Here’s some more of the thought provoking piece by our old mate, author and journalist Martin Cloake.
In this installment (and believe me there will be more) Martin looks at getting to and from the ground and the buzz phrase of our generation, the ‘Olympic Legacy’.
One ‘issue’ with Tottenham’s current ground is transport links. It’s taken as given that they are ‘poor’ and that substantial improvement is needed. This in turn feeds into the argument about Stratford having better links due to the Olympic infrastructure works. But take a breath here.
There are five mainline rail stations and one tube station within walking distance of White Hart Lane. Driving is a problem, but driving anywhere in London is a problem. Congestion at White Hart Lane rail station and Seven Sisters tube can be bad, but not as bad as the congestion outside the Emirates stadium which sees Holloway Road tube closed and Highbury and Islington overwhelmed on match days.
The problem with getting to White Hart Lane is that the, and this is obviously a personal opinion but one based on bitter experience, greedy and incompetent people who allegedly ‘run’ the transport system in this country are in charge of it. That’s why trains are regularly cancelled for engineering work on days when 36,000 are expected to use them to get to Spurs, why short trains are scheduled and why timetables are so bad.
To get to Stratford, punters on public transport will have to use services provided by the same greedy incompetents – who will doubtless be on their best behaviour for the Olympics but return to providing the kind of transport ‘service’ that has made this country a laughing stock afterwards. While maintaining profits, of course.
Even driving may not provide the answer, for to get to and from Stratford’s swanky new roads people will at some stage have to use the less than swanky old ones such as the A10, North Circular, M25, A13 etc. So I need some convincing about this transport thing. One thing a European tour does show us fans is how a transport system can work when a country has the sense to realise it is a key service rather than another commodity.
Having whipped up a storm of condemnation for the plans to demolish the Olympic Stadium should Spurs be awarded it, the club is addressing the criticism that this betrays the legacy promised by the London organisers. So much is being made of plans to refurbish the crumbling Crystal Palace Stadium – ironically very close to the site of Tottenham Hotspur’s historic 1901 FA Cup win when the club became the only non-league side to win the trophy. (In my mind’s eye I can see the club’s PR guru scribbling that one down). That’s going to be funded from profits made by the new stadium. Really?
The first, and obvious, question is how long will it take for the new Spurs football stadium to generate enough money to refurbish Crystal Palace? Then there’s how long will it take to build? How long a gap does this leave between an existing athletics facility at the Olympic Stadium being torn down and the new one going up?
And how much of a priority will funding and building that facility be for a club (hopefully) still competing at the top of English and European football, with all the financial resources that involves?
You don’t have to be a professional cynic to have more than a few doubts.
Re boring old Stratford, I agree with Martin Cloake that there is no real evidence that public transport will be any more efficient in moving 60,000 people to and from the east than to and from the lane.
It seems obvious now that all the athletics legacy bollocks was just another line to convince the IOC and the public that we should have the Olympics and the irony now is that if we get Stratford we will probably be saving the Pikeys and the Porn kings from financial suicide.
old bob keane really is the psb through and through,on the pitch as well as in the transfer window.now hes pointing and shouting at the brummies.dont know how his wife puts up with it.hed be a nightmare watching the news.
Proper honest ITK from me.
I was out having a beer with a mate earlier when we got chatting to a lad at the bar. Turns out that he was Kevin Bond’s son, Jack (Kevin Bond lives in a very nice village called Chilworth, just outside Southampton, about 3 miles from me).
Obviously pushed him for any info but said he didn’t know much that was happening. However, one interesting piece of info he did say was that Pienaar was brought in because ‘Arry doesn’t think that Lennon will ever improve his final ball, so the two of them will be fighting for the RM slot.
Sorry it’s not real proper ITK shit, but it’s an insight into ‘Arry’s thoughts. Lennon off in the summer?
That’s about the first thing that makes sense about the buying of Mr Pinata, err Peanut. I still hope in all hope though that these wage claims in the paper are out by at least £40,000.
“‘Arry doesn’t think Lennon will ever improve his final ball…”
‘Arry’s right, in my reluctant opinion. But why put Pienaar there at 70,000+ a week, or whatever, when there’s Townshend, pretty good already, on a positive learning curve (which is why we brought him back) and nowhere near as expensive?
Would have thought Kevin Bond would have wised ‘Arry up, but then again, as they’re both in the same bed with Crouchie it’s hopeless to expect objectivity and persuasive power from Kevin.
I agree as well. Lennon beats his man more often than not, but delivers a decent ball once every other game (if we’re lucky).
Huge difference between Pienaar & Townshend. Pienaar is ready to rock ‘n’ roll, which is what we need this season with PL & CL massive.
I would have thought Bentley not too far off the money Pienaar is on, so not much difference to wage bill. When PSB, O’Hara, Gio et al disappear, we’re quids in.
I do think it will be interesting to see how it affects Lennon, as he has had no real competition for the RM spot. I would think we could get £25m for him in the summer, which I would take.
I agree with that. Townshend has potential, but this is a “right now” type of season if we want to stay in the CL places. ‘Arry’s a bit of a gambler, but will still seek to minimize risk as much as possible. Pienaar is a “known” while Townshend represents risk.
Townsend is left footed. Play him on the right and I suspect he will end up cutting back inside, rather than going down the line.
As you say, Pienaar is ready to go now, Townsend hopefully in a year or two.
When we play AC Milan in the first leg, Jenas is banned and Hudd not likely to be fit.
Would rather keep Lennon, unless we are offered stupid money.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUuUZH9eZro
It’s a showreel. The music’s sh*t.
However, Josip Ili?i? is his name. And I like the look of him.
I actually posted this about a week ago, it was the last contribution on a previous thread. I’m kinda hoping Harry is going to revert to his old habits and not post a story for a couple of days just so someone shares their views. :freu
We need a midfielder, don’t we? This one scores.
Has Croatian ancestry. :daumen:
He’s got a tasty left peg on him, and seems obsessed with the numbers 2 and 7.
Apparently he only cost Palermo €2.3 million a few months ago. We could give them a quick profit – maybe give them ***** in part exchange? Hehehe. That way ***** can also put all that Italian he’s been learning to good use, too!
Cue new thread emerging any second…