• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - Licence To Stand

Remember too that after the first delay was announced the club scaled down some of the workforce and some of the round the clock working because with the schedule being pushed out more time could be taken and presumably costs saved on out of hours working. So some areas which look like they are only now coming to completion may originally have been on the fast track plan. And as mentioned above not everything was going to be finished for day one.
Don’t waste your time Glenda, some people just want to be negative despite logic.
 
Hmm, i guess time will tell; if it's delayed beyond the Man Utd game as well though then it does start to look like the Liverpool game being the opener wasn't really likely even giving the reallocation of resources, schedules etc afterwards.

I think you have to flip the argument around and ask why Levy would have plumped for a date that was unlikely to be achieved? There’s a whole host of reasons why he wouldn’t do that but not least is the NFL arrangement, where a game was scheduled and very well publicised to take place a few weeks after the planned opening. I suspect there has been an enormous amount of placating and damage limitation going on behind the scenes with the NFL. As well as negotiating with the Premier League to be allowed to play at Wembley again; negotiating with the FA to be able to play host games at Wembley again; negotiating fees with the FA to play at Wwmbley; negotiating with MK Dons to play home League Cup games there; finding additional funds to pay for aforementioned re-locations; working out how to compensate/refund ST holders; dealing with bad publicity; upsetting the equilibrium with the manager and team due to the expected home ground not being ready; etc etc.
All in all it really makes no sense to think Levy went with - and stuck with for so long- a date that wasn’t likely to be achieved.
 
I think you have to flip the argument around and ask why Levy would have plumped for a date that was unlikely to be achieved? There’s a whole host of reasons why he wouldn’t do that but not least is the NFL arrangement, where a game was scheduled and very well publicised to take place a few weeks after the planned opening. I suspect there has been an enormous amount of placating and damage limitation going on behind the scenes with the NFL. As well as negotiating with the Premier League to be allowed to play at Wembley again; negotiating with the FA to be able to play host games at Wembley again; negotiating fees with the FA to play at Wwmbley; negotiating with MK Dons to play home League Cup games there; finding additional funds to pay for aforementioned re-locations; working out how to compensate/refund ST holders; dealing with bad publicity; upsetting the equilibrium with the manager and team due to the expected home ground not being ready; etc etc.
All in all it really makes no sense to think Levy went with - and stuck with for so long- a date that wasn’t likely to be achieved.

Ahhh, I see what you did there - plumping for the old the old 'common sense' angle.

Nice try, Glenda, but it'll make no difference to the miserabilist phalanx - they're too busy imagining stuff up to get angry and moany about and don't have the time to listen to sensible, coherent waffle like yours.
 
I think you have to flip the argument around and ask why Levy would have plumped for a date that was unlikely to be achieved? There’s a whole host of reasons why he wouldn’t do that but not least is the NFL arrangement, where a game was scheduled and very well publicised to take place a few weeks after the planned opening. I suspect there has been an enormous amount of placating and damage limitation going on behind the scenes with the NFL. As well as negotiating with the Premier League to be allowed to play at Wembley again; negotiating with the FA to be able to play host games at Wembley again; negotiating fees with the FA to play at Wwmbley; negotiating with MK Dons to play home League Cup games there; finding additional funds to pay for aforementioned re-locations; working out how to compensate/refund ST holders; dealing with bad publicity; upsetting the equilibrium with the manager and team due to the expected home ground not being ready; etc etc.
All in all it really makes no sense to think Levy went with - and stuck with for so long- a date that wasn’t likely to be achieved.

They would not have scheduled and released details of the test events, if they did not think that there was a realistic chance of them being held.
 
I think you have to flip the argument around and ask why Levy would have plumped for a date that was unlikely to be achieved? There’s a whole host of reasons why he wouldn’t do that but not least is the NFL arrangement, where a game was scheduled and very well publicised to take place a few weeks after the planned opening. I suspect there has been an enormous amount of placating and damage limitation going on behind the scenes with the NFL. As well as negotiating with the Premier League to be allowed to play at Wembley again; negotiating with the FA to be able to play host games at Wembley again; negotiating fees with the FA to play at Wwmbley; negotiating with MK Dons to play home League Cup games there; finding additional funds to pay for aforementioned re-locations; working out how to compensate/refund ST holders; dealing with bad publicity; upsetting the equilibrium with the manager and team due to the expected home ground not being ready; etc etc.
All in all it really makes no sense to think Levy went with - and stuck with for so long- a date that wasn’t likely to be achieved.
This all makes sense...so somewhere along the line at least one person has been signing off phases of the development as completed when they haven’t been..someone has to be accountable for Levy believing the delivery date to not only have been achievable in the first place but also to have got to the stage where test events where being organised?
 
