spurs

[LedleyKing]

United have done it consistently over the years and played utterely shite and still won with seconds to go - they have done it three times this season already.

Without doubt Spuds have played far better than the rags todate and even if you win your game in hand which i expect you to do so you will STILL be behind them.

United are the team to beat dont fool yourself

Read my first post in the thread and you will realize that I am doing no such thing. As I said before, I do not anticipate us being without reach of the top spot come the end of the season, but Spurs' current form would indicate that it certainly is a possibility. A big argument was how would Spurs deal with injuries to their top players? Modric and VDV were out against WBA (a place where we have struggled in recent times) and Sandro and Defoe came in and did a job.

You are right for the simple reason that we cannot beat United head to head. Until that happens (and we still have one more chance to do it this season) I would agree that they will likely finish ahead of Spurs.

Spuds will finish 3rd i reckon - and cant see more than 5 - 10 points covering the top 3 just dont think Spuds will be 2nd and i dont honestly know where City will finish - i seldom make predictions i am just enjoying the football

All i know is that despite City outscoring the rags almost 2 to 1 and playing some decent football in the process we still cant shake the twats and i dont think we will do easily and come the end of the season they will be there ot there abouts

All fair points. Can't argue with any of it.

 

[stimo]

our biggest threat imo.
said it weeks ago.
2nd best team in prem.
more worried about them than rags

laughed when jason roberts said they were true title contenders, but i must eat my own words, or laughter. i dont mind watching spurs, great attacking team, just their fans,manager,owner i cant stand

 

[paul1300]

Its very flattering to be considered your biggest rivals for the title, but I don't think so
Man U are your biggest threat without doubt, old bacon face has done it so many times before and they have a fantastic team.
We have a good midfield and our defense is playing Ok but we lack quality up front, by the way thanks for paying a large chunk of Adebayors wages, I think the best we can hope for is 3rd, and thats hoping the Scum, Chelsea and Newcastle get few bad results

But to be honest I can't see any one catching City this year David Silva is the best player in the Prem this season, then add Aguero, and Dzeko, if you had Modric and Vidic then you'd be the football equivalent of the Harlem Globe trotters

 

[Phischy]

I can kindof see both points of view here (It's not obvious from my user name, but I'm Spurs).

The reality is, Spurs fans of old have seen success and expect it more than we should, giving us a bad rep. We're not as bad as we used to be, having been through our awful patch in the 90s and first half of the last decade. However, City had a bad spell too and they had their relegations and things, so you have to concede, given the difference between City now and pre Sheikh/Thai billions, the rise seems a little more artificial than it does for Spurs, who have been squad-building for about 6 years, buying mainly British youngsters. Modric for example was unproven, which is why he came to us and van der Vaart a Real Madrid cast off we got for a bargain.

Be in no doubt though, although we might dislike the way City appear to be buying success in a way Spurs are not, to a man Spurs fans will accept City have a better squad and we will not begrudge you any trophies you win with what appears to be a stunning team, playing some great football (which is much better than last year, when Mancini was way too defensive).

So yeah, I can appreciate that you might dislike Spurs fans for their slightly holier than thou attitude, but you'd be the same if you'd done it all within the FFP rules. When I met with Daniel Levy earlier this year, he told me he believed Spurs were the only PL side that met these rules. Now I don't know if that is true, but you have to admit that for us to have reached where we are without spending on transfer fees and wages over and above beyond what we can generate naturally, is quite impressive. United and Chelsea can't claim to have done the same, Arsenal are probably the other side who are closest to it.

Back to the point in hand. I think we're closer to being title challengers than we have been since at least 87, possibly earlier. I don't think we can win it though. There is the mental barrier... United, despite having a side of similar strength to us have Fergie and other teams put them on a pedestal because of the name and recent history, that will still help them. But, if it wasn't for Chelsea's money and City's recent emergence, I really do think that we'd be serious contenders. What if's don't mean anything though and we do live in a world where the Manchester clubs are becoming the 'big two' out of about 6 or 7 clubs who can compete for the top 4. Which is probably better than the guaranteed top 4 we had 4 or 5 years ago.

