Protecting and enhancing the name of 'Tottenham'
Monday, July 6, 2009 at 12:25PM Another week is upon us. Buckle up. I'm feeling confident something will happen in the next seven days to break us free from the weary chains of summer boredom. And such is my boredom that I've resorted to browsing the Tottenham OS, trailing for anything worthy of a mention which has successfully resulted with the discovery of a certain clause in the One Hotspur terms and conditions that I missed first time round.
Do you read T&C's before signing up? Did you read them when purchasing/renewing your season ticket? I'd hazard a guess and say you probably didn't read all the small print. Who does? We all know that if you're naughty at games you'll be punished for it - and deservedly so. It's a given. But what's there to know other than the usual blurb you get with any type of purchase?
Well here's the gem in question:
1.2 Members must at all times do everything within their power and control to protect and enhance the good name of the Club and not to diminish the good name of the Club in any way or through any means. The Club does not tolerate foul and/or abusive behaviour towards staff. This applies to any form of communication with Club staff.
Ouch. Don't supporters do this by their very definition, at the ground or away from home - giving their support for the team and players?
But what does this actually mean in context with regards to bloggers or anybody who posts about the club on unofficial message boards? No wonder the official Tottenham Hotspur forum has less bite than a toothless bed-bug, with everyone far too scared to say anything that may be frowned upon considering you can only post once your membership number has been validated through registration. You have to be careful not to be too critical, and people who are get slated for being so.
And since some of my articles incite some fans (I've got a few 'admirers' over on the official forum that think I have an anti-Spurs agenda, the melters) to suggest that the content on this blog is derogatory towards the club, I'm curious for some clarity.
What constitutes diminishing the good name of the club? It's a little ambiguous and vague.
I don't like the new yellow-streaked home shirt. I posted about it. Several times. Even signed a petition. Am I in violation of my contract? And am I failing to enhance the name of the club?
Who am I kidding? Of course I'm not. I have an opinion and I can make my feelings public if I so wish, in whatever writing style I see fit.
IMO, protecting the name of the club is standing up for what you believe in, as a fan. We are the true shareholders. The club belongs to us, be it in a romanticised way. But much like anything in life, we can choose to stand back and be critical if we don’t agree with something - anything - the club representatives do or say. One perfect example was the doomed Director of Football structure. Even though people within the club swore by it, many fans disliked it. And in the end we were proved to be right. Arguably, the club did little to enhance the good name of the club, by dragging it through a dizzying mess of embarrassment. Maybe I can sue for the trauma and emotional stress I was put through during this uneasy period in our history?
Would like to hear from someone at the club about this. I’m not stirring. And I’m not concerned or worried. I always find these type of entries in a legally binding contract to be susceptible to several forms of interpretation and because you agree to it as a member, the power of how its translated to any number of things is not in your hands – but in the clubs and thus, they can exercise it to their hearts content when they see fit. I guess that's the point of it.
Also, re: This applies to any form of communication with Club staff.
I best be grateful that my letters never make it into Levy's in-tray. Small mercies. Going forward I may take to burning my season ticket in the men's gents as nobody is likely to notice with all the smoke emanating from the cubicles.
Reader Comments (18)
What a quirky clause that is. Never noticed it before and can't say I understand what it means. I guess blogs, sites don't need to worry too much - its people who take it a step further than that.
Valid point. Wtf does that clause cover exactly?
Anyone got a club email addy handy?
The freedom of expression which people now are widely using on internet etc as on this blog
are our rights anyway.......
the example of recent events involving the law and maybe the clause you have quoted etc is the treatment of Sol Campbell and the punishment of those named and involvment of the police....there was an abuse issue.or is it part of football?......even if feelings run deep ......it was seen as out of line as a mode of behaviour....
so its about an intent to secure maturity of thought and actions isnt it......while maintaining good impressions and a responsibilty from the fans in general
as it is our club.......we are representatives arent we.....
