Tottenham

[jyriöö]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Ei tahaks väga norida, aga too kunagine keskkaitsja ei tundnud lepingu lõppemise ajal ML jalgpalli lõhna ka mitte. Mitte et ma Soli toonast käitumist õigustan, aga olud on siiski tollesega mõnevõrra teised klubis.

[vello99]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Spursi viimase dekaadi olulisemasse mängu minnakse siis sellise põhi-11vigastute loeteluga: Keane, Carrick, Mido, Jenas, King, Stalteri. Eriti ründe olukorra teeb see päris nutuseks. Barnard tuli Boltoni vastu poolajast sisse ja jättis hea mulje, aga... Come on Man City...

[vello99]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Kahju. Ideaalne võimalus, aga ehk oli tsipa vara.

[Nurmekas]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Mis jama selle toidumürgitusega oli?

[skint]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

[Nurmekas]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'


Väga kena pilt.

[Nurmekas]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Väidetavalt Spursi uue hooaja vorm:
New Kit

[2mSööt3mMööda]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Algselt postitas Nurmekas


Väidetavalt Spursi uue hooaja vorm:
New Kit

Kui ma õieti mäletan, siis spurs järgmine hooaeg enam kappat ei kanna. jama nali

[Nurmekas]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Spurs olla siis tellinud tavapärase roa - austreid ja krevette
Filmides on need halva-austriroa naljad üpsris levinud.

A typical menu offers a dozen oysters for £14, followed by a combination of prime fillet steak skewers and grilled jumbo shrimps with jambalaya rice for £12.
Väike austriroog...mmmm

[SleepWalking]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Duo linked with Berbatov

Arsenal could be set to rival neighbours Tottenham for the signature of Dimitar Berbatov, according to reports in Germany.

Whilst the English press has strongly linked the Bulgarian forward with a big-money move to Spurs, sources in Cologne claim the Bayer Leverkusen star is wanted by Gunners boss Arsene Wenger.

German striking legend Rudi Voller advised Berbatov against joining Spurs earlier in the year.

\"He can leave for £10.7 million,\" said the club\'s sporting director. \"He should play another year for us and wait for an offer from a top club.

\"Nothing against Tottenham but such a player should wait a bit until he gets an offer from a top-three club.\"

Auts!

[vello99]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Kui alguses suhtusin skeptiliselt Levy üritusse, siis paar siin kirjas väljatoodud asja on ikka nii persest, et Levy anna aga tuld. Võta endime omanik Alan Sugar ka appi, ta peaks veel aktsionär olema ja omama korralikult kogemust PL-iga kaklemisest kui need fekaloidid 90-ndatel 12 punktise deductioni tahtsid hooaja alguses teha.


Mr Dave Richards
Chairman
The FA Premier League,
30 Gloucester Place
London
W1U 8PL


9 May 2006


Dear Dave


Re: Protest and request for the match between West Ham United and
Tottenham Hotspur FC on 7/5/06 to be replayed


As you are aware, Sunday could have been a momentous day for our Club
and our fans. It was the first time since the inception of the UEFA
Champions League that we were in a position to qualify for European club
football\'s most prestigious competition. After such a successful League
campaign, the excitement and expectation of our fans was simply
enormous. Our match at West Ham was effectively a Cup Final.


However, we believe that our chances of success were significantly
reduced by the exceptional circumstances brought about by the sudden
illness of the majority of players in our First Team squad in the early
hours of Sunday morning. In being given no viable option to postpone the
match other than a 2-hour delay to kick-off, our players were denied the
possible opportunity of competing in the Champions League, while our
fans have been left with a sense of suspicion and injustice at the way
subsequent events unfolded.


We contacted the FAPL early on Sunday morning and, after a series of
conversations, the FAPL called for the England Team Doctor and the FAPL
Company Secretary to attend our Team Hotel to assess the situation. We
believed that the FAPL were examining the situation in good faith and
were seeking to obtain all relevant information before coming to a
decision. Indeed, in those early conversations the FAPL\'s Chief
Executive had given us every reason to believe the match could be
postponed to allow our players some extra time to recover from a lack of
sleep, vomiting, diarrhoea and dehydration.


At this time, myself, Board members and other key decision makers joined
the players at their hotel. Whilst waiting for the opinion of the
England Team Doctor, who was yet to arrive at our Team Hotel, I was
contacted from a distance by the FAPL and told that we had to play the
game that day or suffer the consequences. This, by implication, may have
meant a significant loss of points and the denial of participation in
any European competition - a situation I could not sanction. This threat
was made by the FAPL despite the fact that West Ham United, acting
honourably and fairly as would be expected from that club, had consented
to the postponement of the match provided that any re-match did not
interfere with their FA Cup Final preparations.


The FAPL\'s Chief Executive then said he would consider the match being
delayed to later on Sunday evening, but unfortunately the Police would
not sanction a kick off time beyond 5pm. Our medical staff advised that
a delay of at least 3 hours would be necessary to have any impact on the
players and therefore it was Martin Jol\'s view that, in the absence of a
postponement or a much later kick-off, we had no choice whatsoever but
to proceed to play at 3pm. What puzzles us is why the FAPL were prepared
to sanction a 4 hour delay but not a 24 hour delay. If the integrity of
all matches kicking off at the same time was your primary concern, why
sanction a delay of any kind?


