Spurs Win Ugly. At Times This Was Downright Revolting

/ Alan / 43 Comments

If winning ugly is a sign of a successful team, this was the Elephant Man of victories. Spurs v Everton should never have come out in daylight. Rather, the game is destined to slip furtively through the back alleys of north London largely covered in a hessian sack for fear of scaring the onlookers.

Nature and adventure. That’s the way to go. Something different. Exciting, innovative, all round White Hart Lane. On the advertising boards, of course. None of that on the pitch. It was that sort of first half, plenty of time to read the ads. One from Spurs encouraged us to ‘Join the conversation’ – nothing much to talk about. ‘What would you like to remember?’ begins the prompt on my note-taking app. About the first half, frankly nothing.

I’m grateful for the three points, I really am, don’t get me wrong, but my giddy aunt large parts of that game were the worst we have played since I don’t know when. Disjointed and devoid of both ideas and energy, we created very little in the way of passing moves in the first half, let alone chances.

Everton had the better of the opening period, Osman missing with two or three decent efforts from the edge of the box and Lloris making one top class save, full-length to his left. We gradually came back into it without making much of an impression on the Toffee’s well-marshalled defence. Eriksen shot over from a long-range free-kick and Adebayor stretched in vain pursuit of Rose’s one decent cross of the game.

Rose was holding his back even in the warm-up and looked sluggish throughout. Eriksen was peripheral, Lennon anonymous, carrying on from where he left off last week. I hope Paulinho is feeling his way back to full-fitness after his injury because if not, he must be mightily hacked off about something. Only Dembele provided any drive or impetus. A rock on the ball, defenders bounced off him as he went he forward but he had precious little help from his team-mates. He should have tried a shot or two.

Bentaleb kept moving across in front of the back four, tidying up and making himself available, his distribution a mixture of the accurate and misplaced but he was not alone in giving the ball away. A plastic kebab box blew across the pitch as half-time approached. Guess the defenders had the time to tuck in. It was so quiet at times, I could hear Sherwood shouting on the other side of the pitch. My highlight thus far was queuing for the toilet at half-time.

After the break Spurs emerged with a bit more purpose and bounce, though everything in this game is relative. We weren’t really getting anywhere but there were a few oohs and ahhs from the crowd, although by then winning a thrown-in might have led to a lap of honour.

The match was won with a moment of high-class football utterly out of keeping with the rest of the performance because it involved a) quick thinking, b) a pinpoint pass and c) a shot on target. Dembele toppled over in centre midfield. While everyone waited for him to pick himself up, Walker hit an early diagonal ball 40 yards onto Abebayor’s chest. Everything about what followed was perfect – a finely timed run to avoid offside and get a precious yard on the defenders, his impeccable control, his strength to hold off two defenders and above all a blinding left-foot shot that flew low to the near post. My whingeing about this game should not detract from Manu’s cracking finish, thrilling with the co-ordination and flow of a striker at his peak.

And that was pretty much that. The goal was our first shot on target. Stats show we had another one but I can’t recall it. Sherwood used his subs well, Capoue coming on to shore up the defence as Everton pressed and the bold move of Defoe and Townsend to distract Everton at the other end. Andros ended up shooting against defenders’ legs from a foot and neglecting his defensive duties as Coleman overlapped but the danger passed. Capoue came across to help but nearly undid his work by making one rash tackle, on Coleman in the box, but the ref said ‘no penalty’. We played out time without too much bother.

A few things to take from this one. People are still talking about Sherwood’s 4-4-2 when he has often varied his formation. This was 4-5-1 to match up with Everton. In the end, both sides cancelled each other out, which made for a dull game. Everton had no recognised striker and it really showed. Even so, their attitude was too cautious and they did not pressure us when it was clear we were not playing at all well.

Our main problem was the absence of movement when we got the ball. Time and again  we picked the ball up in midfield only to find everyone bar Adebayor standing still. We did not get enough players in front of the ball in those situations. One – Adebayor – is not enough. We have the players to do it, we have done it in away games to good effect, yet nothing yesterday and that could be down either to player lethargy or poor coaching.

Adebayor was our best player regardless of the goal. He kept working and was always available despite not getting any support from the midfield.

