Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

[Nou_Camp99]

It won’t be pretty for him. He will do nothing as per usual. Only question is if he does nothing but still scores a penalty or heads one in from a corner or not.

I'd put good money on him scoring at least one with Varane and Martinez out.

 

[Rozay]

I'd put good money on him scoring at least one with Varane and Martinez out.

Luke Shaw will deal with him quite comfortably. I’ve seen various centre halves contain him comfortably for us. Anyone with a but of legs and strength. Chris Smalling for example.

He might score. Any player, particularly one playing upfront would be worth a bet of scoring a goal. I doubt you’d even get long odds on Weghorst scoring in any given game if he starts given that he plays upfront. But I am confident that Kane will generally be handled well and pose very little threat to us. That won’t stop him scoring a penalty, or finding himself in the right spot on one occasion, and he rarely misses if a chance presents. But over 90 mins, I doubt he’ll cause much trouble.

 

[sullydnl]

Using the fact that he scores a lot of goals from set plays as a stick to beat him with is a strange one, particularly when it's in one of the most dysfunctional spurs teams of recent times. What next? 'Well 95% of his goals are scored with his dominant foot. You'd really rather see more of a 50/50 split'?

Except if you actually read the posts, I'm not doing that. I literally said I don't care if he scores all his goals from set-pieces.

I was pointing out that using goals scored this season doesn't work particularly well as a counter to the idea that he might have declined generally, because a much higher proportion of his goals haven't come from general play. It's not criticism of Kane, or even an argument that he has dropped off, it's criticism of the poster's logic that one disproves the other. Kane's pace could have massively dropped off and he'd still be able to get those set-piece goals and score those penalties.

So if you're going to try and use goals to read something into his general play, you need to look at what type of goals he's scoring. Or actually just look at his general play, rather than simply pointing to a goals tally.

 

[Roboc7]

Uniteds window to win is from the summer though, we absolutely have to be in win mode from next season else why bother investing huge money in players like Casemiro and wasting the potential prime years of Fernandes, Varane etc.

Kane will be big money if he moves but we add an instant goal return of 25+ in a position we simply haven’t had fire power in for years. Yeah he might tail off in a couple of years but his game isn’t built around pace anyway. So you overpay by £20-30 million and we get Levy memes as soon as he doesn’t score for 3-4 games but nobody will remember that when we are finally back in a legit title race position and competing on all fronts.

Ten Hag will want to win now, ownership situation aside, adding someone like Kane can have a Van Persie effect, so what if it’s 2-3 seasons, let’s be competing again.

A Van Persie effect isn’t enough though, we won’t get near City with gaping holes in starting eleven and even on the bench.

The argument for this type of signing is they are guaranteed but they’re not really and definitely not for very long. We’ve got enough ageing and pedestrian players adding more like Kane or keeping Sabitzer just makes no sense. With or without Kane we’re not winning the league next season, it’s 2-3 years away.

Varane was brought in to win the title with Ole, Casemiro was signed to steady the ship and save us from disaster. They’re not going to get better over two next or three years and we have too many that fall into that category. They probably will waste these years few years but Real Madrid got the peak out of those two, Spurs have had the best of Kane. We should be able to find players who will play their best football for us, if we can’t do that we’ll just repeat this cycle we’re in.

 

[Isotope]

I really rate him, but man... really dislike (no hate) seeing his smug face.

Would prefer to sign his partner Son, then move Rashford to striker. I think it would be better to the team overall.

 

[Pickle85]

Except if you actually read the posts, I'm not doing that. I literally said I don't care if he scores all his goals from set-pieces.

I was pointing out that using goals scored this season doesn't work particularly well as a counter to the idea that he might have declined generally, because a much higher proportion of his goals haven't come from general play. It's not criticism of Kane, or even an argument that he has dropped off, it's criticism of the poster's logic that one disproves the other. Kane's pace could have massively dropped off and he'd still be able to get those set-piece goals and score those penalties.

So if you're going to try and use goals to read something into his general play, you need to look at what type of goals he's scoring. Or actually just look at his general play, rather than simply pointing to a goals tally.

