Seeing is believing. Spurs are more popular than Man Utd.
After all they are renowned for playing stylish football.
Look it up in the history books.
spurs arn't more popular than man utd.:lmao: spurs and stylise football sould'nt be in the same sentence.and if you check the history books it will tell you man utd have won more trophies. which means they play better football.
Is that right Gareth?
So tell me under which team did Arthur Rowe devised the STYLISH Push & Run method of play which many consider to be the precursor to Total Football and had Alf Ramsay as among their heroes? Hmm?
You have no trouble in belittling Spurs despite your lack knowledge of their history and their achievements...
Well lets remind everybody what those were...
Which club had a first overseas player to play in the football league?
Which team is the only non-league side ever to win the FA Cup and had led with the highest number of wins before Man Utd?
Which British team was first to win a European trophy?
Which club was first to do the double in the 20th century?
Which club was first known to chant Glory Glory... to the tune of The Battle Hymn of the Republic before Man Utd and other clubs rip them off?
If you really wanna be silly about it....
When it comes to trophies, Liverpool leads the pack, so which means they play better football than Man Utd... Right? :roll:
For me, there's no doubts about the best team in the world... Real Madrid, but nowadays it's Barcelona.
I'm not gettin involved in a argument i am going to win, man utd have won more trophies than tottenham fact, we've got a better stadium, better players, more fans (50 million worldwide).
liverpool have won more trophies and most of them were won in the 80's were as man utd dominated the 90's and 2000. this season man utd have played the best football in the premiership.
we are 1st in the league,tottenham are 11th. we've won the fa cup the most(11 times), premier league(8),champions league(2)the only english team to win the treble,UEFA Cup Winners Cup,Intercontinental Cup,European Super Cup and we were the first team to win the premier league.
plus we have had some of the best players in the world in the team over the years.
George Best,Bobby Charlton,Eric Cantona and the list is endless. were as tottenham don't attract big players anymore. so it is a fact that manchester united are a better club than tottenham.
You really are missing the point aren't you.
I cannot stand fans like yourself who solely measure football on success.
As much as I dislike them, Tottenham are famed for playing great football, not necassarily winning as may honours as your mob.
Ourselves also (West Ham) have a massive reputation for great football and we have hardly been succesful.
Ron Greenwood and Arthur Rowe are amongst 2 of the main pioneers of what we know as good football in this country.
All 4 of the goals scored in the World Cup final and the captain were taught at West Ham by Greenwood who learned from the great european sides, notably hungary of the same era.
Consider many of the players that are the leading names in english football and also 2 that now make up your premiership leading side: Ferdinand and Carrick, - both from West Ham's youth academy which was built on the very base which Greenwood laid down.
I know I have gone off the rails towards West Ham a little, but it is a parralel with the point rightly being made by Jack Pott and that is regardless of your titles and success over the years which is the reason behind such smug and arrogant remarks you have made; the fact remains that if it wasn't for certain clubs (West Ham and Spurs being 2 of the main ones) Man Utd and other clubs would still be playing with inside rights and a 6ft 4" striker to hoof the ball to.
The standard of technical ability is so far behind our european counterparts already that you should be a little more appreciative of what other less succesful clubs than yourself have brought to the english game.
I dare you to have a rational and sensible answer to what I posted? Anyone with half a sense of english football should probably agree with the general tone of my post.
Anyway, the fact that you were too ignorant to read my post i'll put this too you:
Spurs aren't a big club you say?
They are the probably the 5th biggest club in England and in the top 20 biggest in the world.
They were always pretty close to Arsenal in terms of size and were far bigger than Chelsea before Chelsea became the corporate whores they are.
Hell, West Ham and Chelsea were about the same size before around the early 90's.
(Please, tell me if I am out of line here, but I would harbour a guess that you are no older than 20 and probably only know football from Euro 96 onwards possibly?)
You are a 'supporter' of the biggest club in the world so it is fair to say you have very little concept of the size and importance of anyone else barring yourselves.
Kinda makes sense.