Complete with human rights violations and a work force being paid a pittance. Woo!
Complete with human rights violations and a work force being paid a pittance. Woo!
Apologies that was tongue in cheek.
The NFL must be so sad. Moving their game from a not so big stadium to a 50% bigger stadium.
Sounds like the Spurs squad.
The new stadium also has a soup kitchen? Nice.
Aye they'll be lining up outside the soup kitchens any day now.
This thread is comedy gold 
I mean we needed something to go with the bakery and what could be better with bread than soup?
Genius Levy strikes again.
Doh
Probably because asking for - and getting - permission is not against the rules.
So they’ve built a stadium that cost more than Wembley but is half the size!
No wonder they were bidding £3m for Grealish.
No wonder they were bidding £3m for Grealish.
Since when did missing 4 home games in our new stadium equate to half a season?
But why would they need permission if there wasn’t a rule about it?
So if they don't have it ready for the Man City game, their next home game in the league is against Chelsea in GW 13 at the end of November.
That article is 3 years old …. things change.
The league rules have changed?
Probably all worth it for those VR tours and automated sprinklers. Haters just gon' hate.
I think they will be, because Wembley is not built with NFL football in mind. The new Spurs stadium has been, which is why the NFL signed a deal with us.
The rule hasn't changed, spurs got special treatment, that's what everyone has an issue with.
I can only suggest that you email them and ask.
But we're the media darlings, so what did you expect?
Besides, it's a disadvantage to Spurs to be playing at Wembley rather than in our stadium … so what have rival clubs really got to complain about?
Nah I think I'll take the fact that the CEO of the league said it's against the rules and that Spurs had to request permission to do it as a reasonably good indication that it's not within the rules.
Come on guys, let's talk about unique features.
Doesn't that mean it's within the rules to ask for - and get - permission?
Otherwise, I can only suggest that other clubs sue the Prem authorities for breaking the alleged rules. Although it beats me why they would wish to do so, when it's a disadvantage to Spurs to be playing at Wembley.
Because for example Liverpool will play spurs in Wembley and other teams will play in the nfl one, that's precisely the issue.
Does Wembley have the ability to lay the NFL pitch over the top, or is the pitch just going to be destroyed for any game after an NFL game?
It’s a league season and there are 19 other clubs. If playing at Wembley is a disadvantage to Spurs then why is it fair to Huddersfield that Cardiff play there and not this new stadium? Or Liverpool play there and potentially Man City but United and Chelsea don’t. You’re pointing out why it isn’t fair by saying it’s a disadvantage for Spurs to play at Wembley.
It's not like Spurs at all to not finish the job properly at the appropriate time 
I'm thinking not.
Well, then I guess it will provide some of these other clubs with a convenient excuse if they fail to make top 4.
The latter, I believe.
It affects everyone, the whole league. Everyone should have an issue with it.
We will boast the longest bar in the UK, which IMO is going to earn us at least 6 more points every season.
Plus, perfect place to go when we sign nobody again. Bet that's been his plan all along the tight fisted cnut.
Grim. Well, I hope it’s us. Will suit our total hoofball, eh?
Share the legal costs ... and all sue together.
Shame, would have liked for us be the first club to play them in the new ground probably be one of the last clubs now until next season or 2020. It's looks great inside, a bit like Marseille's velodrome with the roof.
Should have spent at least £200m net on transfers this summer, on top of the £1 billion invested in the new stadium complex and training centre. Talk about penny pinching!