Spurs Rumours Member Posts


tottenhamOxspur's Profile

Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
Correct Score Competition:

Not entered
Correct Score Competition
Flat Out Racing:

Not played Flat Out Racing

No Profile Picture uploaded


Where from:

Favourite player:

Best team moment:



tottenhamOxspur's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To tottenhamOxspur's Posts



To tottenhamOxspur's last 5 rumours posts


To tottenhamOxspur's last 5 banter posts


To tottenhamOxspur's last 5 rumour replies


To tottenhamOxspur's last 5 banter replies


tottenhamOxspur's rumours posts with other poster's replies to tottenhamOxspur's rumours posts


13 Jun 2016 10:28:43
Hi Eds,

Can someone please summarise what is going on with Janssen?

Do you know if this deal has basically been agreed or is there still a lot of work to do to get this over the line?



{Ed002's Note - AZ's Vincent Janssen has attracted a great deal of attention with his performances this season with van Gaal having scouts watch him on several occasions and Schalke 04 doing the same. Everton have approached AZ regarding Janssen knowing that they will almost certainly lose Lukaku in the summer. Spurs have put an offer on the table to AZ which they would accept if the player is willing to make the move. PSG and Arsenal also both have a declared interest but neither has him as first choice, and for Arsenal he is no better than second on the list if they decide to add a second striker as well. Aside from those clubs that have a declared interest many others have watched the player. The player knows that if he does move he needs to be playing every week or his potential international career could hit a stumbling block. For now everything remains in the hands of AZ and the player.}

1.) 13 Jun 2016 14:03:30
Thanks ed! So it could be Batshuayi or Janssen not Batshuayi and Janssen taking the names as just striker places in the squad, not as those two players.

{Ed002's Note - This is nothing to do with Batshuayi, an entirely separate matter. Spurs want Kane to stay and want to add a second striker - Janssen is that player as we stand right now. Marseille has spoken to Juventus, Valencia and Chelsea about Michy Batshuayi whilst numerous clubs have attended Marseille games this season to watch him and others. Interest of Lyon, Porto, Milan, Monaco and Benfica has seemingly moved on for now due to the price and other issues. Atletico were still hedging their bets over a move by Griezmann and have stepped back after Griezmann agreed a new contract. Arsenal has had long-term interest as have Spurs and Roma, and whilst none can be discounted from making an offer in the summer but the player may be sold but not on the open market. We need to wait and see. Whilst Marseille do not want to sell (and have signed him to a contract extension) and the player wants to stay, a summer move is still looking likely whilst management, financial and ownership issues continue to be the prime focus of the club at the moment. Interest of West Ham and Leicester is known to Marseille but it has gone no further as the player has no interest in moving to either side. Juventus interest was to be dependent on Morata but they have, during discussions over another player, put a very attractive package on the table that could end all speculation of a sale on the open market this summer. Firm interest of Dortmund is known to Marseille but a request for a meeting has been shunned for now whilst Marseille address other major issues as a priority - and again there is a dependency on what happens with another player, in this case Aubameyang. But is may well be a matter beyond Dortmund now. In recent discussions with a major European side over the transfer of another player, Batshuayi was discussed and a tentative agreement reached if he were to become available. Marseille are open to this deal as it will help in other endeavours the club has - but they would like the matter addressed behind closed doors as far as they can.}

2.) 13 Jun 2016 16:24:57
First of all thanks a lot for clearing that up ed002! As the last follow up question on this matter, I'd like to ask if there will be no situation wherein spurs end up with Batshuayi and Janssen?

{Ed002's Note - There could be. If Kane were to leave Spurs might look to both.}

3.) 13 Jun 2016 16:46:14
But there's no reason to believe Kane will leave, right?

{Ed002's Note - Personally I don't think he will leave in this window.}

4.) 13 Jun 2016 17:38:26
Thanks ed! Please don't say that Kane will leave! :)



28 Jan 2016 11:48:09
Hi Ed002,

Can you shed any light on the Moussa Dembele rumours that have resurfaced today?

I was reading before that his signature looked unlikely, but now newspapers are reporting this could happen and that he will not be loaned back. Have you heard anything to confirm these rumours?