But you seem to come to the conclusion somehow that goals from set pieces are worth less than others. Why do you think that the ratio of goals scored from set pieces increasing means that he's declining? Surely, given what is a pretty broadly accepted fact that spurs are in disarray, it's a more likely conclusion that because they're not as coherent going forward, Kane picks his goals up elsewhere (ie from set pieces as opposed to 'open play')?

Your last paragraph flattens the issues massively. And also avoids the fact that looking at his general play, he hasn't dropped off like you suggest.

 

[sullydnl]

But you seem to come to the conclusion somehow that goals from set pieces are worth less than others. Why do you think that the ratio of goals scored from set pieces increasing means that he's declining? Surely, given what is a pretty broadly accepted fact that spurs are in disarray, it's a more likely conclusion that because they're not as coherent going forward, Kane picks his goals up elsewhere (ie from set pieces as opposed to 'open play'?

Your last paragraph flattens the issues massively. And also avoids the fact that looking at his general play, he hasn't dropped off like you suggest.

You're either not reading or not understanding the posts you're replying to.

I didn't come to the conclusion that goals from set-pieces count for less. I said he could score all his goals from set-pieces for all it matters. Goals are goals. Nor did I make any argument whatsoever that he's in decline. I specifically said "it's not criticism of Kane, or even an argument that he has dropped off". Those are arguments you've made up.

I'm saying that if you're trying to use his goalscoring to draw conclusions about whether his current general ability (i.e. pace, touch, positioning, etc.) has declined from his peak, then goals from set-pieces count for less. Obviously. Because they're less dynamic, more limited pre-set situations. For example if he has lost his pace and now struggles to get into the box as quickly from the deeper positions he takes up, that would impact his ability to score from open play but not from corners or free kicks.

But as long as you're not using the goal tally to draw those broader conclusions, it doesn't matter at all where the goals come from.

 

[Pickle85]

You're either not reading or not understanding the posts you're replying to.

I didn't come to the conclusion that goals from set-pieces count for less. I said he could score all his goals from set-pieces for all it matters. Goals are goals. Nor did I make any argument whatsoever that he's in decline. I specifically said "it's not criticism of Kane, or even an argument that he has dropped off". Those are arguments you've made up.

I'm saying that if you're trying to use his goalscoring to draw conclusions about whether his current general ability (i.e. pace, touch, positioning, etc.) has declined from his peak, then goals from set-pieces count for less. Obviously. Because they're less dynamic, more limited pre-set situations. For example if he has lost his pace and now struggles to get into the box as quickly from the deeper positions he takes up, that would impact his ability to score from open play but not from corners or free kicks.

But as long as you're not using the goal tally to draw those broader conclusions, it doesn't matter at all where the goals come from.

Maybe I am misunderstanding. Can you let me know what you meant when you said the bolded below please, then? From it, I understood you to be implying that the fact that Kane scored fewer goals 'in dynamic situations rather than off set plays' was a good indicator of whether his general ability as a footballer had declined. If you're not implying that, can I ask what your post below is saying?

It obviously isn't all that counts though. Because you pointed to goals as a measure of whether Kane's general ability as a footballer has declined from his peak when he was younger. And scoring goals in dynamic situations rather than off set plays clearly tells you more in that regard.

For example if Kane has lost pace or altered his game so that he's in the box less often, that impacts his ability to score goals in open play. Not his ability to head in a corner.

It's not an argument about whether we'd want those set-piece goals too, which we obviously would. It's an argument about whether he could have got those set-piece goals while also having declined as a footballer generally as he ages, which he obviously could.

 

[sullydnl]

Maybe I am misunderstanding. Can you let me know what you meant when you said the bolded below please, then? From it, I understood you to be implying that the fact that Kane scored fewer goals 'in dynamic situations rather than off set plays' was a good indicator of whether his general ability as a footballer had declined. If you're not implying that, can I ask what your post below is saying?

A poster said Kane had declined. Another poster said he hadn't, pointing to the number of goals he has scored this season as proof.

I was just pointing out that a general decline could be disguised by scoring a greater proportion of set-piece goals and penalties, which tell you less about a player's general ability than what they manage to do in open play. And indeed Kane has scored a greater proportion of his goals from set pieces and penalties this season. So Kane could have got those goals while also declining generally.