Good thing is in the long run no one will really care, by the start of next season it will pretty much all have been forgotten and we'll be moving on. Only thing that really annoys me is the negativity getting to the players and us dropping out of the top 4. Once we're up and running money will be rolling in and we'll have the background infrastructure at least to compete with the rest of the big boys.
 
This all makes sense...so somewhere along the line at least one person has been signing off phases of the development as completed when they haven’t been..someone has to be accountable for Levy believing the delivery date to not only have been achievable in the first place but also to have got to the stage where test events where being organised?
You’re talking about the security systems right? It sounds like it was at the testing stage, a month or so before the first game that they realized they’d made an error in installation, or sabotage, or whatever it was. So as soon as that phase wasn’t signed off as completed the delay was announced.

Not sure what more you want the project manager(s) to do?
 
Golden badger update

It is of huge importance to the Club that our rich heritage is embraced at the new stadium.
As such, we were delighted to announce recently that an iconic Golden badger, a scaled-up replica of the original, will return home and take pride of place on top of the South Stand.

Our original designs had the new badger facing North, overlooking the stadium bowl – this resonated given our proud North London heritage and the fact that the badger that sat on top of The Lane’s East Stand also faced in this direction from 1958.

Interestingly, when this badger was replaced due to weather damage in the 1980s, it was placed facing the opposite direction, South, with its right flank towards the pitch, resulting in strong feelings from fans being expressed that the badger should be repositioned back to how it was. The badger was subsequently repositioned and remained facing North until the Finale of White Hart Lane.

This influenced our initial thinking in terms of which direction the new badger should face, particularly as it will not be sitting on either the East or West Stand. Indeed, many fans would have noticed the new badger facing North while playing matches in the new stadium on EA SPORTS FIFA 19.

We were also aware though that the badger that sat on top of the Lane’s West Stand, however, faced in the opposite direction - South. In fact, from 1909, when the Golden badger was first seen at the Lane, it resided in this position before it was moved to the East Stand 49 years later.

We noted discussions amongst our fans on the subject and having received emails on this, we decided to review the positioning of our new badger.

The one consistency throughout history (other than with the repositioning of the East Stand badger in the 1980s) was that the badger was always positioned with its left wing facing the pitch. Therefore, to any fan or player looking up, the badger appeared as it does on our famous Club crest.

After further discussion within the Club and consulting our Club Historian, we have taken the decision to maintain this tradition at the new stadium - our new badger will therefore be positioned with its left wing facing towards the pitch. Additionally, this change will be reflected in FIFA 19 in the upcoming months.
Not only does this ensure that fans and players within the bowl will view the badger as it appears on our crest, it also maximises the visual exposure of this beautiful sculpture from all angles, no matter where you are positioned within the bowl.

We should like to take this opportunity to thank all fans that have shared their views with the Club. The Golden badger will be lifted into position soon.

The original Golden badgers that were removed from White Hart Lane for safekeeping will also feature throughout the new stadium campus.
The badger that sat on top of the East Stand during the Lane’s final days has now been put on display within the Tottenham Experience and can be seen from the High Road above the entrance to the new Spurs Shop.
The second badger from The Lane, that sat on top of the West Stand, will be placed in the players’ tunnel, with the original from 1909 remaining at Lilywhite House, the Club’s executive offices, where it currently resides.

Meanwhile, the Tottenham Hotspur Clock, adorned with the Golden badger motif, that was a feature on the High Road between 1934 and 2007 and is now within the reception area at Lilywhite House, will be moved to the Club Museum when it opens.

https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/2018/november/golden-badger-update/
 
You’re talking about the security systems right? It sounds like it was at the testing stage, a month or so before the first game that they realized they’d made an error in installation, or sabotage, or whatever it was. So as soon as that phase wasn’t signed off as completed the delay was announced.

Not sure what more you want the project manager(s) to do?
Tested it earlier, or conducted more tests at certain stages. If something was understood to be delivered a month before it was due to be used and is now taking several months to fix, something in the installation must have been wrong along the way. Unless it was sabotaged post sign off of course, in which case that needs to be proved to exonerate whoever is on the hook for signing it off.
 
Last edited:
She had a terrible voice and completely out of tune ... or is it the stadium acoustics .... serious relegation fears
 
Tested it earlier, or conducted more tests at certain stages. If something was understood to be delivered a month before it was due to be used and is now taking several months to fix, something in the installation must have been wrong along the way. Unless it was sabotaged post sign off of course, in which case that needs to be proved to exonerate whoever is on the hook for signing it off.

Spot on, something went very wrong somewhere. My experience in construction was that the were always stages and things being signed off as you said, the would have been tests early on that would have showed up problems. Something has gone on thats for sure.
 
Back