I’ve never done it myself but I could understand why many were tempted to drift away before the end. A shame though – they should have stayed to say farewell to Jermain Defoe, who wandered slowly around the pitch taking his applause from two-thirds empty stands. A mistake to let him go. He found himself a relic of a bygone age when the big man/little man combo reigned supreme. Sincere thanks for everything he’s done. I was sad to see him drift away like this and think he was sad too.

 

Heartwarming Tales Of The True Meaning Of Being A Spur Lift The Gloom

/ Alan / 26 Comments

The drabness of Spurs’ 1-1 draw away to Hull yesterday matched the battleship grey gloom enveloping supporters this week. Tottenham went through the motions but never got it together. However, we came home with a point in a match where we had the better of the play overall without ever looking particularly dangerous.

I’m sure I’m not the only one who is feeling numb and disillusioned – the Lustdoctor has returned to blogging with this searing indictment of the current situation on the The Fighting Cock site. Read it if you haven’t caught it already. I have been reminded recently about the bond between Spurs supporters and the special fascination this club develops for those of us who feel our support deep inside.

First, yesterday’s draw. The dysfunctional features of our play, familiar when we’re not doing so well, were in evidence for most of the Spurs blog 108game. A slow tempo, soporific in periods where we seemed scared to play the ball out of defence, or unable to. Lack of cohesion as we tried to move the ball forward. Adebayor was the focal point throughout and our best player, holding, giving and on rare occasions looking sharp in the box. However, he looked around and found precious little going on, at least in terms of anything decisive, something or someone to make a goalscoring opportunity. Lennon missed the beat all afternoon, regularly passing to an opponent or moving to exactly where a team-mate’s ball was not going to end up.

Defensive uncertainty. So good to see Vertonghen back, brought straight into the side alongside Dawson but not yet match fit. The two centre-backs were shifted out of position too often, although this was not all their fault as the protection from our midfield four in front of them melted away frequently, and not under any great pressure. Vertonghen tried too hard early on: in trying to get in front of an attacker he sold himself. Dawson was stranded and Long ran on to a clever ball to exploit that confusion and score. We had still to get going.

Gradually we pushed Hull back. It’s a pattern that they don’t seem to mind too much. They have one of the best home defensive records in the division, plus a recently acquired strike pairing that would always keep us occupied. So without ever firing up the quattro, we made the chances and missed them. Most were fleeting opportunities, might-have-beens not forehead-clutching blunders. Manu and others to the byline, time and again the cross was blocked in or near the six yard box by well-organised and determined defenders. Almost but not quite.

Good to see Paulinho back. Needs time on the field too, his box to box drive is vital in a four man midfield but he can’t get up into fourth or fifth just yet. But class is permanent. Rose’s hopeless mishit came to him at the edge of the box. One momentary lapse from an otherwise diligent defence and he was on his own. Back to goal, he killed the ball stone dead at his feet, then turned and shot into the net in a single movement. A rare moment of quality on a dull afternoon.

Poor Soldado. Strikers more than any other player relay on instinct and when it deserts them, they wander lost and bewildered in the wilderness. When they are out of touch, defenders can whack the cover off the ball to clear it, midfielders can run around a lot but strikers have no such fallback. Soldado has no idea what’s gone wrong. It’s past the point of criticism, I just feel pity.

Now for a heartwarming story of camaraderie and generosity between strangers, united by a loyalty to Tottenham Hotspur. TNot sure if the club is worthy of such loyalty. It fails to grasp the basic fact of support – we give a hell of a lot but in the end it is a relationship, and like any relationship they have to give something back. Not much because we are patient, loyal and longsuffering, but something, yet at the moment they give nothing.

Supporters are different. Supporters get it. They understand what it means, beyond head and heart and into the soul. There’s nothing like it, the bond supporters feel towards a club. Irrational, insane, energy-sapping but as a soul singer once said, when she touches me, nothing else matters.

On Christmas Day our garden was flooded. Another six inches or so and it would have come into the house. I don’t even live especially close to a river. We were lucky the damage wasn’t greater and I’m grateful for that, but under three feet of water, inside our little garden cabin, was my collection of Spurs books, souvenirs and programmes. I’m not a collector, I just kept a programme from every game I saw since I was a kid in the sixties until the late nineties, when I stopped buying them.

