Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,734
- Location
- Welling, London
Spurs are being absolutely pandered to here. It’s completely wrong. Levy must have incriminating nudes of Richard Scudamore or something.
New White Hart Lane - Delayed
- Thread starter BaZ87
- Start date
Apparently Everton fans and united fans are going mad about it as hotels booked flights booked it's a joke
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 1,824
- Location
- Chiang Mai
Honestly it's not really an acceptable situation for traveling fans. Will be very shocked if they aren't massively fined and docked points by the end of it.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 29,640
- Location
- Chelmsford
I couldn't agree more BaZ.. To think the construction of mostly the south side of the stadium only started last June. Spurs media monkeys released some new stadium pictures on social media yesterday which understandably didn't go down too well.. I think they were too quick to sell those tickets in advance. They should refund the whole thing as technically, they have mis-sold me a seat that actually doesn't exist... and Wembely is a pain the ****
Really? We don't play Everton until the 12th May 2019.. I doubt Everton would be selling away tickets that far ahead? They aren't selling away tickets beyond September looking at their site. Furthermore, the TV companies might have their say in possible changes..
Last edited:
They've moved the Utd v Everton game from Sat to Sun 4pm as the Spurs game was meant to be shown live.
There needs to be more consideration for fans, they should have just moved one of the existing Sunday games to a 4PM kick off.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 29,640
- Location
- Chelmsford
Oh I'm with you now.. That's utterly unacceptable. It's bad enough the TV companies change the fixtures around sometime at awkward times.. so yes, they have a right to be upset.
Fixtures always change because of TV scheduling anyway. Spurs aren't being pandered to, it's just that the actual people running the game (and the other clubs who approve these fixture changes) understand the complexity of a project and punishing the players and fans with points deductions because of delays in construction is just the fantasy of salty opposing fans.
Liverpool were allowed to play a row of fixtures away to accommodate renovation works, same with West Ham who can't use their stadium sometimes because it's not actually theirs. It happens more often than people realise.
I wanted to go to Man Utd away, but it was 8pm on a Monday bank holiday meaning I wouldn't get home until about 4 in the morning. Newcastle still stick fans right at the back of the tallest tier despite the rules stating that there should be an away section by the pitch, and Newcastle's excuse is 'fans might die' if they are placed near the pitch near home fans. Where is the points deduction there?
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,303
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
Exactly there was one tweet where one lad had $1000 on the line as he was coming from America to watch them play which isn't something you can do every day and requires planning, time off work etc.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,303
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
They knew the deadline was impossible months ago yet the left it till the last minute. If this was announced back last June it would have been a non issue.
Fixtures are changed well in advance and then fans are able to plan their travel.
Correct but once the season started they didn't go back and ask for fixtures to be rearranged as they could not meet their deadlines/were bad at planning.
What has this go to do with the delay to the stadium and how Spurs have handled it?
Not always true, some months have been left very late meaning fans have had to change and cancel arrangements. Especially when European football starts interfering with fixture dates as well.
Yes but one project was the refurbishment of one stand versus a complete new stadium on the site on the old one. I agree the time lines were too tight.
[/QUOTE]
This is more to do with the comments earlier in the thread about Spurs being pandered to, when in fact different allowances are made a lot of the time for other teams.
That's true but I don't think fans mind when fixtures are due to a successful team. Moving the Utd/Everton game because the Spurs games has to be moved is not in the same category and IMHO is wrong.
Agreed, Spurs should have planned this better and I have no sympathy for their bad planning. Fans of other clubs shouldn't be inconvenienced.
I think they are, once Spurs missed their original deadline they should have been forced to play all their home games at Wembley this season. Other teams have not had the same allowance as Spurs.
Man
Who else has built a stadium on the same site as their old one? As for 'forcing' the team to play at Wembley as some sort of punishment for 'inconveniencing' away fans which in turn punishes loads of Spurs fans who find it difficult getting to Wembley.
The Man City date was changed well in advance, and before any tickets were on sale.
Unless you're a true neutral, there's never going to be any sort of sensible debate about this.
Who else has built a stadium on the same site as their old one? As for 'forcing' the team to play at Wembley as some sort of punishment for 'inconveniencing' away fans which in turn punishes loads of Spurs fans who find it difficult getting to Wembley.
The Man City date was changed well in advance, and before any tickets were on sale.
Unless you're a true neutral, there's never going to be any sort of sensible debate about this.
Spurs were warned it's against PL rules to have more than one venue for home games:
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jul/17/tottenham-premier-league-richard-scudamore-wembley
If Spurs are allowed to play at the new WHL this season I'll consider it pandering.
Without getting into whether Spurs should be docked points, your comparisons aren't fair. Yes, games get moved for TV but this was already done - these games have been moved a 2nd time, after supporters have bought tickets, made travel & hotel arrangements.
You mention Liverpool playing 3 games away from home in a row - that's correct, they requested and stuck to an agreement that a single game would be reversed. It should be pointed out that Liverpool did encounter delays in the building of our main stand which were out of our control - due to us playing an unprecedented amount of home games in the previous season (32-33(?) games due to runs in both the League Cup and Europa League) numerous build days were scrapped and resulted in the stand not being complete for the opening of the season. Even to open in September required Liverpool to focus on completing the actual stand/facilities for the general public and we used portable changing rooms for the opening few months while these were being finished. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, we also agreed that our League Cup game would be away from home regardless of the draw. We did not request to play home games at two different venues - something that Richard Scudamore said would not be possible in the PL.