That doesn't mean I think Kane actually has declined generally this season. It just means that pointing to his goals tally without context is a weak argument.

 

[Bebestation]

A poster said Kane had declined. Another poster said he hadn't, pointing to the number of goals he has scored this season as proof.

I was just pointing out that a general decline could be disguised by scoring a greater proportion of set-piece goals and penalties, which tell you less about a player's general ability than what they manage to do in open play. And indeed Kane has scored a greater proportion of his goals from set pieces and penalties this season. So Kane could have got those goals while also declining generally.

That doesn't mean I think Kane actually has declined generally this season. It just means that pointing to his goals tally without context is a weak argument.

This could also be linked to his manager being Conte.

Conte isn’t going to play like Pep, Ten Hag or Arteta - so the goals coming from set pieces and headers are quite likely linked to his managers tactics if it isn’t his own decline.

 

[Fabio Rochemback]

It means he scored 19 non penalty goals this season. Which is all that counts if you want to analyse it from open play. Trying to deflect because he scored from a freakin’ corner is just silly. That’s what we want.

Yeah I totally understand dismissing penalties, not goals from other set pieces.

 

[Pickle85]

A poster said Kane had declined. Another poster said he hadn't, pointing to the number of goals he has scored this season as proof.

I was just pointing out that a general decline could be disguised by scoring a greater proportion of set-piece goals and penalties, which tell you less about a player's general ability than what they manage to do in open play. And indeed Kane has scored a greater proportion of his goals from set pieces and penalties this season. So Kane could have got those goals while also declining generally.

That doesn't mean I think Kane actually has declined generally this season. It just means that pointing to his goals tally without context is a weak argument.

So you're saying that you don't claim Kane has either declined or not. But he could have. But you wouldn't say he has. But one could.

 

[Caellum]

There is no doubting Kane's undoubted quality but at 30 is he the guy to lead United?

Who knows what the future brings but. if Glazers stay then possibly 5 transfer windows before United will be in a real position to challenge for the title and champions league by then Kane will be 33-34 and United will need a new striker, possibly even longer if they do look to develop Old Trafford.

If we bring in Kane that's 130m, and with the current squad no guarantee of improvement of current performance or ETH can bring in 3 young £40m players for that which allows us to release Maguire, McTominay, AWB, and a few fringe players with the proceeds we maybe get a couple more players.

Or we get Kane but end up having to keep most of the current squad, I know what i'd chose.

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

Good for him. Ours is though.



It won’t be pretty for him. He will do nothing as per usual. Only question is if he does nothing but still scores a penalty or heads one in from a corner or not.

That’s striker job, scoring goal. What do you expect him to do? Dribble the ball beat defenders?

 

[sullydnl]

So you're saying that you don't claim Kane has either declined or not. But he could have. But you wouldn't say he has. But one could.

I have no idea if Kane has declined or not. But just pointing to his goals tally is a bad way of arguing he hasn't. Especially in a season when a smaller proportion have come from open play than before.

 

[Dempsey19]

I'd get Vlahović if i could.

8 in 21 in Serie A. No thanks. Juve paid 80m euros for him I don't think they'll sell him cheaply either.

If we're shopping in Serie A then it's Oshimen or no-one.

 

[Idxomer]

I found the stat about goals from open play interesting. I think it's a representative of Spurs under Conte which is a clueless team in possession with the most goals from set pieces in the league.

I go back and forth regarding Kane really and right now I'm against signing him. I think getting another high-risk high-reward player who's 30 might not be the best idea.

 

[Caellum]

Yeh, that's what was said when Ronaldo returned, lets not forget until he returned to United, Ronalso had scored at more than a goal a game for 13 consecutive seasons.

With the current squad and that's what your stuck with if you get Kane, Maguire, Mctominay, Fred, Sancho, you seriously think they can create the chances for Kane, RVP had the likes of Giggs, Scholes, Carrick Vidic, Evra, Ferdinand, Rooney quality players with years of experience of playing together to back him up.

 

[Rozay]

That’s striker job, scoring goal. What do you expect him to do? Dribble the ball beat defenders?

