Because Harry Kane wants to leave because he doesn't trust Levy ?
Harry Kane | "I will be staying at Tottenham this summer and will be 100% focused on helping the team achieve success."
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Because Harry Kane wants to leave because he doesn't trust Levy ?
Its a very complicated situation IMO.
If you are Kane, you probably feel you have to go this season, age, demand and the like.
City may sign a replacement, that means next season they won't need a ST even if they do Haaland, Mbappe will be available for affordable prices (transfer fee)
If you look at it commercially, Levy will never get £120m again for Kane, this is the highest his stock is going to be, I would go that far to say that next season his value wont be more than £70m.
For Spurs, they are not getting top 4 with / without Kane, £120m will allow you to build for 2/3 season or keep Kane and the team will not be built.
But again, if they sign Kane, fans will be expecting the money to be used this season for signings, which you have to get right
Personally, I think its a very tricky situation for all parties.
They should definitely sell but I personally wouldn't rush to spend that £150million in this window. This is already a bit of a write off season for Spurs in the sense they aren't getting in the top 4, so it makes no sense to panic buy a couple of players to placate the fans when it still won't likely be enough for them to compete with the big boys. The last thing they want is a repeat of the Bale situation where they splurged the huge transfer fee on a handful of largely useless players. I'm guessing they'd want to see how Nuno does in his first season before fully backing him with big money transfers.
Because gentleman's agreements, aka verbal agreements, happen in the real world all the time without the need for writing. If Levy did indeed renege on a promise, then his reputation takes a big hit. I don't think he necessarily 'wins' in that case either.
There weren't any contract negotiations in relation to Ronaldo, he was told there was no way he was leaving that summer, but he would be allowed to leave next summer if certain conditions were met. He accepted it, performed brilliantly and we got a record fee while he got his transfer.
Kane signed a 6 year contract in 2018, and is now claiming that at the time they made a gentlemans agreement that he could leave depending on certain conditions and that those conditions
Just do what Grealish did and make it an obscene fee that the club will either way be happy to accept.
Agreed.
Personally I think they should sell, keep the money and use it wisely. They probably aren't going to make top 4 this season even with Kane. They still have a decent squad that could push for top 8 without him.
Take the money, reinvest it wisely and push on.
If he wanted some control over his career, maybe he should have thought twice before letting a fella who looks like he probably sleeps in a bed shaped like a racecar be his agent?
What promise has he reneged on?
We will sell if City meet our valuation. What do you think he promised Kane exactly? That we'd sell on the cheap?
Or just don't sign a six year deal. He was already on a five year deal, getting paid good money.
Like Keano said on the Sky Sports thing, don't sign a new deal, take the money and then cry about not being able to set your own price tag to leave when you want.
If you wanna do that, do what Grealish did: Put a release clause in the contract.
Ultimately, for all this circus, Kane's in the position he's in cos he put himself there.
Well, we don't know exactly what's going on beyond the little bits we are fed, but I've heard two rumours: that he refused to negotiate at all, which prompted the first attempt at playing hooky. Then refusing to accept 125m because it's not a foreign team, eg moving the goalposts trying to squeeze more out of Dubai.
Verbal agreements are usually not made as a part of agreeing on written contracts. Oh, we'll agree this and that one paper, and all this we'll agree but leave out of the contract. Either way, we don't really know what's been said or not. Maybe Levy did agree that if certain conditions are met, the club won't stand in his way, but Harry Kane's interview and his "£100mill" comment is pretty far away from what he should be valued at. Grealish went for that fee, Lukaku went for that fee, Tottenham would be bonkers to let Kane leave for the same fee. It could easily be a question of what the different parties consider to be fair value and that they simply aren't close to what Tottenham expect
Lukaku 100m
Grealish 100m
White 50m
Willock 26m
Ings 31m
Abraham 36m
Daka 27m
Sancho 76m
Buendia 34m
Based on those fees so far this summer - Kane is easily worth 120-150m.
Levy will stick to his guns, he will not be pressured to sell, he will put the pressure on City and eventually they get him for 125m on deadline day.
Grealish 100m
White 50m
Willock 26m
Ings 31m
Abraham 36m
Daka 27m
Sancho 76m
Buendia 34m
Based on those fees so far this summer - Kane is easily worth 120-150m.