{Ed002's Note - I have no idea at all what has been said today. As I explained before, there is every chance that a move to Spurs can happen. Spurs are willing to pay a premium to take him in January and still give the player a decent signing on fee. There has been some issues surrounding the possibility of loaning him back. Whilst it was what Fulham wanted and Spurs would have been happy with thet, the player wants the move to happen immediately. I think this can happen in the coming days.}



06 Jan 2016 09:15:35
Hi EDs, great site you have here. ED002 do you know of any spurs interest in Zaza? Seeing as he is struggling for game time at Juve.



{Ed002's Note - Enquiries were made for Sassuolo's Zaza by Eintracht Frankfurt, Watford and Spurs in the summer - in a ddition to a number of clubs looking for a loan. However, Juventus had only recently sold the remainder of his rights to Sassuolo (with a clause allowing Juventus to match any sale offer or buy to short-track a deal with Sassuolo at a fixed-price, albeit higher than that which they otherwise might be able to buy him - and that is what they did in July. Whilst Crystal Palace, Watford, Montpellier and Norwich are known to have been showing an interest this season, Juventus has made it clear a permanent move in January is not a viable option as his leaving does not solve a separate issue the club has regarding recruitment. As ever, an offer well over the odds could change that. I am not aware of any contact by West Ham - Juventus say they have had an offer from Crystal Palace and that a number of clubs have enquired after a loan - including Sampdoria, Udinese and Montpellier. I suspect something can be done with Sampdoria.}



10 Aug 2015 16:27:56
Hi Eds,
Do you think that West Brom signing Rondon for £15m is a precursor to us buying Berahino? Would make sense


{Ed001's Note - no, though Spurs do want him, and it does now mean they could afford to let him go if their asking price is reached.}

1.) 11 Aug 2015 11:00:14
Still don't think Levy will buy Berahino for 20 million , go for Austin who now could go for 12-13 Million

2.) 11 Aug 2015 11:22:39
Now Valbuena looks like he might move back to Lyon maybe we will get N'Jie after all.

3.) 11 Aug 2015 16:39:59
What worries me is the media is speculating on 3 attackers coming - cost of which would be equivalent to one Harry Kane going to Utd. Then again, the end result if something like that was to happen might make our squad stronger, assuming at least 2 of the incoming strikers can score goals for us.



16 Jan 2015 14:11:10
Eds any truth to the rumors we're interested in Zaza?

Talk of a first refusal clause for Juventus. Think this is a possible move this window provided we move Ade on?



{Ed002's Note - Enquiries have been made for Sassuolo's Zaza by Eintracht Frankfurt and Spurs. Juventus only recently sold the remainder of his rights to Sassuolo so some sort of clause allowing Juventus to match any sale offer may exist - I don't know. I cannot reasonably predict timescales.}




tottenhamOxspur's banter posts with other poster's replies to tottenhamOxspur's banter posts


18 Jan 2016 12:15:09
Hi Eds, any news on Shane Long?

No doubt a signing that loads of people on this site would dread, but I actually think he would be a great fit to accompany Kane. He runs his socks off and is good at pressing, he's also quick and Kane makes up for what he lacks in finishing.



{Ed002's Note - Not in respect of Spurs.}

1.) 19 Jan 2016 11:57:12
I think shane long's a great shout oxspur. Always pressing chasing lost causes basically giving everything for the shirt and that's what I love to see plus he's a decent little goalscorer, would be a good addition to the squad!

2.) 19 Jan 2016 15:52:02
I like Shane long he reminds me of Robbie Keane.

3.) 19 Jan 2016 17:52:06
I would sign him rather than Berahinho!

4.) 19 Jan 2016 22:12:44
Any day of the week davo! Long's a hard working lad loves the game won't sulk on the bench and will just work his socks off to get in the team, complete opposite of berahino imo



14 Aug 2014 11:31:24
Hi eds
Any info on this "verbal agreement" allowing Schneiderlin to leave Southampton?


{Ed002's Note - No.}



07 May 2014 21:16:07
Sorry didn't mean to post all of those, thought the others weren't going to be posted




07 May 2014 17:10:50
Maybe I sould be asking this on the Liverpool page, but didn't want to be seen to be stirring up trouble.

