Support Triffic On Facebook

Sep 162013

A bit of a rehash on an old article I wrote on this before, but I feel it needs re-telling…

Two sections here:


Once again, there’s been another call by the FA to clamp down on football-focused racism, but a more specific type. Another can of worms has been opened about the term ‘Yiddo’ being used simply because opposition fans have been known to chant anti-Jewish songs at Spurs fans. However, this is ruining it for Spurs’ own fans who adopted the term ‘Yiddo’ to defuse the racist element behind the original insult.

Take a look at the video:


In the advert, there are Chelsea fans featured chanting an anti-Jewish take on ‘Spurs Are on Their Way to Wembley’. They have used the word ‘Yids’ in the lyrics. Let me remind you now that had the word ‘Yids’ been replace with the word ‘Jews’, the snippet would not have been featured and the chant would go on unnoticed as it had done for the last 30 years!

As both a Spurs fan and a descendant of Adam, Eve and everyone’s favourite biblical drunken-Uncle–who takes the command ‘sacrifice’ way too seriously–Abraham [in Lehman’s Terms–A Jew], I feel that I am certainly better-placed to wade in on this than the FA and the Society of Black Lawyers (yes, a slightly divisive name for an organisation who want racial equality yet call themselves something so non-inclusive).

Tottenham Hotspur and the FA waded in to personally help David and Ivor Baddiel – Jewish Chelsea fans [I know, the irony of it] – create that rather hypocritical short advert about what shouldn’t really have been an issue and is aimed at the wrong club. Ledley King and Gary Lineker starred in that advert, two Spurs legends who were (and still are) constantly referred to as the very thing they’re so ‘disgusted’ at in the advert!

Lineker and King never complained about it while they were playing for us and they shouldn’t even complain now. When Spurs fans chant ‘Yiddo’ at their players, it’s meant as a sign of affection for that player and an indication that they are fan favourites there, one of ‘us’. Surely, Lineker and King couldn’t forget that so speedily without a bit of arm-twisting…

What’s even stupider is that this harmless term is considered as offensive as the N-word (which is really just an abbreviation of ‘Negro’ which is the Spanish word for ‘black’) and the P-word (which is really an abbreviation of ‘Pakistani’ that got out of hand). The very assumption that those two words are comparable to the ‘Y-word’ is ridiculous, particularly when the supposedly ‘offended’ group are NOT offended by the term anymore and additionally call themselves that!

I think that whilst there is an unsavoury connotation with the term ‘Yid Army’ being the name for the hooligan fan firm of Tottenham Hotspur, the terms ‘Yid Army’, ‘Yiddo’ or ‘Yids’ are used regularly by Spurs fans to give themselves a nickname which is as harmless as ‘Gooners’ (Arsenal), ‘Luddites’ (Leeds United), ‘Hammers’ (West Ham United‘ or ‘Fans-who-are-getting-annoyed-with-wasting-millions-on-going-nowhere-and-laying-off-good-managers’ (Manchester City).

The club said in their statement:

“A small number of both Jewish and non-Jewish Spurs fans use the Y word in what they consider to be an inoffensive manner…”

Well that would be true if you consider 30,000 in a stadium plus hundreds of thousands worldwide as ‘small’! What a naive assumption. It’s more popular than you think.


“…We look forward to an informed and proper debate with Kick it Out, stakeholders and the key authorities to raise greater awareness….”

Why not consult the actual fanbase as well? Or do the club fear losing the argument? I mean, they recently had the nerve to pursue legal action after the OPLC decided to let West Ham have the stadium which 2/3 of Spurs fans don’t even want. Spurs’ directors’ board would have nothing to lose, now that they’ve further alienated those around them.

“We are committed to eliminating all forms of racism and we shall support efforts to kick anti-Semitism out of the game.”


1)Yiddish’ is a language! A fusion of Hebrew and German still spoken and referenced today.

Are the FA going to make us call it ‘Y-word-ish’ now? What schmerals they are, kvetching about such ein kleyn word.
Sometimes I just want to patsch them in their punims.

2) The term Yiddo was coined by us to defuse the anti-Jewish connotation behind the original insult coming from the likes of Chelsea for example.

What kind of club representative doesn’t know their club’s own history and demographics?

I could do a better job than that! Tottenham Hotspur’s suits need to listen to fans more to gain a more realistic perspective of what the consensus is and how serious something is perceived to be. Otherwise, backlashes occur.

However, naming the hooligan firm ‘The Yid Army’ has thrown a real spanner in the works. That is the only thing I don’t like about the term ‘Yid’. It has been attached to what is an unnecessary and unsavoury part of football–effectively becoming a football-bourne type of extremism.

3) Whoever named the club’s hooligan firm ‘The Yid Army’ is the real idiot/are the real idiots in all this.

(And now time for something slightly different, but somewhat related)…



The initiative mentioned above is an offshoot of a policy that the FA have re-ignited time and time again, which is the one about fans’ behaviour. The FA have tried to direct football’s appeal at families with younger children.

It’s the same thing as last time. The timing of the last attempt was suspiciously synchronised with Rooney’s match ban for shouting down a camera lens at some magic pixie who shouted ‘OI, Shrek! Why couldn’t you score like that in South Africa, then!?’

‘Kick [insert blown-out-of-proportion issue here] Out’ is a ploy to try and keep the ‘family-friendly’ atmosphere in football.

It’s obviously an act of bowing to pressure growing pressure from far-left-wing people [who are far-right-wing people in disguise to be honest] to ‘kick racism/swearing/whatever springs to mind next out’ of football.

There’s a lot of imbalance here.

