-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
According to the Times the Premier League has told the club that all of the last 5 home games must be played either at Wembley or the new stadium. If it’s not ready for the next game then we won’t move in until next season.
If there isn't a rule stating that 25% of the league games need to be played at a chosen venue I don't think the Premier League will have a leg to stand on if this is the case.
Preventing a club from using an benefitting from an investment as large as this because they make up new rules not legally within the boundaries of the leagues law leaves them open for a lawsuit they wouldn't be able to win. I don't know what the rules stipulate or the loopholes entailed but if it's down to preference and it loses us c£10m or whatever it would based on not being able to use facilities we have in place and signed off etc I can't see how the League can justify its reasoning
Because?..........................
Unless there is a rule stating you have to play at least 25% of your home matches in a stadium you choose to use the Premier League don't have a leg to stand on. Jibberish in my opinion and the club would take them to court and win if they try and make a rule that doesn't exist stick at the detriment of the club and it's finances
There is a rule that all home games must be played at the same venue, which the PL has been open to waiving for Spurs' benefit. That patience has run thin, and indeed expired it would appear.
It's the business end of the season with very important places up for grabs up and down the table, they are looking to ensure the sporting integrity of the competition, as they should.
To say that we must come back from the final international break at NWHL or not at all is a very reasonable ask.
The other thing hanging out there is UEFA's apparent hesitancy to have a nighttime CL quarterfinal be the first competitive match, and the London police surely agree. Seems best not to discuss that unless and until we actually see our way past Dortmund.
People act like we'd be at an advantage, which is all well and good but very little is ,ace of the disadvantage we've had to endure whilst not being at the stadium.
If the Premier League dig their heels in based on opinion etc I don't think it's on. We've had a year and a half of every other team having a huge advantage over us, 5 games or 1 when the stadium is ready we should be allowed to open the doors
It's not so much an advantage or disadvantage for us as it is for the other teams.
Wolves beat us at a listless Wembley but West Ham have to play us in the utter cauldron of our first NWHL game? When both teams are fighting for the last EL spot?
An already doomed Huddersfield and a European game would be ideal from the EPL's perspective to get the new place broken in.
The same could be said of early kick offs on a Saturday instead of playing a team under the lights on a Wednesday night etc. Also where is the cut off period! The league would have known that some teams would have played at Wembley, some would have had to endure the cauldron atmosphere. Man U could say it wasn't fair they were the last team to play us at WHL etc.
Simply put, regardless of others getting the arse Wembley was a stop gap until the stadium was ready. If it's ready it should no longer be an issue. The league has agreed to us already having played 14 teams at Wembley so why would a 5 game or 3 game spell at the new gaff make any real difference compared to 6 games or 7? Why has the number 5 been plucked? That's what I'd want to know if I was Levy & co
Been disadvantaged for two years and that was ok.....but 3 home games is too much of an advantage.
Has to be five...makes sense
At this stage it makes no difference to anyone except Spurs fans really
Has to be five...makes sense
At this stage it makes no difference to anyone except Spurs fans really
To be fair ours is always first week of Easter hols to take the kids skiing, so self inflicted
was booked last April, just after the Chelsea game, as its same place as last year
That's still a big unknown.
Uefa reluctant to let Spurs open new ground with Champions League game
So, the CL draw is 15 March and Brighton's FA Cup QF away to Millwall is 17 March. And apparently our first test event is supposed to be 16 March.
Obviously thing #1 is the test events, and I remain of a stance that I will believe this stadium is ready to progress any further only when I see it.
Issue #2 would be if Brighton win to delay our 7 April game and then we draw a first leg at home in the CL which would happen in the week before Huddersfield, UEFA may not allow us to open the stadium with that fixture (again, we're operating purely with their permission here)
That, Ladies and Gentlemen, is an announcement.
