Daniel Levy/Joe Lewis

Martin567

There are some very strange people posting on this forum. I'll be generous and just describe them as naive.

How could anyone with a brain believe John Henry's macho nonsense about Suarez having a release clause but Liverpool refused to sell? If his release clause was triggered and he wanted to leave, there is nothing they could have done to stop him. If Real Madrid want him this summer and he wants to go, then it will happen just like Bale last year. Nothing Liverpool do will make any difference.

Hammar

Ormus wrote: »

It's not conjecture or speculation. Berbatov went on strike, Modric couldn't play cos his head wasn't in the right place, Bale refused to train. How do people not remember this?

Suarez wanted to go to Madrid. But they didn't go for him. That's the ONLY reason he is still with Liverpool. Trust me on that. John Henry of course paints it as him standing firm against the might of Arsenal. But that is not the reality of the situation.

The rest of your message is some kind of fantasy about us beating Barca and signing Lahm? I honestly don't know where this comes from. I've never even vaguely suggested that and I haven't noticed anyone else on this forum suggesting it either.

I seem to recall Modric playing in over 40 games that next season and playing very well in many,once he got over his tantrums.
So once again you have nothing to back up your argument other than sheer speculation over what might have happened if Bale had stayed.

Again speculation on your behalf, Anyway the PFA found that Liverpool didn't have to sell in any case. So your belief that if Real Madrid had to offer,he would have been let go,is once again nothing more than mere speculation.
http://news.arseblog.com/2013/08/pfa-confirm-no-40m-suarez-clause/

That "fantasy" is the "type" of hyperbole, your fellow ENIC cult members throw at spurs fans accusing them of having unrealistic ambitions if they dare question the "genius" that is Daniel Levy and co.

Ormus

Hammar wrote: »

I seem to recall Modric playing in over 40 games that next season and playing very well in many,once he got over his tantrums.
So once again you have nothing to back up your argument other than sheer speculation over what might have happened if Bale had stayed.

Again speculation on your behalf, Anyway the PFA found that Liverpool didn't have to sell in any case. So your belief that if Real Madrid had to offer,he would have been let go,is once again nothing more than mere speculation.
http://news.arseblog.com/2013/08/pfa-confirm-no-40m-suarez-clause/

That "fantasy" is the "type" of hyperbole, your fellow ENIC cult members throw at spurs fans accusing them of having unrealistic ambitions if they dare question the "genius" that is Daniel Levy and co.

Yep, he did play and he played ok in the end, but it's arguable as to whether it was worth our bad start to the season, uncertainty over transfers, players not sure what the team is, endless press speculation, and then at the end of it all he leaves the following summer anyway - for significantly less than was originally bid.

All of that actually happened. It's fact. You might wanna look up the word speculation and get back to me.

Whether there was a clause in Suarez' contract or not, I will speculate that if Liverpool had been offered 85m for him, John Henry would have bitten their hand off (no pun intended).

Do you really think Henry could've stopped Suarez from leaving? Really? I mean if Bale and Modric threw a tantrum, what would Suarez do? He'd have no problem whatsoever doing a Tevez on it if Madrid came sniffing around. It beggars belief that you think otherwise.

Ok, now to "the type of hyperbole my fellow ENIC cult members throw at Spurs fans". Are you drunk? That is a brilliant line. So you're admitting that I never suggested anything like that? Strange that you said it to me but anyway. Would you care to say who did? Care to quote them? Quotes are pretty easy to find on Boards. I'm guessing the answer is no.

Ormus

Martin567 wrote: »

There are some very strange people posting on this forum. I'll be generous and just describe them as naive.

How could anyone with a brain believe John Henry's macho nonsense about Suarez having a release clause but Liverpool refused to sell? If his release clause was triggered and he wanted to leave, there is nothing they could have done to stop him. If Real Madrid want him this summer and he wants to go, then it will happen just like Bale last year. Nothing Liverpool do will make any difference.

Suarez is now on a fatter and longer term contract than Bale was, plus Pool have Champions League, they could even be champions, he is in a warm glow of happiness in his partnership with Sturridge, and Pool are a potentially massive club.

Also Benzema is having a good season at Real so they're not as in need of a striker as previously.

I wonder could even Real break the world record again so soon.

So I'd give Pool half a chance of keeping him this summer. Better than we had with Bale anyway.

Still, if Real make him priority number one this summer, it's as good as done.

