Spuds / Modric

Such as when we beat you at The New Library and a resurgent 'Pool at Anfield, and drew with United. Yeah, we were found out, all right


You, sir, are a complete and utter plum.

 

Failed? I think not, he may well not get Modric but you never know with Levy and light fingered Harry? surely a 'not for sale at any price tag' is just haggling in Norf London?

But if it doesn't come off we will have destabilised your best player and left him heavily resenting the Spuds board.

I'd say Job Done

 

You, sir, are a complete and utter plum.[/QUOTE]

Not really, he was talking about the year you finished 4th where as you seem to be referring to last year.

Any which way, we wont have to worry about that happening again for a while.

 

Not so sure about disregarding totally Spurs finishing 4th again if UEFA'S Financial Fair Play rules kick in. Spurs are not a loss making club and in a good position to benefit from them, though fate tends to serve up a dodgy lasagne or something similar when they are on the verge of doing something.

 

What a day that was!

 

Hmmm...bringing out a DVD of a cup final - shock horror

 

So what culinary delights can be blamed for you bottling every big situation over the last 5 years?

Plank!

 

You released a DVD of a DRAW against Arsenal and a meaningless end of season 1-0 win over Chelsea

 

*Every time.

Do you need a calculator?

Typical chav - thinking history goes back to 2003. Millwall with a lottery win - nothing more

 

And they released a DVD when they beat us 2-1 at the lane when Lennon got the winner.

It's pretty embarrassing however which way you carve it up. Fulham do a similar thing...

 

I'm surprised that you got involved with this little kiddy fight that DL seems to love!

Would you like me to post some figures on the revenues generated from these match DVDs and where the money is spent (namely the charities and foundations that we partner) ?

 

Spurs release lots of DVDs of games.
I really don't see the problem with that.
Arsenal sell branded teabags and Chelsea sell a ton of tat, including a superhero costume.
What does that have to do with football?

GunnerBeGood mentioned wages earlier and the figures for the season that Spurs finished 4th were released recently.
Everton's wages: £54.3m
Spurs' wages: £67.2m
Villa's wages: £80m
Arsenal's wages: £110.7m
Liverpool's wages: £121m
Man Utd's wages: £131.6m
Man City's wages: £133.3m
Chelsea's wages: £174.1m

 

The teams with the highest wages though are those who play regular champions league football. Players who play at the top level will naturally expect remuneration for being in the most prestigious competition year after year. And for clubs who want to sign the best players and stay in the champions league, this is the benchmark that wages are set by. This is reflected throughout any industry, those at the top get the best wages. Those below them get less.

 

Piskie, he wouldn't know that

 

Fight, fight, fight!

Good to see everyone's keeping things in perspective. The whole tapping up thing is the standard response of most clubs facing losing one of their best players to another club. It mainly seems to be a negotiating tactic, like when Venky's claimed Utd "tapped up" Jones to get the value of his release clause, despite it being Liverpool who made the bid that triggered the clause. Same deal with Modric - Levy was accusing United of tapping him up a week ago. Now Chelsea have made a bid they are also apparently tapping him up. Unless someone actually provides evidence (like in the Ashley Cole affair) then it's all just noise in the wind.

 

The teams that are at the top now paid out the highest wages to get there, not the other way round.
Nice try, though.

 

most of the top teams pay quite a considerable amount in wages (and yes surprisingly i am classifying the spuds as a top team for now)

 

That may be right with Man City and Chelsea. I am not sure that applies to Arsenal or Man Utd. I do not know whether Arsenal paid vastly superior wages to other clubs at the time Wenger came along and the success Arsenal got lead to the capacity to pay players more. Man Utd's success in the 90's had a lot to do with their youth team, which saved a lot of money on transfer fees. Even now I do not think their wage bill is huge as a proportion of their turnover.

 

I believe that Arsenal substantially outpaid most of the teams in the top flight since Graham's era at the club, though I freely admit that I don't have any figures to hand to back that up.

Man Utd both outpaid everyone and spent far more on transfers too, though those figures have since been dwarfed, even by extremely mediocre transfers nowdays.
Gary Pallister's move was the second highest British transfer ever in 1989 and he cost £2.3m, for example.