In the words of Cockney prophets Chas & Dave: ‘Spurs are on their way to Wembley, Tottenham’s going to do it again’.
This season, in a move that even a dreaming Ossie Ardiles might tire of, they’ll be on their way to Wembley many more times than usual to fulfil 19 Premier League home fixtures while their new stadium is being built.
And the fear is that what Tottenham’s going to be doing again is struggle.
The precedents are not good – West Ham suffered when they moved into their new home last season, while Spurs lost two and drew one of their four European matches at Wembley in 2016/17.
A strong second-place finish last campaign, fuelled by key assets Harry Kane, Dele Alli and Christian Eriksen, would usually demand our Fantasy attention.
But will the move to Wembley change all that? Will it prompt a right old Knees Up or a case of Ain’t No Pleasing You?
We canvas the opinion of some leading Fantasy Premier League managers and Fantasy Football Scout staff to ask for their verdict on the fourth of this season’s Burning Questions: Is the Wembley factor really a concern when considering Spurs’ assets?
Peter Kouwenberg (Hall of Fame #1) Says…
A confession: I was one who skippered Kane for the Hull City and Burnley blanks last December before a rare rage-transfer out – just in time to ‘enjoy’ his festive haul of six goals in four matches.
I also became something of an expert throughout the season at swapping Eriksen in and out for Alli, just in time to miss each other’s goals and assists, before finally admitting defeat and bringing in all three players.
As a result, I am the last person qualified to comment on Spurs.
Much has been written about why they do, and may continue to, struggle at Wembley and if I was a Spurs fan, I probably would be a little bit nervous about this.
However, I would be far more fearful of not having Kane in my team, with a match away at newly promoted Newcastle and a home fixture against Burnley sandwiching the Chelsea clash.
I agree that there are viable alternatives – the Manchester City strikers and new boys Alvaro Morata and Alexandre Lacazette could all justify excluding Kane – but I’ll be riding out the first three games at least, after which the fixtures suggest it would be a brave or foolish player not to have at least one Spurs attacker.
Where I think the Wembley wariness will influence me is in not trebling up from the off. Alli was the first name on my first draft team sheet and I still think he (and Eriksen) could continue where they left off last season.
However, wagering over a quarter of my £100m budget on Spurs (including the injured Kieran Trippier) to beat their Wembley hoodoo may be a gamble too far.
Uwais Ahmed (FPL Runner-Up 2016/17) Says…
I believe that playing at Wembley for 19 home matches will make a difference, but how much this will affect the Spurs players is impossible to tell.
We simply don’t have a decent sample size of data to confirm how much of a factor Wembley will be. What we do know is that Spurs won 21 of 23 matches played at White Hart Lane last season across all competitions, and you would expect this will be difficult to match this time around.
Given Harry Kane is the most expensive player in FPL, at £12.5m, you have to take into account all factors when fielding a player who uses up such a significant portion of our budget. Playing at Wembley is one such factor.
Kane is England’s number one striker. He’s played at Wembley on a number of occasions, so we’re not talking about a novice with a complete unfamiliarity of his surroundings. What also works in Kane’s favour is that he is a nailed-on starter for Spurs so there is no rotation risk around him.
I believe that in considering Spurs’ assets, you have to play it by ear. What you can hang your hat on is that last season in the Premier League, Spurs had the joint-best goal difference at home and the best goal difference away. This tells you that they’re a very well-balanced team with FPL options across all positions.
They’ve earned the right for us to ignore the Wembley aspect to begin with, particularly with their favourable opening schedule.
But we might need to re-visit the issue once we have more evidence and information.
Ben Crabtree (Reigning FPL Champion) Says…
Stadium moves generally negatively affect performance.
Couple this with Spurs, and Kane in particular, being slow starters and there should be caution around their prized assets.
The 6-1 and 7-1 maulings they handed out in the spring were nearly three months ago. Their form – and that of all the other teams – is re-set for the new season and no-one has half an eye on the beach anymore.
I feel Spurs are less likely to win the title this season. Today’s Danny Rose story is symptomatic of the frustration at the club, with some players concerned that rivals have strengthened so much while their only business has made them weaker, ie losing Kyle Walker.
Then again, I’m open to the possibility of my thoughts deriving from confirmation bias.
Pretending Spurs have no options saves a lot of money and makes picking a team easier. There is a stadium move, but they’ve played there before so it’s not completely new. Kane hasn’t scored in August before, but that could mean he’ll score three months worth of goals this August to average it out.
Then there’s Eriksen and Alli who, as a rule, score more points each year. Even if they get ‘only’ this season, I don’t want to be missing out on that.
At the start you can only have so many top players. The tactic I generally use is to see what factors rule players out rather than in. I think Wembley is a big enough concern to put Spurs on hold for now.
Simon March (FPL Champion 2014/15) Says…
My theory when it comes to Spurs and the ‘Wembley factor’ is that their recent malaise there has less to do with the size of the pitch or the unfamiliar surroundings and much more to do with the fact that it is simply ‘Wembley’.
