Tottenham have denied owner Joe Lewis has been in discussions regarding a reported £1 billion takeover of the Barclays Premier League club.
Press speculation claimed Lewis was prepared to sell Spurs as the club prepares to build a new stadium adjacent to their current White Hart Lane home. However, Tottenham have moved swiftly to quash the reports insisting everyone at White Hart Lane is focused on completing the major project.
In a statement, Spurs said: "Contrary to recent press speculation, neither the club, nor its majority shareholder, are in any takeover discussions and the focus of the club is fully on delivering the new stadium project."
Meanwhile the Tottenham Hotspur Supporters' Trust fears the club's identity risks being severely damaged if the wrong groundshare option is taken for the 2017-18 season. Spurs are assessing all alternatives for a temporary home -- including Wembley, the Olympic Stadium and stadium:mk -- after the latest delay in the saga of constructing a new ground.
Spurs plan to build a 56,250-capacity venue next to the existing White Hart Lane ground, which holds around 36,240. In July they overcame a major hurdle after the government approved a compulsory purchase order allowing building work to begin. However, seven years of negotiations with one landowner are still to reach a satisfactory conclusion, resulting in the delay.
A High Court challenge has resulted in a revised construction program, with the shortest build time meaning Spurs must leave White Hart Lane to allow the new stadium to be built adjacent to the present site.
"The board of the Tottenham Hotspur Supporters' Trust is understandably concerned to hear the latest announcement from the club regarding delays to the building of a new stadium," the statement read.
"While the Trust is pragmatic about the need to move from White Hart Lane for one season, the prospect of moving from north London raises a number of issues for supporters, the local community, and the club's identity.
"For the supporters, there are serious issues over the logistics and expense of travel to home games. For the local community, which is depending upon the stadium project as a catalyst for regeneration, there are serious economic implications. We believe the cost of such a move to the local economy needs to be seriously considered."
