Audere est Facere

[RSS61]

Quote

    I think you will find that virtually all the trophies that we have ever won were won by us playing entertaining football. Nicholson, Birkinshaw, Venables. I dont really remember us winning anything playing boring football.

And how many of those got us into the top 4? Yes, Nicholson did and won us the double. In fact he was the last one who had won us the league title; over 50 years ago. Birkinshaw won us FA Cups (2), UEFA Cup (1). Venables won us a FA Cup. But then so did Wigan Athletic win that cup. And we mustn’t forget Portsmouth and many other lowly teams winning League and FA cup trophies. Using your words RSS61 “I don’t remember us winning the league or getting into the top 4 playing stylish football,” do you? Oh, yes… sorry, we did over 50 years ago. We spend too much time with our heads buried in the past while clubs like Chelsea, boring boring Ars*nal, City, United and Liverpool will all the trophies. I don’t care how we play football so long as we can get into the top 4 and actually win trophies; emulating Wigan and Portsmouth would be a good place to start.

I have started this thread as a reminder to Voice what our club stands for. Also I would like to correct your factually incorrect quoting of my words as highlighted red. I actually said "playing boring football"

[RiffHard]

Considering the fact that Spurs haven't won the league title for 52 years (Second Division title doesn't count), I would be a very happy with a title regardless of how they play. Of course, a stylish win is somewhat more rewarding, but I don't think it's that relevant. For example take Greece from EURO 2004 - a mediocre team, bland style and... and they were European champions whereas fancy teams failed.

Of course, the aim should be the 'beautiful football', but I personally would take an ugly 1:0 win over a 'beautiful' 1:3 loss any day.

[RSS61]

Considering the fact that Spurs haven't won the league title for 52 years (Second Division title doesn't count), I would be a very happy with a title regardless of how they play. Of course, a stylish win is somewhat more rewarding, but I don't think it's that relevant. For example take Greece from EURO 2004 - a mediocre team, bland style and... and they were European champions whereas fancy teams failed.

Of course, the aim should be the 'beautiful football', but I personally would take an ugly 1:0 win over a 'beautiful' 1:3 loss any day.

I agree that the odd 1-0 ugly is ok but I'm not so sure about every week

[spursjoolz]

Good football is obviously better to watch, but as we are not quite there yet, winning the odd trophy here and there would suit me. It has been a long time since the last silverware when we beat Chelsea 1-0 in the League cup a few years ago (Ramos rings a bell!). So I would welcome the Europa Cup any day.

No only "to dare is to do", but "who dares wins" as Del boy would put it!

[Glenn R]

Quote

    I think you will find that virtually all the trophies that we have ever won were won by us playing entertaining football. Nicholson, Birkinshaw, Venables. I dont really remember us winning anything playing boring football.

And how many of those got us into the top 4? Yes, Nicholson did and won us the double. In fact he was the last one who had won us the league title; over 50 years ago. Birkinshaw won us FA Cups (2), UEFA Cup (1). Venables won us a FA Cup. But then so did Wigan Athletic win that cup. And we mustn’t forget Portsmouth and many other lowly teams winning League and FA cup trophies. Using your words RSS61 “I don’t remember us winning the league or getting into the top 4 playing stylish football,” do you? Oh, yes… sorry, we did over 50 years ago. We spend too much time with our heads buried in the past while clubs like Chelsea, boring boring Ars*nal, City, United and Liverpool will all the trophies. I don’t care how we play football so long as we can get into the top 4 and actually win trophies; emulating Wigan and Portsmouth would be a good place to start.

I have started this thread as a reminder to Voice what our club stands for. Also I would like to correct your factually incorrect quoting of my words as highlighted red. I actually said "playing boring football"

I was paraphrasing; I should have made that clear.

As for what we stand for? That depends on who you ask. I don't care what we stand for, what is important is that we become a top 4 team and win trophies; how we get there is not that important.

[Glenn R]

Considering the fact that Spurs haven't won the league title for 52 years (Second Division title doesn't count), I would be a very happy with a title regardless of how they play. Of course, a stylish win is somewhat more rewarding, but I don't think it's that relevant. For example take Greece from EURO 2004 - a mediocre team, bland style and... and they were European champions whereas fancy teams failed.

Of course, the aim should be the 'beautiful football', but I personally would take an ugly 1:0 win over a 'beautiful' 1:3 loss any day.

RiffHard, I am 100% behind you. Nobody remembers losers; people remember what we've won.

Do you know what Spurs supporters do? They talk about the past and what we've won. Do you know what Chelsea, City, United and Ars*nal fans talk about? Winning future trophies/ league titles. That is the difference between us and them. That has got to change.

