Tottenham in Purple & Gold

And what of the phrase "we want our Tottenham back"?

The notion of an "our Tottenham" is a difficult thing to define, as football clubs mean different things to each individual supporter. 

However, while attending the ENIC Out protest, several attendees referred to Tottenham's lack of success, one person asked: "When was the last time you saw us win a trophy?"

This suggests that, perhaps, the thing that so many of these fans want back is success.

In that case, Tottenham's average league position in the ENIC era is significantly higher than the decade before the takeover.

But despite this generally steady process, financially and on the football pitch, the ENIC era has been defined by a lack of trophies and thus, arguably, a lack of success. 

The ENIC Out movement then is fair to criticise Tottenham's failure to collect silverware in a period that has seen the likes of Wigan Athletic and West Ham collect trophies.

However, to many supporters, the notion that ENIC's business decisions have directly led to a lack of success seems rather far-fetched.

Indeed, in a game with as many variables as football, can one really place the blame solely at the feet of the club's ownership?

From those at the protest it was difficult to get a clear answer as to the ENIC Out movement's dream owner for Tottenham Hotspur Football Club.

But the general consensus from those we spoke with was "anyone but ENIC" and "an owner that would spend more money than ENIC."

With that in mind, the ENIC Out movement may be forced to reckon not just with on-pitch concerns in the coming years but moral ones too. 

Over the last two decades, nation-states have taken an interest in the game of football.

Companies funded by these nations have purchased teams such as Manchester City, PSG and Newcastle and used their unrivalled wealth to bring success to these clubs, countries with questionable human rights records have been accused of using the game to engage in a practice known as "sportswashing."

This, according to Greenpeace, is "the act of sponsoring a sports team or event in order to distract from bad practices elsewhere."

And the reality is, if Spurs were to be sold tomorrow, there is a large chance it would be, as recent trends suggest, to a nation-state arguably looking to distract from human rights abuses and questionable politics.

This is reflected in current reporting, with the Evening Standard suggesting Qatar has held an interest in purchasing the North London club.

And this is the central issue for many fans, including Chris Miller, who told us: “It is difficult to not be controversial here, but after ENIC there seem to be three paths.

“The vast majority of new owners we’ve seen in the Premier League, who have bought clubs of a similar size to Tottenham, have been either state owners, often from places with terrible human rights records.

“Oligarchs, who have questionable means of extracting oil and making their billions.

“Or franchise owners who look to extract wealth from the club. So there are legitimate concerns as to what the alternative to ENIC might be.

"It is not like it used to be where if you were a millionaire you could afford to buy your favourite football club and run it like a fan. That is simply not possible, mostly due to the money currently in the Premier League.”

At present, the ENIC Out movement and its largest proponents online have seemingly chosen to ignore concerns over new ownership rather than address them. 

But, if ENIC Out ever wants to transform into a mass movement as groups like Change For Tottenham hope, it must have workable solutions to these questions that the general fanbase can agree on.

Finally, the ENIC Out movement has faced accusations of anti-Semitism in recent months due to coded language directed at Daniel Levy.

As mentioned earlier, one man at the ENIC Out protest described Levy as a "parasite" and this language has been echoed online.

Levy was born in Essex, to Jewish parents and has supported Tottenham since he was a boy.

The word parasite associated with Judaism clearly has historical connotations that even the most passionate ENIC Out members would not want to be associated with. 

This, combined with a media narrative that some claim falsely portrays Levy as a man unwilling to spend money, echoes anti-Semitic tropes made by reactionary right-wing movements throughout history. 

This is not to suggest supporters of ENIC Out are anti-Semites, in fact, many Tottenham supporters are Jewish themselves.

But the use of this coded language and problematic accusations may cast the movement in a light that many fans would not like to be associated with, thus adding to the changes ENIC Out must undergo if it wishes to become a true movement for positive change at Tottenham.

Chris Miller explained to us: "I think a lot of the things we see are not deliberate, I don’t think everyone knows that Daniel Levy is Jewish. 

“And the way that modern football fans think the only way to have any success is by spending vast amounts of money has led to an endless desire to spend more and more and more.

“When that doesn’t happen, people will criticise the lack of spending.

“However, I have at times pointed out on Twitter that the use of the word parasite about a Jewish man, regardless of whether you think his impact is parasitic, is tapping into an anti-semitic trope.”

Chris added that the response he has received online from ENIC Out advocates has been less than positive.

“I think once you’ve been told about the trope if you continue to use it, then you are being anti-Semitic in my opinion," he said.

“And it’s clear, whether deliberate or not, a lot of the vitriolic abuse that Daniel Levy gets is bordering on anti-Semitic and I would have a lot more respect for the movement if key stakeholders distanced themselves from anti-Semitic tropes.”

If the movement is to be embraced by the wider footballing world, it must reckon with the more reactionary elements in its ranks and examine its use of language, be it deliberate or not.