Steve Basing has something to confess. He is a Daniel Levy supporter.
In defence of Daniel Levy
I have a confession to make. A confession which will most probably rile, anger and alienate the vast majority of you reading. But never mind that.
My name is Steve Basing and I like Daniel Levy.
Such is the recent venom that has been directed towards the director’s box this season that many will find such a stance impossible to understand, justify or accept. However, I believe that Mr Levy has simply become the target for discontent; he has made the fundamental error in modern football of sticking around long enough to be hated. Like a Prime Minister limping through a third term, it matters not what has
Spurs fans have run out of people to blame and as another unfulfilling season looms large the attention has turned onto the board, the owners and, as their most visible member, Daniel Levy.
[linequote] Time and time again the decisions made in the upper echelons of White Hart Lane have been ones showing huge ambition[/linequote]
Now I accept Levy is not entirely innocent in recent affairs at our club, and it is understandable that after thirteen managers people may begin to point the finger at the man making the appointments. However, legitimate grievances have been turned and twisted into incoherent, inaccurate and ill-formed hate mongering.
It is perfectly legitimate, for example, to question to wisdom of Levy’s managerial merry-go-round, and ask whether AVB, Sherwood, Redknapp or even Jol should have lost their jobs (for the record the answer is no, yes, yes, no). But to suggest there is a malevolent intent behind these decisions, and others by ENIC, is slanderous and unsupported by any evidence.
The idea that Levy and ENIC are unambitious and only interested in making a profit for themselves has become a self-perpetuating myth; it has been said so many times, people assume it must be true.
However this idea of a greedy intent by ENIC is so far removed from reality to label it ludicrous would be an understatement. Time and time again the decisions made in the upper echelons of White Hart Lane have been ones showing huge ambition, they may have in hindsight proved to be bad decisions, but they were always only motivated by ambition for the football club.
The case in point for this is the dismissal of Martin Jol and subsequent appointment of Juande Ramos. I, like much of White Hart Lane, was fuming on the night Big Martin was given the sack, we loved Martin Jol (and he loved us) and he delivered to me, for the first time in my life, a consistent, entertaining Spurs side.
However, it is easy to forget given the dramatic downturn his career has since taken, but Ramos was one of, if not the most, sought after coach in Europe at the time. Chelsea wanted him and there were rumours of a move to Real Madrid amongst others, so his appointment was quite a coup for a team who, at the time, had never played Champions League football.
The easy decision would have been to leave fans favourite Jol in charge, but Levy felt Ramos was the man to take us forward, the man to break the top 4 and therefore, knowing he needed to act before another club with a bigger bank balance did, he took the difficult decision of axing Jol for Ramos. Whilst the decision proved, in hindsight, to be incorrect no-one can question to ambition of the decision.
I am sure you have all seen the table which shows that over the past five years we have made the largest profit from transfers in the Premier League. And whilst you cannot argue with statistics you can question their validity.
This table has become a stick to beat Levy with, his detractors view it of conclusive proof of his sinister, Bond-villain-esque plot to asset strip the club, but the truth is far different.
What the table shows is that we spend a hell of a lot of money, but just happen to recoup a little more. Our transfer ‘income’ has also been skewed in these last five years by the colossal sale of Gareth Bale and the massive sale of Luka Modric, for roughly a combined £120 million. In addition to these sales, Levy has masterminded some wonderful sales and purchases, Jake Livermore sold for £8 million and Hugo Lloris bought for £7 million.
[fullquote]As a team outside the Champions League, without an owner willing to bankrupt himself or the club to the verge of oblivion, there are certain players we simply cannot purchase[/fullquote]
Just let that sink in for a minute, we bought Lloris, one of the best goalkeepers in the world, the French captain and number one for a million pounds less than we sold Jake Livermore, a player who gives ‘bang average’ a bad name.
It is largely due to Levy’s accomplished business acumen that we have made such a profit on transfers something for which he should be applauded. Yet in the hands of some these statistics suggest lack of ambition. It is argued that we should be investing more and have a net spend on transfers, but once again the table does not tell the whole story.