Every club has its moments of distasteful behaviour, some of which is directed at our club’s fans visa-vie the anti-Jewish references. I don’t think it’s as popular now, but for a while, there was a chant from….erm…I don’t know….some Chelsea fans about the gas chambers which went without detection for a while. Even having a Jewish manager didn’t have much effect as Avram Grant allegedly received anti-Jewish death threats after losing the League Cup to Spurs in 2008. And they say it’s not an important cup…?

(I use the term ‘Anti-Jewish’ instead of ‘Anti-Semitic’ as Islam is also a Semitic religion. Anyway, on we go…)

Now I’m not saying for one second that Spurs fans are totally respectful or controlled in their chanting, a shining example being Sol Campbell being labelled as an HIV carrier for the last ten or so years, but there’s still a problem whereby only certain racist chants are highlighted, leaving other club’s fans to sing what they want without responsibility.

As far as I know, Chelsea weren’t drawn into a manhunt after levelling racist abuse, whilst Spurs fans were arrested, questioned and banned from all stadiums over the abuse fired at Sol Campbell way back when Spurs last faced Portsmouth in the Premier League.
So I feel that there should be more done to call out all clubs on this issue and not just pick on certain clubs where it suits the agenda of whoever is running such a campaign. I don’t seem to remember a time when Chelsea’s racist chanting was ever fully addressed, but everyone sure as hell heard about Spurs chanting at Sol Campbell.
I do not condone that. However, I condone double-standards even more fervently.

An update made by Tottenham Hotspur before the second leg of the Champions League against Real Madrid in the 2010/2011 season  started off as follows:

“A reminder to all fans that foul, abusive, homophobic or racist language will not be tolerated at White Hart Lane and that Stewards will take action against anyone heard using such language.”

It doesn’t just stop at homophobia and racism. They have gone further to ”ban” something which will unfortunately for the PC brigade remain in football forevermore, and that’s ‘foul language’ (swearing).

Again, I refer you to the Rooney incident at Upton Park. This is a knee-jerk so that the club appear to be clamping down on swearing once again. They’ve had 20 years or more to reduce swearing amongst the terraces, but it hasn’t done anything and never will.

The big problem is that the children of supporters who swear of course carry this on when they go to watch matches, like this kid:,d.ZG4&psig=AFQjCNEbzmCaAtSY1r2lHW6l8z3S1cebng&ust=1379366384995256

As you can see, the philosophy of keeping football ‘family-friendly’ is well-enforced throughout the world.

Yes it’s Feyenoord, who have been disqualified from the UEFA Cup for bad behaviour in the past, but the middle-finger seems to be a universally-recognised symbol. If the kids swear at football matches, any efforts made to promote a family-friendly atmosphere at all matches are in vain.
Wait, don’t leave yet, Spurs’ official statement about behaviour gets better. By better I mean, there’s even more to chuckle about:

“If you hear anyone within White Hart Lane using this language please report this to the Club by texting the Control Room…For our staff, it is better to monitor the problem as it is happening as we can view the area of concern on CCTV and deal with everything quickly…We do not tolerate discrimination of any sort at the Club, on the pitch or in the stands. If you experience any form of discrimination, help us to eliminate it from football by reporting it.”

I didn’t know the club offered training in lip-reading pixelated CCTV footage in English, French, Dutch, Portuguese AN.

It’s cynical to think that someone would either grass on their own players for foul language/discrimination, let alone fellow fans would have the patience to enter the long-winded text service number (07766 553 225) or have the attention-span of a gnat to email the club about one bad word they heard in the stands during a game which they paid to watch rather than put the censors on for detecting unacceptable language.

Abuse and foul language is a big problem which does of course need containing, but it’s not going to be solved using this witch-hunt approach. Next thing we know, Huddlestone will have the ball around the penalty box, someone will shout ‘SMASH IT’ and a woman will text the Spurs control room about that fan condoning the quote from Andy Gray. Perfect…we’re being asked to snitch on each other.
I’ll tell you now, what’s really ruining football for everyone are the organisations which govern it.”Thou shalt not swear” is not a commandment, but “Thou shalt not give false evidence against thy neighbour” is. Where am I going with this?

Well, some FIFA officials accepted bribes for votes on the hosts of the last few World Cups and Euro tournaments, therefore, they did not select hosts based purely on the strength of their bids, even though they said they were. That’s falseness.

What I am saying is that nobody is going to listen to an organisation who can’t even enforce and set an example of integrity and upkeep of moral guidelines within their own walls.

The FA, the Premier League and others who criticise fans for THEIR actions should look closer to home before playing the role of do-gooder. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Double-standards means double the work to make fans listen to them.

Aug 292013

Just got news that both Erik Lamela and Vlad Chiriches will both be prestented at The Lane tonight! That is why Spurs have not made anything official on their site yet. GREAT!

My source is an old family friend that used to play for the club. Hint: He’s Norwegian.


                             Vlad Is So Happy To Join Spurs!


These are stone cold facts. I never lie when it comes to our dear Spurs!

It’s actually going to be exciting to see a Europa Leauge match for a change, haha, kidding!!


Aug 292013

Marc Overmash confirmed this morning, that Spurs and Danish playmaker Christian Eriksen, have agreed terms , for his contract at WHL.

Tottenham are reported to have offered around £8million for the 21-year-old, but Ajax were still holding out for their initial £12million valuation. Chairman Daniel Levy was in Amsterdam on Wednesday to discuss the possibility of signing the midfielder, who has just one year left on his current contract, and it seems like the talks have gone well between both the parties, and they met somewhere in the middle at £10million


Aug 292013

Marc Overmash confirmed this morning, that Spurs and Danish playmaker Christian Eriksen, have agreed terms , for his contract at WHL.

