The Spurs Way. Attacking football on the front foot. Played with style and a flourish, not sitting back waiting for the others to die of boredom. It’s a familiar precept for Spurs fans that invests meaning and purpose in our passion.

We all need something like this, if only because watching 22 players kick a ball around is essentially hollow and futile without it. It’s been important for Spurs fans in my lifetime, initially because it characterised our approach to the game and latterly as an ambition to cherish during long periods of mediocrity.

It’s live – Tuesday night, first half, centre circle, Bissouma in space, opts to pass back. Hardly the most serious error in a season filled with catastrophe but the South Stand roared in anger. Thomas Frank, all season, doesn’t get it, can’t handle it, out of his depth to the point where even our board can see it. Out the door 6 weeks too late.

I believe in the Spurs Way but realise it has another function in masking the reality of a parallel truth, that Tottenham in modern times are a club with a history of failure, embedded in poor organisation and owners bereft of the capacity to efficiently and effectively run the club. Sum up the last forty years in a couple of pithy phrases: missed opportunities and unfilled potential. There are three fundamental elements to running a successful football club at any level: the coach or manager, recruitment and finance. Those in charge have never consistently shown the will, ambition, structure or capacity that enables this triumvirate to function smoothly together, united in direction and resolve. In short, this is who we are, and this is why we have ended up in the damned mess we are in, near the bottom of the table and staring at the abyss below.

This dates back to the early 1980s, when the club under chairman Irving Scholar put themselves in the vanguard of a new commercialism. The drive to maximise income, in Spurs’ case through floating on the Stock Exchange, non-football manufacturing, the new West Stand with executive boxes, merchandising and television advertising, was intended to generate funds for transfers and wages. In fact, it had two related consequences, in that the expenditure incurred led to mounting debts, so increasing income became an end in itself for club survival.

Keith Burkinshaw’s wonderful team sustained and entertained us into the middle of the decade. Scholar’s predecessors, the Wale family, were perceived as amongst the fusty blazers holding back the development of the game in England, out of touch and highly protective of their own status. Yet their old-school approach led to Burkinshaw’s promotion within the club and allowed him several years following relegation to rebuild, with money spent firstly on the midfield with Ossie and Ricky, then later up front with Crooks and Archibald. Burkinshaw’s famous passing shot ‘there used to be a football club over there’ was probably written by a journalist but it accurately expressed his views, seen here in this post-match interview from 1982 where this normally taciturn man, complete with de rigueur managerial sheepskin, calmly articulates the problems of the contemporary English game, truly ahead of his time.

The warning signs slowly became apparent. Off the pitch, executive boxes displaced the mighty Shelf, while on the field, the skilful teams built by Pleat then Venables began to take shape only for stars to be sold and replaced with frankly inferior footballers. We build again only for the cycle to be repeated. Stars like Sheringham and Klinsmann were never supported by a squad of sufficient talent, or as Colin Calderwood famously put it, “we’ve got the Famous Five [attackers], what about the shit six?”

Sugar, then Levy and ENIC, but the same pattern. The choice of manager unsuited to the club and in many cases to the task as well. Managers never adequately supported in the transfer market. Promises made to fans as the prices went up that were never kept. Pochettino is the outlier in terms of his suitability but the board’s failure to fully support him in the market remains an era-defining error.

And here we are again. New board, new supposedly vaunted backroom staff, same old problems. The search for a manager last summer produced a man unsuited to the club in so many ways, leaving the bloke out of his depth and no intention of throwing him a lifebelt. He’s gone now, but not for the first time, I’m left to ask the question, what were those in charge of the club seeing when Spurs played? Apparently not the shapeless, tactically deficient football we all saw. What in Frank’s approach did they see that gave them cause to believe he could turn things around when we fans saw nothing of the sort? Why wait this long – do they have access to another Premier League table in a parallel universe, because their inaction is that absurd.

Lange in charge of recruitment knows his up and coming players but we needed some experience too. He says they didn’t want a quick fix. Except we need a quick fix. And if we can’t get our top targets, where is the list of players next in line, and where is the sense that we recruit to fill gaps and create a coherent team rather than be opportunistic?