Our next issue was team selection. Martin Jol and his staff, having
originally selected their squad of 17 players for the match, were then
left in the invidious position of choosing between starting the match
with their original 17 players, 10 of whom were feeling very unwell, or
drafting in Reserve Team players, the majority of whom have not played
for the First Team this season or are untried and untested at First Team
level. In any case, having ended their season, our Reserve Team players
were scattered across various parts of London and the South East, would
not have been prepared to play in a Premier League (or any other) match
at such short notice and would rarely, if ever, have played together.


This was an impossible position for our coaching staff to find
themselves in on the morning of what was our most important match for
many years. Playing a make-shift, inexperienced and ill-prepared team in
such a high profile game could have turned the match into a farce,
resulting in an embarrassment for the players, the coaches, the Club,
our fans and the Premier League competition as a whole.


To add insult to injury, the FAPL\'s announcement that our game would not
be postponed was made live on Sky TV from the pitch side at Highbury. In
light of the obvious sensitivities and the competition for 4th place
between Arsenal and Spurs this was, to say the least, an unfortunate
choice.


We simply do not understand why the FAPL failed to appraise itself of
all of the facts before turning down our request that the fixture be
postponed under rule E 13.4. We were surprised that the FAPL\'s Chief
Executive did not make the short journey from Highbury to the Team Hotel
at Canary Wharf to assess such a serious issue first hand. We also fail
to understand why the England Team Doctor, having been sent to the Team
Hotel, was not even consulted before an announcement was made (in fact,
he did not even arrive at our hotel before the decision was made or even
before our players had to leave the Team Hotel to travel to Upton Park
for the match). As a result we played the game with players who were
unwell but who were desperate not to let their fans and colleagues down.
Clearly, our governing body put us in an impossible situation and gave a
significant advantage to Arsenal in competing for that 4th position.


With this in mind we contacted those Premier League Chairmen and Chief
Executives we were able to locate to establish what fellow members feel
is an appropriate way forward given the unorthodox decision made by the
FAPL prior to receiving objective information on the situation. We now
have confirmation from a majority of Premier League clubs that they
would support a replay and in similar circumstances would expect the
game to have been postponed. This is a gesture made by fellow clubs
which supports the Charter\'s aims of running a professional league in a
manner in which all of its member Clubs are treated equally and in a
professional, fair and objective way. Additionally, from comments made
by Sepp Blatter in the media in the past 24 hours, even FIFA would
support the idea of a postponement provided the match was played on or
before 15 May 2006.


We therefore formally request that you order that the game be replayed.


It is regrettable that we have been put in this position, but we feel
let down by the FAPL\'s abdication of its responsibility to consider the
request for a postponement fairly and after due consideration of all
relevant factors. Where such significant commercial and competitive
interests are jeopardised it is only reasonable that our governing body
ensures we play on a level playing field and supports us by making
decisions based on the facts of the situation which has to include all
relevant information. We feel sure that the FAPL, along with most
reasonable minded people, would not have wanted such a controversial
outcome to the final day of the Premier League season. Furthermore, the
FAPL was inconsistent in its approach in being prepared to consider the
kick-off to be delayed but not allowing the match to be played on a
different day.


Finally, whilst our primary concern here is for our own Club, the
situation we find ourselves in highlights what could have been an even
bigger issue for a Club facing relegation from the FAPL. Similarly, it
is hard to believe that, faced with an identical issue on the morning of
a Champions League Final, a club would not seek a postponement (with the
opposing team consenting) and that, given the importance of such an
occasion, such a request would not be granted by UEFA in the interests
of fairness and good sporting practice. In our view, and regardless of
the outcome of our case, the FAPL\'s decision making process and lines of
communication in such a situation need thorough and urgent review in
order to ensure that no other club is similarly disadvantaged in the
future.


Yours sincerely


DANIEL LEVY
Chairman of Tottenham Hotspur

[SleepWalking]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Algselt postitas vello99
Kui alguses suhtusin skeptiliselt Levy üritusse, siis paar siin kirjas väljatoodud asja on ikka nii persest, et Levy anna aga tuld.

kas tottingtonil on see ka valmis mõeldud, et kuidas mängijate haigust tagantjärele tõestama hakatakse?

[vello99]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Arvestades, et kriminaaluurimine on asjas algatatud, siis ma haigushoo tõestamise pärast eriti ei muretseks.

[SleepWalking]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Algselt postitas vello99
Arvestades, et kriminaaluurimine on asjas algatatud, siis ma haigushoo tõestamise pärast eriti ei muretseks.

BBC: An official criminal investigation has not been launched.

[vello99]

Vastus teemale \'Tottenham\'

Algselt postitas SleepWalking

Algselt postitas vello99
Arvestades, et kriminaaluurimine on asjas algatatud, siis ma haigushoo tõestamise pärast eriti ei muretseks.

BBC: An official criminal investigation has not been launched.

mnjah, paistab et kiirustasin, krim.asja tõesti pole... küll aga \"In a joint statement, the Health Protection Agency and Tower Hamlets Environmental Health confirmed they were now investigating a \"possible outbreak of food poisoning\" and working with the football club and the hotel to identify any possible sources. \"