Tottenham are reported to have offered around £8million for the 21-year-old, but Ajax were still holding out for their initial £12million valuation. Chairman Daniel Levy was in Amsterdam on Wednesday to discuss the possibility of signing the midfielder, who has just one year left on his current contract, and it seems like the talks have gone well between both the parties, and they met somewhere in the middle at £10million


Sep 252012


There were two own goals yesterday. One from Faurlin to level the score for Spurs in the second half, and also one by the boo boys I had the displeasure of listening to in the East Lower [my location] and South Stands. It was HALF TIME when we were a goal down!
I wouldn’t have minded as much if that was the full time result and they couldn’t resist giving the team a hearty booing off until next weekend, but a game lasts for 90 minutes, not 45. Granted some of the football was negative and they could t string an attack or a pass together for toffee in the later stage of the half.
If anything we looked more negative in the second half as we turned Italian, sat back to defend then countered. Even Dembele was standing off the QPR players as they pushed men forward to equalise. Lennon suddenly stopped trying to beat the offside trap and wouldn’t give Walker and Sandro someone to pass to. With all that said, we played below-par and still won, something which is very difficult to do, particularly when coming from behind to win. Friedel and Vertonghen once again saved our backsides.
AVB should be commended for adapting the formation back when his first idea wasn’t working. Maybe he HAS learnt a few things since Chelsea…or the players took on board his reasoning on this team instead.
These boo-boys ought to shut the hell up at least until the full time whistle, if not for good. AVB’s methods are working and we got another three points. Those same morons joined in with the rest of us going bat-sh*t crazy when Defoe scored the winning goal. If they are going to boo halfway through a game, do they have the right to celebrate when the rest of us keep the faith all the way through??
If they are so militant about what the score should be at half time, well…I leave it to you to discuss whether they understand even the most basic rule of football.
AVB’s character and man management/motivation was tested in that dressing room yesterday. He passed. That should be an end to the booing, but hey I am only going to be told ‘I paid to get in, I can do and boo what I please like everybody else’. Well everybody else seems to be able to wait at least until full time to boo or until Christmas to take note of our position in the league.
If the boo-boys think it is so bad, they should sell their season ticket. It is making the atmosphere untenable and the team’s job is not made any easier during the game if all support is lost after 45 minutes. They should get a grip!! It is going to be a long hard slog of a season (when has it not been?) and this is only a transition seaso. Where AVB should be given time to put the feelers out and see what he has to work with. He has done his job so far. Some so-called ‘hardcore’, ‘Tottenham-till-I-die’ “fans” should do theirs by supporting the team throughout the game and waiting a little bit longer for the good times to fully get rolling.
Dear boo-boys brigade:
Basic rule of football – Half time after 45 minutes, score not confirmed (or are you annoyed because Zamora ruined your bet on the half time score….?); full time after 90 minutes.
Basic rule of Premier League football – Season lasts for 38 games, not FIVE games!
That’s your homework for the week – Learn them…preferably in silence!

Sep 132012


The new season is almost four weeks in and already the press are linking a NEW Spurs signing with a move away from the club. Yes it IS Hugo Lloris, who ALLEGEDLY is unhappy with having to compete for one spot in goal with Brad Friedel (along with Cudicini and Gomes let’s not forget – I don’t think they were loaned out in the end). Another angle could be Didier Deschamps voicing his own concerns through the very player he is concerned about.

But again the hacks can’t resist taking a few quotes and twisting them into some instrument they can use to further bully AVB into quitting. Well, it borders on that considering how often they are writing about this ‘non-issue issue’ which Lloris acknowledges comes with the territory when you’re in the solitary role of goalkeeper.

My viewpoint is that Deschamps is carrying on Redknapp’s media-darling work by feeding the media quotes to warp more easily than chicken wire so that it suits their agendas.

Meanwhile, Lloris’ for the experienced keeper he is, probably knows he will have to wait his turn. Yet everyone from the papers and even Sky Sports is assuming that Lloris is being mistreated/undervalued by AVB – the constant in all of this. I wonder if they watched the Norwich game where Friedel saved us from embarrassment in the final minutes where he was one-on-one. They obviously wouldn’t have batted an eyelid in their next back-page-bound (or should I say back-side-bound) articles if Friedel was nonetheless dropped afterwards for Lloris to waltz into the keeper spot without even one Spurs training session under his belt.

It begs the question of how and why these idiot hacks get paid for their column-filling bull-hooks and the real football fan bloggers get mere shrapnel for ad-banners on articles with bags more quality and thought in them.

Don’t get sucked in. I believe Lloris is being professional about the situation and Deschamps should now answer further questions about Lloris with ‘no comment’.

I leave you with this wise proverb I made up:

“If we read everything the papers wrote about football [particularly Spurs at this time] and took each article with a pinch of salt, we would all die of dehydration.”

Aug 272012

Well here we are again fellow Spurs fans, ‘Silly Season’ for transfer stories, and we have not had such a doozie like this Modric saga since Dimitar Berbatov had an all-nighter with Daniel Levy and Alex Ferguson. Real Madrid have rejected a ‘final offer’ of €35million (£28million or $50million for U.S. fans) for the player dubbed as the lynchpin of Spurs’ midfield, Luka Modrić. I’m only slightly unsure about where I stand with this situation.

We are soon to be rid of an unhappy player so that there’s no mass disruption within the changing rooms. Well, maybe Van Der Vaart and Sandro would still duel with twisted-up towels, but I’m talking about disruption of the team’s morale. The money, whatever may be agreed [estimated to be over £30m] would go some way towards equipping us with the gap we have upfront. The space between Peter Crouch’s legs used to account for that until he signed for Stoke. Adebayor is more of a holding centre forward than an actual striker, Defoe cannot possibly fill the striker position every game; and many fans still don’t trust Kane and Coulibaly as far as they can throw them, although, the youth players’ 0-6 mauling of Southend United should have curried some more favour with fans.

