ you'd have to consider it with the 25m clause, but 15 mill isn't really much in football these days, especially not enough to entertain strengthening your rival at your own expense. I expect Toby will knuckle down but do you think Pochettino will be too eager to use him as a key player? Knowing he's almost certainly out the door next season, it feels like its very possible Pochettino will only want to use him as a backup option, or if we go in to a back 3.
 
Lucas and Lamela now have a chance to make their name.. Maybe Aurier too if he somehow got a footballing brain in the summer.
 
TheeAma said:
After reading all these post is it so hard to believe that maybe Spurs are just broke?

Let's look at the money trail. They offered a huge raise to Kane and kept their best manager in recent times very good business for them. Now i can assume that in both these contracts you have bonuses and add-ons that have to be factored into the clubs operating cost and is only natural that after a huge contract signing your transfer budget would decline a bit.

Lets factor now that Spurs commercial revenue is the lowest of the top 6 so unlike the other clubs they rely heavily on TV money brought in from competing in all the cups.

Now they did a massive stadium upgrade which should help them with match day income and other little things that can help them raise money they can also look for a proper name sponsor the problem with this is that Spurs had to use loans to build this new stadium and they have to pay it off that loan which i believe is gonna be levys main priority.

So with all this massive cash outlay inthis current market average players are going for 30m+ and good to great players are going for 50m up and world class is 70m up. Like someone said, 50 is the new 30.

So let's say Spurs bought a player for 30m then we have to factor in their wage, their bonuses, agent fees signing on fee loyalty bonuses and all of that other stuff that goes into making a transfer. Without knowing the details this might be too much for Spurs to consider, not that they can't do the purchase but is this purchase a must? Would spurs be buying players to replace persons in their starting 11 which realistically would help them towards winning a trophy? The answer is no because unlike United, Chelsea City and Liverpool and Arsenal to an extent they don't have the resources to go after a great to world-class player.

Spurs a think for the next couple of seasons won;t be active much and would really be selling to buy in the transfer market to service their stadium debt and relying on poch coaching ability to bring through players and help them improve so as to stay competitive and in the top 6 ideally in top 4 as to get the extra revenue from CL. I also believe Spurs need to start winning trophies, that's the only way your gonna increase your brand awareness and be able to attract better sponsorship deals.
Click to expand...

To be honest, i think its not a guess, Spurs are broke.

To bring in other players would mean shipping off some players, if we were lucky enough to get offers good enough for Toby and Moose, i believe we would have cashed in. Why Liverpool wasn't interested though is way beyond me. as that will definitely shore up their defense.

But since we didn't loose any players, guess we didn't necessarily need to bring in any, wish a chinese club would come in with silly offer for sissoko and Moose, but Moose i don't have a problem keeping for another season or two if he could stay fit. also Wilshere was free, i personally dont give a shot about this rivalry thing as much as the player would give us what we needed.

Didnt Alli start out as CM for us though?
 
Lumimuyiwa said:
To be honest, i think its not a guess, Spurs are broke.

To bring in other players would mean shipping off some players, if we were lucky enough to get offers good enough for Toby and Moose, i believe we would have cashed in. Why Liverpool wasn't interested though is way beyond me. as that will definitely shore up their defense.

But since we didn't loose any players, guess we didn't necessarily need to bring in any, wish a chinese club would come in with silly offer for sissoko and Moose, but Moose i don't have a problem keeping for another season or two if he could stay fit. also Wilshere was free, i personally dont give a shot about this rivalry thing as much as the player would give us what we needed.

Didnt Alli start out as CM for us though?
Click to expand...

We are not broke, we just weren’t going to spend over the odds on players that weren’t going to improve us like we have done in the past.
 
InLevyITrust said:
We are not broke, we just weren’t going to spend over the odds on players that weren’t going to improve us like we have done in the past.
Click to expand...

I don't agree that we're 'broke', but there were players out there we could have signed that would have improved us, especially depth wise. We just decided it wasn't worth the risk to get a small improvement.
 
JDM said:
That said Sherwood was more entertaining, but was more painful to watch for other reasons, so I tend to criticise him more.
Click to expand...

Really? Sherwood was a bit of a tit but at least he brought through a few youth players like Mason and phased out some of the useless dross which didn't even want to play for us. He was undeniably poor but I don't think it was as bad as it got towards the end of AVB's time in charge, when we basically looked like a bunch of strangers assembled and told to play the most boring, inept football possible. He kept playing the players who blatantly had no interest in actually playing for the club too.
 
InLevyITrust said:
We are not broke, we just weren’t going to spend over the odds on players that weren’t going to improve us like we have done in the past.
Click to expand...
whats your definition of broke?
broke
brōk/

  1. 1.
    past (and archaic past participle) of break.
adjective
informal
  1. 1.
    having completely run out of money

are we not out of money sire? or actually in debt?
 
SquishyMcSquish said:
Fair enough, thanks mate. I'm not going to pretend I'm particularly financially savvy or have any idea about football economics, but it has always seemed to me like wishful thinking that the bubble will just 'burst', although the article Glaston linked was interesting. I can see it maybe one day happening, but right now interest in the sport just seems to be growing, especially since there are still markets that have barely been tapped which possibly could be in the future.

Good point about transfer fees, makes total sense that with club profits skyrocketing the transfer fees would rise, with the money for transfers not really being game changers for clubs like they used to be. Do you/anybody that knows much about this stuff have any ideas/ theories about how big footballers wages could possibly get in the next ten years or so?
Click to expand...

I find the Swiss Ramble blog and his Twitter very informative in terms of football finance:

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/?m=1

https://mobile.twitter.com/swissramble?lang=en

In terms of how things will develop going forward im not too sure. It'll be directly related to TV growth which will be directly related to interest from the up and coming Asian markets as well as the US.