Eds - How might these potential FFP sanctions affect Liverpool in the upcoming transfer window and year. As I understand it they need to have below £74m in the two years combined. I thought I saw they made a loss of about £50m this year, so they must need to only make about a £25m loss this coming year in order to aviod the sanctions.

Will increasing TV and european revenues save them with regard to the MD stating that £60m would be spent in the summer? I can't see them spending £60m and only making a loss of £25m


{Ed002's Note - You have got the wrong end of the stick completely here. Try not to worry about it.}

1.) Really?
Liverpool will come under scrutiny next autumn right?
They will be scrutinised for losses made over that season and the one before, so surely this upcoming summer they will need to watch what the spend and keep the losses below the threshold?

£37m per year which they have exceeded this season so surely they need to reduce that in the coming year, assuming they make the champions league come the end of next season

{Ed002's Note - Sorry, you really don't understand and the figures you are quoting are all incorrect.}

2.) Have you explained it at any point which you could copy and paste here?

{Ed002's Note - The Demystification of the Financial Fair Play Rules (FFPR)
I will try and simplify and summarise the FFPR and give examples where I can.
Putting aside all of the “mother country” fluff, the fundamental purpose of the FFPR is to:
(1) Ensure that clubs are operating within their means with transparent financial reporting. Example: Arsenal has debt which they can manage from the money they make as a club (good). PSG has a very low turnover given the amount of money they spend on players through donations from wealthy owners (bad) and sponsorship deals well beyond the norm..
(2) Protect creditors. Example: When Portsmouth went bust they owed money for players (the extreme case being Glen Johnson who had moved to Liverpool but Portsmouth still owed Chelsea for), money to local businesses (tradesmen who had worked at the ground, newsagents etc.), utility companies, the police et al (bad).
(3) Encourage responsible spending. Example: Liverpool under Hicks and Gillett borrowed money against the value of the club in order to buy players (bad).
(4) Protect the long-term viability of European club football. Example: They want to avoid the scenario of clubs entering administration or going out of business.
The FFPR apply to all UEFA club competitions and will actively come in to force from the end of June 2014 taking account of the financial monitoring period (the season just finished) and the two prior reporting periods. So when they first start, the FFPR will look at the 2013/2014 returns, and they will give consideration to the 2011/12 and 2012/13 figures.
I should make clear that it is not the full accounts of a club that are being considered, but just the “relevant” income and the “relevant” expenses. “Excluded” expenses are critical to the FFPR calculations. To this end, all clubs will need to effectively produce two sets of accounts. An audited set which are provided to Companies House and the relevant revenue organisations, and a second audited return laying out the “relevant” income and the “relevant” expenses for the purpose of the FFPR.
Relevant Income
(1) Match day gate receipts. Example: The money made by the club from paying fans attending games. This includes income from cup games when played away from home where a proportion of the gate money goes to the away side.
(2) Broadcasting rights. Example: Television income for games, money provided for radio broadcasting.
(3) Income from commercial activities. Example: Sales of bobble hats and rattles, club shop income, licensed income (e.g. DVD sales). In the future you can expect to see income from other media (e.g. streaming of games on a pay-per-view basis to the web and phones) increase.