Maybe Modric’s transfer money could then be put in Daniel Levy’s Very Rainy/Flooded Day Fund instead. Many say at least one more striker is required to increase options upfront. They are correct.

I’m here to offer some ‘retrospective views’ on this Modric deal.

I’m struggling to see why Madridistas wanted Levy to accept the ‘final offer’ from Real Madrid to transfer Modric from one white/blanco shirt to another. It’s rather paltry considering how Spurs got the Croatian playmaker the exposure to English and European football, not to mention his undisputed passing accuracy and his impact on a match,

The young [and still upcoming] Leandro is only worth £3million less than Madrid’s previous offer for Modric which was £23m. What made the offer more insulting is the fact that the boot was on the other foot for Madrid a little while ago. Their price tag on midfielder Nuri Sahin (currently on-loan at Liverpool) put German club Hoffenheim off. Yet they expected Spurs to lower the value of Modric to suit them. They wouldn’t dream of reducing Cristiano Ronaldo’s value by 1/3 would they. Madrid seem to be using their reputation to try and push Tottenham around in the transfer market. Levy has spearheaded the defence for comparatively ‘smaller’ clubs who are tired of it. It seems like Madrid were in a glass house and started throwing stones.

Madrid cannot, on one end, offer heavily discounted amounts for such talented players from other clubs while hiking up prices of their own players on the other end – I think the famous English idiom of choice here is called ‘having your cake and eating it’. It’s blatant hypocrisy from Real Madrid’s representatives.
Madrid claim they really want Modric but as money talks, it doesn’t look like they’re trying too hard and so it seems like Modric isn’t as vital to Madrid’s progress as first thought. Rather, they are trying to ‘peacock’ their way to a cheaper price using their ‘We’re Real Madrid – Deal with it’ mantra. They aren’t exactly paupers and so would definitely pay the full asking price of £40m if they wanted Modric that desperately. The ball was in their court/net/goalline-technology pilot test, whatever you want to call it.


If the above theory was too conspiracy-like for you, then how about this one:

Levy was trying to ensure Spurs get what they deserve for giving him exposure to the Premier League and European (world-renowned) competitions. There are performance-bonuses which need paying to Zagreb so that’s what the extra money on top may have been for.

Also, I don’t buy into this ‘Modric and Levy had a gentleman’s agreement’ hoo-hah.
Their agreement was if Modric wanted to leave in the future for a ‘bigger club’, Levy would not stand in his way…but then Modric penned an improved six-year deal (doh!). Levy has allowed Madrid to negotiate a transfer for Modric. Agreement fulfilled. He didn’t promise Modric that he’ll be able to tie up a deal.

When a player signs a legally binding contract with the chairman, he too shall not go back on it. Contract means that the player is required to play for the team at all matches when needed unless out through injury, compassionate, etc. leave. I am fully aware of the theory that contracts are worth less than the paper they’re written on nowadays, but it didn’t give Modric the right-to perpetuate it!

Modric unlawfully skipped the pre-season tour of the USA and therefore was already in BREACH OF HIS OWN CONTRACT. Levy was doing nothing apart from going by the letter of the law, upholding the legalities of it, like he would for ANY player of his. Rather that than have renegade players calling the shots and still leaving afterwards a la Berbatov.

Would you go into your boss’ office calling the shots on your pay or giving HIM an ultimatum on possibly leaving for a ‘bigger’ employer without so much as a sit-down and a chat??? Yes, you’d have engineered your own sacking, but there’d be no positive reference for the next employer who takes you on…if any. Football is a business just like whatever company you may work for.

Levy as you know isn’t one to shy away from brinksmanship and he wins most of the time. Resistance is futile. If Madrid wanted Modric so much, they would have paid the FULL asking price. As it stands, they are ‘peacocking’ about how they can have any player they want for half the price because they’re Real Madrid. They are Real alright, but they’re also ‘Mad’ to think that Daniel Levy would’ve got ‘Rid’ for a fraction of the price.

Modric, thank you for your service, good luck in the future. You will need it at Madrid.

Well Madridistas, you have your wish, albeit an unnecessary one.

Good luck with asking Mesut Ozil and Sami Khedira to step aside…

Aug 252012

This is exactly how I felt after the match today. Slightly humbled by West Brom’s second-half performance as the first half for them was nothing to blog about. Let me start by saying it wasn’t a loss, it was a draw. Obviously it won’t wash with a lot of you though. It certainly didn’t wash with the 7,000+ Spurs fans I sat with in the South Stand either. Our maiden home game under AVB was sweetened at half time by an appearance from our new club ambassador and all-out legend, Ledley King. It then appeared to blossom into something gaining momentum when Assou-Ekotto’s ‘have-a-bash-son’ volley broke the deadlock 3/4 of the way through. But cometh the one-and-a-half hour mark, cometh the Morrison from West Brom, who slid a neat shot low  into the right hand side of the net to make everything sour on the stroke of 90 minutes.

In the first half our football was again very tidy and the defence was organised, save for a slight miscalculation by Vertonghen at the back. He made up for his mistake spectacularly with some dogged defending later on.

Livermore did surprisingly well in centre midfield with a hybrid of Parker’s ball-hungry defending and his playmaking which – if I may inflate his ego to bursting point just  for a few seconds – had hints of Modric vision.

Maybe West Brom were given the better half time team talk. They sat back too much in the first half to no avail as Spurd peppered their box with attack, just without the goal to prove it.

In the second half they made use of the counter attack like Spurs did and with Lukaku as the spearhead it looked to be working. Only our centrebacks and Friedel stood in the way and did until the final few minutes when a well earnt three pointer for Spurs turned into despair and a reaction similar to when we lost 0-1 at home to Wigan one summer…in fact, come to think of it, it might be exactly 2 years to the day! Someone please check that…cheers.