Ventkatesham schmoozes the fans at a meeting and writes some corporate rubbish in the programme. He says the culture needs to change, right, but he needs to start that, because that’s his job. And where has the £150m funding injection from the board gone? Not on players, because we sold our top goalscorer in order to fund Gallagher’s purchase.

Spurs are sleepwalking towards relegation. Lousy form, shattered confidence, no structure. I hear that the squad is more than capable of staying up. It is, except half of them are injured. Players who thought they would be competing for honours are not ready for a relegation fight. The current hierarchy is riven with complacency. It could spell disaster.

As I write, Spurs have appointed Igor Tudor as a temp until the end of the season. Good luck – he has my best wishes. I only know what you know after your frantic googling, same as me. I quote Wikipedia: “On 13 February 2026, Tudor agreed a deal to become Tottenham interim head coach until they get relegated from the premier league in the 2025/26 season.” David Ornstein, a reliable source, says that the process was led by Ventkatesham and Lange. That does not fill me with confidence.

On Tuesday night, the booing at full-time was full of righteous fury. What received less attention, but is just as telling, was that as many fans, if not more, shrugged and wandered silently home. Perhaps I’m over-interpreting, but I’ve seldom heard as many non-football conversations going on around me during and after a game, given that stakes were high and despite being excruciatingly bad, we were never more than a goal down. Injury time, ball in their box, there was no excitement in the stands, no tension or jeopardy, and for the first time this season, the players looked utterly dejected as yet another aimless cross went weakly by.

This has been going on for years and we are drained of enthusiasm. Watching Spurs is joyless. It’s the ultimate criticism as far as we fans go. If Spurs can stagger through to the end of the season and avoid relegation, that’s all I care about. But the long-term problems are structural and chronic, and they won’t go away.

A fine outcome to the City game soothed our troubled emotions, a welcome relief from recent struggles. A point! A home point! Yes, it has come to this, but I thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to get behind the team. The fans’ effort matched that of the players and most of the South Stand stayed to applaud them off. 

It was heartening to see spirit, guts and taking the game to our opponents pays dividends. Xavi arrives as proper Spurs. He’s taken stock, inhaled deeply and told himself, right, this is what the Premier League is all about and I’m up for it. I’m Xavi Simons and I will show them all how good I am. And he is. Solanke ran himself senseless for the team, he’s a focal point, target man and finisher. The whole shape looks better with him in the team. I like his close control and ability to nick a fraction ahead of his marker.

Gallagher I like a lot too. He drives the team forwards, makes himself available, is fearless and shows the others the way. His assist was a template for the games ahead, winning the ball through sheer determination then delivering a sweet centre. More please. 

The TOMM mantra is always enjoy a win, or in this case a vitally important comeback that hopefully injects some much needed momentum into the tricky games ahead.  Optimism has been in short supply lately so let’s take it where we can. However, let nobody pretend this addresses the chronic problems facing the club. My last piece articulated my assessment of the situation so I won’t go over well-trodden ground again but the relative inaction during the transfer window may provide further clues to the short-term future.

Thomas Frank came with a reputation for sound organisation, tactical nouse and as a man-motivator. We’ve seen none of this at Spurs, where he seems out of his depth. The Burnley match served as a further indictment of his methods. Once again, he took an overly cautious approach to a game against the bottom side but to be fair, three at the back doesn’t have to be negative and in the first half, it enabled us to get forward frequently. Once under pressure, however, the tactics crumbled and the defensive unit appeared to have not been introduced to each other, let alone work together. Frank’s adjustments to tactics don’t work because the side are not clear about their basic approach in the first place, unlike his time at Brentford where he had years to instil his methods into his players. 

To be fair to him, the injury toll would be nigh on impossible for any coach to manage. Much criticism has been directed at the medical staff, most recently by Romero at least by implication. Yet I thought we totally revamped this side of our operations this season. We will probably never know what’s been going on behind the scenes but the medics don’t work in isolation. They treat problems, caused variously by bad luck, over-playing and/or coming back too soon when not fully recovered from an injury. 

