Falling out of love with Luka Modric

Another month, more sickness. Shaking and shivering, my back is in absolute agony. Apparently my working day sit-down posture is the reason the viral infection has gone to town on my back muscles. I'm laying down in bed typing this on my i-phone, so hardly ideal. And best to apologise up front for what might (probably) turn out to be a less than perfect article in terms of crafted English. But don't feel sorry for me. I don't want any sympathy (it's actually tiresome how often I've been sick this summer). Keep that sympathy and bundle it up into a ball of hug, then embrace Luka Modric and pat him on his back, perhaps a kiss on each cheek. You know what I'm talking about. You've seen that type of hug on The Sopranos. Not the friendly hug. The other one. The 'goodbye hug because you're going to get whacked' hug. Not that Luka is about to walk into an empty basement with Daniel Levy pointing a gun to the back of his head.

There's no need for such fatalistic dramatics. A sit-down was enough to sort things out yesterday.

First thing I'm going to reference is Sky Sports and other members of the media (such as Shaun Custis). Daniel Levy could have pulled up in his Range Rover (it's a Rover, right?) holding the decapitated head of Modric and clearly stated, "He's never leaving Spurs. We've buried the rest of his body under the centre circle", but our esteemed friends with their relentless agenda would have updated their 'Modric time-line coverage' to tell the world that Luka was so desperate to get away, he decapitated himself and is blindly attempting to run to Stamford Bridge where he'll still be able to play, just not head the ball.

No matter what we do or say, they want to engineer a move way for the Croatian. Probably because it gives them something to write about, and in addition, how dare Levy buck the trend and not roll over.

Newspapers will always add negative spin because that's their agenda. They need to say something that will keep people reading/watching. It's just another form of entertainment.

What do we actually know about yesterday?

Before Luka arrived he's interviewed at an airport saying that he could not rule out a move to Chelsea. Two ways you can take this. He means it. Or he's told to say it so that when he arrives back in England and travels to WHL to meet Levy he can perhaps allow his agent to remain in the room after he leaves to negotiate an improved deal.

Wishful thinking considering he's already in a hefty contract and we have the upper hand.

If he means it, then it's still wishful thinking. He arrives at the Lane, he has his conversation, he leaves. Agent apparently does remain behind a little longer.

We then see SSN video footage of a rather smug Levy tell the reporter that Modric understands he won't be sold.

"We had a very good conversation and, as I've said previously, Luka Modric will not be sold"

Good conversation? One-sided good conversation? Good one-sided in favour of chairman?

"That's the end of it. As I said a few weeks ago, there's no further discussion on it"

So the conversation was simply a face-to-face sit-down reiterating what Levy has told the world via his club statement straight to Luka. You wont' be sold, end of.

"He's been on holiday but we've now had the conversation and he understands our position"

Modric 'understands', which means he accepts it.

"I'm just telling you what the position is - he won't be sold. I'm sure once he's back with his team-mates everything will be fine"

This to me might be an indication that although Modric understands and possibly even accepts the clubs standing, he's not happy with it. Levy ignored the question that attempted to gauge the player's opinion. He dismissed it. Which means he's dismissing any attempt by the player himself to force the club to give into any potential bid.

"It would make no difference. This is not about money. We're not selling our best players"

This is what it's about. 

We have to make a stand and we have to lead from the front in terms of throwing the punches rather than backing up into a corner and being bullied. A derisory bid is hardly going to turn our head. The perpetual bullsh*t from the 'journalists', simply laughable. If we take everything at face value, then Luka understands and will now concentrate on training and playing. He can help himself massively by telling us that he's committed to Tottenham for the season ahead. Get the majority back on his side. End the speculation once and for all. Because the longer it goes on, the more pressure/suggestion that he might pull a Berba and strike. Because that's one way to create disharmony within the club and force the club to sell. Although the big difference here is contract length and the fact that part of me believes Luka to be more honourable that Dimi.

I've just seen that Nikky Vuksan (Modric's agent) has said the player is unlikely to ask for a transfer. He'll honour his contract. Even though you still get the overwhelming feeling he's doing that because he has no choice in the matter. Agent also saying that 'fighting the club' is not something he and the player wish to do. I never believe anything an agent states, but I wouldn't be far wrong to suggest that Levy has asked both Modric and Vuksan to go get their shinebox.

This is where the love is lost for me.