Hammar

Ormus wrote: »

Yep, he did play and he played ok in the end, but it's arguable as to whether it was worth our bad start to the season, uncertainty over transfers, players not sure what the team is, endless press speculation, and then at the end of it all he leaves the following summer anyway - for significantly less than was originally bid.

All of that actually happened. It's fact. You might wanna look up the word speculation and get back to me.

Whether there was a clause in Suarez' contract or not, I will speculate that if Liverpool had been offered 85m for him, John Henry would have bitten their hand off (no pun intended).

Do you really think Henry could've stopped Suarez from leaving? Really? I mean if Bale and Modric threw a tantrum, what would Suarez do? He'd have no problem whatsoever doing a Tevez on it if Madrid came sniffing around. It beggars belief that you think otherwise.

Ok, now to "the type of hyperbole my fellow ENIC cult members throw at Spurs fans". Are you drunk? That is a brilliant line. So you're admitting that I never suggested anything like that? Strange that you said it to me but anyway. Would you care to say who did? Care to quote them? Quotes are pretty easy to find on Boards. I'm guessing the answer is no.

So you used Modric as an example,yet he came back the next season and played 40+ games and had a very good season, and i'm the one "speculating". You have no idea what would have happened with Bale if he had been kept,so stop trying to insist you do.

I have no idea what Suarez would have done, If Real Madrid had come in and had an offer rejected and neither do you.
Carlos Tevez eventually came back to Man City after his absence and played brilliant football and was of course eventually sold to Juventus with a year left on his contract. Would Gareth Bale have "went on strike" if Spurs refused to budge? He might have,but he would eventually have came back seeing as he was contracted to Spurs until 2016.

As for your last dig at me being "drunk",i will wholly admit to having used very "exaggerated" language in that post,but yes criticism of Levy has led to quotes such as

same ol sh1te wrote: »

Some folks won't be happy until we have Vincent Tan

Anyway this quote from you really tells us all we really need to know about you

Ormus wrote: »

Personally one of the main things I want from a chairman is to make it as difficult and expensive as possible for other clubs to take our best players, and Levy did a great job of that with Berbatov, Bale etc

Spurs aren't the great underachievers. We're overachievers if anything. We've been turned from a mid table club occasionally flirting with relegation, into one regularly challenging for 4th.

You have a defeatist and loser mentality, and are happy and content with 4th and 5th positions and the constant selling of our best players. You're just like Levy and ENIC, whom are happy and content to flirt with the big boys every once in a while just as long as a profit is to be made.
Personally i think that's a pretty pathetic outlook,but enjoy away.

pleasant Co.

I'm lost, what point are you making?

Hammar

pleasant Co. wrote: »

I'm lost, what point are you making?

Seeing as there are three parts to that last reply,why don't you quote the part which you don't see the point to??

Ormus

Hammar wrote: »

So you used Modric as an example,yet he came back the next season and played 40+ games and had a very good season, and i'm the one "speculating". You have no idea what would have happened with Bale if he had been kept,so stop trying to insist you do.

I have no idea what Suarez would have done, If Real Madrid had come in and had an offer rejected and neither do you.
Carlos Tevez eventually came back to Man City after his absence and played brilliant football and was of course eventually sold to Juventus with a year left on his contract. Would Gareth Bale have "went on strike" if Spurs refused to budge? He might have,but he would eventually have came back seeing as he was contracted to Spurs until 2016.

As for your last dig at me being "drunk",i will wholly admit to having used very "exaggerated" language in that post,but yes criticism of Levy has led to quotes such as



Anyway this quote from you really tells us all we really need to know about you


You have a defeatist and loser mentality, and are happy and content with 4th and 5th positions and the constant selling of our best players. You're just like Levy and ENIC, whom are happy and content to flirt with the big boys every once in a while just as long as a profit is to be made.
Personally i think that's a pretty pathetic outlook,but enjoy away.

Yeah I use Modric as an example. He messed up our start to the season, came back, played ok but not as well as before, and then was sold at a loss. Of course I don't know what would've happened with Bale but neither do you and at least I'm using facts to back up what I say.

If you want to keep players at the club who don't wanna be there you must have no idea what it's like to play on a team and how important it is that everyone pulls in the same direction.

If the Tevez situation is one you wouldn't mind happening to Spurs you need your head examined.

Vincent Tan? I thought you said Phillip Lahm?

Where does the quote from me say I'm content with 4th? All it says is that we are achieving more than the 90s.

