Representatives of We are N17 yesterday met with the Premier League chief executive, Richard Scudamore, to press their case and will collect signatures for a petition outside White Hart Lane before kick-off. Another group are believed to be planning a demonstration.
At the meeting, also attended by the MP for Tottenham, David Lammy, who has campaigned vociferously against the idea, the fans challenged Scudamore over the League's decision not to block the move.
But the League is insistent that neither West Ham nor Tottenham would be breaking rules requiring clubs to remain within their locality if they won the race to move to the Olympic Park in time for the 2015-16 season.
Tim Framps, one of the organisers of the We are N17 campaign, said they had collected more than 5,000 signatures for an online petition. The group are angry at the lack of consultation from the club over the move.
Spurs propose to demolish the Olympic Stadium and replace it with a purpose-built football ground. If they are granted preferred bidder status by the Olympic Park Legacy Company at the end of the month, Spurs will have to pay a sizeable non-returnable bond to demonstrate their seriousness.
"The first thing we're disappointed about is the lack of consultation. The fans should let their voices be known," Framps said. "The OPLC's decision depends on fans following the club. If there are 100,000 Spurs fans who want to go to Stratford, then fair enough. But I don't think there are and that's why they haven't asked us."
The group are calling on fans who oppose the move to lobby the OPLC, the mayor of London, Boris Johnson, and the government.
The issue could split fans as there are also groups campaigning in favour of the move. Likewise, West Ham fans have set up groups campaigning for and against their own bid.
Tottenham believe that once they see the proposal, fans will be convinced by the vision for the area and accept the argument that it will help Spurs compete with Europe's elite clubs.
The club's architects this week argued that retaining the athletics track, as West Ham propose, was incompatible with football. Instead, they have offered to revamp Crystal Palace as a 25,000 capacity athletics stadium, a proposal dismissed as a "poor consolation prize" by UK Athletics.
Spurs have pointed to a string of European examples, including Bayern Munich and Stuttgart, where the track has either been removed or a team have moved to a new football stadium.
Glenn Hoddle, the former Spurs midfielder and manager, has backed the idea of revamping the stadium. "I played for Monaco where there was a running track around the pitch and there was a lack of atmosphere," he said.
"Roma and Lazio have to play with a running track and there's always a lack of atmosphere, so I can totally understand why Spurs are looking to make the Olympic Stadium a football-style stadium. From a Spurs point of view, it's only right they try to make it into the best football stadium they can."
Rick Parry, the former chief executive of the Premier League and Liverpool, supported Hoddle's view.
"I'm not backing either bid for the Olympic Stadium but football-specific stadia are far more suited to the needs of the football-going public than stadiums with athletic tracks. My experience of stadiums around Europe is that when you have a track you lose atmosphere. The further from the pitch you are the less intimate the experience," he said.
"Having spent many years on the plans for the new Anfield I know how critically important it is to get the sight-lines right and the viewing distances right, in terms of maximising revenue and the supporters getting the best experience.
"I think it does have an effect on attendances – the more you meet the needs of the paying public the more likely they are to come."