The fact that I thought Luka was different. When in fact he's much more like Carrick. Model professional, committed, but when it was time to move on, he looked to do just that. Once more the stepping stone that is Spurs. Once more players not possessing the patience or loyalty that we would wish for them to have. Pressures of modern career football, pressure of what people want him to do back in Croatia, pressures of agent advice and the harsh reality that moving to a club cemented in CL is less work and far closer to silverware than playing in a side that wants to cement itself in CL.

Levy is pulling a master-stroke because we don't lose from this scenario. Okay, so let's say he goes on strike (highly unlikely post-agent statement) and makes his position untenable to the point where we simply can't hold onto him because it would detrimental to us and his valuation. He still won't be sold for anything less than £40M. If no bid is made, he stays. He will then have no choice to play and play well. A year is a long time in football. Suitors can move on, target wise, if form dips.

But Levy has said what he's said and this is no ploy to gain that £40M 'alleged' asking price. Transfer requests and sulking - on this occasion - will probably be dealt with by handing the player a cushion and a firm pointing to the bench. His international career will suffer. He knows it. More fool him for sigining a long term contract.

If he commits, plays and plays out of his skin - it's win, win again. Valuation remains high and we do well on the pitch. And a year is a long time in football. This time next summer we could be preparing ourselves for a season in the CL. He might be more than content to stay. If he's not, then we've got what we wanted out of him and we can reinvest our money.

If all of this has simply been about a renewed contract and nothing else (Rooneyesque style) then once more we can all shake our heads in unison that players believe themselves to be bigger than the clubs they play for. Or at least more important. Clubs are just vehicles for their progression.

Much like Rooney had to prove himself after his apparent lack of loyalty, Luka has to do the same. He's completely tainted the love I had for him. But I'm glad because it's reminded me that it's a rare occasion these days to find a player that epitomises the essence of the club. It's mostly fantasy unless you're a club that does not know of the struggles to reach and remain in the upper tier of your domestic league. Players will always come and go and we'll always get over it and move onto the next one because we are in love with Tottenham and occasional have one-night stands with the players (not literally, unless you're female and you frequent Faces nightclub).

In this instance, the club is bigger, far bigger than the player. And Luka will have to deal with that decisive fact and put this summer of discontent behind him and prove he's the player worthy not of a £40M price tag but one worthy to be wearing the Lilywhite shirt. The only thing that deserves worship.

Ain't no pleasing you

guest-blog by Chris King

When is it no longer acceptable to complain? To moan about a service provided, an experience gained or an attitude presented to you?

What makes it unacceptable? Do you have to take in to consideration everything that has gone before – to apply a “mus’n’ grumble” attitude to everything you do – as hey, there is always going to be someone far worse off than you; someone below you – way below you.

When do you hand over your right to complain? As soon as UEFA doles out their 30 pieces of TV silver; or does it go back further than that – to Eastlands last term, to when Harry signed, to when Jason Dozzell went back east?

This is the picture currently being presented to Spurs fans – fans who feel they want to exercise their right to politely point out where the team has gone wrong over the last couple of months. To comment, complain even criticise (lick windows and howl at the moon as some in the media are suggesting us “nutters” do). Yet we are being reliably informed that we are clueless; that we have no right to moan about this past season – as this is the best it has ever been (since circa Sky and all that).

Swallow your penance, shut up and accept your lot.

But what if you are one of those book learning types; you know – those that can read. Can look at a set of results, the names in a squad; understand maths sufficiently well to add up points that could (read: should) have been gained against those clubs below yours. What if you then came to the conclusion that all was not right? That something had gone wrong; horribly wrong – and the slight swagger you presented to the world back in March – was now a hunched shuffle, which had you sloping back in to the pack – to where most believe you truly belong.

City beating us was no great shock last night – eggs, paper bags, and the geek’s even nerdy dad could have Spurs in a rumble right about now. Yet if you read twitter last night, or skimmed through the obituaries – sorry – I mean match reports this morning - you’d think we were just popping off cloud nine for a pint of milk, a decent keeper; and we’ll be back amongst the big boys before next season was but a few weeks old.

It was official – we weren’t allowed to complain. We weren’t allowed to pluck figures like one win in 10 (I appreciate it’s more, I just like round figures) out of the cold, hard facts. We weren’t allowed to comment on the apparent lack of desire at times against West Ham, West Brom or Blackpool. 

We weren’t allowed to question the tactical acumen applied to the team selection in those game, or last night – or the switches made, and the personnel introduced. 

