January 2015 Transfer Window DISCUSSION Thread

  • There is only one thing weirder than posting on internet forums... lurking on internet forums!
    Registration only takes a minute and removes most of the adverts. You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Register to remove

siggy

It's Bale. It's brilliant. It's three.
I guess no one wanted Bale, Modric, Berbatov, Eriksen, Lloris, Vertonghen, Chadli, Lennon, Walker, Carrick or Ginola? They were presumably forced on our managers??
no but you dont get the brand new logic. successful players are always handpicked by managers. if they fail, its Levy.
 
If you think Levy's a clown you really need to look up Irving Scholar.
Well we won more trophies with Scholar, and more prestigious ones to boot, than we have with ENIC/Levy.

Under Scholar, one UEFA Cup and one FA Cup. Under ENIC (or English National One Cup as I like to think of them), one League Cup.

In the Lge, two or maybe three third placed finishes, IIRC, under Scholar. ENIC zero top 3 finishes.

Moreover, Scholar achieved all that in 9 years. ENIC have taken 14 so far to achieve much less.

It's true Scholar got a lot wrong, and I'm not here to particularly defend him. But his trophy and top lge finishes record is WAY BETTER than ENIC/Levy.

Oh and we often finished above Woolwich in those happy days and were considered the London glamour club, not a lacklustre 3rd behind Chelsea and Woolwich like we are now. We were light years in front of Chelsea in that era, and could go to the Bridge and laugh at what rubbish Chelsea were. If you could get past the 'electric fences and walk of death' on the way there that is. :)

PS for those who don't know their history, Chelsea didn't really have 'electric fences' but one of their chairmen wanted to install them there.

'The increase of hooligan incidents in the 1980s led chairman Ken Bates to propose erecting an electric fence to deter them from invading the pitch, a proposal that the Greater London Council rejected.[77]' (Wikipedia)
 
Last edited:
Scholar got one or two things wrong? He nearly ended the club.. Anything he ever achieved was wiped out when he nearly bankrupted the club, oh and took a loan from Robert Maxwell.

I don't get your logic at all, Scholar literally took us to the brink of destruction, but we won cups so that makes him better than ENIC?
 

Register to remove

Scholar got one or two things wrong? He nearly ended the club.. Anything he ever achieved was wiped out when he nearly bankrupted the club, oh and took a loan from Robert Maxwell.

I don't get your logic at all, Scholar literally took us to the brink of destruction, but we won cups so that makes him better than ENIC?
IF you want to misquote me to boost your argument, then I am not going to argue with you. I suggest you reread my post and alter yours accordingly if you want a sensible argument on this.

But anyway, yes Scholar won more than ENIC, yes he was worse for us financially, and yes it was much better to have been the London glamour club in those days.
 

sammyspurs

Suspended
Yeh and southampton spent 50m on players, look how that turned out. I'll keep marking out that clown levy. He is holding THFC back with his selfish penny pinching and ego driven transfer activity.He sees sell on value, but dosen't see link up play. I;d like to sit the little ***** down one day and have him tell me the difference between a no 10, a natural pace winger, box to box midfielder, a creative midfielder. Truth is he wont know didly squat because all he sees is raw stats and thinks he is playing football manager.
Im sure he would care what you think.

Regarding Southampton, they will probably go back to being a yoyo club within 5 years, and we will have probably won a couple cups and made CL again.

So.....whatever
 
Better an Archilles , than to glory in accountancy .
Scholar was worse than Campbell, Wenger and Henry combined, none of those nearly ruined the club. If he'd been in charge any longer we wouldn't be having this discussion because there would be no Tottenham Hotspur.

I am sure Fidel would not have approved of his floating the club on the stock exchange?
 
Last edited:

Fidel Castro

Tractors for the people.
Scholar was worse than Campbell, Wenger and Henry combined, none of those nearly ruined the club. If he'd been in charge any longer we wouldn't be having this discussion because there would be no Tottenham Hotspur.
If Levy/Lewis was in charge then , Hoddle , Ardilles sold , no Gazza , no silverware.
Parasites .
 
Well we won more trophies with Scholar, and more prestigious ones to boot, than we have with ENIC/Levy.

Under Scholar, one UEFA Cup and one FA Cup. Under ENIC (or English National One Cup as I like to think of them), one League Cup.

In the Lge, two or maybe three third placed finishes, IIRC, under Scholar. ENIC zero top 3 finishes.

Moreover, Scholar achieved all that in 9 years. ENIC have taken 14 so far to achieve much less.

It's true Scholar got a lot wrong, and I'm not here to particularly defend him. But his trophy and top lge finishes record is WAY BETTER than ENIC/Levy.

Oh and we often finished above Woolwich in those happy days and were considered the London glamour club, not a lacklustre 3rd behind Chelsea and Woolwich like we are now. We were light years in front of Chelsea in that era, and could go to the Bridge and laugh at what rubbish Chelsea were. If you could get past the 'electric fences and walk of death' on the way there that is. :)

PS for those who don't know their history, Chelsea didn't really have 'electric fences' but one of their chairmen wanted to install them there.

'The increase of hooligan incidents in the 1980s led chairman Ken Bates to propose erecting an electric fence to deter them from invading the pitch, a proposal that the Greater London Council rejected.[77]' (Wikipedia)
Pre Sky : Scholar (when football was down to natural progression)
Post Sky : Levy (you buy your sucess/trophies)
For me, two periods of football history that are not comparable, IMO
 

Register to remove

Thinking about things as you do after reading the comments above, I dont really care about the past, its all about the future and its looking bright to me. Who really cares about Scholar v Levy. We dont really know what goes on behind the scenes and can only speculate. Yes on the pitch, results can support arguments but we all know the margins are slim?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom