Very true, and I hope we eventually do. But it's great to have that feat of tradition, at the bridge for over 100 years.
I don't need any 'solace' as I couldn't really care less how many grounds we have had but if you make a wumming post you should at the very least get your terminology and facts right. If I was being as pedantic as you I would point out that we didn't have a ground at all until 1898 as we played on public pitches. When we moved 100 yards one year later we actually took the stand with us! And we are not proposing a move, just redeveloping the current stadium much as Chelsea did to Stamford Bridge in the 70s (when the pitch was actually moved as the new stands were built, just as we are planning).
That's a fair comment, but if we assume (now I am making assumptions) that the spending already completed was not reliant on the sale of Bale then investing half of profit made on Bale (say £40m) in helping to ensure the future of the club and the rest in playing staff would seem logical (to a neutral at least)!
Don't get tetchy because you've been proved wrong mate, most people know how many grounds their team have had since formation. Also you are on the Chelsea board, how can I be wumming? We talk about the same **** your motley bunch do are you wumming too?
I'm not tetchy nor have I been proved wrong. Your initial post said we would soon have moved grounds four times. We've actually only moved twice and are not planning a move currently, that doesn't come to four in any way of counting. You are in a hole - stop digging! And you do WUM on your own Board. Posting about Spurs moving grounds on a thread entitled 'Bale on his way' is almost the definition of wumming.
Not interested mate, you have nothing to say I want to read. Go wum on your own board we already have two thirds of your problem posters on here don't add to it.
If the new stadium is in the long term interests of Spurs then it should be the priority for any resources that are available so of course a large payment for Bale could help the project. Not sure why this is controversial in any way. It shouldn't be the primary driver in the decision to sell or not, though. That is quite simple - sell if the offer is more than Bale is worth to us. That needs to be a very large offer because of his value as a player and his value for marketing.
All I was doing was pointing out factual errors in your post, which you then argued incorrectly were not errors, but if you don't want to hear about your mistakes then by all means put me on ignore and I'll debate with the grown ups
How much is his value in marketing though? Despite apparently being the 3rd best player in the world, globally he wasn't even in the top 10 of Premier League player shirts sold. I imagine he'd be quite marketable for Real given their stature in world football but does he really add much to Spurs currently?
Well NBC are going all-out to promote the Premier League in the United States and Gareth Bale is their poster boy (or should that be billboard boy) for the campaign. The results speak for themselves... please log in to view this image
Exactly right - this is the main reason why the sale might happen. Its a classic win-win situation as Real can pay less than he is worth to them but which is more than he is worth to us.
No, I don't believe he would after 108 years of history at the bridge. Wouldn't you like to be at Tottenham Marshes, I mean Northumberland Park, No, I meant White Hart Lane or is it the Northumberland nomad project! You know what I mean.
I remember that **** Ensil had the cheek to call us nomads for wanting to move to Battersea/Earls Court for the first time in our existence.
100yards It's over 400 Metres from Tottenham Marshes to Northumberland Park as the crow flies and Northumberland Park is well over a 1000 metres from your present **** hole which is far bigger than any stadia you have ever had which constitutes three new grounds. Hardly a refurb is it That's twice I have had to correct your ignorance about your own nomads. FFS you've had more moves than Pickfords.