Off Topic Spursy

[Spurlock]

Been listening to a lot of chat about this term over the last week on various platforms, after Jose was questioned about it.

Lots of opinions...but the one I have to agree with is of those that think it’s a term we as Spurs fans should not be embracing...it’s like feeding a monster. I guess the main reason is that it’s bullshit and there is no such thing. Only thing is when it has gone wrong for us...it’s highlighted then highlighted again under that stupid term.

Every example coined as Spursy is not exclusive to us...there are many many examples of other teams losing matches in similar circumstances. Like Jose said...it’s crap and it doesn’t even register with him...there is nothing different in our defeats compared to other clubs defeats, the manner...the whatever. So we shouldn’t really be helping everyone else in trying to de stabilise our own club. We have been in ‘almost but no cigar’, moments because we are nearly there...not because we are utter ****...we are at this stage of our development and it’s been tough but that term isn’t a true reflection of what has been happening...we have had to go through the tough defeats to get to where we are today.

Some clubs fans would sell their own mothers to watch their teams play in the games we have lost..to have what we have had at stake, they would like that scenario for their club. I criticise us more than most as you all know...but that term lingers if we continue to use it and that seeps through into the club through various ways.

Imagine going a goal up at home in the first minute then getting spanked 6-1...I’d call that Spursy...but that was United.

imagine going a goal up against Villa then letting 7 in at the other end...that’s Spursy...but that was Liverpool

These are a few recent examples of scenarios which, if they had involved us would have resulted in that term being used. It’s bullshit and I can see that Jose is working hard to eradicate this thinking, this almost self pity attitude because it’s not the attitude of winners.

I think we as fans need to dump the word and treat our team with the respect it deserves instead of taking the piss out of our team in that manner.

 

[The RDBD]

For me, "Spursy" is a combo of things such as :

1. snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
2. not having the spine to see a job through

Examples of #1 ??

The PL middle third PL collapses of Arry 2012 / AVB 2013
that cost the club a CL place (and in addition to revenues,
debatably Modric / Bale) .


Examples of #2 ??

The final 3 games of 2015-16, when Leicester were champions
and the Goons finished 2nd (which BTW cost the club over a
million quid) .


Players and/or manager being the cause matters not.
That Spurs are a team you regularly see the above,
but not the likes of the Moura hat-trick vs Ajax, IMHO does.

 

[Spurlock]

For me, "Spursy" is a combo of things such as :

1. snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
2. not having the spine to see a job through

Examples of #1 ??

The PL middle third PL collapses of Arry 2012 / AVB 2013
that cost the club a CL place (and in addition to revenues,
debatably Modric / Bale) .


Examples of #2 ??

The final 3 games of 2015-16, when Leicester were champions
and the Goons finished 2nd (which BTW cost the club over a
million quid) .


Players and/or manager being the cause matters not.
That Spurs are a team you regularly see the above,
but not the likes of the Moura hat-trick vs Ajax, IMHO does.

Point is other teams suffer the same fates in similar fashion too.

There's nothing Spursy about giving up the ghost when you know the title isn’t on...many teams have done that.

it’s often claimed that teams that win the League cup usually screw up the remainder of the season...that’s Spursy...but it’s got nothing to do with Spurs.

many teams lose having been in the lead...it’s not exclusive to us

 

[Billy The Spur]

Until the club cuts out the grand major mess ups, ceases to be on the wrong end of major refereeing mess ups and starts to pick up silverware, Spursy will always raise its head.

 

[Spurlock]

Until the club cuts out the grand major mess ups, ceases to be on the wrong end of major refereeing mess ups and starts to pick up silverware, Spursy will always raise its head.

yes but it shouldn’t by our own fanbase

 

[The RDBD]

yes but it shouldn’t by our own fanbase

Others use "Spursy" . I use < standard > .

 

[The RDBD]

Point is other teams suffer the same fates in similar fashion too.