I think growth in China could be huge over the next 10-15 years which could easily fuel a doubling of overseas TV revenues. Likewise if the growth of Chinese companies continues along with a growth in interest in the sport I could see huge increases in sponsorships.

The same with US companies - i particularly imagine the appetite of British consumerism for cars combined with the fact that many huge US manufacturers don't have the German-style presence in the UK will lead to large deals (such as Chevrolet's $75m United deal).
 
I just looked at the progress of the new stadium on their website. I've no experience in the building trade but that doesn't look like a site that'll be up and running in three weeks.
 
Lumimuyiwa said:
whats your definition of broke?
broke
brōk/

  1. 1.
    past (and archaic past participle) of break.
adjective
informal
  1. 1.
    having completely run out of money

are we not out of money sire? or actually in debt?
Click to expand...


By that definition Manchester United and Chelsea are broke. It seems pretty stupid to label having debt as being broke.

Tottenham recorded a profit for the 16/17 season, the latest set of accounts released by the club. To add to that the overall financial situation of the club looked very positive in those accounts with the clubs revenue rising by a whopping 41% in one year.
 
Spurs problem showed against Newcastle. They have very little depth. A few injuries and people tired from the World Cup and they looked tired at the end against Newcastle. Honestly one of the first times under Pochettino where i have seen Spurs look unfit. They looked like they only had energy for 60 minutes.

Just look at us resting Lukaku and Chelsea resting Hazard and Spurs had to play Kane who looked unfit and played horrible. Atm Kane is dragging them down, not helping them. They actually played much better when he was injured.

They had to play Sissoko in midfield, because they didn’t buy one when the window was open. Absolutely ridicoulus decision.

They must be very happy with 3 points away to Newcastle. I thought they had the biggest risk of dropping points of the top teams who met a smaller side. It’s not an easy place to get 3 points and definitely not with an unfit squad.

But it’s also why they probably won’t win anything again this season. Not enough depth and they already have lots of injuries. So they have to rely on a small group of players to stay fit and deliver and that’s just rarely a good idea.
 
JMack1234 said:
I just looked at the progress of the new stadium on their website. I've no experience in the building trade but that doesn't look like a site that'll be up and running in three weeks.
Click to expand...

I have been saying this for a couple of months. It won't be ready for Liverpool game. FA should have told them they are in Wembley for another season, bending the rules for them was not a good decision.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...ntinue-to-play-fulham-liverpool-a8490346.html
 
balaks said:
The club believe it will be finished and to be honest I believe them before people judging it from some photos.
Click to expand...
Or... The club raised the price of season tickets because of the new stadium but won't lower them when (of their own volition anyway) it's announced it won't be happening this year.
Gentleman Levy surely wouldn't...
 
Redderp said:
Spurs problem showed against Newcastle. They have very little depth. A few injuries and people tired from the World Cup and they looked tired at the end against Newcastle. Honestly one of the first times under Pochettino where i have seen Spurs look unfit. They looked like they only had energy for 60 minutes.

Just look at us resting Lukaku and Chelsea resting Hazard and Spurs had to play Kane who looked unfit and played horrible. Atm Kane is dragging them down, not helping them. They actually played much better when he was injured.

They had to play Sissoko in midfield, because they didn’t buy one when the window was open. Absolutely ridicoulus decision.

They must be very happy with 3 points away to Newcastle. I thought they had the biggest risk of dropping points of the top teams who met a smaller side. It’s not an easy place to get 3 points and definitely not with an unfit squad.

But it’s also why they probably won’t win anything again this season. Not enough depth and they already have lots of injuries. So they have to rely on a small group of players to stay fit and deliver and that’s just rarely a good idea.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with this. We did brilliantly to get the three points, but the fact we're being forced to play a Dier-Sissoko midfield and playing Kane when, like you say, he's obviously not ready is very worrying. I'm not too worried about us looking unfit as it is the first game of the season and it's not totally unexpected, but I am worried about our severe lack of depth. It's the main reason I don't get the 'we had nobody to improve us!' line of argument many are selling here, we didn't need players to come in and be automatically first choice, we need squad options that can push for places. I can't believe the club didn't even bring in a central midfielder this window, look at our options vs Newcastle and for the season, at no point should Sissoko be playing there.

I am worried about Kane. We're once more stupidly reliant on him this season having failed to bring in another forward, even more so since Son will be out for the Asian Games. He needed to be playing less, not more, but we haven't addressed that at all, even though he's recently been picking up a few injuries. It's total negligence IMO, and will cost us in the long run if we're not careful and continue to not manage him correctly. At most he should have been on the bench against Newcastle, and he shouldn't have been rushed back last season. I feel like sometimes his personal obsession with winning the golden boot etc overrules what is best for the team, Pochettino indulges him at times, playing him when it isn't really needed.

The perfomance against Newcastle doesn't really worry me, I expected a pretty fatigued, messy performance and that's what we got. It's a difficult game (as you say) and we came through, so no worries there. Like I said in the matchday thread, Newcastle last season beat Arsenal, Chelsea and United at home, and drew to Liverpool, they can make it extremely difficult for you. I am worried though about our larger concerns and I expect them to rear their head throughout the season, and people happy with no transfers I think will soon be bemoaning the same old deficiencies costing us throughout.
 
What’s the best way to get tickets to Spurs - Liverpool now that it’s played at Wembley? I’m in London that weekend - hoping to see that game as well as Watford - United (which can be hard due to the tiny stadium they play in I guess). Any hints and tips are highly appreciated!
 
Great news, really didn't fancy playing Spurs for the opening of their new stadium.

That said, is Wembley usually sold out for Spurs home games? If not, is it easy to grab some tickets? Might go over to London and catch the game in that case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.