Which brings us back to the squad and the transfer window. If most players are fit, we can select a decent side but the lack of cover in certain areas, such as full-back, leads to overwork and the lack of alternatives creates real problems. Porro has been run into the ground. However, the window has brought little cover or comfort. The club appear unwilling to invest in premier league ready players at this point. They have been busy hoovering up teenage talent from other clubs, including Wilson from Hearts and youngsters from West Ham and Chelsea, but this neglects the here, now and next season for that matter. The club hierarchy stated their aim to be competing on all fronts but this laudable intention isn’t supported by the reality of our recruitment policy, in a context where our league position and form is dire. It feels like the hierarchy are in denial, pretending our lousy form is just a blip, not a structural fault.

Legitimate questions follow. One, why can’t our vaunted revamped recruitment team, stuffed with analysts high on data and led by Lange find any players? Two, why sell our top goalscorer without securing a replacement? Three, that £150m pumped into the club last year – what exactly is that for, because it does not seem to be available for players. History tells us the answer is that Tottenham owners first and foremost safeguard their investment. I hope I’m wrong.

And of course, four, how long can the manager stay in his position? Again, the team’s league position and form do not appear to be the key factors in this decision. My interpretation is the board, including the owners and Venai, counted on this season being one of consolidation. In this scenario, Frank is seen as a safe pair of hands, a force for stability, and maybe we’d get a decent run in the cups. By May 2026, the board would have a better idea of what they needed to do, their preference being to help Frank build his side gradually and allow him to come to terms with the demands of managing Spurs. Essentially this is how Venai approached his work at Arsenal, and look where they are now. 

But this is Tottenham. However much the board would wish to turn a deaf ear, the hoofbeats of history thunder up on the inside track and they have been overtaken by a series of unanticipated problems. The manager’s not up to it, the squad are weak in key areas and injuries have taken their toll. Team morale falls as fast as our league position. Players didn’t sign up for a relegation battle. The board are unprepared. If they wish to sack Frank, there are no ready made caretakers within the club or approachable outside candidates. Also, a sacking so soon after his appointment means the owners and CEO would lose face. Further, Lange and Frank are close, so there is a big investment there. 

I suspect their current plan is to see this through to the end of the season. They do not wish to invest large sums on players at this point because they are already thinking ahead to the summer and what a new man could bring, a summer when Pochettino, Alonso and Ariola, to name but three, could be available. Given our league form, there are inherent risks in that strategy that do not bear thinking about, except I do think about them, every time our defence evaporates, our keeper flaps or when Solanke or VDV go down injured. Fine margins protect us. 

And so we stagger on through another set of problems. Nothing changes, especially the promise of changes. Prefacing this with a big for what it’s worth, I saw Vivienne Lewis recently at a performance of The Ghost of White Hart Lane, a play by Martin Murphy intertwining the life of John White with his son’s search for his father’s character, based on the book by Rob White and Julie Welch. I didn’t speak with her, but a couple of fans who did, like me fellow sceptics, said she understood and valued the club’s history, and has a genuine feeling for the club. The previous regime would never have appeared in a small public gathering like this and sat chatting amongst the punters in a cosy bar. 

I try to remain optimistic, but like you, I remember the days, not so long along go, when we cut teams apart with two or three passes, just like City did in the first half. A world away now, as the best we can hope for is staggering on. 

With full respect to Bournemouth, losing to their 94^th minute winner would not in normal circumstances been seen as a significant moment in the recent history of any Premier League club, let alone Tottenham. But Tottenham are no normal club. Normally, teams strive to win a trophy, celebrate the win then use it as a platform to build upon. Not Tottenham. We’ve chucked it all away.

