As supporters we want our club to have players that maximize use of chances, in effect, score goals. Goals are delicious not in the same way that aged cheese is delicious but in the way in that they lead to wins and make us happy.

I wrote that Rooney is not an efficient shooter and that this is not where his value lies. This obviously raises two questions:

1) What makes an efficient shooter?

2) Prove to me that Rooney is an inefficient shooter?

Oh my, that is a challenge, but one for which I have answers.

Gordon just recently was his team's star performer in a win at Blackpool, denying Luke Varney on a on-on-one and twice acrobatically tipping over efforts from the much wanted Charlie Adam.

The goalkeeper missed games at the beginning of the season due to injury but since his return the 28 year old has conceded just 12 in 12 games. Not only this but over the course of the season, as of January 29, he has a 79% save percentage, ranking second second among all Premier League goalkeepers in arguably the most important statistical category for a goalkeeper. This after Gordon was among the leaders last season.

These new rules, which come into effect in the next couple of years, force clubs to invest heavily in developing youth talent.

The most radical and positive change being imposed in this plan is the overhaul of reserve team football and it's replacement by an Under-21 development league. This league, mirroring to a big extent the US College sports system, will set in place a competitive playing field for the best young players in the country that can only better lead to a proper transition to top-flight play.

Such a rule will maximize youth development, add value to the players and ultimately benefit the quality on show to fans. I hope such a recommendation can be made to the big voices in the league and enhance the Premier League experience for all of us.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this recommendation, especially if you are an FA boss.

This proposal actually makes a flabbergasting, finger-tingling amount of financial sense for the club going forward - to summarize in a way for the foggiest of minds out there, bigger stadium = more tickets sold = more revenue = increased ability to buy the best players = increased ability to compete for trophies = increased chance of winning trophies, and oh, they are delicious, almost as delicious as finely aged cheddar - and yet we've all seen on the television Tottenham fans protesting vigorously against the move. And to divert, any cheese companies out there, if you sponsor this site, there will be frequent musings and attestations to your wonders. It will be your worthwhile!

Well, back to the subject at hand, which I gather is still cheese. Wait, I just re-read the first paragraph and it appears cheese was my digression. I've been tricked! Spurs's stadium move is the chief subject of this article. Well, it has come to my attention, well, that or I'm just guessing, that many are wondering why the protest against the stadium move? Do these foppish fans (I saw at least one wearing a suit) realize that the move will increase the possibility of success? Can they envision the tastiness of success? Somerset Applewood, anyone? Alfredo with Gorgonzola?

Spurs fans are agitated because the plan is to move the club from it's current and forever-up-until-now location of Tottenham (hence the name, Tottenham Hotspur) in North London to a new stadium in the degenerate, horrid alleys near West Ham in East London. You can see the spatial gap between the locations here. Its a full 22 minutes by car according to Google Map. More importantly, Tottenham are named Tottenham for a reason. The club is and forever-up-til (sorry, getting lazy)-now is located in actual Tottenham. If the club is moved to somewhere else, how can it still be called Tottenham with logical justification? Clearly, the fans are chiefly angry about the potential for logical fallacy inherent in the club's name.