Well then that should be easy to show for say the past decade for several of the "Sky 4" clubs + Citeh,


"There's nothing Spursy about giving up the ghost when you know the title isn’t on...many teams have done that."

To a club :

- who are deemed your local rivals
- you have not finished above in the league for 20 odd yrs

 

[Spurlock]

Well then that should be easy to show for say the past decade for several of the "Sky 4" clubs + Citeh,


"There's nothing Spursy about giving up the ghost when you know the title isn’t on...many teams have done that."

To a club :

- who are deemed your local rivals
- you have not finished above in the league for 20 odd yrs

yeah I understand that...but was it ‘Spursy’?

I just think it was a group of inexperienced players and staff and they lost the fight once the end goal was out of their grasps.

City were dire last season...a part of that for me is that they had no chance of catching Pool...if it was a realistic possibility I think they would have been more intense...but if that was us in 2nd spot and we stopped chasing by January...it would have been labelled Spursy

 

[Dier Hard]

I think Spursy stems from the fact we as a club have a tendency to mess up spectacularly on a more regular basis than our rivals. That can be both on and on the pitch. Luck also plays it part at times too.

Luck for instance was finishing 4th but Chelsea winning the CL, thus knocking us into Europa.

On the pitch can be what we saw last week at West Ham. Pretty sure I read we’re the first team to concede a 3 goal lead in the final 8 or so minutes of a Prem match. Finishing 3rd in a 2 horse race is another example.

Off the pitch can be choosing to sign Aurier over Pereira. Or having Willian complete a medical only to then lose out to Chelsea.

As we’ve yet to win anything for over a decade too, the Spursy term is bandied about a lot more because of the fact we’re now a solidified big six team in the country yet don’t have a recent trophy haul to match our status.

In a more simplistic sense I’d say it’s also a more common phrase for us than other teams purely because it rolls off the tongue. You can’t have “Arsenaly” or “Chelseay” or “Uniteady” etc, it just doesn’t really work. They just get listed as bottling something if it goes agains them.

 

[vimhawk]

There is no such thing as "spursy", or if there is such a concept it isn't restricted purely to Spurs.

Why is it therefore attributed to Spurs? Because is sounds right. There's a lot of expressions in this world that only exist because they sound right. For example Boris Bikes. Doesn't matter that Ken Livingstone contributed to the scheme before Boris was mayor. The term Ken Bikes doesn't have that same ring to it.

So if other teams do "spursy" things (and there's no actual definition of what that is), do they get the term? No, because it doesn't sound right. Liverpool could have exactly the same results and do exactly the same as Spurs and it will never be "Liverpoolsy" because the term doesn't work.

So I hate the term because (1) it doesn't mean anything and (2) it only exists because our name happens to fit.

 

[Diego]

I think Spursy stems from the fact we as a club have a tendency to mess up spectacularly on a more regular basis than our rivals. That can be both on and on the pitch. Luck also plays it part at times too.

Luck for instance was finishing 4th but Chelsea winning the CL, thus knocking us into Europa.

On the pitch can be what we saw last week at West Ham. Pretty sure I read we’re the first team to concede a 3 goal lead in the final 8 or so minutes of a Prem match. Finishing 3rd in a 2 horse race is another example.

Off the pitch can be choosing to sign Aurier over Pereira. Or having Willian complete a medical only to then lose out to Chelsea.

As we’ve yet to win anything for over a decade too, the Spursy term is bandied about a lot more because of the fact we’re now a solidified big six team in the country yet don’t have a recent trophy haul to match our status.

In a more simplistic sense I’d say it’s also a more common phrase for us than other teams purely because it rolls off the tongue. You can’t have “Arsenaly” or “Chelseay” or “Uniteady” etc, it just doesn’t really work. They just get listed as bottling something if it goes agains them.

It's not just the "bottleing" that brings the name, it's the frequency.
So many times you have looked "the part" only to let it go in the end.

Spursy

 

[PowerSpurs]

It's not just the "bottleing" that brings the name, it's the frequency.
So many times you have looked "the part" only to let it go in the end.