I expect him to score goals and some more. Any player needs to be a part of a team, and first and foremost, I value a player’s contribution to the unit. I don’t see Kane easily being on the same wavelength as our other forwards, our play is too fast for him. Also, I don’t take him scoring loads of goals as a given, even though he has scored loads at Spurs. For him, or any other player, to get the best of themselves they need to work best within the team they are in. He’s more of a sure thing at City than he is at United due to stylistic differences.

Kane is the wrong player for me. He’s a top finisher, but he lacks other things that I see as key qualities to getting the best out of a United attack.

 

[sullydnl]

Taste of a mix of opinions from a Spurs forum:

Honestly don't think Ten Hag will want him, doesn't fit how he wants he's team to play.

Would be a wise investment, Kane has still at least 5-6 good years left in him at top level, the guy is a fantastic all-round footballer with phenomental vision and passing ability, not just a striker.

If you want to be a pressing team from the front then you can’t with Harry. If you still want to press you need fast aggressive players willing to work around him. Both Utd and ourselves don’t have those players.

Far too low price tag. I know kane has just over a year on his contract but a player of his calibre is still worth minimum of 120 million. He is in his prime. If United got him it would guarantee the title for them next season. He is indispensable. Kane's come but once in a generation.

Manutd adding Kane does not guarantee them the title. We had much much better players in 16/17 and Kane used to be better and it didnt guarantee anything. With how good City are and Arse/Newcs probably improving, nothing is guaranteed.

Ten Hag wants a central focal point skilled in hold up play as a number 9.

Wout Weghorst isn't going to press anybody into lightning counterattacks. Neither are Klaas Jan Huntelaar or Sebastien Haller who scored buckets for him at Ajax.

Kane and Ronaldo alike aren't balls-out pressers, but Kane is a central node of a passing network, Ronaldo isn't.

We keep talking about Utd but he doesn’t fit in a system that presses from the front. Does ten Haag actually want him?

If he wants to stay and is willing to sign a new deal then definitely keep him. Still a top top class player for many years, is an icon. Whatever limitations he has in pressing I think are worth dealing with.

Whether United should stump up that money for Kane is a valid question. Whether they will probably isn't.

I would sell him today for that amount of money.
he is one of the greatest strikers in the world, but he's not a leader at all.
I would take benzema even for 1 year, just to let the other players share the dressing room with a real charismatic champion.

He'd have been a great captain for us but never got the chance because Levy stupidly decided to hold onto Lloris until retirement, and failed to remove him from the captaincy after his drink driving incident.

Ten Hag: “We have to build a new future and we need a striker who not only scores goals but contributes by linking up play very well and pressing, which is very important."

Looks like Kane is off the agenda then.

Perhaps Mr Kane will do better as a big fish in a small pond than a small fish in a big pond. I believe the whole of Spurs tactics have been swayed to accommodate his legacy. The lack of dynamism in the team is personified by his own.

If an attacking manager keen on the press joins, it will be interesting to see what becomes of Kane's role. He hasn't got the legs anymore to do that week-in week-out. If he drops into a 10, he'll score less goals but the extra seasons may see him past Shearer's record.

Criticise his work rate/mobility for sure .. it's a weakness and hurts us, but he is finishing chances at a rate 99% of forwards cannot, and he is creating opportunities for teammates more than most centre-forwards manage. These are statistical facts.

Talk about a small sample size upon which to make an argument. Does Kane have a goal outside the box this season? In fact, how many does he have outside the penalty spot, >12 yards out? And I'm not "criticising his finishing"...I'm criticising the value-added of having his lumbering ass on the field when we could have someone that could actually move. If the value-added as per your (weak) argument is 4 goals over a season then compare that with 150M pounds and stick it in your pipe and smoke it.

He does so much thankless dirty work in this team that no other center forward in the league does as often and as well, and then when his opportunity presents itself, bang.

Our entire squad, from keeper, through CBs, through midfield, through Son and Kulu have been utter shit, Harry is single handedly dragging us to a top 4 race we don't deserve...and our fans still criticize him.

The real reason is exactly why I've wanted him gone for years now and that is because he has NO intrinsic threat on the football field...he can't run you, can't dribble you, can't outmuscle you, can no longer create the half-yard of space to get his shot off (into the legs of the defender now), and posses no threat in behind...it's tapins and headers now.