THFC appears run well in business terms ...it is right to question any decisions as with the shirt issue (agree not right, Paul Barber ,opinion please or are you one of the untouchables))for this year
as its in the interests of all of us that the club is succesful in its merchandise..programme......and not shooting itself in the foot......process issue definately..as far as some fans are voiced with the petition
constructive criticism and debate on issues affecting THFC should not be shoved underground to appease those in positions of power and decision........just because they make mistakes....and being human..........like us?
Good morning from over here in the states to you spooky. I love your blog so muh tht I sit here and write to you from my iPhone in my bed with a diabetic low. This is just one of those things tht the club put into the terms & policies. We need not look into it too much as fans of Tottenham.
In regards to something happening to break our summer boredom I really do hope so because we Spurs fans have been so bored this summer that we would have bought a ticket to Michael Jafksons' funeral.
Okay I'll concede to the poor quality of that joke but what can you expect froma diabetic who's up too early but feels the need to write a comment on your blog before I go & fix my low.
Ok maybe this one is a little better. What's the difference between Alex Fergueson & Michael Jackson?
Fergueson will be playing Giggs in October.
Its a safe guard so that they can terminate the 'contract' if they see fit. I think you're safe Spooky. Just hold off with the water balloon attacks for a while.
Spooky, it looks like you've met your Stan (Dan) with James (New Orleans).
"We should never confuse dissent with disloyalty"
Ed Murrow
I'd like to think that those in power at the club understand that, and are far more benign than we give them credit for. Most of these legal clauses are catch-alls written by some anally retentive lawyer hoping not to get sued for negligence.
Agreed. Not that any legal mumbo jumbo would put off Spooky or any other blogger for that matter.
Excuse my ignorance as I am only a young lad, but who is Stan (Dan)?
http://www.dearmrlevy.com/dml/2009/6/24/what-if-daniel-levy-actually-replied-to-one-of-my-letters.html
Thanks Harry's Heroes. I had forgotten all about that entry. Should I take this as a compliment or an insult?
The clause is meant to be "vague"
In the interests of keeping the club free of taint, they reserve the right to treat each indiviidual case according to damage and risk. Spooky, you may be a left wing fan, but your views are not dangerous enough a risk, on a financial, or indeed reputational basis to the club.
You will be just fine, and dont by all means water down your blog, Love it matey.
on anoher note... Figo SRSLY?!
It is like wading through treacle passing the time waiting for the ITK's to admit that they actually 'know' nothing.
Rather than reading T's and C's why not try and work out who the un-named players on 'the lads are back' on the tottenham OS (other than bentley, o'hara and Hud), because everyone gets a mention in the afternoon! Are these simply players who have no future at WHL or are they the players agents in disguise?
BTW, you missed out 'Owns a bar in Malaga' from Bentley's "Brand Values". MIght be worth a few more quid then?
I wouldn't be surprised if nothing happened this week. And for the last time, my name's not Shirley!
Wouldn't worry about stuff like this. Unless you directly do something that upsets the clubs dynamic.
You looking for another court order spooks?
1.2 Members must at all times do everything within their power and control to protect and enhance the good name of the Club and not to diminish the good name of the Club in any way or through any means. The Club does not tolerate foul and/or abusive behaviour towards staff. This applies to any form of communication with Club staff.
I take it that means we're not signing Craig Bellamy then. Unless the above statement makes an exception to 'communicating' with golf clubs.
Na, that'd be club head, not club staff. Bellamy don't miss the target.... with a golf club anyway.
Craig Bellend? Let's see, according to the stats (wiki only so probably wrong) he made 22 appearnces (8 for city since Jan) and scored 10 goals in all competitions, and at 5'9" he's not exactly a target man (unless of course you are in fact referring to him using people as human targets.
So on that basis I'd rather have Bent still. Actually on second thoughts get Sandra on the pitch and spend the 10/12/18 mil for Bent from Sunderland (*delete as applicable depending on which made up number the article you havemost recently read say we are selling him for) on giving away the home kit for free to members, as that's the only way you'll get me in one of them.