Spurs’ new stadium

Got to give it JimB, or Daniel, he never gives in spouting the party line I said on here in August that the stadium wouldn’t be open until late in the season and JimB totally refuted it compared it Athletico Madrid’s build. Then they dreamed the safety systems issue which is taking longer to resolve than to build the stadium Unbelievable Jim

I don’t know why you think we feel as though we are being peresecuted We suffer when we had to play there but our club were good enough to compensate the fans who lost out something that Spurs should have picked up
the tab for

@JimB needs to understand why he’s getting heat for quoting ITKs is many called bullshit & he wouldn’t have a word of it. Since then it has been proved bullshit & as for the persecution, well you get that way when rules are changed to specifically harm your club.
 
If you had any ounce of common sense, you would know what pisses people off, not just on here but all football forums.

It was a risk posting what I did, granted. But I think it needed saying anyway. You guys obviously don't want to talk about it, though, so I won't persist.
 
@JimB needs to understand why he’s getting heat for quoting ITKs is many called bullshit & he wouldn’t have a word of it. Since then it has been proved bullshit & as for the persecution, well you get that way when rules are changed to specifically harm your club.

Sorry but that's simply not true, mate. I stand to be corrected but I don't believe that I ever put a date on when the stadium would be ready or posted any itk to similar effect. At most, I think I said after the initial delay announcement that the stadium could still be ready by the time of the City game or, subsequently, that the club was hoping that things would be sorted by such and such a date. At that time, no one knew how bad the safety systems problems were.

What I "wouldn't have a word of" were the conspiracy theories - none of which had any basis in fact. Nor did they even make any sense since none of them painted a scenario that was anything other than disadvantageous to Spurs.
 
Sorry but that's simply not true, mate. I stand to be corrected but I don't believe that I ever put a date on when the stadium would be ready or posted any itk to similar effect. At most, I think I said after the initial delay announcement that the stadium could still be ready by the time of the City game or, subsequently, that the club was hoping that things would be sorted by such and such a date. At that time, no one knew how bad the safety systems problems were.

What I "wouldn't have a word of" were the conspiracy theories - none of which had any basis in fact. Nor did they even make any sense since none of them painted a scenario that was anything other than disadvantageous to Spurs.

Do you think Spurs would have preferred to have played City on a bowling green perfect pitch or the one that was played on after the nfl games in October? Your manager called the situation a leveller, the side he picked that day was put out to be physical and live off forcing a mistake. It was one of the worst games of football I’ve ever seen, talk about cheapening and devaluing the competition, the Fa turned a blind eye to it but UEFA kicked off about the state of it and that was for a game a week afterwards.
 
Do you think Spurs would have preferred to have played City on a bowling green perfect pitch or the one that was played on after the nfl games in October? Your manager called the situation a leveller, the side he picked that day was put out to be physical and live off forcing a mistake. It was one of the worst games of football I’ve ever seen, talk about cheapening and devaluing the competition, the Fa turned a blind eye to it but UEFA kicked off about the state of it and that was for a game a week afterwards.

Spurs are always physical. It's one of the hallmarks of Pochettino's teams. The chosen Spurs eleven that day was pretty much the normal Spurs team, injuries allowing. Only the pitch was different. And, as much as you might not wish to believe it, the stadium delay, the NFL fixture clash, the consequent state of the pitch and the lack of alternative dates were all things that were out of Spurs' hands. Even Daniel Levy isn't so scheming and evil as to have been able or willing to arrange all of that simply in order to have a marginally increased chance of gaining a point, or 3 points, in just one game.

This is what I mean by some of the conspiracy theories that I've read on here.
 
It's late, so forgive me for copy and pasting the following by someone who is genuinely ITK. Hopefully, it might encourage you at least to put aside conspiracy theories for one moment and give some consideration to the possibility that the stated cause of the stadium delay is not a fabrication:

"From what I have been told regarding certification the state of play at the moment when it comes to those installations that together make up the integrated safety system is that we're sitting on about 90% fully passed (ie. following council inspection, and which accounts for almost all of the remedial work undertaken since last September), about 8 to 9% provisionally passed (tested by the contractor and awaiting 3rd party approval) and the remaining 1 or 2% yet to be assessed. This small bit includes the integration software which governs automated activation and deactivation of several subsidiary systems in real-time and which is naturally the most critical of them all and potentially the most problematic system to test to a point of guaranteed functionality. It is the one that will certainly fail umpteen tests as it's brought to full function, and if any rumours about "test failures" leak out again between now and when the first test event is held you can be sure this is what has led to them.

