ShadrachDingle said:lloydie said:It's Spurs job to take care of the ones they do own, and they haven't. What makes you think anyone but Spurs should pay to make it easier for predominately Spurs fans to get to WHL?
MCC premised their bid for the C/W games on having City as tenants, it made economic sense for Manchester, at no point was the benefit of Manchester City Football Club a motivation for the decision.
If it made economic sense for Haringay to subsidise THFC's plans they would, clearly the benefit to Haringay as a whole does not. As for MCC being a friendly bunch but you don't like Haringay, it's a bit pathetic tbh. If you feel strongly enough stand against them and in favour of what you believe will benefit the borough.
I repeat, THFC is a commercial enterprise and should be treated as such. If it's unable to progress it's plans without public subsidy then tough.
That's untrue it hasn't taken care of any buildings. If Spurs are going to pump money into the local economy then surely the local council should help?
As I said some of the stats on the area show it's one of the worst in England, it's the worst place in London.
I don't blame Spurs for wanting out now, it will be cheaper than staying.
<a class="postlink" href="http://savetheredhouse.synthasite.com/history.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://savetheredhouse.synthasite.com/history.php</a>
English Heritage have been cited by proponents of Spurs plans as having set unreasonable demands to preserve the red house, however, Arsenal had to preserve much of Highbury, Spurs should do the same.
Spurs are not pumping money into the area, they are spending money for the betterment of THFC, no one else as their pitch for the Olympic sites demonstrates.
Once again, Spurs should not be treated differently from any other commercial entity.
On a side note, why are you embarrassed to state your allegiances clearly and why do need to refer to Spurs as a third party as it implies that you are a disinterested observer when you're obviously not?