• Tottenham Hotspur Message Board

  • Jlock Jlock Feb 18, 2011 17:34 Flag

    Relocate or not relocate


    The article is an eye opener, with the comment that only 1% (360) of our matchday supporters come from the local area.

    Don't get me wrong - in principle, I think clubs should stay in the area of their origins. Obviously this isn't always possible.

    My local team is Brighton. In my youth, they were located at the Goldstone ground - which was in Hove (in theory a separate town). When that was sold off, they moved to Withdean (a district of Brighton), now they are moving to Falmer (a small village on the outskirts of Brighton - but still 'Brighton'). The overall move, must be 3+ miles, and moved the club away from it's 'Hove' base.

    Obviously 'London' (as with most metropolis) is huge and the 'districts' are more 'individual' in how they're viewed, but in theory Spurs weren't going to move much further than Brighton.

    So the question is, given the 1% figure, what makes a move 'valid'? Brighton are staying in Brighton - although they have moved districts from 'Hove' to 'Falmer' - Spurs wanted to stay in London and move from Haringey to Stratford.

    Is the issue 'what you have already'? IE Spurs have a brilliant ground already - small (in comparison) yes, but a good ground, Brighton had a crap ground (Goldstone) and were forced into a worse location (apologies to Withdean, it was only meant as a school running track/athletics field - oops isn't that the OS?)- now are moving to 20,000+ state of the art ground.

    Would the same fuss have been kicked up, if Spurs were 'doing a Brighton' - ie moving from a crap ground into a state of the art ground? Wouldn't the supporters have then been clammouring for the move?

    It just begs the question whether (like I did) the blame for trying to move is really down to big business.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • he puts buisness before the club or else he would never have tryed to move the club away from its home.

    • I think we may differ here KM, as I see Levy as more business than club. The move to the OS makes obvious financial sense as a business move, but a club is more than just money (can you hear Vera Lynn singing in the background as I say this?...) it is i's supporters, its heritage, its location - it's an intangible. It is more than life (thanks Shankly)....

      (I was wearing my Biggles helmet and scarf as I typed that)

    • The new ground at WHL looked imminent at the beginning of the season John, then out of the blue (well to we fans obviously) Levy felt the need to go all out for the OS.

      I doubt we'll ever really understand what the last straw was in the Harringey negotiations to make him take such action but I don't somehow think it's purely down to TfL's demands.

      But I believe Levy is a pretty shrewed businessman with a genuine love for the club. Apart from getting his fingers burned over the Jol/Ramos saga he's largely let 'Arry get on with building the team - albeit his lack of insistence at solving the defensive/strike problems may well be down to not wanting to tread on 'Arry's toes like holy Comolli did before he arrived. Or, as I've said before, 'Arry made it a condition of accepting the job that he would brook no interference or being told which players he should/shouldn't buy.

    • With the benefit of hindsight, legacy really should have been agreed during the initial stadium planning process. That way football - be it the FA or clubs - would surely have been involved and pointed out these (seemingly obvious) issues; as the biggest sport in the country surely their buy-in is one of the key points? Particularly as it's them forking out for the stadium moving forward.

      I'm sure they've learned their lesson for next time... mmm...

    • KM,
      It's an unenviable position for Levy. He strikes me as a 'business first' rather than 'club first' type person, so maybe he's the best person to get the best 'deal' - but whether that then suits the fans.

      If we stay where we are, we lose because of the additional cost (from what they're saying, it's not a small figure either is it - aren't they talking £200m+ difference - see http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jan/12/tottenham-west-ham-olympic-stadium) and if we move the club loses 'identity' (not sure how long that will last though, if the new ground is good - that's basically how this thread started and Brighton's move to a nice new start-of-the-art stadium)

      Either way, a couple of seasons back the new ground looked imminent - it now seems a million miles away.

      (PS as Sfer pointed out, the OS, if left unchanged, just isn't conducive to football is it? So I pity WHU if they do end up with it as it stands (what odds though, within 5 years, they're asking for planning permission to change it?)

    • I'm not sure it has John - from what I understand (and I may well be wrong) TfL are pushing for even more of a financial commitment from the club towards transport upgrades than they originally asked for and I'd guess that's what makes it less of a viable proposition.

      Apparently the appeal will cost no more than £1m (even if we lose and have to pay the other side's costs) so that's peanuts in relation to the bigger financial outlay of building a new stadium. Winning would only delay things as the Hammers/Council etc etc would surely appeal so if we lose Levy can concentrate on moving forward.

      That said I think Levy is caught between the proverbial devil and the deep blue sea - has to satisfy the shareholders financially plus keep the fans happy. A very fine balancing act which if achieved will be nothing short of a miracle given the way things seem to be going.

    • This just appeared on Yahoo - http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/30032011/58/premier-league-spurs-legal-action-stadium.html

      Seems that Levy et al may have been serious about moving after all (either that or further discussions with the local council have just fallen through).

    • I see that the WHU move has been approved by Boris and the 'Government'.
      I thought that Mr Hearn was still fighting his corner re an EPL club moving down the road? He stated there was a specific FA rule that governed this.

      It all seems to have gone ominously quiet after that fateful Friday re our plans as well. There was talk of an appeal against the OS decision, but I would guess from the announcement today, that didn't go ahead.

      Anyone know what is going on?

    • Unless Spurs relocate to Tottenham Court Road ;)
      Great transport links, and the name should be no bother either!

    • Not quite Champ - the West End and City areas of London are pretty much neutral territory.

    • View More Messages