I've gone off topic again. It's fair to say that if it's true that 'Arry's approach is motivation over tactical nous then we could well be exposed at some stage. But he does do something our previous managers seemed unable to do. He plays players in their natural roles and tells them to play the way they know best, then if it doesn't work he finds a player who does. Parker being a case in point, he identified what he needed to make the whole team tick and made it happen.

My feeling is that we will finish 3rd after competing for much of the season. I think we bear comparison with Keegan's mid 90s Newcastle side and that with a couple of injuries we'll lose just enough games to lose touch with City. Between City and United, I wouldn't like to speculate on who will win, but it will be one of those. Finishing above Arsenal and Chelsea will be a good acheivement for us, anthing higher (i.e. 2nd) would be mindblowing. I think we can win the league and have the side capable of doing it, but I don't think we will. I'm just happy to settle for finally being taken seriously!

 

[andrewmswift]

I can kindof see both points of view here (It's not obvious from my user name, but I'm Spurs).

The reality is, Spurs fans of old have seen success and expect it more than we should, giving us a bad rep. We're not as bad as we used to be, having been through our awful patch in the 90s and first half of the last decade. However, City had a bad spell too and they had their relegations and things, so you have to concede, given the difference between City now and pre Sheikh/Thai billions, the rise seems a little more artificial than it does for Spurs, who have been squad-building for about 6 years, buying mainly British youngsters. Modric for example was unproven, which is why he came to us and van der Vaart a Real Madrid cast off we got for a bargain.

Be in no doubt though, although we might dislike the way City appear to be buying success in a way Spurs are not, to a man Spurs fans will accept City have a better squad and we will not begrudge you any trophies you win with what appears to be a stunning team, playing some great football (which is much better than last year, when Mancini was way too defensive).

So yeah, I can appreciate that you might dislike Spurs fans for their slightly holier than thou attitude, but you'd be the same if you'd done it all within the FFP rules. When I met with Daniel Levy earlier this year, he told me he believed Spurs were the only PL side that met these rules. Now I don't know if that is true, but you have to admit that for us to have reached where we are without spending on transfer fees and wages over and above beyond what we can generate naturally, is quite impressive. United and Chelsea can't claim to have done the same, Arsenal are probably the other side who are closest to it.

Back to the point in hand. I think we're closer to being title challengers than we have been since at least 87, possibly earlier. I don't think we can win it though. There is the mental barrier... United, despite having a side of similar strength to us have Fergie and other teams put them on a pedestal because of the name and recent history, that will still help them. But, if it wasn't for Chelsea's money and City's recent emergence, I really do think that we'd be serious contenders. What if's don't mean anything though and we do live in a world where the Manchester clubs are becoming the 'big two' out of about 6 or 7 clubs who can compete for the top 4. Which is probably better than the guaranteed top 4 we had 4 or 5 years ago.

I've gone off topic again. It's fair to say that if it's true that 'Arry's approach is motivation over tactical nous then we could well be exposed at some stage. But he does do something our previous managers seemed unable to do. He plays players in their natural roles and tells them to play the way they know best, then if it doesn't work he finds a player who does. Parker being a case in point, he identified what he needed to make the whole team tick and made it happen.

My feeling is that we will finish 3rd after competing for much of the season. I think we bear comparison with Keegan's mid 90s Newcastle side and that with a couple of injuries we'll lose just enough games to lose touch with City. Between City and United, I wouldn't like to speculate on who will win, but it will be one of those. Finishing above Arsenal and Chelsea will be a good acheivement for us, anthing higher (i.e. 2nd) would be mindblowing. I think we can win the league and have the side capable of doing it, but I don't think we will. I'm just happy to settle for finally being taken seriously!

This post would be a whole lot better without its first half.

 

[redmizzle]

I can kindof see both points of view here (It's not obvious from my user name, but I'm Spurs).

The reality is, Spurs fans of old have seen success and expect it more than we should, giving us a bad rep. We're not as bad as we used to be, having been through our awful patch in the 90s and first half of the last decade. However, City had a bad spell too and they had their relegations and things, so you have to concede, given the difference between City now and pre Sheikh/Thai billions, the rise seems a little more artificial than it does for Spurs, who have been squad-building for about 6 years, buying mainly British youngsters. Modric for example was unproven, which is why he came to us and van der Vaart a Real Madrid cast off we got for a bargain.