All the work we believed AVB had done was unravelled during a frantic defensive scramble to clear the ball from Spurs’ penalty box but it was being pinged around like a hot potato in a pinball machine. Morrison leveled the score for West Brom, cue Arsenal-style mass exodus…

Towards the end, our formation (looked like a 4-5-1) began to deteriorate with Vertonghen moving too far up on his own and Livermore taking his place which opened up a massive void in centre midfield for Lukaku to roam around in; a void so massive that I thought at any moment, he could swing his arms around, twirl and sing a the opening song of ‘The Sound of Music’ on our nice new turf while the subs were coming on.

Not sure if AVB wanted a more total-football approach or Vertonghen thought he’d try one anyway but it almost cost us another game. The substitution of Defoe for Jenas was a daft one to say the least. I know Adebayor needed a position but maybe it could’ve been modified to a 4-4-1-1 to accommodate both strikers. It looked too much like Redknapp’s choice of Parker coming in against Aston Villa when we were trying to take a lead rather than keep one.

I would like to hope that we go from strength to strength – From a loss to a draw to a win. But it will take some major tweaking of the midfield and what should be simple close-range passing.

Saying all that, I would like to say I won’t be too happy if I have to come on here after every loss and defend AVB from fans who already had he long knives out for him before his first pre-season friendly. His building of a team will take time. Rome wasn’t built in a day, Roman never gave him a day. It is one occasion where if we are in such an equivalent as Rome, we should NOT do what that Roman did. It helps neither the team or the media’s coverage of the team. They are the pied pipers leading the torch and pitchfork parade towards AVB on a daily basis just because it’s easy to and  he hasn’t already led Spurs to a 10-0 away victory against Newcastle.

I’m sorry AVB-haters but if you no longer want to ride this roller coaster of stress, despair and appreciated celebration which you’ve come to know well as a Spurs fan, you know where to get off.

Good things come to those who wait. Ain’t that right Abramovich… :-#

Aug 182012


Naaahhh not really; I was getting your attention so that I can somehow ‘bunny hop’ to the defence of AVB on our 2-1 defeat to Newcastle…
I was on a day trip to Liverpool today, which was potentially a perfect destination to rejoice in that wonderful city’s football team suffering at the might of West Bromwich Albion. Case and point – Spurs overall weren’t THAT bad. However, yes a loss is a loss and I’m waiting for the haters to just let rip on Spurs forums across the land about how AVB should already ‘fxxk of and do one already’ along with Levy and Co. Investments Ltd Plc BBC ITV and sons for not bringing a striker in.
The open play at times was quite marvellous. Spurs now have a three-man weave in use which almost led to Defoe scoring a much needed goal early on – something which unfortunately I saw as a key moment in the game. He burst into the box and slid a shot past a wrong-footed Tim Krul. However, it rebounded off the left post and Sigurdsson couldn’t reach it.

The counter attacking where that weave was formed has much improved. After what I’ve seen today, the tactics are almost down to a tee which diverts attention away from our lack of firepower up front. Mind you, Defoe showed his quality with a poached goal after a misfired header from a Newcastle defender got Krul mixed up again and he fumbled the ball towards the right post with Gallas and Defoe closing in. Jermain came in to meet the bobbling ball and equalise for Spurs. The fist-pumped celebration from AVB was slightly heartwarming if not a little overdone.I think that after our shaky defence cost a penalty and eventually the game, fellow fans may now ask either where a new centreback is or more appropriately – Why didn’t Jan Vertonghen start. But that isn’t a question for Levy and Co. Still, the defence tactics still worked this time around, save for Walker ending up out of position when defending after attack and giving too much space to Demba Ba.

It was a tough game, a bad result which will cue cries of ‘there goes our silverware’ or ‘told you we need a striker’, but I don’t think as a team Spurs played a bad game, Demba Ba’s neatly curled goal was one which even Spurs just had to sit back and compliment. And two-on-one defending brought down Ben Arfa in the penalty box. So no real howlers on the goalkeeper’s part or any others.
Defoe – our main striker – did his bit with a poached goal

Just one of those days I guess….oops – shouldn’t say that.


We are doing ok. I judge by home games more as these are usually when the team are much more entertaining to watch and are morally obligated to put on a match-winning performance for the hard-done-by away fans who come home to The Lane where they prefer to be. Wait for our first home game before you get the knives out (if you really need to get them out).


I’m still an AVB-liever. Who’s up for a cuppa (FA or Capital One…)?

Jun 072012

Hi guys.

I play fantasy football regularly on a site called Picklive.

It has been known as ‘fantasy football on crack’ with their ‘live games’ where you pick five players from the teamsheets in a particular televised matchand those players accumulate points in real time based on what they do during the 90 minute game.

OPTA, the statistics company are involved in tracking that activity and logging it for the purpose of converting it to points which can win prizes.

Picklive cover premier league, champions league, europa league and international tournaments like this one.

There are great cash prizes up for grabs using stakes ranging from FREE [no cash prize there] to upwards of a few grand…

But as it’s kind of an ‘off-season’ at the moment and there’s an international event on, Picklive are just holding the normal kind this time. The £2,500 prize pool is one where you pay £15 to make a team of 11 players across ALL TEAMS. But here’s the difference – NO TRANSFER BUDGET LIMIT! 

You heard it right, there isn’t a set budget like the others. So if you want Van Persie, Ronaldo, Nani, Terry and Klose in the same team, you can have them! The only restraint is that you can’t have more than three players from the same country.

PLUS – The prize-pools are only a MINIMUM. If the number of entrants exceeds a certain number in any cash tournament, the prize-pool increases. Prizes are paid out to the top-three places.