I wrote about it here. Of course I did – the essence of the blog over the last five seasons is about how it feels to be a Spurs supporter, and this felt bad. Logically, rationally, really, I am so relieved the house didn’t cop it but those programmes meant a lot. But, I have discovered, not as much as the touching response I had to that piece. I’m going to embarrass a few people by naming names, because you deserve to know about their generosity.

As well as the kind comments on the blog, several people wrote to me to say how much they enjoy the blog and felt for my loss. Thank you.

Three authors, proper writers not a scrappy blogger writing in snatched moments between chores and work like me, took the trouble not only to contact me but to offer to replace any damaged books. Adam Powley, Martin Cloake and Julie Welch – thank you. Please buy their books – all of them, now. They will remind you what it means to be a Spur.

On the Spurs Odyssey site, run by the mighty Paul Smith, my pal Rich Dickenson put me in touch with Graham Barker. His father, a lifelong Spurs fan like Graham, had died recently. Graham wanted his programmes to go to a good home and so now they are in mine. We had never met before I went to pick them up, he refused to take any money for them, he knew his dad would have wanted them to go to someone who knew what they meant. Graham, thank you.

Davey, sometime commenter on this site, writer, we’ve shared a few games on the Shelf. Not been in touch for a while, out of the blue a programme from the Pat Jennings testimonial drops through the letter box. It’s found a good home. Didn’t have to do it, but took the time and trouble. Thanks Davey.

My blogging pal Greg from the excellent Dispatches From A Football Sofa  More coincidence. I had admired his work for ages, discovered a few years ago he lives nearby. Semi-final programme, same letterbox. I told him he should have kept it for his newborn son, a hierloom. Thanks Greg.

Whatever the club do, the spirit of being a Spurs supporter will never go away.

Spurs: The Taste Of Honey Bitter On The Lips

/ Alan / 12 Comments

If I were a proper journalist, I’d focus on a few key incidents that altered the course of Wednesday’s night game against City. Overwhelmed early on, Spurs were only, miraculously, a goal down when Toure’s unnecessarily hard tackle in midfield confirmed the lingering suspicion that they are not entirely comfortable if put under a little pressure.

That this put some fire in Spurs bellies, that Tottenham rallied with the crowd at their backs. That Spurs nearly scored as a corner fizzed low into the six yard box, then Dawson’s ‘goal’ from an Eriksen free kick was disallowed, a close call.

That closer still was Danny Rose’s goal-saving tackle on Dzeko, tipping the ball away with his toe, only to find the linesman semaphored ‘penalty’. That Rose was dismissed, City converted the penalty and that extinguished the dim spark of comeback.

So that’s one story of the match, and it’s true. However, what worried me were the bits in between. Spurs were completely outclassed for extended periods of this game. In the first half, 11 v 11, City repeatedly scythed through our defence. I’d tell you a bit about what happened and how they did it except that it was all a blur, so swift and innovative were their attacks. For certain our defenders did not have a clue what was going on.

City’s movement on and off the ball was fluid and cohesive, a joy to behold in other circumstances. Pressing in midfield, they hunt in packs, three or four players surrounding the man on the ball. Time and again we lost possession, either tackled or in getting the ball away, thinking we had outwitted them, only to find the pass had nowhere to go except to sky blue feet.

With the ball, they could and should have scored three or four. Hugo did what he could, precious little mostly but he made one blindingly fast reaction save, hurling himself to his left to palm away a certain goal. A standing ovation, justified.

This story makes sober reading. For that opening half hour, this had a cup-tie feel with big time City slickers visiting the plucky underdogs who were hanging on for dear life in the hope that the big boys would miss a few chances then take their foot off the pedal. Spurs cast as the minnows. That’s my story and I don’t want to tell it.

There’s something wrong here and I know I’m not the only one. We sat and admired City’s play instead of urging the team back into contention. Marvelling at how they did it, as if we’d come as neutrals. Instead of railing against the injustice of the penalty, I shrugged in resignation. I bought into the minnows, no real chance but live in hope, a couple of meaty tackles, never mind playing football, come on! A sign that we were nowhere no-hopers before we kicked off. For a side as good as we might be, it’s the ultimate condemnation.