Be in no doubt though, although we might dislike the way City appear to be buying success in a way Spurs are not, to a man Spurs fans will accept City have a better squad and we will not begrudge you any trophies you win with what appears to be a stunning team, playing some great football (which is much better than last year, when Mancini was way too defensive).

So yeah, I can appreciate that you might dislike Spurs fans for their slightly holier than thou attitude, but you'd be the same if you'd done it all within the FFP rules. When I met with Daniel Levy earlier this year, he told me he believed Spurs were the only PL side that met these rules. Now I don't know if that is true, but you have to admit that for us to have reached where we are without spending on transfer fees and wages over and above beyond what we can generate naturally, is quite impressive. United and Chelsea can't claim to have done the same, Arsenal are probably the other side who are closest to it.

Back to the point in hand. I think we're closer to being title challengers than we have been since at least 87, possibly earlier. I don't think we can win it though. There is the mental barrier... United, despite having a side of similar strength to us have Fergie and other teams put them on a pedestal because of the name and recent history, that will still help them. But, if it wasn't for Chelsea's money and City's recent emergence, I really do think that we'd be serious contenders. What if's don't mean anything though and we do live in a world where the Manchester clubs are becoming the 'big two' out of about 6 or 7 clubs who can compete for the top 4. Which is probably better than the guaranteed top 4 we had 4 or 5 years ago.

I've gone off topic again. It's fair to say that if it's true that 'Arry's approach is motivation over tactical nous then we could well be exposed at some stage. But he does do something our previous managers seemed unable to do. He plays players in their natural roles and tells them to play the way they know best, then if it doesn't work he finds a player who does. Parker being a case in point, he identified what he needed to make the whole team tick and made it happen.

My feeling is that we will finish 3rd after competing for much of the season. I think we bear comparison with Keegan's mid 90s Newcastle side and that with a couple of injuries we'll lose just enough games to lose touch with City. Between City and United, I wouldn't like to speculate on who will win, but it will be one of those. Finishing above Arsenal and Chelsea will be a good acheivement for us, anthing higher (i.e. 2nd) would be mindblowing. I think we can win the league and have the side capable of doing it, but I don't think we will. I'm just happy to settle for finally being taken seriously!

This post would be a whole lot better without its first half.

I agree. Patronising nonsense.

 

[Phischy]

I can kindof see both points of view here (It's not obvious from my user name, but I'm Spurs).

The reality is, Spurs fans of old have seen success and expect it more than we should, giving us a bad rep. We're not as bad as we used to be, having been through our awful patch in the 90s and first half of the last decade. However, City had a bad spell too and they had their relegations and things, so you have to concede, given the difference between City now and pre Sheikh/Thai billions, the rise seems a little more artificial than it does for Spurs, who have been squad-building for about 6 years, buying mainly British youngsters. Modric for example was unproven, which is why he came to us and van der Vaart a Real Madrid cast off we got for a bargain.

Be in no doubt though, although we might dislike the way City appear to be buying success in a way Spurs are not, to a man Spurs fans will accept City have a better squad and we will not begrudge you any trophies you win with what appears to be a stunning team, playing some great football (which is much better than last year, when Mancini was way too defensive).

So yeah, I can appreciate that you might dislike Spurs fans for their slightly holier than thou attitude, but you'd be the same if you'd done it all within the FFP rules. When I met with Daniel Levy earlier this year, he told me he believed Spurs were the only PL side that met these rules. Now I don't know if that is true, but you have to admit that for us to have reached where we are without spending on transfer fees and wages over and above beyond what we can generate naturally, is quite impressive. United and Chelsea can't claim to have done the same, Arsenal are probably the other side who are closest to it.