[Blackjack]

To be fair, you need to play good football to win topheys full stop, sure there are teams that play bad and still grind out 1 nils but that is  down to the mental state of the players, having the desire/will to win and keep going even when things are going bad, good coaching and management is essential and ofcourse having quality players aswell. Keep things simple and encourage the yourth system, finaly hold onto your best players and not constant restructuring or it is a ever revolving circle, 2 steps forward 3 steps back, as spurs fans we want to see free flowing, fast moving attacking football, its what I grew to love about Tottenham when growing up, it has always had players to great quality that would light up the lane and draw you in, Hoddle, Gascoine, Villa, Ginola,Bale,Klinsmen, etc, all of these players provided magical moments and got the ball moving on the deck, the teams they played in passed the ball well and was great to watch, but all of these players we never kept and replacing them wad always a step back, so we need to play well all the time and to do this we must keep our assets not be fooled into making a quick buck.

[Glenn R]

Good football is obviously better to watch, but as we are not quite there yet, winning the odd trophy here and there would suit me. It has been a long time since the last silverware when we beat Chelsea 1-0 in the League cup a few years ago (Ramos rings a bell!). So I would welcome the Europa Cup any day.

No only "to dare is to do", but "who dares wins" as Del boy would put it!

I would rather Spurs win by playing good football; so long as their are trophies at the end of it. But I would rather play crap football and titles to show for it than attractive football and nothing.

They called Ars*nal "boring, boring Ars*nal"; yes, but look what they won. They called us stylish Spurs, but look what we won.... please remind me what Spurs have won since the formation of the Premiership? Remind me how many league titles we won since Bill Nicholson won the double over 50 years ago please?

[Metalanimal]

Considering the fact that Spurs haven't won the league title for 52 years (Second Division title doesn't count), I would be a very happy with a title regardless of how they play. Of course, a stylish win is somewhat more rewarding, but I don't think it's that relevant. For example take Greece from EURO 2004 - a mediocre team, bland style and... and they were European champions whereas fancy teams failed.

Of course, the aim should be the 'beautiful football', but I personally would take an ugly 1:0 win over a 'beautiful' 1:3 loss any day.

Fair point and I think most of us would agree that winning ugly is better than a defeat but recent times whilst the wheels feel off under AVB we were scrapping unconvincing wins and getting utterly battered with only luck preventing a double figure defeat.

There was no light at the end of the tunnel during this period, now we are playing decent football again and also winning.  I think the key point is if we are playing stylish attacking football and still lose we can accept that more than playing utter shyte and getting mauled with no prospect of things getting better the next match.

Over recent seasons we have been challenging top 4 now were are back on track after a stutter!

TS is certainly taking the Dare aspect!

[RiffHard]

Considering the fact that Spurs haven't won the league title for 52 years (Second Division title doesn't count), I would be a very happy with a title regardless of how they play. Of course, a stylish win is somewhat more rewarding, but I don't think it's that relevant. For example take Greece from EURO 2004 - a mediocre team, bland style and... and they were European champions whereas fancy teams failed.

Of course, the aim should be the 'beautiful football', but I personally would take an ugly 1:0 win over a 'beautiful' 1:3 loss any day.

Fair point and I think most of us would agree that winning ugly is better than a defeat but recent times whilst the wheels feel off under AVB we were scrapping unconvincing wins and getting utterly battered with only luck preventing a double figure defeat.

There was no light at the end of the tunnel during this period, now we are playing decent football again and also winning.  I think the key point is if we are playing stylish attacking football and still lose we can accept that more than playing utter shyte and getting mauled with no prospect of things getting better the next match.

Over recent seasons we have been challenging top 4 now were are back on track after a stutter!

TS is certainly taking the Dare aspect!

Let's take Manchester United - Sir Alex knew exactly how to win ugly, and the fans knew it, and everybody knew it. Why it was a real pain to watch Spurs win ugly when Villas-Boas was still here, was the fact we didn't believe we could do it. Always a late equalizer etc... But that used to be different with Manchester United because when they had to win ugly, they usually did. It's called confidence. They didn't usually throw away their leads, but Spurs... I think we all know the answer to that.

[Metalanimal]

Considering the fact that Spurs haven't won the league title for 52 years (Second Division title doesn't count), I would be a very happy with a title regardless of how they play. Of course, a stylish win is somewhat more rewarding, but I don't think it's that relevant. For example take Greece from EURO 2004 - a mediocre team, bland style and... and they were European champions whereas fancy teams failed.

Of course, the aim should be the 'beautiful football', but I personally would take an ugly 1:0 win over a 'beautiful' 1:3 loss any day.

Fair point and I think most of us would agree that winning ugly is better than a defeat but recent times whilst the wheels feel off under AVB we were scrapping unconvincing wins and getting utterly battered with only luck preventing a double figure defeat.

There was no light at the end of the tunnel during this period, now we are playing decent football again and also winning.  I think the key point is if we are playing stylish attacking football and still lose we can accept that more than playing utter shyte and getting mauled with no prospect of things getting better the next match.

Over recent seasons we have been challenging top 4 now were are back on track after a stutter!