He's got nothing to keep a defense honest and against VVD it was going to be sad no matter what...even worse coming back lacking fitness. It was embarrassing...and predictable. And yet folks are allergic to strikers that can actually move. So many of our problems are because we are static up top because he never clears centrally and it limits the fluidity.

This post is not even worth reading why have I even responded Is beyond me.

I know it's been said before but Harry's midfield work is great to watch. He obviously wants to score goals but his ball control, hold up play, shielding of the ball, speed of thought, lay offs and incisive passing are real assets in MF.

As i've said numerous times, Kane is the best playmaker at the club, and a fantastic passer. With our current crop and without signings, i wouldn't hesitate to play Harry as an AMC and Richy up top in a 4-2-3-1 formation.

 

[CatsOfUlthar]

Kane is very good as a player you play to.

He doesn't create chances, and he doesn't work outside of the final third.

I feel he's the wrong signing. It would be perfectly okay and I'd encourage it, if he were to be signed in to a team of creative players, but that's not what we have. We have one side that when played together, will get the job done.

When one man is out it all goes out of the window.

I would not like to pay an extraordinary fee for someone who might be good to thirty five, or might be good until next year. I'd rather invest in someone who doesn't quite slot in next year and grows after that.

Who that might be, I don't know. I'm neither a Premier League manager nor do I play Football Manager. I personally believe there's a massive drought in out and out strikers, and that's one of the two final third signings we need.

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

I expect him to score goals and some more. Any player needs to be a part of a team, and first and foremost, I value a player’s contribution to the unit. I don’t see Kane easily being on the same wavelength as our other forwards, our play is too fast for him. Also, I don’t take him scoring loads of goals as a given, even though he has scored loads at Spurs. For him, or any other player, to get the best of themselves they need to work best within the team they are in. He’s more of a sure thing at City than he is at United due to stylistic differences.

Kane is the wrong player for me. He’s a top finisher, but he lacks other things that I see as key qualities to getting the best out of a United attack.

Last season he had 9 assists in the league and 2 seasons ago he had 14 assists in the league, so he is not just goals but also can bring others into play and produce assists to his team mate. I don’t know what more do you want from a striker who is proven to score goals and assists? Isn’t it that contribution to unit? If not then please explain or give example of what you expect because you are being very unclear.

Son is fast and direct, similar style to Rashford. If Son and Kane could have the same wavelength, why can’t Rashford and Kane be on the same wavelength?

 

[Rozay]

Last season he had 9 assists in the league and 2 seasons ago he had 14 assists in the league, so he is not just goals but also can bring others into play and produce assists to his team mate. I don’t know what more do you want from a striker who is proven to score goals and assists? Isn’t it that contribution to unit? If not then please explain or give example of what you expect because you are being very unclear.

Son is fast and direct, similar style to Rashford. If Son and Kane could have the same wavelength, why can’t Rashford and Kane be on the same wavelength?

I see football as a lot more nuanced than just a bunch of numbers, and I think one of the common mistakes is that people think they can just take a bunch of numbers and extrapolate them from one team to another and I think it’s not as simple as that.

Kane has several assists for example, and people commonly mention his dropping deep and then just take it out of a Spurs team and drop it into a United one. Two very different teams, and the first and most notable difference is one team has Bruno Fernandes and one doesn’t. All that stuff is not needed from Kane. It is not as simple as swapping Son for Rashford. Rashford is not searching for a Kane. Son may need him, but Rashford has Bruno.

To be more specific as you asked, I see our forwards as using quick interplay between themselves. One-touch passing and movement that Kane simply cannot keep up with IMO. That’s how they create for each other. They also like to get in behind, and Kane can’t do that. I’ve been watching the centre forward role closely all season and I watch out players and I watch the other strikers we are linked with and I am mainly watching their movements, the runs they like to make, the passes the like to make and I don’t see Kane as the best fit for us.