Laing O'Rourke went through all this before with Terminal 5 in Heathrow, with uncanny parallels to this stadium build. In September 2007 they discovered a rake of non-compliancies in the fire safety system and, like Mace, switched to modular certification as the remedial work was undertaken. By January 2008 they had rolled this work right up to the point where they could concentrate again on the integration control system, and then spent two months trialling, failing and trialling again until they were satisfied it would pass official tests, which it did. What had been envisaged to be a simple run of a dozen or so major trials allowing the terminal to open in October 2007 turned into 68 trials involving around 4,000 workers, 15,000 public volunteers, and an eventual opening date of March 2008. The ultimate tests of the safety control system lasted 8 weeks, in other words, 7 of which involved consistent failures as the calibration of this system continued, so that the final week could be guaranteed to produce a certifiable system and transfer of ownership.

Bottom line - given how far they've come with the stadium now any reported failures at this stage are much more likely to imply progress, not disaster. If I hear the same rumours coming from River Park House then I'd be worried, but as yet all seems fine by them. Rumours coming from a mate's uncle's pal who heard a lad with a hard hat mutter the word "fail" when he was there delivering bog roll are probably insufficient grounds to go into Private Frazer mode, let alone Corporal Jones mode."



That's another matter altogether. Sure, City fans were hard done by and Spurs should have done more. But it's not what I was talking about. Specifically, my post was in response to the claim that had City asked to continue playing at Wembley, they would have been censured and fined by the FA again and again and again. I see no precedent to justify such a claim.
So if Laing O'Rourke had the same issues 12 years with Heathrow as the do now at the new stadium that just smacks me as gross incompetence from them
 
It would never cross my mind to go onto a Spurs forum and have a pop at their fans. Why would I do it when I'd be a guest on there? Yet you seem to think it's okay to come on here and do it. Hmm. I guess some of us on here have different standards than you do.
I don’t think he’s having a pop: he’s expressing his observations in a courteous, controlled manner, which are also not totally wide of the mark. We used to have the thickest skins in football, but that is certainly no longer the case. There are many examples where our fans have been justifiably aggrieved over the last decade, but plenty of others where every perceived criticism is taken by some as an attack on the club, sometimes comically so. Those views would carry much more weight if we hadn’t flourished as a club during that decade. Whatever conspiracy there is to stop us in our tracks, clearly isn’t working.

I think he’s perfectly entitled to express those views in the way he has, Spurs fan or not.
 
Spurs are always physical. It's one of the hallmarks of Pochettino's teams. The chosen Spurs eleven that day was pretty much the normal Spurs team, injuries allowing. Only the pitch was different. And, as much as you might not wish to believe it, the stadium delay, the NFL fixture clash, the consequent state of the pitch and the lack of alternative dates were all things that were out of Spurs' hands. Even Daniel Levy isn't so scheming and evil as to have been able or willing to arrange all of that simply in order to have a marginally increased chance of gaining a point, or 3 points, in just one game.

This is what I mean by some of the conspiracy theories that I've read on here.

It was very opportunistic by Spurs at the time to tilt the odds in their favour, it was a non event of a game. What do you think would have happened if the game had been played on a proper standard pitch? The game could have been won by a bigger margin, which could effect the outcome of the league if it goes to goal difference. Liverpool didn’t have to play Spurs on a pitch like that, Spurs have a responsibility like every other Premier league club to provide an environment where the game is played at a standard fitting to the competion. It’s their responsibility ultimately not the construction company.
 
I can’t see that blaming the pitch against spurs and not having a bigger winning margin will have much effect come the end of the season. Surely losing games that should have been won against Leicester, Newcastle and Palace at home will have more of an impact
 
I genuinely don't believe that City's treatment would have been much, if any, different.

More generally, apologies for pointing out what strikes me when reading numerous posts on Bluemoon but there is something of a persecution mentality creeping in to City fans' psyche. Reminiscent of Liverpool. It's not my intention to come on to another team's board and be critical but I just think that it's something that you guys should guard against. I get that you're defensive. Quite understandable. But when people start imagining persecution in every little thing or any hypothetical outcome, it goes too far and invites ridicule.

I dunno. What do you guys think about it? Do you not agree that this kind of thinking needs nipping in the bud? Probably a discussion for another thread, to be honest.

Persecution complex? Well it's little things like UEFA fining City more for coming out at half time by 30 odd seconds, than a club for racist chants and attacks for just one example, that may make us have reason to be.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.