The Truth Has Spoken

[talkshowhost86]

Well, the point in the article was that we gave away a 2-0 lead due to the lack of strikers on the bench, which was facilitated by the lack of signings due to the financing of the stadium.

Didn't we start to give away the 2-0 lead when our biggest Summer signing gave away a penalty?

Perhaps a bigger lack of signings may have helped us there!

 

[talkshowhost86]

If only we had a striker in the squad other than Harry Kane that could hold the ball up and help us keep possession at 2-0.

Oh wait, Poch didn't put him in the 25.

Really?

No I mean actually....really?!

 

[CowInAComa]

Well, the point in the article was that we gave away a 2-0 lead due to the lack of strikers on the bench, which was facilitated by the lack of signings due to the financing of the stadium.

Which is patently nonsense

 

[kaz Hirai]

Really?

No I mean actually....really?!

To be fair he would have actually done a better job than chadli but who knows what he's like personality wise apart from those in the club

 

[CowInAComa]

A bigger net spend wouldnt have crumbled to Stoke

 

[thelak]

I read this article and it sounds so logical and sensible... But then I remember the last time we really actually spent anything without recouping it in transfer fees was 2010 when we got in the CL and we signed Van Der Vaart and Sandro (and hardly did the upgrade on the team we could have). So either we have been saving up for this stadium a hell of a long time or this is the way things are done at Spurs and articles like this are suggesting we have had a golden period of investment that lead to the relative success we had when that is not true