Have a friend who worked on the stadium, he said the mid-level management was incredibly inept and led to numerous feck-ups. Some of the crews were out right bad at their jobs, and even some of the good crews were messed around and given incorrect instructions and schedules by the mid-level guys. There's been a lot of turnover and switching of contracts.
Have a friend who worked on the stadium, he said the mid-level management was incredibly inept and led to numerous feck-ups. Some of the crews were out right bad at their jobs, and even some of the good crews were messed around and given incorrect instructions and schedules by the mid-level guys. There's been a lot of turnover and switching of contracts.
No, not at all. Glaston will be here shortly to explain why exactly.
Utd must’ve made a fortune from selling all those tickets.
For sure something should happen now
The rules that has allowed Spurs to in effect ground share are as follows
K.5.
Each Club shall register its Stadium with the Board and must play all matches in the competitions listed in Rule L.9 for which it is the Home Club at the Stadium. No Club shall remove to another Stadium (either on a permanent or temporary basis) without first obtaining the written consent of the Board, in accordance with Rule K.6
K.6.
In considering whether to give any such consent, the Board shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case (including, but not limited to, the factors set out in this Rule K.6) and shall not consent unless reasonably satisfied that such consent:
K.6.1. would be consistent with the objects of the League as set out in the Memorandum;
K.6.2. would be appropriate having in mind the relationship (if any) between the locality with which by its name or otherwise the applicant Club is traditionally associated and that in which such Club proposes to establish its Stadium;
K.6.3. would not to any material extent adversely affect such Club’s Officials, Players, supporters, shareholders, sponsors and others having an interest in its activities;
K.6.4. would not have a material adverse effect on Visiting Clubs;
It’s really difficult to see how this situation can be allowed to roll on for there is no doubt whatsoever that 6.3 and 6.4 are relevant. Indeed I wonder if City are being forced to play at Wembley and are going to make the point loud and hard that it is impacting on them.
Sounds amateurish. Does anyone know if Spurs are due compensation?
This is what Levy told THST in May 2017
Northumberland Development Project
- KL asked for an outline of the build schedule for the stadium from here on in. It was obviously on time right now, considering the Wembley deal had been signed, but what should fans look out for over the coming months as signals it’s still on course? DL said that the roof going on at the end of January/ early February 2018 would be a big indicator
- KL asked for comms around the build to continue as fully as possible, considering fans would not be coming to WHL every other week for matches and wouldn’t be seeing the progress for themselves. DC agreed
- DL stressed this was all at the Club’s risk – Mace wouldn’t work to a fixed price contract with this build as there were too many variables and Mace would not be responsible for any overruns. This is a complicated demolition and build
Jeez! Quite amazing they have taken all the risk for something that has to be ready for a schedule they have no control over.
Why would UEFA care if they play the knockout rounds in a different stadium to the group stages? If Lyon qualified from the group stages in 15/16 the same would have happened to them.
Chelsea's ground holds what, about 40k? Now that is embarassing. Back in your box.
Imagine those kids who have asked their parents: 'Mum, can we go watch my idol Harry Kane in the new stadium next season? (as in this season) When I grow up I want to be like Kane, without that open mouth part.' and the mum said 'oi u fecking cnut we can yes'.
What will they tell their children now? Crashing dreams, destroying future English footballers, here goes future world cups coming home. Hope they disband Tottenham for this disgustan behaviour altogether.
What will they tell their children now? Crashing dreams, destroying future English footballers, here goes future world cups coming home. Hope they disband Tottenham for this disgustan behaviour altogether.
It's one thing messing their own fans around, or even those fans unlucky enough to be playing them, but when it now messes games for other clubs it's an absolute farce.
I'm sure even Tottenham fans would agree on that.
I'm sure even Tottenham fans would agree on that.
Great news for Spurs. This is exactly the scenario where Spurs gain the most. Why? Over to you @GlastonSpur.
Complete joke isn’t it. How did they get it so wrong? It’s not close to being done and now it’s effecting other teams.
If they start playing home games at Wembley they have to play all games at Wembley this season surely.