In a £1000 Fantasy Football tournament for the final day of the season (£10 Stake).

1st Place – £600
2nd Place – £200
3rd Place – £100

(Picklive took a rake of 10% from the total prize pool)
If you can’t spare £15, which many of u can’t, you can play in a £10 tournament, join mine (£5) , or even create your own and invite others! Choose the stake and the phase in the tournament, pick your team, invite a few mates/office colleagues and away you go.

You can even have a tournament ‘for fun’ and just compete for bragging rights. No cash required.

However, if you sign up using my link – and deposit some cash into your Picklive account, you can get an extra £3 on top. Sounds meager but that is enough for one cash entry where the prize pool is a minimum of £30.

Go to the homepage and scroll down to see the many free, low stake and stupid stakes tournaments available.

Tournaments I’ve set up:

Euro2012 Phase  – Group D
Stake – £5
Prize Pool – £10 (increases if more people join)

Stake – £5
Prize Pool – £10 (increases if more people join)

Email and ask anything you like about how it fully works and
what’s what 🙂

Have fun if you join up!

Good luck!

Jun 042012

Yet another degrading company-sponsored cup...yay...

Old news I know, but it’s once again annoyed me that the Football League Cup is changing sponsor from Carling to Capital One, a Credit Card company.

The Football League Cup has gone through a tonne of names since its inception:

Period                 Sponsor                                          Name

1960–1982 No main sponsor                Football League Cup
1982–1986 Dairy Crest                                         Milk Cup
1986–1990 Littlewoods                        Littlewoods Challenge Cup
1990–1992 Rumbelows                                 Rumbelows Cup
1992–1998 Coca-Cola                                      Coca-Cola Cup
1998–2003 Worthington’s                         Worthington Cup
2003–2012 Molson Coors                               Carling Cup
                                                                          Mickey Mouse Cup*
                                                                                 Tin Pot Cup*
2012–2016  Capital One                               Capital One Cup

*2008 – Present: Informally known to fans by either of those two names. Both widely accepted names
amongst Premier League fanbases. Rumoured to be re-named ‘Crapital One Cup’,
‘Capital Fuck-Cup’, ‘Two Teams One Cup’ or even the ‘Ballina Cup’.

What kind of sales increase are Capital One expecting to achieve by acting like another faceless corporation – desperate for customers who, if they bothered to realise, are trying to pay off their LAST credit card anyway – plastering their logo all over a trophy, which five of the top six premiership teams don’t care about anymore (unless of course they get knocked out of the FA Cup and Premier League title race where all of a sudden it’s worth-winning again) and in truth, was only established as an excuse to test new floodlights in football stadia??

The name ‘[Insert company] Cup’ doesn’t roll off the tongue properly (say each one out loud without cringing and I’ll buy you a pint) and yet those companies’ ideals behind it remain just as cynical as they’ve always been about customers suddenly dropping everything else to buy their products/services. I even got annoyed when presenters of FA Cup coverage had to say ‘The FA Cup…’ and then add on ‘sponsored by E-ON’ and then later ‘with Budweiser’ (which isn’t that good anyway, so no wonder they were desperate to plaster it over anything and everything they could!).

What sponsors of sports events think we think:
WOW, COOL, SUPER, SMASHIN’, GREAT – Capital One are sponsoring the cup now. I’m going to cancel ALL my other credit cards with MasterCard and Visa just so I can sign up to Capital One. They really do connect to me and speak to me now that they’ve plastered their name all over this cup in football, the sport I love so much and watch so often while drinking my Carling Lager and betting on the score at ESPN‘s sponsor Bet365 [as William Hill‘s odds didn’t come on until about 45 seconds before kick-off and by then it would have been too late!] with the money stored in my Barclays bank account, which I maintain at the bank I drive to using the Ford car sponsoring Sky Sports’ live coverage which will be reported in scoreline form on Sky Sports News, by which time I’ll be back at home, sitting in my armchair watching it while sniffing my armpits which have been sprayed with Sure For Men deodorant!

What we REALLY think:
What an absolute fookin joke this trophy is. Bloody corporate advertising vehicle is all it is now. Go buy advertising space in the paper, on the god-awful banners stuck around the edges of our stadiums or on TV like everyone else. Stop ramming it in our faces when we’re trying to escape into the world of watching the footy, drinking and celebrating in a homoerotic fashion when our team scores. Sod off, sports sponsors and sod off, Capital One! Leave these once credible trophies alone. Invest money in another form of advertising. Or better still, form a company football team and WIN the damn thing. You can then have your company name engraved on it for nothing!

BTW, One isn’t even a capital! It’s a number not a letter. Jeez.

“With the glory of cup competitions dying out. Its hard to find high octane gambling at all points through the season. At its cup final day every day with big stakes gaames taking place around the clock”

Apr 152012

Firstly a message for Martin “Double-Vision” Atkinson:

‎”Referee” Martin Atkinson, you are a disgrace to the game. You watched that ghost-goal from a better angle than the linesman and you still give it even though it was NOWHERE NEAR the line!

I hope you can’t sleep tonight after once again propping up the ‘bigger club’ for your own ends and theirs.
I hope you realise the need for a few more refereeing lessons on what is defined as a goal.
I hope you hang your whistle up or put it somewhere really really safe!
I hope you know what I meant by that you double-vision, biased blueblood.
You got it wrong wrong wrong and you know it.

Not taking anything away from Chelsea and Didier Drogba who ravaged us in the end, but that’s not to say
that the second goal (ghost-goal) wasn’t a veritable tipping point for it!!!

