When Daniel Levy left Tottenham last September, fans exhaled. Twenty-four years of frustration, finally over. A new era and a clean slate beckoned. The scapegoat had been removed—surely now, things would change.
Seven months later, Spurs sit 17th in the Premier League, just one point above the relegation zone and on their third manager of the season.
The idea that one man’s exit could fix Tottenham’s problems was always wishful thinking disguised as accountability. Fans had protested for years, citing just two trophies in 25 years, which is a legitimate grievance. However, the structural rot at this club runs deeper than any chairman’s tenure.
Levy did not invent the injury culture, the soft squad mentality, or the habit of collapsing under pressure; he merely presided over those things.
Peter Charrington, the new non-executive chairman, spent 26 years in private banking before working for the Lewis family. This is his first role in sport. Day-to-day responsibilities are now split between Charrington and CEO Vinai Venkatesham – neither of whom possesses Levy’s deep knowledge of the football business.
The managerial carousel is the most damning evidence. Thomas Frank was appointed with fanfare. Igor Tudor lasted just 44 days. Now Roberto De Zerbi has been parachuted in with seven games left and the Championship looming. The ownership promised a ‘new era of leadership’ and ‘stability’ last September. It has delivered neither.
Levy became a convenient vessel for everything that felt wrong about Tottenham. Some criticism was fair, but the problems at this club are systemic, cultural, and run deep into ownership. Removing him without changing the decision-making structure was not reform.
The scapegoat left. The cycle remains.