Second to this, fans are angry in that they feel that the club, being a club that is now and forever-up-until-now is located in Tottenham in North London, belongs to Tottenham in North London and the fans that support the club. I grew up supporting the club in Tottenham because I grew up near the club; I did not support a club in the East End because that is a dodgy area with dodgy people and in which dodgy things happen. I don't identify with any club in the East End. I identify as a Tottenham fan and only as a Tottenham fan. As I aged, I gave money to the club as a Tottenham fan and went to games to see Tottenham in Tottenham; what I did not do is give money to a club in the East End and go to see games in the East End as a fan of an East End club. The point I'm getting at is that if the club leaves, my memories as a Tottenham fan will somehow be left valueless, as if they have been judged not as memories vis-a-vis Tottenham Hotspur in Tottenham but as memories vis-a-vis a faceless, movable franchise outside any geographic, and therefore importantly cultural, values. I, as an individual Tottenham fan, will be seen as meaningless, as will my memories. This assumption by those who want to move the club is, and they do know this, a false assumption. The club, as Tottenham, belongs in the memories of it's supporters who supported it as Tottenham Hotspur, related to the geography and culture of Tottenham and stands of White Hart Land. If it moves, it will belong to a completely new demographic - the relationship between Tottenham and the club will be shattered. New memories will be built, but not as memories of Tottenham. To pull the argument to an extreme the club's owners will be in effect ridiculing the memories of the fans - and the meaning attached to those memories (and it won't be a funny Ricky Gervais or lousy, half-bummed ridicule; it will be one of those ostentatious, Josiah Bounderby type "I'm richer than the value of your memories" ridicules) . 1901, 1921, 1951, 1961...Blanchflower, Mackay, Hoddle, Klinsmann...these all happened at the Lane and were supported by fans who supported Tottenham as the club from Tottenham with the specific culture of Tottenham Hotspur. These were meaningful experiences and deserve recognition as meaningful experiences. Future success is meaningless outside of historical meaning.

Now I have not re-read any paragraph and can only hope that it all makes sense, but to continue, as you have probably gathered the point of this article is to figure out the best way to make fun of Spurs Chairman Daniel Levy Josiah Bounderby for contemplating a stadium move, as well as how best to go about your protest.

Dress for such a protest is optional in the UK but strongly recommended as it is winter and there may be women around. A Spurs jersey will probably be most effective but a training jacket, though less obviously effective, may allow for extended time of protesting due to it's warmth and so either is advisable. Ideally you need both factions to be present at a protest and so fans should ensure that Josiah Bounderby is in the building at which you are protesting and aware of your presence. Do not attend a protest in Cornwall as little will be known of your presence except that you are a bit weird. Likewise, don't protest in your own house and you will have little effect on Mr. Bounderby from such a location and again you'll be a bit weird, just nobody else will know about it.

A question will quickly arise which is what to call Josiah Bounderby. "Mr. Levy" would probably be most likely to garner the oppressor's attention, but it will not be fun shouting such a name and so not recommended. "Levy" is a secondary option that again has a good chance of being effective, though lacks the fun that one expects from the effort of leaving his or her house and going to a location deliberately to protest. Beyond these names, another option is to angrily curse, perhaps wave your arms a little (it's exercise if nothing else). This will surely show the seriousness of your endeavor and justifies the effort taken in attending in the first place, but it may lack effectiveness in getting Bounderby to listen and could lead to public disorder if one fellow protestor takes himself a bit too seriously. Yet another method is to flatter Bounderby. This can usually most effectively be done with a beautiful girl. She can tempt him, cajole him into coming down to talk to her, perhaps with some use of the Song of Songs - it is pretty steamy - and when he does finally attend, expecting to perhaps invite the beautiful lady to dinner, the rest of the protesters can voice their concern directly to him, or she can accept, go for dinner and then discuss the matter of the move with the owner himself. The final option that I will offer here, and the one that I recommend, is to shame Mr. Bounderby, but only if it is done in such a witty way that he sees his actions as having been wrong but nothing beyond (we're not mean spirited, we're angry about a specific issue).

I've taken the liberty of only calling Mr. Bounderby by his rightful name and what I recommend is that the protest movement from hereon only refer to Mr. Bounderby as Mr. Bounderby. Hopefully he'll then feel shame at his actions and remorse by announcing that Tottenham is staying in Tottenham, where the club - and the memories of it's fans - rightfully belongs.

Mr. Bounderby, Tottenham belong in Tottenham!

The horrible treatment by Daniel Levy Josiah Bounderby of Tottenham's hard-working and loyal fans through the proposal to sell the club away from its home has to be unequivocally repudiated.

Spurs aren't a franchise, Josiah! The club belongs to the fans.

Now make the statement yourself, Josiah.

1882 and counting. Spurs will live!