Back to the point in hand. I think we're closer to being title challengers than we have been since at least 87, possibly earlier. I don't think we can win it though. There is the mental barrier... United, despite having a side of similar strength to us have Fergie and other teams put them on a pedestal because of the name and recent history, that will still help them. But, if it wasn't for Chelsea's money and City's recent emergence, I really do think that we'd be serious contenders. What if's don't mean anything though and we do live in a world where the Manchester clubs are becoming the 'big two' out of about 6 or 7 clubs who can compete for the top 4. Which is probably better than the guaranteed top 4 we had 4 or 5 years ago.

I've gone off topic again. It's fair to say that if it's true that 'Arry's approach is motivation over tactical nous then we could well be exposed at some stage. But he does do something our previous managers seemed unable to do. He plays players in their natural roles and tells them to play the way they know best, then if it doesn't work he finds a player who does. Parker being a case in point, he identified what he needed to make the whole team tick and made it happen.

My feeling is that we will finish 3rd after competing for much of the season. I think we bear comparison with Keegan's mid 90s Newcastle side and that with a couple of injuries we'll lose just enough games to lose touch with City. Between City and United, I wouldn't like to speculate on who will win, but it will be one of those. Finishing above Arsenal and Chelsea will be a good acheivement for us, anthing higher (i.e. 2nd) would be mindblowing. I think we can win the league and have the side capable of doing it, but I don't think we will. I'm just happy to settle for finally being taken seriously!

This post would be a whole lot better without its first half.

I agree. Patronising nonsense.

How is it patronising? My intention was to say that anyone who dislikes Man City's approach to achieving success is missing the point. Yes it's not how purists would like to see success achieved (myself included), but we live in a different age. I just can't understand some of the hatred for Spurs, when we haven't gone out and bought success, but can understand the hatred of some Spurs fans' attitude. Does some of it come from '81?

All I meant was, as clubs, our histories, particularly from recent times aren't that different. Our recent success stories are derived from slightly different backgrounds and as a result we probably can't compete, but we like the suggestion that maybe we can!

 

[LesBleuMiserable]

What baffles me about Spurs is that there is a high court case going on at the moment where Karen Brady (West Ham Vice Chair) is suing Spurs for alleged inappropriate acquiring of her accounts and other financial data to undermine West Ham in their bid for the Olympic Stadium, and in addition to the Olympic Committee having come out and condemned Spurs actions of covert surveillance on committee members to undermine their positions and/or reveal information presumably that spurs can use in their favour for any further judicial review actions. It amazes me that despite the potential serious ramificifications of the alleged Spurs owners actions (and this could only be sanctioned from the top up) that none of the papers/media have going for them or evn tried to hold them accountable! It is absolutely shocking! Yet Garry Cook had to resign on the back of a pathetic email and which the media took City to task with and an ensuing subsequent fiasco over the nothing incident!

Could you even imagine for a second if City had been in Spurs position with the Olympic stadium scenario; the non stop 2 hour reporting coverage, the outcry of moral vacuum, foul play condemnations, criminal activity allegations, need for inquiries...etc...etc

Just shows the "old boys network" stick together but will hang out to dry the likes of City given an inch!

 

[Dave S]

What baffles me about Spurs is that there is a high court case going on at the moment where Karen Brady (West Ham Vice Chair) is suing Spurs for alleged inappropriate acquiring of her accounts and other financial data to undermine West Ham in their bid for the Olympic Stadium, and in addition to the Olympic Committee having come out and condemned Spurs actions of covert surveillance on committee members to undermine their positions and/or reveal information presumably that spurs can use in their favour for any further judicial review actions. It amazes me that despite the potential serious ramificifications of the alleged Spurs owners actions (and this could only be sanctioned from the top up) that none of the papers/media have going for them or evn tried to hold them accountable! It is absolutely shocking! Yet Garry Cook had to resign on the back of a pathetic email and which the media took City to task with and an ensuing subsequent fiasco over the nothing incident!

Could you even imagine for a second if City had been in Spurs position with the Olympic stadium scenario; the non stop 2 hour reporting coverage, the outcry of moral vacuum, foul play condemnations, criminal activity allegations, need for inquiries...etc...etc

Just shows the "old boys network" stick together but will hang out to dry the likes of City given an inch!

Well fucking said. Top post.

 

[jay_mcfc]

If Spurs are our main rivals they might as well give us the trophy now!