Juande the press will get it right

From the official Spurs site, via JuandeRamos.com, in response to several media outlets running stories suggesting Ramos was shaking his fist furiously in the direction of Levy, and then pointing and saying 'IT WAS YOUR FAULT'. This is Juandes response to the coverage:

"I understand that my comments regarding the sale of Keane and Berbatov have been misrepresented in the UK press. For the record Daniel Levy did not sell these players to make money. They were sold for footballing reasons. The players wanted to change teams because they had the opportunity to play in the Champions League. During my time at Tottenham I always received support from the Chairman regarding sporting decisions to make Spurs an even greater team: I maintain an excellent relationship with him and I am convinced that he is doing everything he can to lead Spurs to a successful future."

Lost in translation perhaps? Whether it's the tabloid newspapers or the broadsheets, it seems its quite acceptable to take a quote, slap a bit of make-up on it, and push it out to walk the streets where it gets picked up for cheap thrills.

I don't know any journalists, apart from one chap (a Gillingham fan) who covers football for a non-national (he has yet to be corrupted by the dark side) so I guess the editorial process allows for mistakes like this because cheap thrills will always be in demand.

Reminds me of one particular TV channel that ran a story about a Barcelona player, and that said player was in talks with Spurs, only to then remove it from their screens and their site and never mention it again, all in a rather zany 10 minutes.

Then again, we can hardly trust anyone in football either. It's not like they don't lie.

Rock. Hard place.

Payment plan for Palacios?

According to Wigan boss Steve Bruce, the size of the fee has been agreed between Spurs and the Latics for holding midfielder Wilson Palacios. But as far as the payment is concerned, Bruce has stated that our dear esteemed chairman wants to pay if over something like 55 years.

Obviously a slight exaggeration. It's probably more like 48 years.

Honestly Daniel. Look for those extra pennies behind the sofa and if need be, smash that piggy bank you've got in your office and try and be a little more reasonable with the offer. Or maybe sell the Opus for a discounted price of £3,500 (bargin!).

Have we run out of those £15M reserve transfer buckets?

Still on the Palacios story, loving the piece in the Daily Mail about how Wilson will reject Spurs and stay at Wigan till the end of the season. That's not the bit I smiled at. The part that says Wigan are reluctant to do business with Spurs - much like Sunderland, West Ham, Pompey and Boro having been 'aggrieved' at the way we have gone about our business.

So let's take a look at how we've gone about it.

Who revealed to the media that a bid had been made for Palacios? Wigan.
Who revealed to the media that bids had been made for Bellamy? West Ham.
Who revealed to the media that a bid had been made for Jones? Sunderland.

As for Downing. All Redknapp did (I'm not too critical of him in this case) was answer a direct question from a journalist. Not exactly with the style of a Rafa or Sir Alex either. After that point, it's Boro who did all the 'talking' via the media.

In fact, I see no 'scatter gun' approach in the way we have gone about our (lack of) business this Jan window. We made enquiries, made bids and that is it. If clubs then want to make comments after the fact, that's their prerogative.

For now, all we can do is sit back and wait for an official word from the clubs in question. Then let the media tell everyone like they knew all along.

Mourinho'ed

Jenas to Inter? Scoff.

Apparently his admiration for Bale and JJ dates back six months when the Daily Telegraph asked him to take part in their Fantasy Football league. He picked the both of them.

Once more, I applaud the nations tabloids, broadsheets and Sky Sports News for re-inventing old news. Does nobody confirm quotes and comments drafted up for print? Or perhaps it's the old nudge nudge wink wink, '......print this and I'll buy you a pint' favour journos do for football agents to help add weight to something that doesn't quite exist.

Jose hinted that the 'quotes' have resurfaced because someone might just be interested in one of his players. I'd prefer not to do the maths on this with regards to where the story got it's re-birth from. You know. Because of the Adriano rumours.

At least it gave us all something to write about, debating how Jenas must be more than decent if the Special One wants him in his side and that us fans are blinded by our lack of true in-game knowledge and know-how that leaves us without sight of just how vital JJ is to the midfield. Riiiiiiight.

Someone needs to follow-up and ask Jose if he's transferred JJ and Bale out of his team since July and who he's replaced them with? Might be a story in there for the red tops.