Would you prefer to still be in mid table or flirting with relegation? I think that's a loser mentality ; )

Hammar

Ormus wrote: »

Yeah I use Modric as an example. He messed up our start to the season, came back, played ok but not as well as before, and then was sold at a loss. Of course I don't know what would've happened with Bale but neither do you and at least I'm using facts to back up what I say.

If you want to keep players at the club who don't wanna be there you must have no idea what it's like to play on a team and how important it is that everyone pulls in the same direction.

If the Tevez situation is one you wouldn't mind happening to Spurs you need your head examined.

Vincent Tan? I thought you said Phillip Lahm?

Where does the quote from me say I'm content with 4th? All it says is that we are achieving more than the 90s.

Would you prefer to still be in mid table or flirting with relegation? I think that's a loser mentality ; )

Listen,I'll take this back a notch,as the posting style of my last one was quite aggressive,

Would i be happy with a Tevez situation at Spurs? Nope, I don't think Bale would have went that way,because he is a more balanced individual,but in my opinion,it would have been worth the risk to take that chance,to keep a world class player.

Despite what i've posted mainly in this thread,i'm not an ENIC or Levy hater.
They deserve great credit for transforming Spurs from a mid table team up to a top 5/6 team.
However we have been stagnating in the same position now and have failed to take the necessary steps to try and advance further.

We don't have the financial backing or the reputation of a Man City/Chelsea/Man United,so we can't afford to spent 40/50 million on a world class players and even if we could,many wouldn't be interested in coming to us.

What we can do however is keep the players whom we have brought through and turned into World Class players like Bale and try to surround him with quality players.

Other areas such as appointing Baldini (whom i rate by the way and who made some very good buys and brought some great players through the ranks with Roma and Real) as DOF and pairing him with a manager whom he has no connection to and has their own ideas,was a recipe for disaster in my opinion.

The appointment of AVB whom failed in English football already was another bad error.

ENIC and Levy deserve great credit for their initial work in my opinion,but equally deserve criticism for some of their decisions for the stagnation which has occured in the last year or two.

There's probably no where else for this discussion to go,i have football training at 7.30,so il leave this for another time.

Hatch99

Levy calls the shots, he has failed miserably, if we want to progress further, we need a change.

2nd Row Donkey

Ormus wrote: »

Yawn

Since Jol taking over in 2004 (10 years ago), only 4 managers have come and gone at Spurs.

The average Premiership managerial tenure (taking out Wenger) is 379 days (As of January 2014)

I expect that figure - an average tenure of 379days is heavily influenced by multiple sackings as a result of relegation's from the EPL in the last 10 years. If you take away those dismissals and examine the clubs that have consistently stayed in the league - the big 5-6 teams, ourselves, everton, newcastle, Villa, stoke etc... whats the average then?

Ormus

2nd Row Donkey wrote: »

I expect that figure - an average tenure of 379days is heavily influenced by multiple sackings as a result of relegation's from the EPL in the last 10 years. If you take away those dismissals and examine the clubs that have consistently stayed in the league - the big 5-6 teams, ourselves, everton, newcastle, Villa, stoke etc... whats the average then?

Haven't a rashers!

irishmover

Statement from Levy.

"Our financial position is key to ensuring we can continue to thrive both on and off the pitch and we have taken the necessary, prudent steps to ensure that we are in a secure financial position as we move forward.
“At the time of this announcement, we are in sixth position in the Premier League and it has been another season when the top four places have been fiercely contested by at least seven teams. It is no surprise that the English Premier League is the most watched League in the world as every season the fight for a top four UEFA Champions League place becomes more competitive.
“We have come far in the last decade - we have raised our expectations from a Club aiming to be in the top half of the table, to competing in Europe each season - to the point at which we find ourselves disappointed if we don't make Champions League.
“This season we have had to make significant changes, both in respect of coaching and playing staff and yet we are currently only two points less than last season’s tally. Whilst this season’s performances and results have not lived up to expectation, we believe our squad has potential and it is important that we all now show commitment and teamwork to get the best possible finish to the season.
“We have fantastic, strong support. Our current 36,000 seater stadium sells out and the waiting list for season ticket holders is currently in excess of 47,000. We cannot stress strongly enough how critical the new stadium is over the long-term to these raised expectations. We have the smallest capacity stadium of any club in the top 20 clubs in Europe, let alone the current top four Premier League clubs, and given we now operate within UEFA Financial Fair Play rules, an increased capacity stadium and associated revenues is fundamental to supporting the future ambitions and consistent achievement at the top of the game.
“Our focus therefore is to continue to invest in and develop the squad - we shall not look to a summer of major upheaval, but rather to strengthen in key positions - to play the style of football for which we are famous - and to deliver the new stadium.
“The new stadium is a landmark project, of importance not just for our Club , but to the regeneration of an area which has been our home for more than 132 years and to London as a whole. It will be a key regenerative component of the local economy and a significant tourist attraction in its own right.
“To anyone visiting Tottenham today, our commitment to delivering the new stadium project and associated regeneration is clear for all to see - Phase 1 is built, the Club-sponsored Tottenham University Technical College is due to open this Summer, 447 jobs have been delivered to date and some 9 acres have been cleared in readiness for the stadium development. We eagerly await the outcome of the CPO decision by the Department of Communities and Local Government.
“We are optimistic for the long-term future and believe our efforts will make this great Club even greater over time. Our supporters are our life-blood and we shall ensure that they are our most important stakeholder as we move forward."