TS is certainly taking the Dare aspect!

Let's take Manchester United - Sir Alex knew exactly how to win ugly, and the fans knew it, and everybody knew it. Why it was a real pain to watch Spurs win ugly when Villas-Boas was still here, was the fact we didn't believe we could do it. Always a late equalizer etc... But that used to be different with Manchester United because when they had to win ugly, they usually did. It's called confidence. They didn't usually throw away their leads, but Spurs... I think we all know the answer to that.

Utd as an example under SAF had many gears they could go through also, their supporters were never feeling as we were the case of ok we lost where do we go from here it looks bad! 

I am not against grinding out ugly wins as they are needed for certain, my point is that winning ugly should be an option to employ when needed not a method week in and week out due to inability to play any other way!

[RSS61]

Considering the fact that Spurs haven't won the league title for 52 years (Second Division title doesn't count), I would be a very happy with a title regardless of how they play. Of course, a stylish win is somewhat more rewarding, but I don't think it's that relevant. For example take Greece from EURO 2004 - a mediocre team, bland style and... and they were European champions whereas fancy teams failed.

Of course, the aim should be the 'beautiful football', but I personally would take an ugly 1:0 win over a 'beautiful' 1:3 loss any day.

RiffHard, I am 100% behind you. Nobody remembers losers; people remember what we've won.

Do you know what Spurs supporters do? They talk about the past and what we've won. Do you know what Chelsea, City, United and Ars*nal fans talk about? Winning future trophies/ league titles. That is the difference between us and them. That has got to change.

Yes, but the teams you mention winning trophies has nothing to do with the particular style of football that they play being boring. It has everything to do with them having more talented players than us. Surely, the worlds best players all endeavour to play exciting and attacking football ?
Why do you think that we have won nothing much for the last 20 years ? Because we play entertaining football ? I don't think so. More like because we have wasted hundreds of millions on crap managers and even more crap players, and we are still doing it now it seems.

[Glenn R]

Considering the fact that Spurs haven't won the league title for 52 years (Second Division title doesn't count), I would be a very happy with a title regardless of how they play. Of course, a stylish win is somewhat more rewarding, but I don't think it's that relevant. For example take Greece from EURO 2004 - a mediocre team, bland style and... and they were European champions whereas fancy teams failed.

Of course, the aim should be the 'beautiful football', but I personally would take an ugly 1:0 win over a 'beautiful' 1:3 loss any day.

RiffHard, I am 100% behind you. Nobody remembers losers; people remember what we've won.

Do you know what Spurs supporters do? They talk about the past and what we've won. Do you know what Chelsea, City, United and Ars*nal fans talk about? Winning future trophies/ league titles. That is the difference between us and them. That has got to change.

Yes, but the teams you mention winning trophies has nothing to do with the particular style of football that they play being boring. It has everything to do with them having more talented players than us. Surely, the worlds best players all endeavour to play exciting and attacking football ?
Why do you think that we have won nothing much for the last 20 years ? Because we play entertaining football ? I don't think so. More like because we have wasted hundreds of millions on crap managers and even more crap players, and we are still doing it now it seems.

I totally agree with you, however, Ars*nal won trophies with boring football. I am quite happy if Spurs played boring or attractive so long as they win trophies/ league titles.

[Blackjack]

Everybody keeps bringing up Ars,Utd winning things but you all fail to mention that both these teams invested lots on advancing there oown yourth team, they played them in the champions league and nurched them into first team players, this coupled! With experience  players already there to fine tune there skills ,both clubs produced league winning teams, this in turn lured top players to the club and so the cycle starts all over again. Here is where Spurs fail as we go and invest then spend a few seasons getting the team to gel, produce a brilliant player/players then sell him, the team then struggles the next season and out goes the manager in with the new and the cycle starts again, we need to keep hold of the best in order to attract the best, who is realisticly going to want to come to a club that changes managers every year or so?,

[Paul Finch]

Everybody keeps bringing up Ars,Utd winning things but you all fail to mention that both these teams invested lots on advancing there oown yourth team, they played them in the champions league and nurched them into first team players, this coupled! With experience  players already there to fine tune there skills ,both clubs produced league winning teams, this in turn lured top players to the club and so the cycle starts all over again. Here is where Spurs fail as we go and invest then spend a few seasons getting the team to gel, produce a brilliant player/players then sell him, the team then struggles the next season and out goes the manager in with the new and the cycle starts again, we need to keep hold of the best in order to attract the best, who is realisticly going to want to come to a club that changes managers every year or so?,

        Generally speaking, what you say is correct, but in recent times as soon as we produce a decent player ie. G.Bale or find a quality player ie. L.Modric their heads get turned by a so called Super Club making un-ethical advances and the player wants to leave, irrespective of whether they are a contracted player or not, and the so-called Powers continually allow these clubs to get away with it, until steps are taken to outlaw these approaches, unfortunately the cycle will continue.