Usual rubbish on 606. “Worst team since the second division” – come on. “Sell the lot of them” – really? “It’s time to start again and rebuild over two years” – yeah right, after £100m worth of rebuilding 6 months ago. All Spurs fans these, bollo but I couldn’t identify with the anger, never mind the remedy. No solace in midnight Twitter. Those not finger-pointing were so miserable, they couldn’t muster the energy to raise a finger to point.

Tim Sherwood is making a decent fist of things in a job for which he has no experience, precious little preparation and with a squad not of his choosing. What is happening off the field at Spurs pervades the air and seeps in through every pore.

This is what I think about modern football. On the pitch, football’s fine. Football was never nine or ten months of rollicking Brazilian flair or for that matter push and run style. It’s about sweat, luck, brilliance, cock-ups and drama. Always has been, always will be, and that’s why it is compelling and irresistible. W formation, registas, heatmaps, tactics truck – the game’s the same. How team-mates players relate to each other, what they do with the space with and without the ball.

It’s what happens before and after the whistle blows that’s the problem. Spurs are not the only club to suffer but it’s the one I care about. For some time, the deteriorating relationship between the club and supporters has created a sense of alienation. Because the club makes little or no effort to look after us, we fans are increasingly distant from the reason we turn up every week. It’s us and them, not we.

No need to go over the reasons in detail. The board do lazy backstroke through deep pools of television cash yet seat prices rise year on year as living standards fall. Not that of the chairman, mind – £2.2m pa at the last call. My salary is 1% higher than it was five years ago. TV dictates we can kick-off most any time Saturday morning to Monday evening. £2 for a bottle of water. Kids priced out of it.

Alienation becomes the equilibrium, tolerated and in balance. It rumbles under the surface, omnipresent and dormant save for a few grumbles, like this one in fact. Until something happens. Then, it becomes other things – anger, resentment, bitterness, protest, resignation. Different things to different fans but the same underlying cause.

I know we shouldn’t complain in one way. Going nowhere, 12 years ago, from Pleat the caretaker (my worst ever experience at Spurs in the 45 years I’ve been going because even in Division 2 there was hope and expectation for the future) to the Champions League. I am grateful, really I am. We’re still contenders, in 5th place. At least I think we are. I don’t actually know off the top of my head where we are because it doesn’t seem to matter. There’s no plan. We all know there’s another guy lined up for the summer. We know our chairman cannot judge a manager’s ability in advance so it will be potluck. So we wait and in the meantime go through the motions.

Buying and selling over the years, buy young to build them up, stick with them to develop a team, against the odds, the admiration of football because we haven’t broken the bank, do it the proper way. Reality exposed – no plan. Buy a team for a manager, sack him, bring in another guy, he’s not happy with the squad, buy and sell. And so it goes. But Levy’s still here. As the immortal Smokey Robinson says, a taste of honey is worse than none at all. If we seem ungrateful, Mr Levy, it’s because Spurs supporters know the game. We know good football, we know how to get it, and this isn’t the right way. Sullen silence in the stands is that resignation palpable, in the air, real because this isn’t right. We know the potential and time and again it’s been wasted.

This is hard. It feels a bit like that caretaker horror year, marking time, twiddling thumbs, the loftiest ambition was just to get it over with. At least we have much better players this time and are at the other end of the table. Poyet, Anderton and Redknapp to get us through a 38 game season – hah! We are expected to be bothered when Levy isn’t. You might want to remember these last few paragraphs, these last few games, when you want to fill the new stadium, dear Daniel.

And so to the game itself. This week we had a rare insight into the tactical approach taken by Tim and his management team. I’m referring to Les Ferdinand’s interview where he talked about the role of a holding midfielder. What he said has been discussed as if he doesn’t like them but his actual meaning was admirably nuanced. Midfield defensive cover is essential, it’s just that having a midfielder in a purely defensive role is a waste.

This is something that ‘ahem’ I’ve talked about every now and again. These days we need midfielders who are flexible, who are mobile and alert, with a highly developed positional sense that is more effective a protection for the back four that the old-fashioned hard tackling destroyer, who can get a toe in but who can also pass the ball to turn defence into attack. That’s why AVB persisted with Dembele in a defensive role, the wrong position for him in my view but he fitted the bill. It also explains why Sherwood prefers Bentaleb to Capoue, whose passing range is more restricted.