same ol sh1te

“Our focus therefore is to continue to invest in and develop the squad - we shall not look to a summer of major upheaval, but rather to strengthen in key positions - to play the style of football for which we are famous - and to deliver the new stadium

Manager being the most important......

Dublin Spur

Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy has promised to strengthen Spurs' squad in 'key positions' this summer after a 'disappointing' season.

Announcing the club's financial results for the year ending June 30 2013, Levy admitted 'this season's performances and results have not lived up to expectation' but stopped short of backing boss Tim Sherwood and did not even mention the Spurs manager by name.

The Tottenham chairman vowed to continue to 'invest in and develop the squad' after revealing non-football trading profit of £23.4million for the last financial year, but insisted there would not be a 'summer of major upheaval' as in 2013, when Spurs spent more than £100m on seven players to replace Gareth Bale.

Levy did not mention manager Tim Sherwood by name when discussing the club's transfer plans

Spurs also confirmed their £16m per annum, five-year shirt sponsorship deal with insurance company AIA, as revealed by Sportsmail's Charles Sale in February, and said it is 'feasible' the club could be playing in a new Northumberland Park stadium as early as the summer of 2017.

ENIC International Limited, owned by Joe Lewis (70.6 per cent) and Levy (29.4 per cent), which controls an 85 per cent stake in Spurs, has committed an unsecured, interest-free loan of £40m to help the club finance the first stage of building the new stadium.

Levy said: 'At the time of this announcement, we are in sixth position in the Premier League and it has been another season when the top four places have been fiercely contested by at least seven teams.

'It is no surprise that the English Premier League is the most watched League in the world as every season the fight for a top four UEFA Champions League place becomes more competitive.

'We have come far in the last decade - we have raised our expectations from a Club aiming to be in the top half of the table, to competing in Europe each season - to the point at which we find ourselves disappointed if we don't make Champions League.

'This season we have had to make significant changes, both in respect of coaching and playing staff and yet we are currently only two points less than last season’s tally.

'Whilst this season’s performances and results have not lived up to expectation, we believe our squad has potential and it is important that we all now show commitment and teamwork to get the best possible finish to the season.

'Our focus...is to continue to invest in and develop the squad - we shall not look to a summer of major upheaval, but rather to strengthen in key positions - to play the style of football for which we are famous - and to deliver the new stadium.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2594959/Daniel-Levy-promises-spend-big-summer-Tottenhams-disappointing-season.html#ixzz2xibFRuG7

Ormus

IDWT (In Daniel We Trust)

Dublin Spur

Daniel Levy to blame for Tottenham's wasted season
BT Sport columnist Jason Burt says Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy must be held responsible for the club wasting opportunities to progress.
Share this
19
Share this19

By Jason Burt
Last updated: 17 April 2014, 09:05 BST Print this story Tottenham Hotspur v Fulham, Saturday April 19, kick-off 12.45pm, live on BT Sport 1

There is a joke doing the rounds: if Liverpool had been Tottenham Hotspur last season and finished seventh then Brendan Rodgers would have been sacked and Luis Suarez would have been sold.

The irony of that will not be lost on Spurs supporters. After all Rodgers could have been their manager and Suarez could have been their star striker.

But, and for too many years, Spurs are all about ‘coulds’ and ‘shoulds’ and near misses. Maybes and almosts.

Yes, Rodgers could have been their manager. But chairman Daniel Levy dithered, delayed, worried about the costs and implications, tried for that famous (and famously overblown) brinksmanship – and watched as Rodgers was snapped up by Liverpool from Swansea City.

