Yep. Would be a very petty thing to object over as well.
Or you could argue that the teams playing at the new stadium would have an advantage while Spurs adjust to it. Ourselves, Hammers, Arse all struggled initially after moving. Six in one...You could argue that the teams that have to play at a 'neutral' two thirds full Wembley before Christmas have an advantage over those that will play in the new stadium after the new year. Full house, fans well up for it etc
Good for us I suppose as we will play at Wembley... our second home
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/breaking-tottenham-make-payment-fa-13077010
Spuds bunged Wembley more money to play there as their super dupa stadium is nowhere near ready.
No surprise really been looking at the YouTube updates of the ground and realised months ago that there is no chance they’ll play there when they said they would. Also thought they had a deal with an American football clubs to play games there in October is that now been cancelled.
“However, it is still their intention to play their home games at White Hart Lane after the Fulham game (at Wembley).”
Think we've already had this conversation but you won't play your first two home games there.It's clickbait. Read the article in full and you see the following quote from the FA official who is their source for the story:
This is about prudent planning. Nothing more. Failure to be able to fulfil home games would lead to a huge fine and possibly a points deduction. So Spurs have paid a small sum to purchase an option to play at Wembley in the event of an unforeseen, last minute delay - e.g. tower crane collapse; industrial action; failure to gain health and safety certificates etc.
As to how ready or not the stadium looks to be in various updates, you'll find that most building projects with tight schedules look to be far from ready right up to deadline. There's no reason to believe that this project will be any different. As was always expected, this stadium will not be finished by mid September (and won't be fully finished and snagged for months to come). But it will be ready.
The interior bowl is complete, save for the installation of the remaining 20% or so of seats. The sliding pitch is complete, awaiting only the laying down of the turf. The roof is all but complete. The only respect in which the exterior of the stadium itself requires a considerable amount of work is the installation of the outer cladding. And since that is non-essential with regard to gaining an interim safety certificate, it won't affect the opening date for the stadium.
Of course, there is also work to do internally and on the public areas around the stadium. But both are well advanced and there is no suggestion that either are likely to delay the stadium's opening. As before, the critical distinction is between "finished" and "ready". The latter is all that is required to gain the necessary certificates.
Think we've already had this conversation but you won't play your first two home games there.
No, you took care of that with the away games at the start of the season, I'm saying your first 2 home games (at least) will be at Wembley.Are you referring to the fact that our first game at the new WHL won't be until mid September? If so, that was always the expectation.
Or you could argue that the teams playing at the new stadium would have an advantage while Spurs adjust to it. Ourselves, Hammers, Arse all struggled initially after moving. Six in one...
Ah I hate them but it would be extremely petty for any club to keep them out of the new ground for nearly a whole season by objecting, even Arsenal didn't do it.True could work either way... but whichever way it works there may be an advantage to someone
Anyway it’s spuds so they shouldn’t be allowed to bend the rules.... cos it’s them
No, you took care of that with the away games at the start of the season, I'm saying your first 2 home games (at least) will be at Wembley.