Firstly, the table ignores signing-on fees and increased wages over the past five years, which would more than eat away at the ‘profit’ we have made, as well as investment in a world-class training facility and preparation for a new ground.
But more fundamentally, it fails to consider the actual reality of modern football as well as those in which Tottenham Hotspur Football Club operate. In the modern era of billionaire owners, inflated Champions League payments and a failed system of FFP which entrenches, rather than tackling, the top clubs advantage, we have to accept our place in the pecking order. As a team outside the Champions League, without an owner willing to bankrupt himself or the club to the verge of oblivion, there are certain players we simply cannot purchase.
Therefore operating, as we do in this confined reality, it was remarkable that in the summer of 2013 Levy sanctioned £100 million worth of signings including £27 million on a proven star striker, and £17 million on a Brazilian international as well as bringing in Franco Baldini.
[linequote]ENIC would have been perfectly entitled to re-invest most of the Bale money into the stadium but they did not, instead they invested on the pitch[/linequote]
This was a hugely ambitious attempt to crack the monopoly of billionaire backed clubs in England. The fact that we made a net profit on transfers that season is irrelevant, and further points to Levy’s business genius (once again Hull paid £8 million for Jake Livermore).
Rightly or wrongly, Baldini was given the opportunity to bring in the players he wanted and there was no-one out there that we needed who we could attract but did not buy due to financial restraints. ENIC would have been perfectly entitled to re-invest most of the Bale money into the stadium but they did not, instead they invested on the pitch. It may not have worked out, but hindsight is a wonderful thing for those who do not have to make the decisions.
ENIC and Levy have consistently made risky, bold and sometimes foolish decisions in their pursuit of success at Spurs, but they have always been made with the best interest of the football club and it’s long term health, but on and off the pitch, in mind.
To suggest Daniel Levy is tight and is only interested in making money for himself and the shareholders is to airbrush history to your design, and forget this is a man who once spent £17 million on David Bentley.
All views and opinions expressed in this article are the views and opinions of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of The Fighting Cock. We offer a platform for fans to commit their views to text and voice their thoughts. Football is a passionate game and as long as the views stay within the parameters of what is acceptable, we encourage people to write, get involved and share their thoughts on the mighty Tottenham Hotspur.
14 Comments
Would you like to write for The Fighting Cock?
24/11/2014 @ 10:08 am
Great article and I agree with all of your points, I try and remind people to look at the club before ENIC and Levy arrived we finished 12th that season and Steven Carr was our third top scorer with 3 goals, we have come so far since then. I would rather have Levy then a chairman like Hull or Cardiff have.
24/11/2014 @ 10:37 am
The FACT that Levy/ENIC spent less on transfers than they received is irrelevant? Really? I think your apparent belief that good intentions are more important than good decisions says it all (and, for the record, the correct answers are ‘yes, no, no, yes’, OK?).
24/11/2014 @ 10:39 am
ENIC aren’t blameless but they’ve certainly brought us on from the club they purchased.
It’s just unfortunate that their tenure aligns with a period of financial doping in the game that has skewed everything. We’d otherwise probably be a regular Top Four team.
I can understand the frustrations but it’s a bit petulant. It’s like living in a perfectly nice detached, four-bedroomed house next door to someone who has five bedrooms and a swimming pool. It doesn’t matter that most of the other houses on the street only have three or even two bedrooms. Daniel Levy should get a better job.
24/11/2014 @ 10:59 am
I believe that our problems started in the late 80s and the forced selling of Gazza to Lazio due to financial meltdown at the club in 91.Sugar came and went with the only notable success of bringing Klinsman to our club.Lewis brought financial stability and a very astute businessman to the club.I have no problem with Levy being in charge of monetary affairs at Spurs.In fact I think that we would be foolish to abandon his policy.The big but is that he must realize that he has no football brain and that Spurs will never achieve success on the pitch unless he allows his manager (head coach) to select the players that HE wants from the budget available to him,and not a list of players offered to him by the DoF.Due to Levy’s involvement in transfer deals THFC has become one of the most despised clubs in UK ,and due to his policy of getting every single penny out of a transfer deal opposing clubs do likewise with us.It will be interesting to see that players that might have cost us 25mill. in July will cost in January next year.No doubt our continuing striker/defence problem will be solved by loans of Saha/Neilson clones.