Allegedly

I'm sure we'll know in time, but there are rumours suggesting that the 11 Tottenham fans charged for you-know-what against Sol Campbell have been pretty much stitched up. Not to go over old ground (for the millionth time) I have no gripes about people being prosecuted for racist chanting or homophobic chanting (although this one is a bugbear for many people who frequent football games - as discussed in earlier posts).

Apparently, of the 11 fans arrested, only 2 have been charged with singing the 'Lunacy' song which has been deemed offensive by the Police and media via Campbell (bite me yeah). The remaining 9 fans (three of which are juveniles ) have been charged with singing one of the following songs:

You can stick Sol Campbell up your arse, Singing we've got Ledley at the back

or

Gay Boy, Gay Boy

Again, I have to stress, this post is simply about this rumour and I'm not suggesting it's fact and will be interested to see what the charges amount to once the guilty appear in court. The 'gay boy' chant is crude but is hardly worth prosecuting people for. Seriously, its ridiculous. Songs about gassing the Jews (can we retrospectively bring charges against thousands of Chelsea and West Ham fans dating back to the 1970's?) and Harold Shipman, Munich, Ronaldo dying in the tunnel and a ton more with homophobic connotations relating to several Prem players sang by most clubs that never appear to fathom complaints from the targeted footballers are completely ignored because as wrong as they are, they are right in the footballing stadia arena (although that appears to be changing. No more common mans muck for us).

Apparently the following is from an e-mail sent by Spurs to a fan. Again, pinch of salt, as it's just an extract, but if you remember the Trust meeting from a few weeks back, Spurs did make it clear that they did not think the charges against the Spurs fans were fair.

We do not believe our fans to be guilty of racism and believe that the media organisations that originally carried the story under that misapprehension have now amended their copy. We have actively promoted our stance that the song is not racist within the media.

If anyone has e-mailed the club, feel free to share the response.

Christ only knows how volatile and intense the atmosphere will be on Sunday. Personally, 3 points and a good performance is all I care about. We need to rise above it, but you get the feeling the police and stewards will be very active and fans (both sets) will exchange colourful words - but nothing more than the usual for a game that includes former players/managers up against the club they left.

Campbell, will no doubt have unbelievable abuse (I'm talking about the level of noise) aimed at him. I can guess already the four letter word on everyone's lips (it's neither racist or homophobic, well, not until Campbell complains and the Daily Mail run the story).

It's 'Redknapp'..spelt..HOUDINI

So, according to Harry Redknapp, he’s a better coach than O’Neill and Sir Alex. Been in the business for 28 years, so he must be right, right? According to the News of the World all this. But how relevant is it? All managers/coaches get interviewed, and most of the time they mouth off various sound-bites, all in the aid of kidology or egotism. Hoping that this particular masterful pat on his own back was an attempt to deflect attention away from his players. Even though he was gladly attracting attention to them when slating them for yet another poor display. You keeping up with this?

Pinch of salt should always accompany a Redknapp quote or interview. Does he love the sound of his own voice? Yes. Does he love talking to the media? Yes. He’ll even phone them up now and again and give them an exclusive. Does it all serve a purpose? Yes. But that purpose is dependent on how much (or little) you trust his agenda.

He’s in it for himself, that, there is no doubt. But then most are – more so modern day players. He also knows how to keep the press sweet, which explains the non-stop media assault. But what he does best does have to do with his responsibilities as coach.

He plays the blame game to a tee, banging on about how the squad he inherited is unbalanced and lacking in depth and how the whole universe is conspiring against him as he attempts the impossible with bare bones Tottenham.

Ferguson is the master of kidology. Redknappology is altogether a different thing. Our ‘arry manages to engineer and bend reality to aid his untouchable public persona. Immunity to criticism is a wonderful tool to possess. Harry Houdini. You know him right? He failed to oversee the escape from relegation for Southampton.

The Daily Mail (stop laughing) who seem to always have some kind of insider story or exclusive that never quite pans out to be true (can you believe?) have one such story today about how Harry launched a tirade of abuse at the Spurs players after the Wigan game.

Transcript?

'I don't think you love the ******* game’
'I think you ******* are here for the money, I don't think you give a ****. You, do you give a ****?'
'You? You're the ******* worst of the lot!'

I’m not suggesting for a second this never happened, because it’s the exact type of thing you would hope a manager tells the players after a defeat like the one at Wigan. But if the transcript is word for word correct, then my money is on a cheeky little chappie by the name of Harry calling it in, because once more all eyes are on the Spurs players as the ones who should be blamed. And again, to a degree, they should be responsible. But just how far will this subtle finger pointing go? How far will Harry allow it to go?

