ENIC's mission statement from
the time they bought the majority shareholding from Alan Sugar back
in 2000 was to break into the Champions League places. Although we
have been flirting with these top 4 positions over recent years, we
are currently battling against relegation and this would seem to sum
up the schizophrenic performance of the club over the last 25 years.
The club, of course, has a rich
history of success and of achieving this by playing a certain brand
of football that would be described as exciting and attack minded
and of which the supporters are justifiably proud. I don't think
many Spurs fans over the years would have sacrificed flair to secure
success - the feeling has always been that as long as we had a good
cup run, played well against Arsenal and generally played "flair"
football, then mid-table would just about satisfy us. We certainly
would not want to achieve success by playing the Arsenal style of
the 1970s or that of Everton in the majority of the 1980s.
Although this belief is still core
to any Spurs fan, the feeling over recent years has shifted slightly
in that the expectation levels have risen to where the majority of
supporters, and probably the Directors, now feel that we are at
least a top six club and very much knocking on the door or the
Champions League places. However, the clubs current position does
not show this and we do now need a lengthy period of stability for
the investment in the club to reach its fruition. So has Mr Levy's
tenure brought more stability to the club and is it better placed
now then before ENIC took over ?
Over the last 25 years the club has
continually imploded just when it appeared that they were on the
verge of something special - the FA and UEFA Cup successes of the
early 80s came to an end because we couldn't keep Keith Burkinshaw,
the great 1987 team quickly disintegrated to relegation dogfighters
after Pleat left, the 1991 Cup final success again lead to nothing
but relegation battles the following seasons due to Venables moving
upstairs and then falling out with Alan Sugar, the great side of
94-95 again lead to nothing, in part due to us being unable to hold
on to, or successfully replace, Klinsmann, with the rest of the
nineties being just more flirtations with relegation under Gross and
then Graham. Not all of these "implosions" can be blamed on the
Directors/Owners of the club at that time, but many can be.
Alan Sugar, although unpopular with
an element of Spurs fans, turned the club around financially, made
it a very stable business and brought some sanity into the
"business" of football - he should be more widely recognised for the
job he did for our club. ENIC, therefore, took over a financially
secure club in 2000 and Levy spoke widely about "periods of
stability" and "not buying success" - much in the way that Sugar had
been preaching previously. Levy initially supported Graham and
didn't want to change the Manager as this would lead to instability
- yet within weeks Graham was gone and Hoddle was in. Although this
action was clearly against Levy's mantra of "stability", I do not
think there was one Spurs supporter who did not think that Hoddle
was absolutely the right choice at that time - both from a
popularity standpoint and from his talent as a coach.
Hoddle did not work out, but the
Directors gave him enough time and support. The shower of Season
Ticket wallets that rained down on the last day of the season ( an
empty gesture if ever there was one ! ) after our trouncing by
Blackburn showed that the fans had turned against him and left ENIC
with little choice but to terminate his contract. The club did not
rush into a knee-jerk appointment, but had a Director of Football in
David Pleat who could come in whilst a thorough search could be done
to source the right candidate. Again, ENIC can not be blamed for
Santini's departure for personal reasons ( does anyone actually know
what happened here ? ) but had in Jol someone that could step in and
do a job until we found a new man. As it turned out, Jol was good
enough to take on the job permanently and Enic must be praised for
this - Jol was someone who Alex Ferguson rated highly and wanted as
his right hand man at Old Trafford before we secured him.
ENIC certainly did not cover
themselves in glory in the events that lead to Jol's departure.
Their actions directly lead to the instability they had so long
sought to avoid and a popular and successful Manager was forced to
leave. But why were the owners of the club looking at another
Manager ? This has never been fully explained, but there was a
feeling at the time, and that remains, that Jol had lost some of his
authority or even his drive. Certainly, many members of the squad
were failing to build on their performance of the previous year and
some were clearly overweight. It would appear that ENIC had
justifiably lost faith in Jol and were acting in the best interests
of the club to seek a replacement. They handled it badly and Levy
made a lengthy apology to Spurs fans.
Again, the communication/language
issues that lead to the demise of Juande Ramos can not be fully
blamed on Levy - this was a man who was widely respected throughout
Europe, had won back to back UEFA Cups, played the type of football
that fitted in with the Spurs style of play and who has subsequently
go on to manage the biggest club in the world with a near perfect
record with them. His initial results were promising, the squad got
fitter and performed better, leading to the Carling Cup win in 2008.
The performances after this triumph were poor and when it was clear
he had lost the dressing room, the club had to act and moved quickly
in appointing Redknapp.
So not a great deal of stability
here, but the turbulence has only once been down to Enic and even
then, there are large mitigating circumstances. They have
continually invested heavily into the club, have not hiked up ticket
prices even though many of our rivals have and even though we have a
much lower capacity than similar clubs. They have not often paid
over the odds for "Carlos Kickaballs" and have stuck, in the main,
to sourcing good, young prospects ( often English ) who will either
stay and grow with Spurs or who will be sold at a profit to plough
back into the club. They have maintained the financial stability of
the club ( currently 14th richest club in Europe ) where others have
not and who are now starting to feel the panic of "what if our
oligarch leaves", "what if our two US owners don't get on and then
sell at a loss", etc.
With Redknapp's appointment we have
an experienced, canny old campaigner. We still need a structure to
be put in place so that he is suitably replaced if he fails, falls
ill, leaves etc. Not sure if Bond is the man or Clive Allen, but it
would be good to have clarity on this, maybe after the season
finishes.
If we can have a full five years or
more of this much desired "stability", I have no doubt that we will
be at the very least knocking on the door of the top four places and
winning some silverware along the way. If we can get this far with
the same owners and management, we continue to run our club properly
and keep investing in good young players, then maybe its not too
unrealistic to think we may be looking to win the Premier League and
Champions League in 2015 and beyond especially if some of the top
four can't continue their current purple patches of stability.
Sounds a long way away doesn't it and football does have a habit of
not looking that far forward. We will wait, look forward with
optimism and trust that the current owners have what it takes to
establish the stability we have all craved for so long. Please , .
. . .. no more seasons of transition !
paul barker |