Weghorst is so much worse of a player than Kane, he has got a worse touch, worse finishing, worse in every technical area. I can accept that much. However, I don’t think there is much between them in terms of mobility. When I watch us play with WW, one of the most notable things to me are the numerous passes that we don’t play because it’s WW upfront and not someone who can move. To a commentator, these are not amongst WW’s many missed chances. We simply just pass the ball somewhere else, somewhere less immediately threatening to the opponent and try and build the attack more patiently. When I see those situations, I don’t think ‘if that was Kane we would have played that pass’. I think it’s the same problem. And I’m not talking about a big back to front for a striker to run into 30 yards of space exclusively. Often they are shorter passes, but one that will put a striker in and we have to turn that pass down too often due to having a centre forward who won’t win the first 10 yards.

That is OUR football. I don’t want us to have to change the way we attack because of Harry Kane. I want a striker who can come in and play out game. We need a more sprightly striker in my personal view. I would take an 18 goal, fit and consistent centre forward who can move around the front line, can stretch teams and play the high speed interplay with Rashford, Antony and co than a 25 goal Harry Kane who will take any chances that fall his way but overall make us as a unit easier to defend against I reckon.

 

[AttackAttackAttack]

Kane is the perfect signing for us. No need to elaborate ; deep down we all know it’s true.

 

[croadyman]

Kane is the perfect signing for us. No need to elaborate ; deep down we all know it’s true.

Would be great to get him and Hojlund,however no chance because still have first XI and squad issues at GK,RB,CB,DM,CM,

 

[AttackAttackAttack]

Would be great to get him and Hojlund,however no chance because still have first XI and squad issues at GK,RB,CB,DM,CM,

We need goals now so it has to be Kane. We can look at add a back up in a year or two. We can slot rashford or martial, when fit, into the striker position when needed. Osimhen looks class but there is no telling if he will adapt to the league and how long that may take. Plus, I believe he will cost more than Kane.

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

I see football as a lot more nuanced than just a bunch of numbers, and I think one of the common mistakes is that people think they can just take a bunch of numbers and extrapolate them from one team to another and I think it’s not as simple as that.

Kane has several assists for example, and people commonly mention his dropping deep and then just take it out of a Spurs team and drop it into a United one. Two very different teams, and the first and most notable difference is one team has Bruno Fernandes and one doesn’t. All that stuff is not needed from Kane. It is not as simple as swapping Son for Rashford. Rashford is not searching for a Kane. Son may need him, but Rashford has Bruno.

To be more specific as you asked, I see our forwards as using quick interplay between themselves. One-touch passing and movement that Kane simply cannot keep up with IMO. That’s how they create for each other. They also like to get in behind, and Kane can’t do that. I’ve been watching the centre forward role closely all season and I watch out players and I watch the other strikers we are linked with and I am mainly watching their movements, the runs they like to make, the passes the like to make and I don’t see Kane as the best fit for us.

Weghorst is so much worse of a player than Kane, he has got a worse touch, worse finishing, worse in every technical area. I can accept that much. However, I don’t think there is much between them in terms of mobility. When I watch us play with WW, one of the most notable things to me are the numerous passes that we don’t play because it’s WW upfront and not someone who can move. To a commentator, these are not amongst WW’s many missed chances. We simply just pass the ball somewhere else, somewhere less immediately threatening to the opponent and try and build the attack more patiently. When I see those situations, I don’t think ‘if that was Kane we would have played that pass’. I think it’s the same problem. And I’m not talking about a big back to front for a striker to run into 30 yards of space exclusively. Often they are shorter passes, but one that will put a striker in and we have to turn that pass down too often due to having a centre forward who won’t win the first 10 yards.

That is OUR football. I don’t want us to have to change the way we attack because of Harry Kane. I want a striker who can come in and play out game. We need a more sprightly striker in my personal view. I would take an 18 goal, fit and consistent centre forward who can move around the front line, can stretch teams and play the high speed interplay with Rashford, Antony and co than a 25 goal Harry Kane who will take any chances that fall his way but overall make us as a unit easier to defend against I reckon.

I think you need to go deep of what happened under Poch rather than just make random conclusion based on what happened under Mourinho and Conte.