Good stuff. It requires flexibility and an understanding between players, an awareness of when to go forward and when to cover depending on where the ball is, where the opponents are and the position of team-mates. We had a brief glimpse of how this works when Sandro and Dembele formed a powerful midfield axis in AVB’s first season, one goes forward while the other covers, before Sandro was injured.

Trouble is, it takes time to build up that teamwork and time is one thing Tim hasn’t had. After City sliced through what passed for our defensive cover for Aguero’s  opener, Les leapt from the bench and he and Sherwood berated the midfield. Dembele and Bentaleb looked sheepish: I guess it was primarily directed at them.

This is what happens when a manager takes over. Chopping and changing. The new moves may be better but they take a while to learn. Another example: City pressed as a unit, we as individuals. Outcome – City dominated the midfield with only Dembele escaping every now and again – twice leaving Toure for dead – the nerve of it. I forgot Lennon was playing in the first half. Eriksen was invisible throughout, Siggy ineffective. It was just too quick for him.

Much of the match passed Bentaleb by. It was a brave selection and wrong for this game, but paradoxically it was confirmation that he is a player of rich potential because he never gave up, never once shirked any responsibility and did not hide. He did no worse than several more experienced men around him.

We were torn apart by stunningly beautiful attacking football. The irony was that for all their enterprise they scored only once as the fans looked on in silent envy. There was no sense of expectation that this would be anything other than the shape of the match. We expected it to turn out like this. That dull, flat mood says all you need to know about life at the Lane right now.

Dawson desperately tried to stem the flow, singlehanded. He hurled himself around the box and outside, in position, out of position, ineffective at times, heroic at others. You have to admire him – beaten for pace and he knew it but when the going got tough, he got going.

Then a tackle or two changed it. Toure’s blemish got the crowd going and you sensed that there was a soft centre underneath the hard tasty City shell. Rose made waves down the left, shame his crossing was poor because we had men over. City can’t defend set pieces either. A low corner was nearly stabbed in on the line then Dawson had his effort in the net but ruled out for offside.

Relief at half time that it was only one. Capoue on for an injured Dembele. His first touch was on a player not the ball as he ploughed through Silva on the halfway line. Then the penalty and the lingering hopes of a revival and a decent match ruined by a lousy decision. I am in a minority of one it seems in saying I have some sympathy for refs. I sit fairly low down and can assure you that you have no idea how quick Premier League football is from watching on TV. Here, the ref looked to his linesman, as he should. All I would say is the linesman is not a ref because they are not good enough, yet this crucial decision was taken on his say so.

Sherwood then showed his inexperience again by not thinking quickly about the substitution. After Rose was sent off for depriving City of a goal scoring opportunity, inevitable once the penalty was given, Capoue moved into the back four. This upset the centre back paring, moved Chiriches to left back and further unsettled a jittery and uncertain midfield. City scored quickly, Dzeko picking up a loose ball in the box. Sherwood then brought on Naughton as left back with the other reverting to their positions, but the damage had been done. Game over. Perhaps it was at kick-off.

City’s final three goals were all a bit scruffy – two loose balls in the box and one deflection. This is the stuff in the penalty box that ten men can defend as well as eleven but we were all over the place. Luckily for us so was Dzeko. We played out time wondering how many it might have been had he been on form.

 

 

Spurs And The Y Word: Fans In The Dock

/ Alan / 20 Comments

The Prime Minister is a man of the people only when it suits him, and what suits is when votes might be at stake. He’s hardly the first politician to attach himself temporarily to sport as a way of proving his street cred and he won’t be the last. He tipped up at a few Olympic events and suddenly became a Blues fan when the late-running 2012 Champions League final provided an unexpected G8 photo opportunity. Angela, I’m with you all the way on that one.

So when in September last year he pronounced upon the long-running dispute over the use of the Y-word at Tottenham Hotspur, he was focussed less on the good of the national game and more on his intended audience, those involved in the debate around free speech and the readers of the Jewish Chronicle, where the interview was published and whose editor happens to be a Spurs fan. Yet there’s no doubt he stuck a chord with many of us.