Yes, Suarez could have been their striker but, despite a deal appearing to have been agreed with Ajax in late 2010, Spurs pulled the plug because as the then manager Harry Redknapp later claimed scouts told him he was not up to it and too similar to Rafael Van der Vaart and too expensive to boot. A month later Suarez joined Liverpool.

It has since transpired that one of those scouts was Tim Sherwood who is now, or at least until the end of the season, the Spurs manager having succeeded Andre Villas-Boas when he was sacked in December. Villas-Boas and Sherwood never saw eye-to-eye, of course, and so on and so on..

What a mess. There does not appear to be a coherent plan; a sense of direction; an identity; a willingness to see things through at Spurs; a willingness to let the manager manage.

“

It feels like Tottenham constantly waste opportunities and money."



Managers, players and backroom staff come and go but the one constant has been Levy. Since replacing Lord Sugar as chairman in February 2001 Levy has worked with nine managers and six different nationalities – including two caretaker spells for David Pleat – in just 13 years and that is too great a turnover and too often too significant a gear change.

Spurs have undoubtedly progressed – 10th and 14th in Levy’s first two years in charge and fifth and fourth in the last two – and the chairman undoubtedly runs a tight ship financially for which he should largely be applauded even if it sometimes is not channeled in the right direction.

But something is not quite right. It cannot always be the fault of a succession of managers or that other clubs simply have more financial muscle.

In terms of budgets that it is probably true. Spurs are, roughly, where they should be in the table, albeit ahead of an underperforming Manchester United and behind an overperforming Everton.

But it feels like they constantly waste opportunities, and ironically money, do not hold their nerve or – in the case of Villas-Boas – do not give their young manager his head and appoint a polar opposite novice in Sherwood who then appears not to have their backing.

That must come down to Levy and the way he runs Spurs.

There is talk now of clearing out the players signed for £107 million last summer after Gareth Bale’s world record £85m transfer to Real Madrid that was lucrative but tortuous and damaging to Spurs.

That would be madness also given the investment. Spurs need to hold their nerve; not constantly lose it. They need to have a plan and stick to it. Levy needs to have a long hard look in the mirror.

Ormus

Dublin Spur wrote: »

BT Sport columnist Jason Burt says Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy must be held responsible for the club wasting opportunities to progress.

Spurs have undoubtedly progressed – 10th and 14th in Levy’s first two years in charge and fifth and fourth in the last two – and the chairman undoubtedly runs a tight ship financially for which he should be applauded.

Spurs are, roughly, where they should be in the table, albeit ahead of an underperforming Manchester United and behind an overperforming Everton.
.

Less is more Jason.

Dublin Spur

Haha ! Good work

irishmover

Damn you Alan Sugar for not snapping up Arsene Wenger in the 90's.

Hindsight is great isn't it.

Ormus

irishmover wrote: »

Damn you Alan Sugar for not snapping up Arsene Wenger in the 90's.

Hindsight is great isn't it.

If we could only turn hindsight into foresight we'd win the league at a canter every season.

jobeenfitz

Ormus wrote: »

If we could only turn hindsight into foresight we'd win the league at a canter every season.

Be very boring winning the league every year. Look at all the excitment we had this year! Who knows what awaits next season?

MrKingsley

Id be pretty sure that even if Sherwood could see into the future hed still make a mess of it

Leinstersqspur

Plenty of empty seats at the Lane today, how's that 45,000 season ticket waiting list looking Daniel?

Ormus

Leinstersqspur wrote: »

Plenty of empty seats at the Lane today, how's that 45,000 season ticket waiting list looking Daniel?

Largely unaffected I'd imagine. There'll be some empty seats for the rest of the season, get used to it.

Leinstersqspur

Ormus wrote: »

Largely unaffected I'd imagine. There'll be some empty seats for the rest of the season, get used to it.

First time in a long time. Speaks volumes in my opinion, 2nd last home game of the season.

Ormus

Leinstersqspur wrote: »

First time in a long time. Speaks volumes in my opinion, 2nd last home game of the season.

Yeah, first time since Ramos' reign

irishmover

These seats were already paid for by season ticket holders.

They'll all be back sitting in their seats come August.

mickman

Moyes facing sack

Next manager for us ?

Pacing Mule

mickman wrote: »

Moyes facing sack

Next manager for us ?

Anyone but Tim at this stage.