Delirium in Bilbao and at the Lane for those of us watching on the screens. 250000 in the streets on a working day. At last, a trophy. At last, supporters and players can celebrate in unity. It seems like a fantasy now, a fever dream hallucination. Two points from three games against teams who were not at their best but have in common the harmony of purpose and intensity that is so obviously absent from our football. Ahead in two of these, we cave. Our first goal in open play since December 6^th. The sale of our top goalscorer with, so far, no replacement.

The football is dull and unadventurous. It’s not even safe, the late goal being the perfect example. It typified Spurs defensive deficiencies this season. Deep into injury time, we are wide open rather than closing ranks, leaving their most dangerous player time and space at the edge of the area. No last ditch tackles, no flying blocking bodies, but shoulder shrugging spectating.

More than this, it’s inept. We cannot consistently pass the ball to a teammate. Players are spread far and wide on the field with little connection to each other. We are persistently caught in possession. We’re easy. We’re mugs.

It’s accurate to say that Frank and perhaps those who appointed him do not grasp the heritage of a team that wants to play exciting football and that this is what supporters want to see. However, attacking front foot football is not merely about aesthetics, it’s about winning. Teams who succeed do not sit back.

In other circumstances I might write in philosophical whimsy about how remarkable it is that Spurs could waste supporters’ goodwill, stretched already to near breaking point by high ticket prices and the club’s treatment of fans as customers and consumers. But I’m not in that frame of mind. Our football is terrible. It’s tactically negligent, gutless and soporific. To reach this point is an indictment of the club’s strategy and neglect.  

The Lewis family declare their intentions to make Spurs a major force through strategic investment and better off the field organisation, but already the reserves of their most precious resource, time, have been severely depleted. Everybody at the club is under pressure now. You can’t build on foundations of quicksand. Years of change and transition undermine the efforts of the new manager and the revamped recruitment and medical teams to develop the squad.

I tend to be cautious and patient in making my judgements, in life as well as in football. I thought Frank would bring much-needed qualities to the club. He is a manager with a solid reputation, a thinker, a good motivator and organiser, and a shrewd tactician who can get the most from his players.

We’ve not seen any of this. In a league where other sides, Bournemouth again being a good example, with fewer resources than us compensate and prosper through organisation and identity, we have few discernible effective patterns of play, especially to turn defence into attack. These issues could perhaps have been mitigated by the comfort and security of a set pattern of play, a familiar formation where teammates knew what was expected of them and others and where young players could grow and flourish. Instead we have flux and change. Managers come and go, unsuitable in their individual, special ways but all with different philosophies and approaches to team building, often diametrically opposed to that of their predecessor.

Our current coach alters the set-up every game. Ostensibly this is in response to our opponents’ assumed tactics. Frank treats this squad as he did his Brentford team, the difference being that whereas in west London he had many years to build a squad and inculcate this approach, at Spurs there is no such foundation upon which to base these changes. It has the effect of creating uncertainty within our own players, and masks the truth that he does not know his best team.

The club thought he was ready to step up. In reality, he seems out of his depth. Managing  Spurs is different: expectations are higher, as is the pressure, and he does not have the long history of support from within that he benefitted from at Brentford. When highly rated coach Matt Wells left the club recently, his stated aim as boss of his new club was to play football on the front foot. Looking at Frank’s Spurs, no wonder he saw his future elsewhere. (Remember we’ve also lost a strong link to our heritage as the grandson of Cliff Jones).

Like Ange before him, when stressed Frank returns to his past record of achievement. I understand why he feels the need for self-justification, but it sounds hollow when his current side are chronically underachieving.

Not one player has improved their game under Frank. On the contrary, the deficiencies of team play have revealed the lack of quality in the squad. Granted, injuries have not helped, particularly to my mind to Solanke, a good rather than great centre forward who can be both target and finisher and above all can provide a focus for attacking play, someone to build play around. Players like Bergvall, Tel and Odobert have promising futures ahead of them but this is now, and time is running out.

It is legitimate to question the judgement of our vaunted recruitment team to allow us to be in this situation. Paratici and Lange are supposed to be working in unison, but already the former supposedly wants to go back to Italy. However, underlying these issues is a long-term structural weakness where the chronically dysfunctional relationship between football (i.e. the coach), recruitment and budget (the board) undermines any pretensions to achievement.

