I think history is more a matter of pride than an indicator of current ambition. But ambition should be credable.

While on the subject of Steve Gibson, I’d like to say that it’s good to see a chairman with an ounce of patience and sense of realism. I wish him and boro success.

Let me put ambition this way, if you were watching MOTD on a Saturday night and saw Middlesbrough’s home games and Tottenham’s, where would you want to play your football?

Not in front of all those fans dressed as red seats!

Since our UEFA Cup run (and maybe even before), Steve Gibson has said he wants to see us, and believes he will see us, in the UEFA Cup. Yakubu said much the same thing while he was with us.

Now, unless Spurs are aiming for the League title, do they not share the same ambition?

Or does ambition need credibility and history?

I don’t believe in how much ambition a club has. In today’s world of power-corrupted football, it all boils down to who will throw the most money at a player that determines ambition.

Oh, and yes. It is totally ridiculous, but I do hate to walk away from an argument

If you refer to the title of the page, will it not say Southgate vs Woodgate, Boro or Spurs: Who has more ambition? That is what this debate is about, right?

And here you are clutching at anything you can to prove that Boro even have a respectable history. I actually like Boro. As they are. A decent premiership team that have made their mark on English football. But they are no Tottenham Hotspur. Simple.

I’ll respond to your comments anyway.

Woodgate has seemed to be a sound purchase based on his performances to date, but I accept that you will have seen more of him than me and are better placed to make a decision on his ability than I am. But if it’s okay with you I’d rather place my faith in the collective professionals at Real Madrid, Boro, and Spurs that were responsible for bringing him to there respective clubs.

Personaly, I was gutted when I read that we’d signed Bent for that much. It’s stupid, but like I intended it, it is clear evidence of the ambition of the spurs board, however foolish. Like most of the other fans on this page, you can twist this anyway you want Tom, but unfortuneately for you the reality remains the same – as does the actual subject of this debate. Woodgate was right and Boro are undeniably less ambitious than Spurs.

I hate to say that Arsenal are a more ambitious club than Spurs. But I can. Why can you not concede that Spurs are more ambitious than Boro?

*More cup finals in the past 12 years or so than any club outside of the top 4*

Who knows how many promotions since 1986. 4 or 5 I think.

The two impressive UEFA Cup comebacks in recent years, which, lets be honest, most of the nation watched.

Someone clearly can’t be arsed to look into any research.