(4) Prize money. Example: income from the Premier League, Champions League etc..
(5) Sponsorship. Example: Shirt sponsors (Standard Chartered, Samsung etc.), shirt manufactures (Adidas, Warrior etc.).
(6) Advertising. Example: Companies who buy time on video screens during games or hoardings at the stadium.
(7) Other operating income. Example: Payments made to a club for playing friendly matches in the Far East.
(8) Income from transfers: Example: All income from the sale of a player regardless of payment being due to previous clubs, the player himself etc. as they are allowable expenses which will later be deducted.
(9) Excess proceeds on the sale of tangible fixed assets. Example: The money Arsenal from converting part of Highbury in to apartments and selling them.
(10) Other income: Example: Interest on investments.
Relevant Expenses
(1) The costs of running the business (confusingly referred to as “the cost of sales” by accountants etc.). Example: Wages, ground maintenance, lighting, telephones, IT equipment, travel costs, policing costs etc..
(2) Employee related benefits and associated costs. Example: Costs of providing insurance, dental care, medical, employer NI contribution, housing, loyalty bonuses etc..
(3) Other operating expenses. Example: Payments for advertising, legal fees, agent fees, accounting fees, payments to players in relation to transfers, payments to player’s previous clubs, etc..
(4) Amortisation or transfer costs. Example: The total amount of money paid to another club to transfer a player or, if a club decides to do so, the amortised cost for that year (where a club is spreading the cost of the transfer out over the length of his contract for accounting purposes).
(5) Finance costs. Example: Bank charges, interest on loans etc..
(6) Dividends. Example: The owners may take a dividend from the profits a club makes as income.
Excluded Expenses
(1) Depreciation of tangible fixed assets. Example: The loss, if any, in value of the stadium, cars, IT equipment etc..
(2) Costs associated with the intangible fixed assets (other than player registrations). Example: goodwill, franchises, trademarks, copyrights etc..
(3) Expenditure on youth development activities. Example: All youth development expenses (housing, schooling, travel, medical etc.) are excluded from the calculations.
(4) Community development activities. Example: Outreach programmes, donations to the local community and charities, provision of equipment etc..
(5) Tax expenses. Example: Monies paid to the Inland Revenue, VAT etc..
(6) Finance costs related to construction of tangible fixed assets. Example: The interest on the £300M loan to build a new stadium.
(7) Interest payments on old loans (pre June 1, 2011). Example: Any interest due on a loan taken out for whatever purpose before June 1, 2011 is excluded from the calculations.
(8) Certain expenses from non-football operations. Example: This does not really apply to British clubs, but in other European countries clubs are often “sporting clubs” and have basketball, football, hockey team etc. all under one business.
The Calculation
FFPR calculates from a club’s “relevant” income and the “relevant” expenses whether the club is running at a surplus (profit) or deficit (loss) within a Monitoring Period (e.g. 2013/14). From this the FFPR decides if a club has met the “break even” requirement or not. This is not met if the “relevant” expenses exceed the “relevant” income by more than 5M euros (an acceptable deviation).
If the club exceeds this acceptable deviation, the owners of a club may contribute toward correcting it to a maximum of 45M euro over a rolling three year period (30M euro from 2015/16 on). Example: If Club X made a loss of 50M euro in 2013/14 due to the purchase of players, the calculation will ignore the first 5M euro and assume an owner contribution of 45M euro and there would not be an issue. However, for the two years following, there would be no allowable owner contribution as the full allocation had been used. If Club Y made a loss of 30M euro in 2013/14 due to the purchase of players, the calculation will ignore the first 5M euro and assume an owner contribution of 25M euro and there would not be an issue. But in this case, for the two years following, there would still be 20M euro allowable as owner contribution to cover further losses.
The Punishment
The Threat: If a club has been determined to have violated the “break even” requirement for a season it may be excluded from the next season’s UEFA competitions.
Likely Situation: If a club can show it has been moving in the right direction and doing what it can to overcome financial issues, perhaps brought on by a recession (e.g. in Spain) then I would expect a strongly worded letter as a warning. If a club has strayed a significant distance for the rules, then a fine and cap on number of salaries of players in UEFA competitions may be imposed. Perhaps by then end of the 2016/2017 season, If a club has been determined to have violated the “break even” requirement for several seasons then it may be excluded from the next season’s UEFA competitions.
UEFA are willing to make some exceptions to the rule and have already said they will consider:
(1) The quantum and trend of the break even result. Example: Chelsea spent a lot three years ago summer rebuilding an aging squad, so even with considerable additional income from winning the Champions League it could violate the “break even” requirement. However, spending less the next season will show the club moving in the right direction. Expect a strongly worded letter in a couple of years time.
(2) Debt situation. Example: A possible “get out” for Barcelona, Real Madrid and Manchester United should they have a bad season and need to violate the “break even” requirement. Consideration will be given to the existing debt and the ability of the clubs to service that debt. The trend of the debt reducing and an excuse of “one bad season” and “need to rebuild the team” would likely result in a slapped wrist.
(3) Fluctuating exchange rates. Example: All non eurozone countries need to report the FFPR figures in euros which could fluctuate due to the exchange rate, whereas a number of the UEFA figures are fixed amounts (e.g. the 5M euro acceptable deviation).
(4) Projected figures. Example: UEFA will allow clubs to show that they are moving in the right direction if they provide projected figures showing that the “break even” requirement will be met in the following season.
(5) Force majeure. Example: Any extraordinary events or situation arising that is beyond the club’s control will be taken in to account.
(6) Until then end of 2014/15 only - Ongoing reductions in wage costs. UEFA will be flexible over the “break even” requirement if a club can show that their wage bill has been reducing and with the exclusion of wages of players signed before June 1, 2010 they would have met the “break even” requirement. Example: An escape route for the likes of Chelsea with Cech, Terry, Cole, Lampard etc. wages excluded from the calculations. A possible future escape route for the likes of Barcelona.
The Issues
There are a number of matters that UEFA still need to figure out and a number of concerns that certain clubs and certain national associations have. Off the top of my head:
(1) Loopholes: Whilst UEFA has done what it can to block any potential “loopholes” it is well aware that exclusion of wages for players signed before June 2010 is one it has introduced itself, and one that will be popular with the higher paying clubs as a short term escape route through to the summer of 2015. The matters of excessive sponsorship will be addressed via a cap to thwart the concerns over the likes of Manchester City abusing the rules. The cap has yet to be finalised but will require ratification. It was discussed without UEFA present at the end of March at a meeting of a number of clubs in Monaco. No agreement was reached.
(2) Soft Sponsorship: UEFA are concerned at the aggressive approach to obtaining sponsorship some clubs are taking. Questions are being asked about the ethics in clubs having airline travel partners, photocopier partners etc.. The Spanish clubs have raised this as a concern.
(3) National Sponsorship Variations: As we have seen tobacco sponsorship leave Formula 1 UEFA would like to see alcohol sponsorship out of football. We already have a situation where sponsorship by alcohol related businesses are forbidden in certain countries. Wealthy breweries are now focussing their sponsorship in other countries thereby creating a perceived imbalance in what income clubs are able to obtain in sponsorship. The French and Russian clubs have raised this as a concern.
(4) National Financial Distribution Variations: Concerns exist in countries where different models are used for distributing prize money, contributing to the grassroots game and distributing income from television and other media broadcasting. This led to an original request (rejected) from a number of clubs to restrict the FFPR to only the wealthiest of clubs, those with a turnover in excess of xM euros.
(5) National Taxation Variations: There is a considerable difference across UEFA nations in taxation, and this is seen to be reflected in the wages paid to players. The Spanish clubs have raised this as a concern.
(6) Third Party Ownership: Countries that allow third party ownership of players are seen to have a distinct advantage in being able to keep the costs of transfer fees low as they are only paying for a proportion of a player. The English clubs have raised this as a concern.
The Great Fear
Without going in to too much detail: (a) A number of clubs take the opportunity a once or twice a year to discuss various issues including changes in rules, television rights, the power of UEFA, exploitation issues for new technology streams, etc.. These discussions, the last of which were in late August, also always turn to the possibility and structure of a breakaway pan European league. Several are ex-G14 clubs, several are not, and some clubs decline involvement in such discussions. (b) The plan is that at some point a number of clubs would break away from their national leagues and UEFA. They accept that they would be banned from all existing club competition and the players would initially be banned from all FIFA competitions as well, but know that FIFA would be looking to negotiate in any case. It would be the end of UEFA in all probability and UEFA are very aware of this. It would also result in a restructuring of many of the national leagues. (c) The clubs would renegotiate their television rights, rights of distribution via other streams etc.. (d) It remains the greatest fear of UEFA and all major national authorities that one day this will happen.

