Daniel Levy: Tottenham's Concerned Chairman Or Football Dictator?
In the wake of the comments made by Spurs striker, Darren Bent, regarding his protracted move from White Hart Lane to Sunderland, Spurs have revealed today they are implementing a new policy concerning their players and any social networking and or blogging sites they may be involved with.
This means that the club's players must announce any Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, or other on-line forms of expression to a "Spurs Official" and also grant he/she access to it.
Sounds to me like Daniel Levy and his Tottenham board are wrapping themselves in cotton wool, putting up walls, and surrounding those walls with guards.
The question is, are these the actions of a concerned chairman? Or are they the actions of an egotist who doesn't like criticism?
As things stand, if this policy comes in at Tottenham, it means that the players of the North London club have less human rights than the rest of us, as it affects their right to freedom of speech.
Bent admitted that his actions were ruled by his emotions, in regards to how long his move to the Stadium of Light was taking. He has apologised for his remarks. That should be enough.
The move by the Tottenham elite is not just an overreaction, it is also a concerning development. It begs the question of where will it end?
Will players and club officials soon not be allowed to talk to the media and the fans?
Could it go even further and mean that fans of the club aren't allowed to speak their minds on the terraces?
The latter sounds a bit out there, but that doesn't mean it can't happen.
The Spurs board are setting a dangerous precedent here. It's a precedent that every time it happened in history has lead to conflict. This won't be the last we hear on this issue.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?