You can see it now. Spurs get relegated and it’s all down to those pesky uninterested Spurs players. Harry Houdini walks away, chains left behind for someone else to pick up and tie up the next clueless mug.

Has Defoe signed yet?

Can't Spurs ever just sign a player, straight-forward transfer, parading him only after the ink has dried? Nah. Not fucking likely. No official word yet, so the tabloids are stirring it up with rumours about no fee agreed and legal issues with Spurs re-signing Defoe so soon after selling him.

Personally, find this a little more interesting, and far more likely:

Tottenham also inserted a sell-on clause when they sold Defoe, which entitled them to a percentage of any future transfer fee. Given the sums involved, that would have amounted to £4m. But Portsmouth negotiated that figure into the final package while the monies that they already owed to Tottenham in instalments on previous transfers were factored in as well.

Portsmouth were due this month to pay the balance on Defoe's transfer to them, a figure of £4.5m, while they also owed £5m on the switch that Younes Kaboul made last summer and £2m on Pedro Mendes' transfer in January 2006.

Little money has actually changed hands on Defoe's return to White Hart Lane but Portsmouth sources are satisfied they have made a £6m profit on him in just under a year. They also received £5m from Tottenham in compensation when Redknapp traded places.

Spurs are stupid, but not stupid enough to parade him before a game. And Pompey are broke and need the cash. It's done.

Oliver Holt

Holt, Daily Mirror journalist and Sky Sports Sunday Supplement melter, thinks the pressure that Paul Ince is under at Blackburn and the abuse he is getting from sections of the home support is simply because of the colour of his skin and has nothing to do with the former MK Dons boss being completely out of his depth. His argument is that Roy Keane was not subject to the same treatment from the fans at Sunderland.

This bloke actually gets paid by a tabloid newspaper and a tv broadcaster to write and speak his views. All these years, all the job opportunities I've had - if I had known that all I needed to do was pull my pants down, stick my arse in the air and fart shit every time I had an opinion I'd be laughing myself all the way to my pension. People in the media who get paid to commentate on weekly events in football are no different from the thousands who frequent message boards (apart from the fact they get paid, obviously). Some talk sense, some talk a lot of sense, the rest are trolls. Any takers on which one Oliver is? It's not the ones who talk sense. And no chance is it the ones who talk a lot of sense. Its the troll. He's a troll. Oliver Holt is a troll. Troll, if you're still not getting what he is.

Morning

According to SSN, Harry wants rid of Pav, but nobody is interested. 1 goal in every 2 games Pav obviously doesn't know where the back of the net is, the lazy Carlos Kickaball. How dare he not settle in London and average 2 goals per game from the off. Considering the lack of depth we have upfront, this is yet another example of lazy unnecessary reporting which has no relevance to anything other than filling up a couple of hours of time in between all the rehashed-every-20-minutes of non-event headlines going into the weekend that Sky Sports News drowns in.

Ramos, apparently wants Adam Johnson. I kid you not. Madrid obviously going for a next generation galactico.

Elsewhere, forgot to mention yesterday the Jamie Redknapp to Chelsea story. He's apparently coaching reserve players twice a week (so sadly he'll be free to pundit on Sky Sports over the weekend). Massive massive move there for Jamie, and no doubt he'll continue to be impartial when discussing his cousin Frank Lampard, Chelsea, Liverpool and his dad at Tottenham. I don't know about you, but if I'm out at White Hart Lane and miss whatever is being televised I rush home after the final whistle, and sit in-front of the tv with my wank-rag watching Jamie tells us how it is in that ever handsome yet definitely not clichéd manner he has when he insightfully tells us he can see a chess game when all we can see is 45 minutes of fucking crap. Surely our Jamie would have been a better bet than Tim 'I hate Spurs unless they are paying me wages and all the slagging off I did about them on the radio didn't really happen' Sherwood.

We've lost out big time there people. Big time.

Challenge Spurs™ - I really really love Sky Sports, I really do

We won. 1-0. Pav with another goal (that's 6 in 9 now). Great first half performance, but couldn't score that second which would have made it just a little bit less of a 'Oh God please no last minute equaliser' type of afternoon.

Second half, with Rovers down to 10 men was still fairly comfortable thanks to their inability to push forward and apply any type of pressure. Lennon, was in cracking form. Hasn't just put in pacey performances here and there this season, he's actually playing decently week in week out. Another reason to pat Harry Redknapp on the back.