3.) Is £37m per year wrong? Around 45m euros

{Ed002's Note - Yes.}

4.) Care to explain?

{Ed002's Note - I have done.}

5.) Enlighten me, I am so stupid

{Ed002's Note - I knew would post a correct statement at some point.}

6.) Fair enough, can you answer this, do you expect they might struggle to adhere to them and strengthen their team/squad like they plan to.

Or do you think they will be fine and uneffected by them?

{Ed002's Note - Could you have someone feel your head just to see if it has gone soft.}

7.) I really wish you had posted this on the Liverpool page, imagine how many more people would've been questioning your intellect.

8.) I obviously didn't post all of those replys like that, I just thought my previous ones weren't going to be posted.

I already understood those FFP rules as you stated them, it's not exactly rocket science.

I was just asking a contextual question with figures I quoted from the BBC, wouldn't have been that hard for the ed to give me an answer initially, rather than patronising me.

{Ed002's Note - You obviously didn't understand it otherwise you would not have mis-interpreted the values.

9.) I understand the principles and basis of FFP, wouln't really have taken long to explain one point to me, the values I gave relating to Liverpool were my own memories and estimates at the time.

You're probably one of the few who understands both the FFP rules and the inner finances of clubs, was just looking for your opinion of how it might effect them really, regardless of how incorrect my figures were.

{Ed002's Note - Clearly you don't understand.}

10.) Guess i'll throw my BA in Finance and Accountancy in the bin

11.) Guess i'll throw my BA in Finance and Accountancy in the bin

{Ed002's Note - Right, clearly you weren't listening.}



08 Jan 2014 17:10:03
Anyone know of the injury situations with Vertonghen and Kaboul?


1.) Until approx.: Middle of Jan. 2014 jan

Hip problems
until approx.: back in 2 days

this is what I've read on afew websites




tottenhamOxspur's rumour replies


Click To View This Thread

12 Aug 2015 10:46:14
hope this is true




Click To View This Thread

11 Aug 2015 11:22:39
Now Valbuena looks like he might move back to Lyon maybe we will get N'Jie after all.




Click To View This Thread

24 Apr 2014 11:12:32
Ed2, Do you have any idea how stong the interest from united is on Van gaal? is he top of their list? or just papers putting 2 and 2 togeather?


{Ed002's Note - It is early days but he is clearly one option being considered.}



Click To View This Thread

What's the transfer error? player bought or missed? {Ed002's Note - Lamela.}




Click To View This Thread

Vertongen 1, stop speaking with so much conviction, we are all in the dark here





tottenhamOxspur's banter replies


Click To View This Thread

29 Mar 2016 13:41:21
Ed001 I normally tent to agree with your opinions, especially on the Liverpool pages.

Though on this point I am starting to think you have lost the plot a bit. Rose and Walker have been among the best fullbacks in the league this season and comparing them to Alves/ Marcelo is a bit farfetch'd.

We do not play the system we play in order to compensate for the fullbacks, that is a very strange thing to say.


{Ed001's Note - if you say so, but the only reason you play a deep lying midfielder and split the centre backs so far apart is to allow the full backs to get forward with more freedom. Bielsa, who Poch is an acolyte of, used to abandon the full back altogether, in favour of wide midfielders and a back 3, but Poch is slightly more defensive in his outlook. His tweaks to Bielsa's system provide a more solid base to build on, based on defenders who are comfortable being dragged into the full back area and a midfielder who is comfortable if he has to drop back into defence to cover for them. It is about getting the best out of the players he has at his disposal.

By the way, being amongst the best fullbacks in the Prem is not saying much, the Prem has very few, if any, top class full backs. It is a very poor pool to pick from. More of a least worse than best....}



Click To View This Thread

15 Jan 2016 13:29:31
Getting very confused reading this thread! Have some of you guys been watching the same Spurs team I have? Lamela has been one of our best players this season! Gives absoloutely everything, tackles well, is aggressive and has been massively improved in attack. I think he would get into most prem starting 11s in current form, and he's only getting better.




Click To View This Thread

12 Dec 2014 14:38:43
top response Wulf, spot on




Click To View This Thread

12 Dec 2014 11:41:43
did you watch the game against Everton?




Click To View This Thread

I think our problem is that we have far too many players who are number 10s!! Eriksen, Llamela, Soldado and Kane would all arguably want that role