Unbeknown to Spurs fans, a new law was passed across the land placing the penalty of treason on any negative comments directed at the Red Top’s new “King of Hearts”. Harry is lauded as a very good manager who had a bad run with a few dodgy decisions, sendings off, injuries – it was always someone else’s fault.

But what if we want to complain? What’s stopping us?

Well there’s the ever so slightly patronising undertone that we’ve been shockingly bad for so long that, To Dare – is apparently above us. We should be happy with the fact that we’ve beaten AC and Inter Milan – we’ve had a run in the Champions League that no one expected of us, and that we took our beating against Madrid like men.

If there’s a Spurs fan out there that can’t find a positive from the season, then there is a little more than something wrong with them – and in fairness, to those baying for Harry’s head, only Vicente del Bosque would get the sack after some of our European results this term – but there is no disputing that our season was derailed sometime in March – and if we can’t moan, then at least let us ask why it all went so wrong?

I don’t buy in to the notion that the European experience did for us. We’ve been all over clubs at times – West Ham at home, City home and away – and what have we got to show for it? If we can’t criticise Harry, do we point the finger of blame at Dear Mr Levy? – who is so cunning in his transfer bargaining that he left us a striker light, and gave us Pieenar – a player who appears to have left what form he had, back up in Liverpool – no doubt a victim of that gang that targets the prized possessions of their local players.

But we can’t moan – nor question. So what do we do? We do what all Spurs fans do at such times, we argue with each other. If no one is prepared to listen, we find someone to at least shout over the top of on the same subject matter; though for once, we all seem to be shouting the same things.

No Journos will return our tweets, opposition fans only see the folly in our arguments – we’re no longer the darlings – back to being the overly expectant, laughing stock we’ve been since the ‘80s.

If last season delivered the earth, this season promised the moon and the stars as well. There was, daft as it now seems - the faint glimmer that we might even be the club to take the title race in to May. Looking at our last 13 league games, the teams we’ve played and the points we dropped – would it really have been so daft?

Though I guess it is not really our fault. United, Chelsea and Arsenal are where they supposedly belong – City have bought their place at the top table, and Liverpool – well, they’re just the Liverpool of old; same efficiency, same manager, same reliance on the back pass to the keeper. So if it feels like we robbed ourselves of glory; chances are it just wasn’t meant to be.

So if you feel like moaning – ask yourself a few questions: are we better than we were under Francis? Have we enjoyed some fantastic European nights down the lane this term? If the Red Tops want Harry for England, surely he’s still the man for us, right? If we’d have won half of those last 13 games, would we be back in the Champions League next year?

Actually, don’t ask that last question; it’ll only cause you to question, to moan….. To ultimately, be wrong!

Chris King, a regular on the old Shelf and held a season ticket in the Park Lane Upper. He now lives in Leeds, where he spends most Saturdays trying to teach his daughter the words to Spurs’ songs. Writes for In Bed with Maradona and his own blog Northern Writes.

To dare is to just do it

I see there have been plenty of discussion points in my absence from London town since Thursday.

Niko

Gutted he's out for the season (ankle injury thanks to that clown Michael Brown) and played on during the Cup semi-final in agony with said injury. Along with one or two other players, he's battled on through the pain barrier and really shown that we have players in the squad that do give their utmost in the name of Spurs. Huddlestone being one of the others, who I somehow forgot to mention in my NLD match report. So I'm mentioning him now.

And Ledders. Bionic Ledders.

Barry Glendenning / The Guardian

Media in shock 'WE ARE ANTI-SPURS' sensation. One or two bias reports doing the rounds and a podcast that might make you chuckle that has Glendenning suggesting one or two rather silly things. Seems that certain chants are only relevant and disgraceful and thus must be highlighted when sang by the White Hart Lane faithful and must be ignored completely and unequivocally if sang by any other set of fans. Behind closed doors apparently. Peter Andre could possibly write us a new chant that's easier on the ears?

Judas

Can the journalists and reporters who comment on the abuse Campbell gets when he plays us as 'disgraceful' please explain what makes the player so special that he should have be granted special dispensation? Why are football supporters, you know who they are, the one's who watch the game and don't play it (clue: not millionaires, eating bagels in the stands) suddenly being criticised for hurling the verbals towards a player who committed the cardinal sin in a world where most would like to dream that loyalty is a virtue that carries substance?

He lied. He left. He deserves the welcome he receives when he returns. Can't believe it's even a talking point. And yet it continues to be one.