I’ve written repeatedly about this, that in any club these three elements have to align, and since ENIC took over, they have failed to consistently fulfil their duty to do so with diligence and insight. They were never clear about these goals or if they were, how to achieve them. At Spurs we have an embedded culture where people running a football club don’t understand football.

The question is, recruitment for what? To be contenders, the finance for salaries and transfers has to be made available. Players come and go according to the whims of these coaches and whatever the job title is this week of those in charge of recruitment, ever changing but never evolving. Modern football at a high level requires investment and resources, yet after a generation’s work to make us one of the most wealthy and self-sufficient clubs in the world, we remain stubbornly oblivious to the necessity of spending a substantial portion of that money in order to remain competitive.

This is not just about recruitment – it is also about retention. If our policy is to buy and develop young talent without also strengthening the team ready to be contenders in four competitions in the here and now, then the likely outcome is not success, it is that we become a nursery for Europe’s top sides as the likes of Bergvall, Gray and Vuscovic move on.

Where does this leave Spurs? In a dire mess. Players having a go at the fans. Players having a go at the board. Fans having a go at players, although at home games the crowd has been reasonably tolerant given the extent of the problems. This may change on Saturday where we will field a weakened side against a rampant Villa who have an allocation of 9k, that’s a lot of away fan noise.

Having vehemently criticised the club’s leadership for their lack of long-term strategy, it’s hardly logical to suggest they should sack Frank now unless they have a suitably able replacement available, which is seldom the case mid-season. There are no suitable candidates within the club as Frank brought his own men with him. I fear things could turn ugly if we lose to Wham, which is perfectly possible given our form and their motivation to beat us. Frank now also has to contend with a series of injuries. I suspect it may turn on the desire of the Lewis family to make statement decisions, a message that they are in charge, rather than on league form.

In this window we need to sign players with proven experience at this level, ideally from the PL, who can pass the ball forwards and strengthen the side from the start of their Spurs career, especially in central midfield. Good luck to the 19 year old fullback coming from Santos, but he’s not what I have in mind.

Whether the Lewis family, supported by our supposedly able and fan-friendly CEO, can change this toxic culture remains to be seen. The reconstituted board is packed with experience in finance and in sports finance, but running an English football club, to echo a previous comment, is different. Vinai Venkatesham has to make the forces align – that’s the role of an effective CEO. Certainly there is no quick fix. This will take time, but if our league form remains so poor, short-term decisions will have to be made, potentially undermining the longer term strategy.

And so we go, round and round again. Something has to break the cycle. Whether the Lewis family want to make it work is a question only they can answer, because as we all know, the I in ENIC stands for investment, and they must be tempted to walk away from these problems and towards a mountain of cash.

To alleviate the gloom and doom of this piece, two friends of the blog have shared their warm memories about Spurs. Take a look.

More Trauma Than Triumph is Harvey Burgess’s story of his life as a Spurs fan

Norman Giller is a veteran of Fleet Street and lifelong Spurs fan who knows the club and the players. His latest Spurs Select evokes warm memories available with all his many other books here

The supposed lack of atmosphere at White Hart Lane has become ingrained into the story of Spurs’ season. As each home game passes without a victory, so early season passivity turned to audible dismay and moments of outright hostility, most notably the raucous booing of Vicario after his howler last Saturday.

Driving the narrative is the assertion that this is all the fault of supporters. Although Frank subsequently attempted to recant his ‘not real fans’ line, and to be fair English is not his first language, this wasn’t the first time he has criticised Tottenham fans. The players are also feeling hard done by. They had a post-match meeting to discuss it, apparently, then Frank says this was not a meeting, they just talked about it. At half-time against Fulham, captain Van der Ven gathered his men in the centre circle before they went into the dressing room. Rather than the pep-talk I assumed, supposedly this is a display of solidarity in defence of the abuse from the stands. Perhaps if they applied themselves to the defence of our goal with similar dedication and initiative, they would face less of a problem. 