“There’s a difference between Spurs fans self-describing themselves as Yids and someone calling someone a Yid as an insult. You have to be motivated by hate. Hate speech should be prosecuted – but only when motivated by hate.”

He’d better change his legal advisers. Although the PM would have been thoroughly briefed in advance on the topic, the Metropolitan Police beg to differ. Last week three Spurs fans, Gary Whybrow, Sam Parsons and Peter Ditchman, were charged with using threatening, abusive or insulting words and are due to appear in court on February 4th. The BBC report a Met spokesperson as confirming the alleged offences were racially aggravated and charges brought under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Perhaps they could call DC as a character witness.

I don’t know anything about the precise circumstances of this case but it is possible to talk about the whole issue of active police intervention in what goes on amongst football fans, which has implications not just for Spurs supporters but for fans of football all over the country.

The debate over Spurs’ fans use of the Y word has been part of my consciousness and identity for the entire time I have been a Tottenham supporter, which dates back to the mid sixties. It’s hard to know when it began. Spurs have always had a loyal following drawn from the Jewish community in north London, which persists to this day. Tottenham itself has had a large Jewish population ever since substantial sections of the community moved from the east End in the early years of the twentieth century encouraged by employment in Jewish-owned businesses based in what is now Tottenham Hale. It was easy to walk up the High Road after schul on Saturday or even, and don’t tell the rabbi, to hop on a tram. Many used their precious leisure time to watch the Spurs, to be part of the local community, to fit in. By the mid thirties, some accounts state a third of the crowd were jewish. That proportion seems inflated but it’s certain the links with the community have lasted almost as long as the club has been in existence.

The explanation of why Spurs are the yids lies outside the club and its fans, however. Arsenal also have huge support within the same north London community. Both clubs have had Jewish representation at board level. The Manchester clubs have a jewish following too. The origins of the term lie in the pernicious, consistent abuse of Spurs supporters from other clubs, especially at away matches. Tracing the origins is difficult. Talking to a couple of long-standing Jewish fans recently, one said it began from Charlton supporters, a mild-mannered bunch there are too. Another watched the 1967 Cup Final from the Chelsea end and vividly recalled the remarks at the final whistle that the ‘the yids have won it.’ After my piece in When Saturday Comes on this topic, a contributor to the letters column blamed Alf Garnett for popularising the term, but I suspect that may have emerged as authentic bias from actor Warren Mitchell, who would have heard it regularly when he came to the Lane as a fervent Tottenham fan.

As a young impressionable jew, I heard the abuse develop in the early to mid seventies and I saw the response. Instead of marginalising the Jews amongst their number or blaming them for provoking trouble and – literally in those days – aggro, Spurs fans chose defiance and reclaimed the word to neutralise its negativity. Claiming class consciousness is pushing it but there’s no doubt that White Hart Lane was notable for an absence of the casual racism sadly rife in football grounds at the time.

I understand that there is a legitimate counterargument, that the use of the word ‘yid’ cannot be justified. It carries a long, sorry history of anti-Semitic abuse and is seen as profoundly abusive to this day by large sections of the Jewish community. It is also argued that Spurs fans cannot reclaim a word that never belonged to them.

Remember that there is no agreement over the use of the word amongst Spurs fans. Many Jewish supporters, including people who regularly and loyally read this blog and whose views I utterly respect, do not want to hear it at the Lane.

These objections are far more substantial than pointing to the culture of instant outrage and offence that prevails in social media, twitter especially. This week the words of national treasure Stephen Fry have been quoted in support of the view that outraged people can feel what they like but this does not give them rights, that being offended has no meaning other than as an expression of an individual’s feelings. “I am offended by that. Well so f**king what.” I agree but this debate has real heft, formed over decades of anti-Semitism. It’s not about Baddiel, newspaper columnists or even the Chief Rabbi – it has history and substance.

I cannot escape that context. It has over-riding significance for me. As the response was formed in fan interaction, I was there. I don’t use the word yid to describe my identity as a fan. Don’t know why, not something I have thought about, but ask me and I am a Spurs supporter. But I defend the use of the word by Spurs fans. I get the debate, the balance but come down firmly on the side of ‘no objections’.