The idea of Kane dropping deep is started since Mourinho took in charged. Under Poch, no one has ever mentioned this because Poch used him as more the main man. So what does this tell us? It tells us that Kane can play 2 different kinds of role striker, one that drop deeps and one that doesn't drop deep. So to counter your argument, Kane can play the role of striker that doesn't need to drop deep which will counter your argument about the existance of Bruno Fernandes in this team. Furthremore, Kane can also play the role of striker that drops deep which will suit to ten Hag's flexibility if he decides to do what he did vs Leeds and Barcelona where he dropped Weghorst as no 10 and moved Rashford as no 9. Therefore, Kane suits to ten Hag's criteria of striker based on tactical selection he had chose this season.

You told me that Kane is more of a sure thing at City than he is at United due to stylistic differences. But one-touch passing and movement is exactly the kind of style that Pep Guardiola uses. If in your argument he can play the one-touch passing and movement at City then he shouldn't have any problem to do them in any clubs that play one-touch passing and movement. Someone as technical as Kane with his understanding and adaptility to make movement like a main striker and false 9 can easily adapt to any kind of one-touch passing and movement style through coaching in training. Pep knows this and that's why he wanted Kane.

Rashford doesn't need to seach for Kane, Kane can search for Rashford just like how he did it in the past 2 seasons to Son and Kane can adapt into different kind of striker like how Poch used him before which also benefit Bruno.

 

[DickDastardly]

8 in 21 in Serie A. No thanks. Juve paid 80m euros for him I don't think they'll sell him cheaply either.

If we're shopping in Serie A then it's Oshimen or no-one.

A year before that he had 24 in the league.
And a year before he had 21.

Well capable of scoring over 20 goals in the league per season.

And as per how much they payed, that's what I said, if and when they get deducted points again and fall out of CL spot, they might want to get some of the money back...

Getting him for 50 would be a steal.

 

[jamesjimmybyrondean]

A year before that he had 24 in the league.
And a year before he had 21.

Well capable of scoring over 20 goals in the league per season.

And as per how much they payed, that's what I said, if and when they get deducted points again and fall out of CL spot, they might want to get some of the money back...

Getting him for 50 would be a steal.

He's shit

 

[Rozay]

I think you need to go deep of what happened under Poch rather than just make random conclusion based on what happened under Mourinho and Conte.

The idea of Kane dropping deep is started since Mourinho took in charged. Under Poch, no one has ever mentioned this because Poch used him as more the main man. So what does this tell us? It tells us that Kane can play 2 different kinds of role striker, one that drop deeps and one that doesn't drop deep. So to counter your argument, Kane can play the role of striker that doesn't need to drop deep which will counter your argument about the existance of Bruno Fernandes in this team. Furthremore, Kane can also play the role of striker that drops deep which will suit to ten Hag's flexibility if he decides to do what he did vs Leeds and Barcelona where he dropped Weghorst as no 10 and moved Rashford as no 9. Therefore, Kane suits to ten Hag's criteria of striker based on tactical selection he had chose this season.

You told me that Kane is more of a sure thing at City than he is at United due to stylistic differences. But one-touch passing and movement is exactly the kind of style that Pep Guardiola uses. If in your argument he can play the one-touch passing and movement at City then he shouldn't have any problem to do them in any clubs that play one-touch passing and movement. Someone as technical as Kane with his understanding and adaptility to make movement like a main striker and false 9 can easily adapt to any kind of one-touch passing and movement style through coaching in training. Pep knows this and that's why he wanted Kane.

Rashford doesn't need to seach for Kane, Kane can search for Rashford just like how he did it in the past 2 seasons to Son and Kane can adapt into different kind of striker like how Poch used him before which also benefit Bruno.

It’s not a ‘random conclusion’, it’s my observation and opinion from watching the footballer. You are as entitled to your own.

It is of no relevance to me what Kane did 5 years ago. Again, I am all about watching a player and assessing their qualities. I don’t simply extrapolate. ‘Kane did this 5 years ago so put him here and he’ll do that’. He is incredibly immobile. He wasn’t when he was younger, unsurprisingly. Simply saying ‘he can play the role of the striker that doesn’t drop deep which counters your argument about the existence of Bruno’ is again a mathematical/scientific assessment. The nuance and the specifics are the qualities. I didn’t just make a sweeping statement, I gave examples of scenarios where Kane doesn’t have the qualities. Obviously this is not a matter of him simply being told to ‘stay up front’. Kane may well have the technical ability for our type of passing, I just don’t see that he has the dynamism. There’s more time and space 20 yards deeper.