Blaming the fans is superficial and derogatory, a calculated insult to the loyalty and commitment of Spurs fans across the generations. Here’s another part of the story, one which the manager, players and especially the board would do well to hear and digest. Spurs fans have filled that stadium since it was built, week after week, regardless of the quality of football, and some of it has been awful, while paying the some of the highest prices in the country. Away fans – you can’t get a ticket for love nor money. Newcastle on a work night, 8.15 kick-off to suit Sky, Spurs songs loud and clear. 

This commitment dates way back, but just taking this century – the old Lane permanently full and huge crowds at Wembley including British record attendances, in a context where the board conspicuously failed to match the fans’ ambitions, and that’s putting it politely. Part of the narrative picked up by sections of the media is that Spurs fans possess some overweening sense of entitlement. This is ludicrous. There are no glory-hunters at Spurs because there has been precious little glory. 

The current anti-fan narrative conveniently excuses the team, manager and the club from taking responsibility for the problems at Spurs, many of which run deep-seated within a club without a coherent strategy to ensure a consistent challenge for honours. If I were a cynical soul, I might go so far as to suggest this was a deliberate ploy. I want to focus on the actions of the club itself, where a series of decisions stretching back many seasons has soured the relationship with supporters and caused much of the frustration, dissatisfaction and alienation many long-standing fans experience. These decisions directly hamper the team’s efforts to succeed because they create the disgruntlement underlying the lack of vocal support at home.

Spurs, like all clubs, constantly express their gratitude to supporters. They have many ways of interacting, including the Supporters Trust and FAB, but I’m always left believing that they don’t completely understand us. They fundamentally misconceive the relationship as one-way. Crudely expressed, we essentially give to them, giving our time, money, vocal support and undying, lifetime loyalty and the club take this for granted.

In reality, there is a degree of reciprocity in the relationship. It remains unequal and unbalanced, for the reasons I’ve just listed. There’s a power dimension here too. There are 13 other league clubs in London but I’m not going to support them, and Spurs know that. But that’s not an excuse. Fans want something back. Not much, we’ll tolerate a lot, we have to, but if Spurs fans do have a sense of entitlement, it is that we wish to be treated fairly by the club and understood as individuals, rather than as consumers or customer reference numbers. It is not asking a lot, but it seems beyond the comprehension of the club, judging by many of their choices. 

Over the past few years, I’ve researched the relationship between fans and the club via a series of in-depth interviews with supporters. The biggest source of dissatisfaction was the price of tickets. I make no apology for repeating a familiar refrain that Spurs’ prices are unnecessarily and, for an increasing number of fans, prohibitively high. In these straitened times, families cannot afford to come, or if they do, it’s a once or twice a season treat rather than regular attendance. With the income from television, sponsorship and merchandise, the club can generate the money it needs to compete and consider a price cut. Or, cheaper tickets might earn as much by filling the empty spaces currently visible on the ticketing site for upcoming matches.  

Supporters can see this. We understand that the club has a choice here, and the choice impacts negatively on us. The club has made other choices too, such as the price banding for games and the way senior and youth concessions are limited. Also, the ramifications of choices made during the seat allocation process before the new stadium was occupied are still being felt. Long-standing groups of supporters who had become friends were broken up. We sat with the same people for the best part of twenty years and saw our children grow up, but it was not possible to transfer that to the new ground. Prime viewing spots on the Shelf became premium seating. The south stand, trumpeted as the wall of noise, was pockmarked with more areas of premium seating. Many fans I spoke to missed their familiar stewards – the experienced stewards were apparently transferred to the upmarket areas of the ground and replaced by temporary staff.

For some of you, this may not sound significant. However, the single most important factor for fans coming to games is their relationship with the family and friends they come with and also meet at the ground, more significant for their attendance and expenditure than how the team is performing. This isn’t about entitlement at all, therefore. It’s about how fans are treated and how these needs are respected by the club. To labour the point, I’ve advisedly emphasised that the club had choices about these and many other elements of their relationship with fans, and the consequences of many of these decisions made several years ago create this underlying dissatisfaction that comes to ahead when the team are not giving their all.