I'm wondering. If Ledley King was white and left Spurs for Arsenal in his prime, would the Daily Mail and other tabloids even get involved? In fact, colour shouldn't be an issue, because Ashley Cole is equally abused on his return to Arsenal's cesspit and the media commentary is of a completely different nature to the one that surrounds Campbell's return or presence for anyone versus Spurs.

It's a conundrum that doesn't need to be solved. We all know it's bullshit. So I'll draw a line under it (again).

Danny Rose goal

It's still wonderfully majestic no matter how many times you watch it and regardless of the 'he should have punched the ball better' counter-arguments from some haters.

  comic by the ever-remarkable Chris Toy...click on the image for more.

Ian Poulter

Another contentious issue is the use of the term 'yid'. It's probably worthy of an article of it's own, but it's been done many times over and I'm pretty sure there was an awareness campaign that THFC did some years ago too. There are directors/fans at Spurs who don't like the term being used and although nothing can be done if 20,000 fans are chanting it - one fan can probably be removed or warned, if someone complains. We all know the history behind the adoption of it (to defuse the word being used in a derogatory fashion by opposing fans). Hence the self-referral. In some ways we have desensitised it. But it's very much a complex issue and it's one that becomes clouded when, let's say, another fan of an opposing team refers to us as 'yids'.

Is he referring to us by the name we choose to use? Or is the connotation a different ilk? It's in the delivery I guess. If a fan across the police divide screams 'You f*cking yids' at us, then there's no arguing the tone. Chelsea have thrown out a few of their fans in their home games for similar types of pleasantries.

But Poulter (he's a gooner and golfer if you didn't happen to know) is only guilty of being stupid enough to calls us 'yids' on Twitter because the media (and anyone who does take offence) will pick up on it. Anti-Semitic taunt, is what it was refereed us. Ho hum, another over-reaction to something that is undeserving of attention.

Self deprecation and acknowledgement of self deprecation anyone? No? Okay then.

Anyways, let's not lose sight of what's important here. We ruined his night. And he's a bit of a twat.

Bale

Bale. Bale. Bale. I have to mention this lad every week now. Mainly because everyone else was mentioning him every week for completely different reasons not so long ago. You know what I'm talking about. 23 games and all that. Where's his new contract?

Chelsea at the Lane

You'll have to forgive me. I'm shattered and have written all the above in one quick swoop before I go to bed and attempt to recover from a night spent in Swansea intoxicated with work colleagues and four Meerkats. Long story. So unless I manage to write something up in the morning, this will have to do for the match report:

Question. Do we have it in us to dig deep again, days after overcoming the enemy?

I reckon as long as we don't believe any unnecessary hype and simply do as we did last time out (To dare is to f*cking do, so just f*cking get on with it and do it) then we have a chance. A fighting chance. I reckon the game will be more open. Less ball watching from us - at least that will be our intention, but the physicality will no doubt be energy zapping and it's quite possible Chelsea might try to get us chasing them, hitting us on the counter. Would prefer the final 10 minutes not to be spent chewing my arm.

Hoping King plays. Suggestion is he will. Unclear on Lennon, even though some quarters are stating he's on the bench. We've got a decent record at home against them recently, so a point would be good. Three would be faint-inducing, but - and brave this one out - if we are left empty-handed it won't be the end. Mainly because of the other fixtures being played, but would prefer our destiny to be guided by our achievements rather than the failings of others. The potential failings. Shocks can disrupt proceedings, as some have recently discovered.

Wilson still banned. Corkula a no-go. Has Danny Rose recovered from his knock? Bare bones, Harry would have you know. All I ask is for the same guile and intelligence, the same heart and desire. And some of that magic and clinical punishment displayed in the NLD. And more of The Gomes Show please.

Another London derby. Another noisy day at the office. This is the life.

COYS.

MOTD - The irrepressible beast and the unmoveable object

by guest-blogger Tricky

Football; a lot of us watch it live, some of us listen to it and some of us have to be content with the ‘highlights’. But how much of a true representation is it and how do different media streams of the Beeb get their point across. And who chooses what gets missed out?

Well starting with Radio 5 Live it's exactly that (a true representation); on the spot, full coverage, all incident and aspect considered, often to the nth degree bordering on trivia quiz.

The Beebs live internet format is a relatively new, but in essence is simply a web based version of Ceefax (if you don’t know what that is just ask your dad, if you don’t know who your dad is give Jeremy Kyle a call) with more info.

