Sign up to FREE email alerts from Football London - Spurs Subscribe Thank you for subscribing See our privacy notice Invalid Email

With Tottenham Hotspur it's always about timing and often that timing is dreadful.

That ranges from delivering the world's best football stadium but doing so seven months late to Martin Jol realising he had been sacked mid-match as the 36,000 fans inside White Hart Lane found out before him.

Whether it's being caught red-handed meeting Juande Ramos in a Spanish hotel months before that night or in the present day deciding to release a statement about wage cuts just 24 hours after posting their successful financial reports, Spurs aren't exactly the masters of public relations triumphs.

Video Loading Video Unavailable Click to play Tap to play The video will start in 8 Cancel Play now

In almost 20 years since they bought Alan Sugar's stake in Tottenham, ENIC, fronted by chairman Daniel Levy, have delivered off the pitch if not on it, but their anniversary year will be indelibly stained by the timing of their wage cuts announcement.

Other Premier League clubs have gone down the same route as Tottenham in furloughing staff, taking advantage of the government scheme, and others are expected to follow in the days and weeks ahead.

Those football clubs will point to the fact that many other major, multi-million pound UK businesses will take advantage of the scheme so why shouldn't they in order to protect their own long-term future?

But does it feel right when there are billionaires in the background?

Liverpool most recently joined the growing number of clubs to furlough staff, which also includes Norwich, Newcastle, Bournemouth and of course Spurs.

Where Tottenham differ is that they are the only club currently to have said non-playing staff will lose 20 per cent of their pay from their April and May pay packet.

Of the 550 non-playing employees, it is believed that 40 per cent have been furloughed to use tax payer money.

At Newcastle staff will paid in full in April but their cuts will kick in from May with the furloughing, but at the other clubs mentioned wages will be topped up from the word go to ensure employees are not financially disadvantaged.

While very different men, neither Mike Ashley and Levy appear to particularly care what the public opinion is of them.

For the Spurs chairman, his belief is that he is always doing what is in the best interests of Tottenham Hotspur and admitted so at last month's meeting with the supporters' trust.

" Daniel Levy explained that the board has had to take a long-term view to protect the club. He said he takes lots of criticism and has broad shoulders, and needs to have in his position," read the minutes from the meeting.

It's that lost 20 per cent though that sticks in the craw. For those furloughed staff - those lower earners - would Tottenham paying just 20 per cent of their salary really have contributed to the ultimate downfall of the club?

While people will understandably debate the need for the Champions League runners-up to rely on tax payer money, Spurs aren't even offering to pay 20 per cent, let alone 100.

There is hope that when the players and coaching staff eventually make their collective decision - as much as one is possible - across the Premier League that Tottenham's staff will see those wages topped up.

However, for Spurs to announce those wage cuts before that decision has been made did not feel like a club looking after its staff. One eye on their long-term job prospects certainly, but not on their short-term financial situation which could well affect their long-term.

Some have suggested that those employees have been used as a pawn in the battle to force the PFA to make a decision and for some staff it will no doubt feel that way as they contemplate how to make ends meet in the next couple of months.

Some will look at Tottenham's finances and to whether it was really necessary.

There have been some slight misdirection in certain aspects of the finances and some within the club feel the backlash has been harsh in this respect.

The club submitting their full financial report for the year ending June 2019 the day before the wage cut announcement did not help as direct correlations were drawn.

However, that £68.6million profit made in that financial year and more was spent on the four transfers that came in the two months after June 2019.

Even with the departures of players like Kieran Trippier and Vincent Janssen, Spurs had a net spend of £74.5million last summer, after the end of that financial year, and that's not counting their January business.

There is also a £1.2billion stadium complex that is being paid for with £637m of loans while other loans are still being paid off for the training ground and other ventures.

What this year's financial results will show in next season's accounts will very much depend on how much of a boost has come from the new stadium, balanced with the lower capacity to Wembley, as well as a potential lack of Champions League next season and the fall-out from this global pandemic, including issues with sponsorship revenue and potentially lost TV revenue if this season cannot eventually be recommenced.

Then there is Levy's much-publicised bonus and salary. It's a headline grabbing sum - £7million in all - but of course it was not paid in the midst of this crisis. It was paid a year ago.

Levy and his fellow directors have taken their own 20 per cent cut, but a very wealthy man - his stake in the club is believed to be worth around £500m - will always come into focus when cuts are being made. He will take the flak and as he says he's used to it.

The chairman's comment about future transfers - or lack of - in the club's statement was a realistic one but it was not the time to tell people to "wake up" about transfer business in the midst of such an important statement about his employees' wages.

For his detractors it seems liked excuses were being readied and attacks made, when just paragraphs later people's livelihoods were being placed in doubt.

Above it all sits Joe Lewis - the owner of ENIC - with a net worth of roughly £4billion according to this years Forbes' figures. He's currently the 355th richest man in the world according to Forbes' real-time list.

Lewis has never been a sugar daddy for Spurs. That was never his intention. The club has always been run as a business and in line with financial fair play regulations.

However, at a time with UEFA have relaxed those rules to allow teams to deal with the problems faced by the coronavirus, so they have a man at the very top who could help all of those affected far down the ladder for three or four months without feeling too much of a pinch.

When Lewis and ENIC eventually sell Tottenham Hotspur they will make a lot of money on their initial investment. Why not help those staff who have got and will get them there?

Other clubs have not thought twice about ensuring employees will not be financially disadvantaged during this time, clubs with far less revenue than Spurs.

Instead Tottenham are waiting on the players to do their bit but what affect has their early wage cut decision and calling on the players and PFA to make their decision had?

Despite the initial outcry about only non-playing staff being affected, the club cannot cut wages of players and coaching staff as easily.

That is a bigger machine and relies upon the PFA and LMA working with the Premier League and the clubs.

Saturday's PFA statement said: "The Premier League players want to take the lead and ensure their financial contributions will support:

"Our clubs that we play for will obviously need our support, particularly if this crisis goes beyond June.

"Non-playing staff at our Premier League clubs – guaranteeing they receive 100% of their wages.

"EFL and non-league clubs, their staff and players. The NHS - whose workers - many of whom are football fans - are doing so much for us all. They are the real heroes."

There is also an issue over the "12-month 30 per cent salary cut/deferral in wages for players" proposed by the Premier League in what that means in terms of lost taxes for the government and institutions like the NHS and whether it is better to set up a fund for instance than take cuts.

Football needs to come to a solution together, motivated by the need to help those who need it the most rather than self-interest.

Players earn a lot but most of them also do a lot for charity and good causes. They will want this sorted out sooner rather than later.

In the mean time, Tottenham need to repair their public image whether they believe they need to or not.

A lot of sympathy has been eroded for Spurs and it all comes down to timing. Once again in N17, it was completely off.