Who decided Spurs could use Wembley?

[dogwithabone]

What a bizarre post. Who do you imagine would be punished by United playing 'shut up shop' football?

But regardless of venue, Mourinho won't care in any case about playing entertaining football.

Well quite clearly Spurs will prefer United to come and play. Parking the so called bus gives United a better chance in an away game against a top six side. See out a 0-0 after 120 minutes and take it in penalties. We saw first hand against Juventus that Spurs ain’t the brightest at breaking down a packed defence.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

It's a fair point. I wouldn't class it as Spurs' home ground per se. You had the dodgy start, but got used to it. That said, I'd rather it was at Villa Park.

I liked it when Wembley was shut and England played their qualifiers at OT, St James's Park etc...Gave far more fans the chance to see big games.

Honestly wouldn't have a problem with that. But I do think way too much of a deal is being made about this, the FA cup semi and final will be like black and white compared to a home league game, how people can't see that is beyond me TBH.

 

[Jippy]

Honestly wouldn't have a problem with that. But I do think way too much of a deal is being made about this, the FA cup semi and final will be like black and white compared to a home league game, how people can't see that is beyond me TBH.

Meh, it's an excuse if we lose is the way I see it.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Well quite clearly Spurs will prefer United to come and play. Parking the so called bus gives United a better chance in an away game against a top six side. See out a 0-0 after 120 minutes and take it in penalties. We saw first hand against Juventus that Spurs ain’t the brightest at breaking down a packed defence.

Well played.

 

[Wotspur]

Obviously I've created this now the cup is at semi final stage and essentially Spurs have two home games to win the competition.

It's got me thinking, who decided Spurs could use Wembley and how can it be seen as fair? Not only does it affect the cup but no other clubs have the luxury of using another stadium when redeveloping, least not the biggest one in the country.

Just to let you know , that when we first went to Wembley, we our first 6 games there , lost to Chelsea , drew with Burnley, drew with Swansea , lost to West Ham in the car about, before beating Bournemouth and thrashing Liverpool , as we got used to playing on a bigger pitch, but for those dropped points ,we’d actually be clearly in 2nd and challenging City.
Regarding no Northern teams getting an advantage, well City got the 1st Council house, allowing them to spend more on their squad, whereas Arsenal and Spurs have had to tie up 5-800 M in the new stadium , whilst creating an exciting team that has over the last three seasons gained more points scored most goals and conceeded the least.....but unfortunately not resulted in a deserved trophy or two.
Thanks for allowing me to post.
Just thought I’d also let you know , that Spurs have ALL season been using the away dressing room , because it was better situated similar to WHL and they didn’t want the negativity emanating from the England team dressing room .
Anyway should be a good game

 

[noodlehair]

Is it really that much more unfair than the Quarter finals being home/away ties and not going to a replay?

Or the Champions League final being at a ground where the home team could realistically be one of the finalists?

Or teams having a realistic chance of winning the World Cup when they are also the host country?

They should probably have said if Spurs get to the semis, their semi would be at a different venue, but even so I don't think it's a massive travesty of justice. Especially as United have had an easy ride of the draw up until this point (although Spurs have too)

 

[GeorgieBoy]

Is it really that much more unfair than the Quarter finals being home/away ties and not going to a replay?

Or the Champions League final being at a ground where the home team could realistically be one of the finalists?

Or teams having a realistic chance of winning the World Cup when they are also the host country?

They should probably have said if Spurs get to the semis, their semi would be at a different venue, but even so I don't think it's a massive travesty of justice. Especially as United have had an easy ride of the draw up until this point (although Spurs have too)

Yeah agree with this. The whole nature of single-legged knock out ties makes the competition unfair from the first round regardless.

 

[Harry190]

The villa park semis hold good memories. Ruudddddd.

Not even the best one.

 

[TheReligion]

Not even the best one.

Giggs

 

[Harry190]

Giggs

Yes.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Giggs

Only because there was a replay - wouldn’t get that these days.

 

[redman5]

I think there's more chance of Spurs actually being affected by the occasion rather than United. Having played all season at Wembley when their own supporters have been the vast majority, to suddenly being in a position where the opposition fans are equal in numbers, & making just as much noise - if not more - than their own. That must have an unsettling affect on Spurs, & an uplifting one for Manchester United.

I can't see United losing this. It'll be totally different to the league match a few weeks back. It might go to pens, but I reckon all the pressure will be on Tottenham.

Hope you lot put some money on your boys. I certainly did. Jose is the master of these kind of situations. The league game at Wembley had no relevance whatsoever to today's outcome.