Coming back up to date, Tottenham’s ticketing policy deprives large numbers of supporters of their chance to go to a game and contributes towards a poor atmosphere because seats are left unoccupied. This is not just about price. There are two significant factors here. Before the start of this season, the club removed the right of season ticket holders to transfer their seat to a member of their network, basically any fan they nominated who held a Customer Reference Number (CRN), which was free and easily available from the club after filling in a simple form. Instead, season ticket holders must now put their ticket on the exchange if they are unable to go, whereas until now, this was merely one option. The club told me that if I do not use my ticket and do not put it on the exchange (for medical reasons I knew I would miss a few games in the autumn), it was now their policy to reconsider my future use of the ticket come the end of the season. They might take it away from me, in other words.

This decision reeks of their short sighted approach when considering their relationship with supporters. While it potentially increased the number of tickets available for members – to use the exchange you must hold a membership – it meant the ticket could not be used by family and friends. However, to use business language, the language most familiar to the board, this method of securing lucrative lifetime brand loyalty, available free to the club, has been seriously undermined. My son and now my granddaughter are loyal Spurs fans (and season ticket holders) because they followed in my footsteps, a story repeated in countless families down the generations. Spurs are family and family are Spurs. To repeat, this is the most important reason fans keep supporting the club and keep coming to games. It would be a simple matter to find a compromise here, for instance before the season starts, season ticket holders nominate a limited number of fans who could use their ticket occasionally.

The other element is that at the moment, it seems you must hold a membership to buy a ticket. I’m not sure when this changed or indeed if it was ever announced – I certainly missed it if was – but in the past, tickets went on general sale if there were any left after the members’ window closed, i.e. were available to anyone with a CRN. Now, for all upcoming games, click on the ‘non-members’ info button on the ticketing site and it takes you to the page where memberships are on sale, minimum cost £45. In other words, to buy a ticket in one of the most expensive grounds in the country, you have to give the club more money. If a few family members want to go, we’re easily into three figures for a membership that you may not use more than once or twice a season.

This is a screenshot of ticket availability in my section of the south stand, taken the day before the Fulham game, available seats in colour. The combination of the team’s form, the kick-off time, being close to Christmas and price (back row of the stand is the cheapest at £62.50) meant fans had had enough. The unavoidable conclusion is that Spurs would rather those seats remained empty. Bearing in mind that season ticket holders have already paid for their seat, their revenue is more important than creating the best possible atmosphere to back the side or to give other fans, including families and the fans of the future, a precious chance to see the game. 

One argument in favour of the members only policy is that it prevents opposition fans from buying tickets in home areas, and that the club are responding to complaints about this. I suspect the club’s safety officers may be involved, which is fair enough. Also, ticket touts have gone online but it remains a problem, and other clubs like Newcastle and Brighton have taken action on this. However, surely there is a way round this that does not justify keeping seats empty. If we want fans to get behind the team, give supporters, especially young fans, the chance to come to the Lane, and the fans will do the rest. 

I don’t agree with the way Vicario was targeted last Saturday, and in fact stood up to remonstrate with fans who were booing, not that it did any good. However, I understand where this comes from, which apparently the club, manager and players do not. In particular, and I wrote about this at the time, the club’s ticketing policy and associated measures cause a simmering tension. Fans I spoke to felt the club perceived them as faceless consumers – the club don’t care who sits in the seat as long as somebody does, regardless of a lifetime of loyalty. Or, this recent iteration where the club don’t care if anyone sits in the seat as long as it has been paid for.  Blaming the fans is a handy cover for the club, who should take their fair share of responsibility to look after supporters who, we are told repeatedly, are the life blood of the game, except it feels all too frequently that we are at the bottom of a long list of club priorities.

On a more positive note, longtime friend of Tottenham On My Mind Harvey Burgess has written a memoir of his time as a fan. It’s a rattling good read, and Christmas is coming! More Trauma Than Triumph is available now here.