Martin Atkinson had the best view of it where there were no players blocking his view, and he gives the goal regardless. Time and time again, we have been screwed over by referees, whether it be over a bad penalty claim, miscommunication of a free kick or goals which in reality were or were not.

How many big games do we have to lose before goal-line technology gets implemented in football or an appeal system is put in place to help referees make better-informed decisions???

I had a look at FIFA’s rather weak arguments for keeping technology out of the game and will demonstrate them one by one, using mainly England’s World Cup defeat in 2010 to Germany as an example. A goal which should’ve been given in one scenario; and a goal which shouldn’t have been given in another scenario.

Apart from pure penny-saving, FIFA have no other valid reason for rejecting every call for such technology to be introduced.

I will make holes in every point FIFA have against it so that they eventually look like Sepp Blatter’s native cheese type—Emmenthal for those enquiring further. For even more information on the topic of Swiss cheese with holes in it, google “Swiss cheese” or alternatively “Diego Maradona’s liver.”

But before that, let us look at their mission statement and what they stand for, besides profit like any business does (even though sport was never meant to be commercialised):


A) “Develop the game…”

HOLE— They have not developed the game much beyond the “silver goal” rule in extra time, as implemented by current president Sepp Blatter.

B ) “touch the world…”

HOLE— Rather than just touching the world, they’ve given it a nasty poke in the eye with full force by trying to save money any way they can, notably by rejecting goal-line technology.

C) “and build a better future.”

HOLE— Any new technology is for the future!

In the past and in the present, officials have had to bare the brunt of outrage when they get a decision wrong and also have to live with it for a long time afterwards (ask that Soviet linesman from the 1966 World Cup Final for more details).

Introducing technology like this will ensure that officials’ decisions are corrected if wrong the first time and prevent backlash because decisions are final and they can change everything in a game.


…Integrity— They ‘ believe that, just as the game itself, FIFA must be a model of fair play, tolerance, sportsmanship and transparency’:

HOLE— Fair play goes out the window when a legal, above-board goal isn’t given and also when a total non-goal is given.


That’s a funny one, considering that they’re not listening to good ideas put before them.

Sportsmanship isn’t there if players are allowed to dive without being disciplined for it by referees being too gullible to deal with weak South American or Ibero-American players in particular.

Transparency means you can see what their true agendas are. Judging by their persistence with rejecting goalline technology, one has to ask whether there’s a hidden agenda somewhere. Their reasons which I’m about to blow holes in don’t ring true to me, hence me blowing holes in them.

So here we go then.

Fresh from the 124th meeting on March 6th of the IFAB regarding FIFA and their position on technology in football are FIFA’s reasons for not implementing goal-line technology.

Take everything written by them with a pinch of salt. You certainly will after you remember all the duff decisions made by officials over the years:



The universality of the game: one of the main objectives of FIFA is to protect the universality of the game of association football. This means that the game must be played in the same way no matter where you are in the world. If you are coaching a group of teenagers in any small town around the world, they will be playing with the same rules as the professional players they see on TV.


It’s still the same rules! It’s just with technology introduced to verify officials’ decisions.

If they mean ways of officiating the match should remain universal, that is also flawed.

Lower tiers of tennis and rugby do not have “Hawk-Eye” (tennis) or audible dialogue (rugby), but even though hawk-eye in professional tennis was initially opposed by purists, Hawk-Eye has now been widely accepted, but with the compromise of limited challenges against an umpire’s decision.

Technology in professional rugby has been welcomed without the call for it in grassroots rugby. Still, officials presumably confer with each other on giving tries at grassroots level if needed.



The simplicity and universality of the game of association football is one of the reasons for its success. Men, women, children, amateurs and professionals all play the same game all over the world.


If it’s the same game, it should be the same rules. As in the ball being over the line means a goal, regardless of whether it hits the back of the net or not!



The human aspect: no matter which technology is applied, at the end of the day a decision will have to be taken by a human being. This being the case, why remove the responsibility from the referee to give it to someone else?

It is often the case that, even after a slow-motion replay, ten different experts will have ten different opinions on what the decision should have been.


Who says the referee would need to be stripped of responsibility at all?

There are at least two giant video screens at every major stadium which play replays and follow the game on camera. All the referee would have to do is watch a short replay of the issue at hand. Maybe the referee can alert the 4th official who can ask the screen-operator for a replay of the desired event.

I mean, all the 4th official does is hold up an LED monitor at certain points in the match (OOPS, MENTIONED TECHNOLOGY AGAIN. MY, MY, AM I NAUGHTY!). It’d give him something else to do. Seriously though, those LED thingies aren’t seen at grassroots football, yet FIFA and all other professional football governing bodies use them at matches.

What’s more, LED indicators aren’t vital, hence grassroots games getting by quite easily without it.

At stadiums, substitutions and injury times are announced on a PA system anyway! That too is technology used by FIFA. So basically, they haven’t lived up to their mission statement of universality of the game. If they truly had, there’d be nothing electronic at stadium matches.

One more thing, technology is made by humans, so technically, human arbitration is always present in football. This type of human-made intervention (goal-line technology) in football would help to REMOVE ALL HUMAN ERROR.



Fans love to debate any given incident in a game. It is part of the human nature of our sport.



Fans also love to call governing bodies of football money-grabbing fat-cats because of their commercialising football through countless adverts without caring for the spirit of the sport itself.

Fans would still have other things to debate like team selection and individual players. If anything, some fans no longer want to talk about goals/offsides that weren’t or officials that aren’t!



FIFA’s goal is to improve the quality of refereeing, making referees more professional and better prepared, and to assist referees as much as possible. This is also the reason why refereeing experiments (such as with additional referees or the role of the fourth official) will continue to be analysed, to see how referees can be supported.