Out of the bottom three, for the second time, and up to the giddy heights of 14th. Nosebleeds all round.

Now the match review is out of the way, let's get down to the business of ironic cheering and Sky Sports who pride themselves on hype and bullshit. See, a game of football is never enough for them. They have to take something and turn it into something else and do their best to make sure it builds a nice bit of momentum so that Sky Sports News have something to talk about every 30 minutes. Although (ironically) we have ourselves to blame for cheering in this manner in the first place, thus given them opportunity to run with it.

Spurs fans cheered with smiles on their faces every time Gomes got hold of the ball without a fumble or flap in sight. Now usually, ironic cheers like these are kept for the visit of David James. These type of cheers are blatantly tongue-in-cheek piss-takes. Because for all of James ability to drop a clanger, he can pull a mighty fine world-class save out of the bag. And we know it. Much like he knows it. There's no argument that these type of cheers are of an ironic nature. And YES, its not the cleverest thing for Spurs fans to do the same thing for their own keeper, because of the way it will be misconstrued.

However, to suggest Spurs fans this afternoon were cynical or negative to Gomes is mountain out of a mole hill ridiculous. That includes you Harry (who mentioned it in a post-match interview). Abusive language and booing is far worse than ironic cheering. And I'll prove it to you.

Back to the suggestion that this form of pisstaking is moral draining is it of the same level as the the Sky Sports Soccer Saturday panel do when they laugh and giggle and make jokes at Gomes expense? If Spurs fans 'hated' Gomes or did not want him in the side they would boo and shout abuse whenever he got the ball, not cheer or sing his name or applaud him - all things that Sky prefer not to mention because if they do, there's no story to be told.

People who publish photos on the back pages of the papers with clever and witty headlines, ridiculing a man for millions of people to read about is something I'd wager more likely to hit his confidence than a few hundred people cheering at a game.

Touched upon it a moment ago, but no mention of the same Spurs fans singing 'We love you Gomes, we do'. Why? Was this an editorial decision to make Spurs fans look bad? How about a news item on the constant booing the Arsenal home fans dish out to their own players. Or are they being ironic?

[ repeating myself ] Ironically cheering an opposition keeper for simple ball handling is what it is - a piss take. [ / repeating myself ]. When you do it to your own, its not the brightest of ideas even when meant in good-humour. But its far from being devastating. Much like Spurs fans singing 'England's Number One' to Robbo last year when he was complete shit. Surely that could be deemed ironic too? No? Robinson appreciated it, much like the positive applause he got from us today (he throw his gloves into the Spurs crowd......on purpose, they didn't slip off his hands).

For every Gomes fuck-up, he's made 3 or 4 great great saves. Doesn't excuse his fuck-ups, but one or two media hacks should concentrate on the facts rather than soap opera sub-plots. That includes Match of the Day 2 this evening.

Facts?

We sang his name.
He acknowledged us at the start of both the first and second halves of the game, during the game and after it when he APPLAUDED THE FANS.
The fans behind both goals stood up and applauded him.
He even managed a 'thank you' in our direction and was the last Spurs player off the field at the end of the game, having celebrated the three points with the home faithful.

This is Spurs AND Gomes sticking a middle finger up to the armchair pretty-boys and shaved-gorilla(s). I'd say its best next time to leave out the irony, but it was clear to anyone with their eyes and ears open that Gomes was just fine, got over his early mishap missing the ball completely and grow stronger in confidence as the game progressed.

So, fuck you Sky Sports.

And now back to Challenge Spurs™.

13 points in the bag now, halfway through the Dirty Dozen. Still part of the yo-yo that is 20th - 11th, and currently sitting in at 15th spot. Home win next weekend is once again imperative. But can't argue with our current form, even if we are still way way off playing at full capacity. And talk of Europe is still not acceptable.

Everton at the Lane next.

Shaggy

Darren Anderton, old shaggy, remember him? Decent bloke, decent player, plagued with one or two injuries. He said some rather interesting things in the papers recently about his career, including one or two digs aimed at our emperor, Daniel Levy.