The venue is synonymous with ‘an occasion’ and, for the visiting teams and their fans, fixtures there take on a cup final atmosphere, irrespective of their actual significance. As a result, Spurs’ opponents typically bring along a larger, louder following and their players raise their game accordingly.
If this is true, then Spurs may have 19 ‘cup finals’ on their hands next season and this could, of course, impact on their players’ performances.
Though I expect Spurs to eventually adapt to their new surroundings and the greater pressure that comes with them, I might be concerned about their results early on in the season.
I’m less concerned, however, with the impact on Spurs as an attacking force.
Even if the results aren’t going their way, I think their usual suspects of Kane, Alli and Eriksen will still find opportunities to score.
The atmosphere might even work in their favour at times, with opposing teams less inclined to ‘park the bus’ in front of a more vociferous than usual away following.
So, while I might avoid their defence for a few Gameweeks at least, I’ll still be backing their attacking assets.
Jonty Says…
Spurs were an unstoppable force at White Hart Lane last season, racking up more shots than any home side and scoring 47 times – a tally only bettered by Chelsea.
In defence, they conceded just nine times in front of their own fans and kept 12 clean sheets – another two records for their 2016/17 stats cabinet.
Given that they effectively play 38 away matches this season, due to Wembley being their temporary home, the theory is that this fine record will suffer.
Leading the charge in pushing this theory are those that study pitch sizes. They will point out that, at 100 x 67 metres, White Hart Lane had the second smallest Premier League pitch last season and Spurs players may struggle to adjust to the extra space afforded by Wembley’s gigantic 105 x 69 metres (7,245 ) of turf.
West Ham’s travails after their move to a larger pitch at the London Stadium last season further strengthen this ‘groundsman’s argument’.
Then there’s Spurs’ track record at Wembley – a stadium where last season they were beaten by Monaco, Bayer Leverkusen and Chelsea and could only secure a draw against Belgian team KAA Gent. In fact, CSKA Moscow were the only side they managed to beat at the home of English football last season.
But I’m still not buying into the Wembley effect.
The key is that, in Kane, they have a player looking to win the Golden Boot for the third consecutive season and who still scored 12 goals on the road last season – with only Alexis Sanchez and Sergio Aguero scoring more.
In addition, their away record was superb – suggesting the tight White Hart Lane pitch is not needed for success. On the road they conceded a mere 16 times- another record – and scored 39, which was only bettered by Manchester City.
If Spurs fail to replicate 2016/17’s form, it won’t be due to playing at Wembley. It will arguably be more to do with their failure to impress in the transfer market, where they have lost one of their best players in full-back Walker and have been forced to watch in envy as their rivals strengthen.
Paul Says…
Due to Spurs’ tactics under Mauricio Pochettino, I don’t think you can rule out the Wembley issue altogether, or at least in the very early stages.
Spurs play such a high-pressing game that, with more ground and space to cover in their new home, there’s a possibility that energy levels could drop later in matches and they might not be able to close down opponents quite so effectively.
That’s essentially a fitness factor and one that their manager will presumably address by ensuring that Spurs’ levels are even greater than before. It could initially have an impact but, as the season unfolds and the players up their match fitness and become more accustomed to Wembley, I can’t see it being an issue.
Kane’s minutes per away goal last season – which was almost identical to Romelu Lukaku’s at home – underlines that he’s far from reliant on White Hart Lane. At present, he’s the only Spurs player I own as I feel he’s unparalleled as a captaincy pick.
Elsewhere, you can also point to the fact that Alli had more big chances away from home than any FPL midfielder last season. Eriksen, meanwhile, sat first for shots and key passes, and his penchant for efforts from distance is unlikely to be quenched.
Defensively, I’m going to steer clear of Spurs for now and see if they can maintain the same levels of resilience as last season.
But with Burnley, Swansea City and Bournemouth three of their first four visitors, the opening schedule should allow them to settle and give us time to assess any possible Wembley impact.
Mark Says…
While they have been conspicuous by their absence in the transfer market, in many ways it was difficult to strengthen Pochettino’s first XI and, under normal circumstances I’d reluctantly be installing Spurs as title favourites.
But the Wembley factor has to be a consideration and, coupled with the sudden unrest in the camp following Rose’s outburst today, I do have escalating concerns about their prospects.
The pitch size and sense of occasion created by the stadium move is less of a factor than the morale issues for me.
I worry that, with a ready-made excuse for a reduced title bid, the mood in the camp could suddenly plummet further.
One of the main reasons for Spurs’ success last season was the fact that they came across as the most unified and spirited of teams.
But cracks are now appearing and I do feel that the re-location will compound matters.
Having said that, I am still struggling to overlook Kane.
Based on last season’s output, he is peerless as a captain option and while there is explosivity and possibly consistency on offer from Romelu Lukaku and Gabriel Jesus, they are for my money still giving chase to Kane for these qualities .
So Kane will likely get the nod for me, regardless of my concerns.
However, I am unlikely to back him with Eriksen or Alli for fear of over-investment in a side perhaps on the verge of a transition – both in terms of venue and, perhaps, mentality and confidence.