Tottenham haven't simply been allowed to reverse a single fixture. Initially they were also allowed to play a single home game at Wembley, something that we were previously told wasn't possible. They've then not been able to stick to that agreement and been allowed to move a further 2 home games to Wembley after the fixture announcements, are trying to get permission to play a League Cup game as the home team at a neutral venue and now again moved another home game to Wembley and had the date moved, which has had knock on effects to other games too. And still can't say when the stadium will be ready to open. I think it's fair to say Tottenham have been pandered to.
I'm not massively fussed about whether Spurs should be allowed to play home games at two stadiums but the moving of fixtures after they've been announced and after the TV dates/times have been set is not on. My biggest issue though is that I don't believe for one moment that this is simply a case of unforeseen construction delays as you've suggested and is that a justifiable reason anyway? Again, I'm not a construction expert and maybe I'm completely wrong but you only had to look at the state of Spurs stadium 2-3 months ago (when the fixtures were announced) to see that the Liverpool game wasn't realistic - why did Spurs wait until after the start of the season, just a month before this game was due, to tell us this? Given that the stadium was still not nearly complete and they had to host multiple test events before they could play a PL game there, surely they knew well in advance? Why have they waited another 3 weeks before announcing (at least) a further 6 week delay? Is it because Spurs feared that the PL wouldn't agree to letting them play 4-5 home games at Wembley before moving into their new ground had they proposed that to begin with? Is it because Spurs realised it would massively hit season & corporate ticket sales had they announced it in the summer? It could even be as simple as to protect themselves from further fan backlash after a lack of transfer activity. But even if we give them the benefit of the doubt and they did genuinely intend to be in the new ground for the Liverpool game - ultimately they set themselves an unrealistic target. I've read reports that there's no penalty clauses in contracts with the contractors because Spurs acknowledge that they were working to a tight (impossible?) deadline. Given the rules and what Scudamore said re playing all home games at one stadium, I think it's fair that if Spurs weren't in a position to guarantee that the new stadium wasn't going to be ready in time that they should have been forced to open next season.
That is not true, no tickets were sold. Ticket sales weren't even open to Tottenham fans for the Man City game. The delay was announced a month before the Liverpool game, but it is being held at the same date and time.
Well done for plucking out a three year old article.
Last edited:
Tickets may not have been sold for the Spurs game but what about the other games that have been moved as a result of this change? I know that Liverpool for example, start selling tickets for all games in the first half of the seasons as soon as the dates have been set.
edit: and of course just because tickets may not have been on sale yet, that doesn't mean that supporters haven't already made travel and hotel arrangements.
30th of August was when season ticket holders from last year could get their ticket, 31st for Members and the tickets have gone on general sale today.
The date and time for the Liverpool game is the same, both Wembley and WHL are accessible from the tube - if Liverpool fans are in London they can still go. Most will just take the coach/train on the day.
As for the Man City fixture, that would have been 2 months notice that the fixture would be rescheduled.
I wouldn't book anything without tickets, fixtures are always subject to change due to TV, domestic and European cups.
It's a rubbish situation for everyone, including Spurs fans but it's not a huge inconvenience.
The date and time for the Liverpool game is the same, both Wembley and WHL are accessible from the tube - if Liverpool fans are in London they can still go. Most will just take the coach/train on the day.
As for the Man City fixture, that would have been 2 months notice that the fixture would be rescheduled.
I wouldn't book anything without tickets, fixtures are always subject to change due to TV, domestic and European cups.
It's a rubbish situation for everyone, including Spurs fans but it's not a huge inconvenience.
I agree, the Liverpool game isn't a major issue however the date changes for the other fixtures are. And I was referring to the Utd - Everton game that's supposed to have been moved when I said 'what about other games...'. I have no idea if they have gone on sale already btw, I'm just speculating but if they have then their supporters will have massively been put out as a result of this. And while you may not book anything without having your ticket, numerous fans do and have. You say that fixtures are subject to change due to TV but aren't acknowledging that these matches were already moved due to TV and it's fair to assume that the date & time that was originally set would be the date and time the game will be played. The vast majority of City supporters that would have been traveling to the Spurs game would have probably known, even if they hadn't physically purchased their ticket, that they met the criteria to get a ticket and are very likely to have made plans for this game. The situation is far worse for Utd supporters - they have large numbers of supporters that travel from Ireland & Scandinavia (and other parts of the world) every week and these supporters would have made plans and purchased packages (packages being sold even if tickets weren't officially for sale) well in advance.
You're right, it's a rubbish situation but as I said in reply to you originally, the lack of clarity (and imo honesty) from Spurs has caused these issues. These problems being faced now are exactly the reason why, if Spurs weren't in a position to guarantee that the stadium would open on time (and that includes leaving enough leeway for possible hiccups along the way) then they should have been forced to open next season. And if they did provide guarantees that the stadium would open on time then they should be faced with some penalties - points deductions may seem extreme but at the very least a fine well into the millions.