Dazza, back in 2004, had a verbal offer for a new contract at Spurs. He was out in the US seeing a specialist about an injury that had seen him sidelined for 2 months. He received a fax from the UK, from a secretary, that simply said:

“We won’t be renewing your contract”

Classy. No phone call. No waiting for a UK return. Just one line of text faxed across the Atlantic. Dazza made sure Levy knew what he thought of the fax. Levy, in response, told Dazza that the club had to make a decision between offering him a contract or Jamie Redknapp. What makes this another perfect illustration of the detachment from footballing reality and Levy’s brain is that the excuse given to Anderton was that Redknapp and his wife were settled in the area, compared to Dazza who was obviously still waiting to settle having lived ‘in the area’ for 12 years.

Yeah sure. Santini (remember him? Christ, why do I still remember him?) didn't want him, so out went Shaggy. But regardless of whether it's up to the clubs discretion on what injury plagued player to retain, it's no way to treat someone who had spent over a decade at the club.

To make matters worse, Levy (at a later date) said that Anderton could have a testimonial only to then find out that the team would be on an end-of-season tour to Malaysia. A testimonial without the actual squad of players representing the club is not a testimonial. Its one man on his own in an empty ground.

It’s a bit of a shame really. He was a loyal and much liked player. Dazzled us a few times too, regardless of the injuries he was one bright spark during a period of time where we didn’t too often shift forwards in the right direction as a club, so had to make do with the odd stand out game(s) here or there as a way to cope with the overall barren, desolate plains of nothingness that us Spurs fans had become accustomed too. He did leave us with a few decent memories. The Famous Five, the Klinsmann season, Euro 96, early 2002 form.

Anderton is still kicking a ball about for Bournemouth. So all the best Dazza/Shaggy/Sicknote, and maybe, like you want, you get to visit the Lane with your current club in the FA Cup. Not quite a testimonial, but close enough.

Top 4 Bias

"Hope for a Liverpool goal for the sake of a good finish"

Yes, over at Setanta Sports the usual pro-Top 4 biased commentary kicked into over-drive. As per usual. Obviously they agreed with the Liverpool fans that the Bale tackle should have led to a penalty and thus moaned about "The overall poor reffing (sic) of the entire game" adding that "Rafa has every right to be disappointed" (That's Rafa, first name terms there - our man was always referred to as Redknapp).

On came the usual soundbites defending the defeat. Rafas shadow side/second string/youngsters apparently 'outplaying us' on occasions against an 'experienced Tottenham side'.

Sky's commentary from their SKY Live Score Centre bore more of the same:

"Boateng runs into the track of Babel but somehow earns himself a free-kick"

"I hardly dare say it, but it looks like Spurs are there now - the quarter finals await"

Hardly dare say what? The result was never in doubt and was fully deserved. I'm sure if Liverpool had won we would have heard about Rafa's brilliant selection of randoms out-smarted Tottenham's first eleven. As for Boateng, he was fouled. Or is it not permitted to be a victim?

I can forgive the Daily Mail for telling everyone that we were lucky against City and even going back to the Arsenal game (they cant kill a team off) and the Liverpool result (they don't know how to score) and can doubly forgive them for having four photographs from the 4-4 derby, three of which were Arsenal players celebrating their goals. I can forgive them because the Daily Mail is a rancid mess of a cuntness.

Setanta and Sky should try to break their mould once in a while. Match of the Day too. But then the whole point is that the 'elite' deserve the coverage they get because they are the best in the land. But the bias which is blatantly apparent within the coverage is now beginning to bore me.

It's ok for Liverpool to lose games, it really is.

The Blame Game

Wenger is all guns blazing, supporting his old chum Comolli claiming DC is nothing more than a scape-goat for the Spurs boo-boys. Really? Not his fault? So who's fault is it? Because if you take note of various other newspaper articles and interviews it seems the blame doesn't sit with anyone at the Lane.

Sugar stuck up for Levy.
Ballague stuck up for Ramos.
Wenger for Comolli.

Friends looking after friends can be dismissed based on factual evidence.

Comolli has failed to address the main squad issues relating to the DM position, no left-winger, two right-wingers, no strikers. He didn't support Martin Jol and our squad is no stronger than it was a year/two years/three years ago. Is he a director of football or a mediator between chairman and manager?

Levy has sanctioned the deals that have taken place and is probably responsible for the ones that got away. His whoring for extra cash on the Berbatov deal is textbook.

Ramos, whether effected by the terrible twosome or not, has struggled to get to grips with the domestic game.

You don't get bottom of the league from bad luck. You get there because you deserve to be there.

Wenger should mind his own business and concentrate on giddiness and superlatives for his super team of super super kids.

Leave the commentary to the people who own the dramatics.