Is emotion driving Spurs' High Court bid?
So, why are Tottenham Hotspur still fighting a legal battle to take over the 2012 Olympic Stadium after the Games?
That's the question being asked by people who have followed the arguments around the stadium since it was awarded to West Ham.
I reported last week that Spurs were very close to a deal with London Mayor Boris Johnson to build a new ground close to their current home at White Hart Lane. Johnson has offered £8m to improve the infrastructure around a 56,250-seater stadium.
I was told by very senior sources that the club was ready to pull out of its court case for a judicial review over the 2012 stadium and that the documents for the deal were ready for signing.
Now, I trust the sources and I still expect Tottenham to do a deal with the Mayor and build the stadium at Northumberland Park. I also understand that Johnson is prepared to put more public money into the project.
So everybody close to the negotiations was very surprised when Spurs still went to the High Court last week to force through the judicial review which will take place in October.
It does seem strange for Spurs to go ahead with the legal case.
Firstly, why upset the Mayor, who supported the West Ham decision, when you've already done the deal to stay near White Hart Lane? The deal for Northumberland Park could be put at risk, especially with Boris Johnson facing re-election next year.
Secondly, Tottenham seem to have lost their moral argument against the West Ham decision. It focused on why Newham Council was ready to loan £40m to West Ham for the Olympic Stadium redevelopement when it wasn't prepared to offer Spurs the same deal.
BBC London has asked this question many times in our reports in the last six months, especially since the money is being offered by the poorest borough in London. I've said again and again that it's the weakest link of the decision to award the stadium to West Ham.
But Spurs are in the unusual situation, now, where they appear ready to accept public money for their plans at White Hart Lane at the same time as protesting in court about West Ham being offered state cash for the 2012 ground. How does all that square up?
It seems to me that the reason Spurs are in court has more to do with emotion than considered thinking.
West Ham have alleged that Spurs offered them a deal around the current Scotland Yard investigation into accusations that a private investigator hacked into the personal banking and phone records of West Ham and Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC) staff during the bidding process.
West Ham claim Spurs offered to drop their bid for the 2012 stadium if the hacking accusations are dropped. As I reported last Thursday, the same offer has allegedly been made by Spurs to the OPLC. Both West Ham and the OPLC have turned it down.
Spurs refused to comment on the claims when we contacted them but the OPLC chair Baroness Ford told me she wants a "full investigation" from the police and takes the hacking accusations very seriously.
If Tottenham were to back out of the judicial review, it wouldn't be over, of course. Leyton Orient are also involved in the appeal. But Orient didn't make a bid for the stadium.
The club and many of the supporters argue that West Ham moving into their territory will damage their fan base.
It's a fair argument and it is one that the football authorities need to answer as well as the High Court.