If they start playing home games at Wembley they have to play all games at Wembley this season surely.
Those kids should be taken to sermons from Swami Glaston. That will turn those kids to "glass completely full" type of people.
Well this is a bit of a joke from Spurs and to he honest I wouldn’t be happy if i was Man City having to play at Wembley one day after a NFL game..I mean it’s not going to be in the best condition is it?
What are the other options?
Force them to continue using Wembley? Will the FA allow that if the new stadium is ready?
Spurs will get special treatment because they have England's captain and golden boy up front, Eriksen and France's world cup winning captain in goal. UEFA aren't going to do anything that could negatively affect them.
I doubt everyone would be so accommodating if this was Newcastle and they somehow qualified for the Champions League.
(I'm not going to sit here and pretend that Arsenal, City, Chelsea or United wouldn't get the same special treatment).
Ffs lol very good
Let’s be perfectly honest, UEFA have long been anti English, and whether it’s Spurs or any other English’s club, if they can - they will take action - having the England captain will not help Spurs in the slightest.
UEFA care mainly about TV money, just like the Premier League (and others)..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39177581
BT are paying £300m+ a season, far the highest in Europe I think, fo the UK rights, you'd better believe they want English teams doing well or the value of the contract will crater next renewal...
Spurs won't have an issue with UEFA imo.
I don't think that's true anymore. They know that English teams are their biggest draw after the two Spanish Clubs + Bayern + maybe Juventus. Besides Kane, Spurs also have Lloris, Eriksen and Son. Players that are popular not only in their own respective countries but worldwide.
If you want to argue that UEFA prefer Real and Barcelona and do everything they can to help those two out, argue it. But English teams are too important to them financially for them to do anything too drastic towards them.
I don't think we will ever see English clubs on a whole banned from Europe again, unless something extremely drastic happens.
Last edited:
Best paid CEO in the league...
So what, a week here or there, it's best football stadium in England. Lots of teams if not all will be privileged to play there.
Actually saw a Spurs fan on Facebook saying he didn't mind them losing against Watford because they'd have a world class stadium soon.
Actually saw a Spurs fan on Facebook saying he didn't mind them losing against Watford because they'd have a world class stadium soon.
No prizes for guessing who that person was.
I am dying to know why Tottenham Hotspur as a business get preferential treatment because Christian Eriksen plays for them. Is he the Chosen One and everyone in the FA are in the Stonecutters?
I'm sorry, I hate Spurs but how is the stadium over-run their fault? The contractors have messed up the safety system, and are struggling to get it fixed (because there are miles and miles of cabling, they can't find the fault, just that their is one).
Crossrail, 3 months from opening has been delayed for a year. Similar problems. The thing is basically finished, but they can't get the software to work with the signalling. Result, last minute postponement due to safety concerns.
In the old days, something was ready when it was built. In the technology age, something is ready when its state of the art systems work.
Point is here, Tottenham are trying to get their toilet seat ready, and it serves them no useful benefit for it to be delayed, but they have no control, and it's a little nasty, and un-necessary to be suggesting point deductions or fines.
Crossrail, 3 months from opening has been delayed for a year. Similar problems. The thing is basically finished, but they can't get the software to work with the signalling. Result, last minute postponement due to safety concerns.
In the old days, something was ready when it was built. In the technology age, something is ready when its state of the art systems work.
Point is here, Tottenham are trying to get their toilet seat ready, and it serves them no useful benefit for it to be delayed, but they have no control, and it's a little nasty, and un-necessary to be suggesting point deductions or fines.
It’s their fault for trying to rush it. The contingency plan should’ve been a second season at Wembley. An option that was available to them. It’s nobodys fault but there’s that they didn’t legislate for delays.
Sounds like Spurs rushed it, and the contractors basically told them what they wanted to hear to get the job. Quite common when non-technical people tend to be the ones doing the bidding for the contracts.
They should've just stayed at Wembley for another whole season.
Can the NFL fine them for failing to deliver them their most prestigious ground?