But what of the much loved MOTD? After all condensing a 90 minute game into 11mins of highlights and 3 minutes of ‘analysis’ requires a lot of editing, but for some it is an institution. But surely the Beeb are an impartial neutral, able to report with objectivity and without bias. So if anyone can they can, right?

But then again this is a programme where - for what seems like eternity - they have employed two pundits who were given carte blanche to wax lyrical about their old clubs, so you have to question their bias in the first place on that point.

      Lawro and Hansen hard at work analysing

And the integrity of the new kids on the block? Well, I only have to ask what sort of genius would employ an irrepressible beast who has a ‘face for radio’ to help analyse the game? (Do they not know that I watch the repeats on a Sunday morning and have to eat breakfast sometimes faced with the gargoyle love child of ‘Sam the Eagle’ and Andi McDowell?)

So is MOTD a true representation of the game or it is edited to buggery with intentional bias?

Well, last Sunday I managed to watch the first half of Sunderland vs. Man City, and then listened to the second whilst in the car on 5 live. Now a certain Mr, Shaun Wright-Wright Phillips had, by all accounts, a woeful game and was the cause of the head shaking by Mancini who couldn’t believe how wasteful with his possession he had been, and then the radio covered an incident.

Now this incident bought into question the competence of the referee, (The radio 5 commentator said at the time the ref “bottled” making the correct decision which would have led to the dismissal of Wright-Wright Phillips) and how one moment could affect the course of a game.

For those that didn’t hear /see it; Born of frustration WWP effectively handled the ball whilst it was in play, already on a yellow and a goal down, the ref simply restarted and looked across to the bench as though he had been expecting a substitution to occur as his ‘get out of jail free card’. Sunderland can perhaps feel a little hard done by.

And so later on when watching MOTD2 I was interested to see, err, nothing. No reference to it, nada. There was time for a little montage of woeful shooting, but an actual incident that could have altered the context of the game. Not an iota of coverage at all. Nada, just an extra minute spent on the equalizer (not the late Edward Woodward) and how Adam Johnson might now be ‘a contender for the World cup squad.

So now, if you read the online match report on Beeb or watched the highlights you would be forgiven for thinking from the comments made on MOTD by the commentator that Adam Johnson’s inclusion was just a tactical change.

Now taking a step back from the ‘one game mentality’ for one moment, we all know that any given season could be said to be nothing more than a series of interconnected ‘incidents’, out of which both the myth of ‘what goes around’ and ‘the conspiracy theories’ are born.

They help form opinion, often about opposing clubs, and with a myriad of sources available who do we tend to believe? The journalists perhaps, after all they were there? But then they’re hardly without bias (just ask the reporters at the standard).

Consequently we all know people who dislike us, not for what we are, but for how we are portrayed, our team, our manager [yet another separate barrel of fish that one] and even our fans. And you can almost forgive some of them, because six different match reports could equally be from different games.

So having watched MOTD objectively I have some new conspiracy theories, time will tell how self fulfilling they become:

-    Is it now policy between now and May on MOTD to always show potential England players in a good light?

-    There must be a Rooney montage available for all end credits?

-    Each show should include the ‘kiss of death’ commentary that Rooney needs to ‘stay fit for the WC if we are to stand a chance’?

-    No wrong decisions by referees will be shown to undermine them (or at least our representatives at the summer WC, can’t think who they might be though)?

-    Do we now ignore the negative aspect of the national teams players, in order to help build up the inevitable furore and ‘national pride’ across the country, as we all believe that our players are without fault 100% of the time?

So what of Gerrard and his investigation by FA? There are those who seem to think that in a World Cup year certain players are ‘untouchable’, but it should make no difference, surely? But will it be ‘carpet and brush’ as in previous years or is this the next ‘Terrygate’? (edit: Spooky: FA have turned a blind eye much like the ref who was staring at the incident when it happened)

And what of the neutrals? Those of us who follow the game and for whom day to day banter with opposing fans in an office or out with friends and family is often based upon these half truths.

Well, as Day of the Triffics pt2 has shown (link to his rundown of Webb-isms from Blackburn match report) the fans remember the incidents, in their own way and from their perspective, so when you next watch MOTD maybe a healthy dose of cynicism wouldn’t go amiss.

For me, I will declare my bias accordingly, I still love MOTD, but then if anyone has read my biog Lineker is my childhood hero, so I’m 100% biased on this one.

And if you're looking for a new drinking game, try the ‘triffic game’ with Harry full pre- and post- match interviews, you’ll be on the floor in 90 seconds.