I might fast become the minority if the FA and the Met have anything to do with it. The one point of agreement for everyone involved in the debate is that there are grey areas of interpretation. Nothing is cut and dried. Back last autumn, around the time of the PM’s comment, the FA deliberated on the matter at length. Their report as described in the papers contains a balanced summary of the debate.  However,  the FA chose sides, concluding, “The FA considers that the use of the term ‘yid’ is likely to be considered offensive by the reasonable observer.”

It is likely they were conscious not of anything happening on social media but problems around the alleged use of racist and discriminatory language in other prominent cases. Then, significantly, their definition was endorsed by the Met, declaring before the West Ham home league game that fans who use the language could be committing an offence under section 5 of the Public Order Act. A year before, the police publicly stated that fans would not face prosecution in these circumstances. Now, saying the word itself was enough. Only the FA’s reaction has changed, nothing else. Context was erased from the equation.

The law under which the Tottenham Three have been charged refers to section 5, which enables action against words and actions that are ‘threatening, abusive or insulting’. The phrasing of the FA ruling is deliberate and careful. Section 5 requires that offence must be caused. However, this does not mean one or more people present have to be offended before action is taken. It’s another moment in the spotlight for the reasonable man, presumably on top of if not the Clapham omnibus then the 279 to Edmonton.

My understanding is that the element of ‘insulting’ is shortly going to be removed from the law although ‘abusive’ rightly remains. In reality, an insult and abuse might run close together. When this becomes the case, a lawyer I have spoken to suggests that someone using the insult ‘yid’ would not be a criminal act. However, someone being abusive towards a Jew because they are Jewish could be liable for arrest. Again this is not cut and dried. The thorny problem of the definition of abuse remains.

As it stands, we stay with ‘abusive or insulting’. I have no idea about the circumstances of the arrest of these three men, although I believe they relate to two separate incidents, i.e. they weren’t arrested at the same time. Whatever was going on, they were not the only three Spurs fans to use the word in and around White Hart Lane. It seems to me that the FA and Met have ruled on the definition and it is this that will be tested in court.

I have deep misgivings about this case. All Spurs fans are vulnerable if the word is used. I don’t accept that the use of the word devoid of context is abusive. As Spurs fans, it seems highly unlikely they were directing the word as a term of abuse towards other Spurs fans, let alone Jewish people. If it is the word that counts in the absence of context, what happens if I as a Jew use it outside the Lane during a conversation with my yiddisher Spurs pal Dave? We’re a long way from abusive or insulting.

Another decision has been made here. Spurs supporters have been charged, not those of opposition supporters who routinely abuse us. I could mount a case that hissing noises, songs about concentration camps and Nazi salutes in the High Road are abusive and insulting, and not just to Jews but to other minorities. The FA has adopted a position so contorted that they are gazing up their own backsides.

The Tottenham Hotspur Supporters Trust have tracked this case and have pointed people in the direction of advice and representation. They say that, “It remains our firm belief that, used in a football context by Tottenham Hotspur supporters, there is no intent or desire to offend any member of the Jewish Community.” I agree wholeheartedly.

I wonder too about any wider implications for fans in general. The police these days have a sophisticated approach to policing football matches. This implies an interventionist approach at odds with current tactics. After all, police at grounds all over the country have let anti-Semitic abuse directed towards our supporters go past without any action. I have asked police officers in the past why this is. They reply that they can’t prove that any one individual is the culprit. yet the police around our club have made a decision relating to three fans. Also, those officers are acting on orders, which I suggest revolve the idea common in the football policing which is, keep a lid on trouble, if it is in one place it can be controlled and don’t provoke anything more.

Will these tactics change, in the Met and/or elsewhere? Will fans of other clubs be in danger of a word being taken as indicating a possible breach of the law? it seems a reasonable question.

Finally, evidence from twitter suggests this has not increased popular understading of the issues or decreased anti-Semitic abuse one iota. Every day there are examples of fans of other clubs using the Y word as abuse. When challenged, they often dismiss it as not being anti-Semitic, ‘it’s what you call yourselves’, ‘it doesn’t mean anything.’ They are wrong of course but there’s precious little evidence of progress. Plus we return to the problem that this goes unpunished yet three Spurs fans are in the dock. I remain extremely uncomfortable about the whole situation, for Spurs fans and others. I fully the appreciate the deep and complex debate, but to me, in the end this is plain wrong.