Last edited:
I'm confused how they are allowed to move fixture dates. The rules are pretty clear that the ground not being playable is not a valid reason to move the fixture date and should result in a forfeit. I understand that would not happen in the premier league era, but they must face some penalty. Lots of fans have already booked travel and accommodations.
This is my fundamental issue. I don’t have a problem if spurs play at Wembley or wherever in London - but having to move the dates is unacceptable, and should not be allowed. Lots of City fans will have pre booked travel and accommodation. The game is now on a work day, so they will need to take a day off of work. Simply put, it should not be allowed - poor planning from Spurs, who are clearly running around trying to rearrange games left right and centre should not affect the fans of other clubs.
In addition the Man Utd Everton game has moved a day as well. There will be fans of those two clubs who will have additional travel costs as well - at the very least Spurs should be compensating every single fan of other clubs. It is their absolute ineptitude not to have a robust plan in place.
Levy doesn’t have a plan, he did for the first couple of matches, but clearly did not have a contingency for this. When you have a £billion project, that’s unacceptable.
Mess around your own supporters all you like, but there should be significant consequences when other clubs’ fans are put out.
It’s a bit pathetic - especially when you have to wear a hard hat to get in the Spurs stadium.
I get the date change frustration, but there is no alternative. Wembley can't host that day. City are refusing to switch the fixture. No 3rd stadium is available, and if it were, the Premier League would likely say no anyway. The match has to be played, no one can magic something else. The stadium could be ready, but that is down to whether they can get a safety certificate in time. Lets be real here, people are suggesting effectively the match stays on that day and Spurs play it at their new stadium or else. Down the line, any punishment would probably be fiercely attacked in the courts (cival and sporting), and disruption from a last minute cancellation would be far bigger that dealing with it now.
In terms of Spurs rushing it, well of course they wanted to get it ready and have an ambitious schedule. It's their new home. Would you want to play too many games/season at Wembley? It's a horrible stadium.
In terms of Spurs rushing it, well of course they wanted to get it ready and have an ambitious schedule. It's their new home. Would you want to play too many games/season at Wembley? It's a horrible stadium.
My comments to Frank Grimes were related to his somewhat pompous view that Spurs shouldn't be sharing their ground with the NFL. He was getting a bit high and mighty about it and I pointed out that Utd shared with The Stones and Billy Joel. It makes financial sense for both Utd and Spurs to generate additional income by doing this. I would, though, say that Spurs have taken additional sensible measures to accommodate NFL by having a retractable pitch for such events. I do not have a problem with this and why Frank Grimes does is beyond me.
I work in construction and know a lot of these large projects overrun. The industry has suffered for decades with a lack training from top to bottom and it's a game of Russian roulette as to how the contracts work out. Spurs are not builders and it's a bit rough to be holding them to account for the overrun.
Apologies then.
I think it’s a really good idea for Spurs to encorporate NFL capability into the stadium.
I’ve worked in construction, but from the ‘client’ side. It’s up to Spurs to ensure they can hold the contractor to account, as it is their responsibility (Spurs) to ensure they have a fit for purpose stadium. So whilst the overrun is clearly outside of the control of the club, the contract, the timescale and importantly the contingency planning is absoubtly within their control. The latter has seriously been overlooked.
Saying that construction always overruns as a reason for late delivery is inexcusable, and I would have been sacked on the spot if I claimed that. Where Spurs have failed, is that they should have relocated to Wembley (or elsewhere) for two seasons.
I’m all for supporting clubs, and giving them reasonable dispensation for building/ reconfiguring/ improving stadia - it makes our league better, and improves our chances of hosting international tournaments. But Tottenham have now got this seriously wrong, and should compensate fans of teams they are directly affecting.
As an aside, I was a Spurs member last year, and went to Wembley to watch Utd, Arsenal, Madrid and Juventus. I was furious when I discovered the membership has been auto renewed this year, and only discovered it when they sent through the membership pack. I got round to calling them last week, primed for an argument, not in anyway expecting a full refund - I didn’t get that far as they were so quick to refund me. I expect that are quite a few Spurs fans that have cancelled their memberships this year.