Goal-line technology would save an awful lot of earache for referees and assist them as much as possible like they aim to do. FIFA aren’t even prepared to experiment with goal-line technology. Despicable stubbornness prevails here.




The financial aspect: the application [or testing] of modern technologies can be very costly, and therefore not applicable on a global level. Many matches, even at the highest level, are not even televised. For example, we have close to 900 preliminary matches for the FIFA World Cup™, and the same rules need to be applied in all matches of the same competition. The rules need to be the same for all association football matches worldwide.


The cheek of it: FIFA have made MILLIONS from international tournaments, enhanced further by giant sponsorship/advertising deals.

For the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa, ticket prices have been astronomical! It makes Category A ticket prices at White Hart Lane look like a couple of pounds! Take a look at the following link:

Pay attention from here:

As you can see on their site, the best pitch-side seats (Category 1 ) for a group game cost $160 each! That’s over £100 per ticket!

Taking an average of the South African stadiums in use for the event—with both capacity and attendance considered—they take in 50,000 fans every time. 30,000 of those tickets would be Category 1 (along the pitch) while the other 20,000 would be behind the goals or in the corners (Category 3 ).

30,000 Category 1 tickets (pitch-side seats along the touchline) sold per match at $160 each take in $4.8m (nearly £3.2m) every match. 20,000 Category 3 tickets (behind the goals/in the corners) sold at $80 each (approximately £53) take in $1.6m (just over £1m).

$4.8m + $1.6 = $6.4m ~ £4.2m per game.

$6.4m multiplied by the number of group games to which this pricing applies (48)
equals a massive $307.2m (around £200.4m) just for that phase of the tournament!

It begs the question of—apart from paying for energy bills (surely not all of the revenue goes towards that) and staff—where does the rest of the money go!?

Surely some of that revenue could be retained for use in experimenting with goal-line technology at least, otherwise people may get suspicious of FIFA board members simply lining their own pockets.

Wouldn’t look very good seeing as their aim is to contribute to the “good of the game”, would it?



The experiments conducted by companies on technology in football are also expensive. The decision of the IFAB, after careful consideration and examination of studies conducted in recent years, to give a clear answer on technology in football is also positive in this regard as these companies will now not spend significant amounts of money on projects which in the end will not be implemented.


You need to test technology before deciding to implement it anyway! Duh!



The extended use of technology: the question has already been raised: if the IFAB had approved goal-line technology, what would prevent the approval of technology for other aspects of the game? Every decision in every area of the pitch would soon be questioned.


What the hell is the difference between investing in goal-line technology and investing in LED thingies, earpieces to communicate and signals in the linesmen’s flags which alert the referee of an offside call (the latter three technologies already being in force throughout professional football) besides the degree of usefulness!?

The flags with signals are the least useful. The referee does have eyes (in theory) and it’s out of line with what Sepp Blatter said about “keeping the human aspect of refereeing in football.”

If FIFA wanted to keep refereeing so human-based, why did they need to blow millions on flags that make a sound using one-button signal technology when the referee should be able to see the flag being raised/waved by himself?

Hypocrisy I say!



The nature of the game: association football is a dynamic game that cannot be stopped in order to review a decision. If play were to be stopped to take a decision, it would break up the rhythm of the game and possibly deny a team the opportunity to score a goal. It would also not make sense to stop play every two minutes to review a decision, as this would go against the natural dynamism of the game.”


Union rugby is a “dynamic game.” Tennis is a “dynamic game.” I’m guessing what FIFA mean by dynamic is that it’s fast-paced and would look very lacklustre if it stopped too often.

Maybe so, but in football, referees may choose to play advantage on fouls. That’s enough to keep a game flowing as much as possible.

In rugby, the game always stops for scrums and throws but that’s one of the rules and fans of that particular sport still maintain enjoyment. Only boring people get bored quickly and FIFA representatives sound like that right now.

It doesn’t take a massive chunk of a referee’s life to reconsider and look at a video replay (another good idea in my opinion).

In rugby, tries can be reviewed. Can take a while but as I said, fans of that sport do not mind because it’s all in the name of totally fair and impartial refereeing.

In tennis, players can challenge a call (up to a MAXIMUM of three times in a game) and it’s a simple 10-second clip of the ball’s path and point of landing. A substitution of a football player takes longer than that!

What do FIFA want to do next?

Deny throw-ins because they “stop the game”?

Are you going to have all the subs just randomly throw a ball back onto the field to keep the game “flowing” or will the game just be abandoned because it “slowed down too much?”

Give me a break…


Compromise is something FIFA missed out in their mission statement. My proposal would be to introduce it but, like in tennis, have a limited number of challenges (I would accept just one as that’s the usual number of controversial decisions in a match if any).

It’s not just the ball which had crossed the line at the World Cup, it was the level of FIFA’s stubbornness and unwillingness to discuss the issue with advocates of goal-line technology. I call it a “Blatter problem.”

There is absolutely no point in having rules or professing them if you’re just going to forget those rules, one of which states that a goal is granted if the entirety of the ball crosses the line.

Why does the net have to ripple for it to be a goal?
Why does there need to be a scuffle on the goalline for it to be difficult to make the right decision?

You might as well not have a “back of the net” and instead stick a badminton net there!!! At least it ripples immediately when something hits it!


It doesn’t need expensive testing (more money in FIFA’s pockets and pensions, eh?), the ripple is more “visible” to even the most Uruguayan official’s eyes and doesn’t involve “TECH-NOLOGY”, that word which—when said in the company of Sepp Blatter himself—constitutes one euro being put into the company swear box.

I bet Sepp Blatter still sends messages to FIFA colleagues via homing pigeon! Get with the future you want to build, not the past which you evidently want to live in.

I am now going outside to catch a pigeon with strong-enough legs to carry this much writing to Switzerland and back…