Regarding how we set up against Barcelona, I don’t see that as relevant at all. We have simply been getting through the season with what we have, the best we have. Rashford played up front because Weghorst is rubbish, in the main. Weghorst also played in midfield because he is seen as good at pressing, which Harry Kane isn’t. The whole set up was makeshift. If we had all the right pieces, Bruno would play 10, Rashford would play left and a capable striker would have played up front. Using that game as a tactical positive isn’t something I see. The idea is not to have to do that.

Kane can’t simply ‘adapt to how Poch used him before’ IMO. That’s my issue. He’s not the same player. I don’t see that he’s started dropping deeper because all his managers have asked him to either. There’s a famous saying in English football that says ‘once you get older and you lose a bit of pace you tend to drop 15 yards’. This is a clear example of that. I can see that because I see the struggles that Kane does have when he is up against many of these centre halves who he can’t get away from. It’s not simply a case of ‘he could if he chose to’. Ultimately, if I saw that he had the qualities I had mentioned in his game today, then I wouldn’t care whether he had been playing right back for tactical reasons even. It would be obvious whether he would still have the mobility to play up top or not.

And speaking of the difference between City and United, City have greater territorial advantage which is the key difference. The spaces in general are smaller so there is less need to transition. Kane can probably often finish with his first touch or two more often than not. Jamie Vardy (in his prime even) was more suited to United than City for the same reason. If the game is played in a 30/40m square box, then it will take pressure off Kane to transition quickly and run away from people. The pitch is typically bigger when we play, and players are required to run longer distances to connect with others I feel.

 

[Cloud7]

Taste of a mix of opinions from a Spurs forum:

A lot of these posts echo a fair few concerns I have about him

 

[sullydnl]

A lot of these posts echo a fair few concerns I have about him

That they treat his inability to press and lack of mobility as an accepted fact is the main concern from what I read, I think.

They do also repeatedly emphasise how great he is when he drops deep, but that's not particularly something I'd want him doing here that much.

 

[MadDogg]

They do also repeatedly emphasise how great he is when he drops deep, but that's not particularly something I'd want him doing here that much.

I could see it working fairly well if we had wide strikers on both sides, like Liverpool did with Mane and Salah or like we have on one side with Rashford. Antony isn't really that player, and neither are any of our other options on that side (unless Greenwood does make a comeback). Having only Rashford doing it would see us still being too one-dimensional in attack IMO. I expect they'd have a great combination (in the way Kane and Son do), but at the top level you need more than just the one real attacking threat.

But the lack of pressing would be an issue no matter what.

 

[sullydnl]

On the other hand, the humanitarian in me thinks Kane needs to be rescued from Spurs.

 

[rajds89]

Time to leave Harry me thinks.

 

[Nero]

As long as it's not to us.

 

[Cloud7]

That they treat his inability to press and lack of mobility as an accepted fact is the main concern from what I read, I think.

They do also repeatedly emphasise how great he is when he drops deep, but that's not particularly something I'd want him doing here that much.

We don’t need him dropping deep and trying to find passes when we have Bruno to do that

 

[Red Star One]

Great player but we shouldn’t buy him

 

[sullydnl]

We don’t need him dropping deep and trying to find passes when we have Bruno to do that

Yep. Having read through their Kane threads, I'm now decidedly against this.

Even when praising him they speak about his lack of mobility and inability to press as fact. And I would have that as essential for any CF we sign, because I've had more than enough of us trying to work around players who can't press well enough.

And one of the main things they (rightly) praise him for is how good he is when he drops into midfield. But I absolutely do not want our CF doing that. Spurs need it, we don't.

It's nothing that hasn't been highlighted in this thread already but seeing Spurs fans speaking about it with such clarity too just sealed it in my mind. For some teams it'll absolutely be worth working around his weaknesses for his obvious qualities but not us.

 

[r0663664]

We need 2 strikers, Kane or not. Market will determine his price. I doubt anyone will pay top dollars for him, he may leave 40-50 million. If he has the longevity of Zlatan then it is worth the buy.