Spursy

I can't remember a single recent occasion when we had the best team but failed to win a trophy. You said so many times......so name three....

 

[humanbeingincroydon]

The interesting thing is Man City fans (and I think you can see where this is going...) long had a similar version of this, for example that time in the 1995-6 season where they played for a draw in their final game of the season thinking that would keep them up...only to get relegated on goal difference as Southampton and Coventry both drew their final games too, or in 1997-8 where they dropped down to the third tier because, even though they beat already-relegated Stoke on the final day, Portsmouth and Port Vale winning their final games coupled with City drawing to 21st placed QPR in their penultimate game saw them drop to the third tier

Of course, since they became The Sheikh Mansour Team they've shed this image, partly because they have the money to avoid such mistakes, but mostly because pundits operate under the belief that the club was founded in 2008 so that anything that happened before isn't relevant in much the same way that pundits operate under the belief that Chelsea didn't exist until Ruud Gullit started playing Premier League games in 1995

 

[The Changing Man]

. Finishing 3rd in a 2 horse race is another example.

I hate that quote DH, we finished 3rd but it was 20 horse race the same as it always is. Offered 3rd at the start of that season we would have taken it. We blew the title in January when we battered Leicester at the Lane lost to the only effort they had (that might have been Spursy!). We were never above Leicester and the nature of the match at Chelsea just took all the wind out of our sails and yes we allowed the goons passed us by losing at Newcastle, but Clattenburg finished that season for us when we reffed the battle of the bridge to his own set of rules so that Leicester could win the league that night.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

I hate that quote DH, we finished 3rd but it was 20 horse race the same as it always is. Offered 3rd at the start of that season we would have taken it. We blew the title in January when we battered Leicester at the Lane lost to the only effort they had (that might have been Spursy!). We were never above Leicester and the nature of the match at Chelsea just took all the wind out of our sails and yes we allowed the goons passed us by losing at Newcastle, but Clattenburg finished that season for us when we reffed the battle of the bridge to his own set of rules so that Leicester could win the league that night.

Arsenal were also top of the league on the 17th of January, yet they somehow didn't blow it.

 

[The RDBD]

I hate that quote DH, we finished 3rd but it was 20 horse race the same as it always is. Offered 3rd at the start of that season we would have taken it. We blew the title in January when we battered Leicester at the Lane lost to the only effort they had (that might have been Spursy!).

IMHO Spurs blew it the week they lost away to the Spanners and drew the home NLD.

That we were still in it on paper come April was then hamstrung by
the fact that Lesta were given four consecutive match weeks where
they played before Spurs (no opportunity to close the gap before
they next played) .

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

IMHO Spurs blew it the week they lost away to the Spanners and drew the home NLD.

That we were still in it on paper come April was then hamstrung by
the fact that Lesta were given four consecutive match weeks where
they played before Spurs (no opportunity to close the gap before
they next played) .

3 consecutive Monday night games, IIRC.

 

[humanbeingincroydon]

I hate that quote DH, we finished 3rd but it was 20 horse race the same as it always is. Offered 3rd at the start of that season we would have taken it. We blew the title in January when we battered Leicester at the Lane lost to the only effort they had (that might have been Spursy!). We were never above Leicester and the nature of the match at Chelsea just took all the wind out of our sails and yes we allowed the goons passed us by losing at Newcastle, but Clattenburg finished that season for us when we reffed the battle of the bridge to his own set of rules so that Leicester could win the league that night.

Having to play our last few games without Dembele or Dele didn't help

Dele was a stupid one, punching a West Brom player in the ribs at a corner that he got pulled up for after the fact, but Dembele was a fit-up as ****witberg claimed to have not seen something he was standing five yards away while looking directly at just to sting us - and, as I've said before, those four games without Dembele the next season cost us, as if the 8 points from the first four games became 10, we'd have topped the table at the first international break after beating The Sheikh Mansour Team - instead we were second, and the run of four straight draws after the break sapped our momentum