24/11/2014 @ 11:27 am
I would have invested the Bale money in the stadium!
24/11/2014 @ 1:10 pm
Me too? £25-30m on a replacement then the rest on the Gareth Bale North Stand.
24/11/2014 @ 12:01 pm
Completely agree with the article; even the “no, yes, yes, no”!
24/11/2014 @ 7:25 pm
I also agree.. good, sensible read. Those of us old enough to remember the days of mediocrity appreciate where we are now.
24/11/2014 @ 1:02 pm
Sanity at last. Thank you.
24/11/2014 @ 2:22 pm
Good article. The carping that goes on has been obsessive and predictable. I am reminded of it whenever I see a football player in effect give away a goal and rather than accept responsibility he points at someone else to blame (often ridiculously when such situations are re-examined on TV).
Levy has done well for Tottenham, all the more when some of his predecessors are re-considered. Spurs will get there, so cheer up!
24/11/2014 @ 3:15 pm
Whilst the majority of your article is well written and presented, you have to realise that Levy is Spurs, well he thinks anyway. Yes there is now doubt his negotiating are of a high quality, but are we running a football club or business. He impetuously sells our best and I’m not going to go over the players as you well know who they are, as you mentioned 13 managers in a “week” have come and gone, so explain how are you going to achieve stability and consistency? How do you develop a system of play with 13 different characters with 13 different ways of playing with 13 different backroom staff? Explain that Stephen. You are never going to have stability while Levy has a say. This absurd notion of a football director who goes and buys plays HE thinks are suitable is plain stupidity. Levy should only be a figure head at the club with no say in transfers or employing people. Let him play with developing a stadium that we may not have for 2-3 years!….. I rest my case mate
25/11/2014 @ 2:22 pm
yeah agree with most of the above Levy has become a tangible figure for discontent rather than the devil reincarnate. Yes he has made some poor decisions sacking redknapp being the number one, but overall he’s done well. Personally I would question some of our transfer policy as well, people like Jake Livermore, tommy huddlestone for me would both get in this current tottenham team and buying ‘cheap foreigners’ (not to sound too xenophobic) is never a good policy. If you look at redknapp players like scott parker, crouch, defoe were good premier league class players, Vaart was a quality foreigner, with a proven pedigree coming from a quality club. For me if you look at the likes of Fazio, stambouli (jury being out currently), chiricles, Paulihno, would something like Delph, shawcross, shelvy, etc be better? players who know the league etc…the obvious exception is soldado who should have been class but hasn’t for whatever reason…
For me what happens with the stadium, general fan treatment and what signings and sales could seal levy’s fate, if this stadium gets built and Poch is given time and a bit of decent transfer activity i suspect that levy will look better than he does currently….
Thus to say for me Levy has become Spurs’ fans figure of hate in relation to ‘modern football’ football has changed/changing and people don’t like and levy is the nearest and most powerful spokesperson to aim our discontent at.
25/11/2014 @ 2:39 pm
Interesting read. The net spending argument can be spun a whole number of ways and usually is. I tend to think when we have spent big we have spent poorly and when we have spent moderately (in modern football’s grossly bloated context) we’ve done better.
I always liked Livermore and rated him more highly than most it seems. He’s been a very good buy for Hull at 8 million and would have remained an asset for us if he’d stayed. His performances are better than a good many of the more expensive players that have replaced him. That could be said of a good few we’ve let go more recently.
The football under Poch is pretty anaemic too.
I don’t want Levy out, because he’s taken us on a lot and because the alternative is unlikely to be better. Another investment company or a worse a Russian super criminal with more skeletons (figuratively and real, allegedly) in the cupboard than you can shake a new chelsea fan at. I don’t want success (measured in pots and baubles) at any price, I know many will feel differently. Bit we are at a crossroads and need to decide what sort of club we are or want to be on and off the pitch.
25/11/2014 @ 8:57 pm
If people hate the club then go to SpursDreamer. He has a lovely Twitter campaign called Enic Out. Hopefully it’s just a small minority who follow and agree. Let the rest of us who Love the club just get behind them. COYS.