Levy will stick to his guns, he will not be pressured to sell, he will put the pressure on City and eventually they get him for 125m on deadline day.
The only place it doesn't matter as you said, is in a courtroom. Don't get me wrong, it doesn't make Kane and his brother any less stupid for being left with little to no leverage, but I just don't believe in giving Levy a pass, he's being a difficult cnut again. Now I'll just leave it at that before I start sounding like Neville.
That's not the issue here. Even if Kane agreed to play for free for Man City, Spurs still need to agree to sell and accept City's offer. i don't think the wages will ever be an obstacle.
I'm not a big fan of these comparisons. Bad or overpaid signings don't put value on other players. You could do it the other way too.
If the players as good as the ones below are this cheap, then Kane should be based around these prices:
Bruno - £47m
Varane - £40m
Sancho £70m
I think I see both sides in this situation. Harry Kane got duped by not putting in a release-clause in his contract like Grealish did. If he had a release clause of 125M, all this drama wouldnt have happened.
Was Harry Kane stupid? Yes. Do I also blame Levy? Yes. If he promised him he would let him leave and didnt mention the price he is a scheming asshole, and if he promised he would let him leave for 100M, then he is a lying prick. If I was Kane, I would down tools. Play with the workrate of Oezil
.
No way he will be dropped for England anyway. Yeah his release clause is not in the contract but neither is his workrate. Beat that bald bastah at his own game.
Was Harry Kane stupid? Yes. Do I also blame Levy? Yes. If he promised him he would let him leave and didnt mention the price he is a scheming asshole, and if he promised he would let him leave for 100M, then he is a lying prick. If I was Kane, I would down tools. Play with the workrate of Oezil
.No way he will be dropped for England anyway. Yeah his release clause is not in the contract but neither is his workrate. Beat that bald bastah at his own game.
Last edited:
It's just speculation. Levy isn't daft and he's always wanted a premium, the fees for Tottenhams top players have rarely been low. We don't know what their verbal agreement was, but Kane talking about £100mill is pretty far from a realistic valuation of Harry Kane in todays market
We'll see. There should be a way to do it without pissing off the player. Worst case scenario he gets stuck with an unhappy, underperforming Kane and loses out on 50m+, I don't see how that is in Spurs best interests.
Last bit is spot on and if it was united who signed Grealish and Kane for this price the narrative would be about united ruining the league.
Again, this all comes down to having a better agent. A gentleman’s agreement is this play, a complete joke of a concept. Everyone knows it should have been a release clause of £150 to £200 million.
You can never compare prices for players saying this player went for so much meaning another player has to go for this much. There are so many factors involved like length of contracts, how desperate the club are to sell, the players performances and the general financial situation of the clubs involved.
On a facetious note: what would Kane's estimated loyalty bonus value be on a 150m deal? He should just hand in his transfer request if he really wants to leave and not worry about a loyalty bonus (where is the loyalty if he does leave, anyway? - forget the 8 years he's spent there). I'm sure City can pay him through various other businesses their owners own, to make up for the loyalty bonus anyway.
I think the issue here isn't so much so that Levy hasn't necessarily kept his word about selling him in terms of the apparent gentlemans agreement, but moreso in terms of what constitutes a fair market offer for Kane. We can all disagree with 150m, but if that's what Levy considers fair, then you can't say he's broken his promise, IMO.
I think the issue here isn't so much so that Levy hasn't necessarily kept his word about selling him in terms of the apparent gentlemans agreement, but moreso in terms of what constitutes a fair market offer for Kane. We can all disagree with 150m, but if that's what Levy considers fair, then you can't say he's broken his promise, IMO.
Exactly. Absolutely no way a verbal agreement was agreed at the time of the signing of the contract, what potentially may have happened is that during the firing of Poch, HK went into Levy's office and had a convo with the chairman. What happened at that meeting is what this all issue is about.
Harry Kane has not come out and said exactly what this alleged agreement was/is, all we hear is media insinuations that "Harry was led to believe" "Harry was under the impression" etc etc. Harry is not the brightest bulb, so I would take anything he believes with a grain of salt.
These are the values the market dictates based on the circumstances of each player.
Grealish - 4 years left + 100m release clause - City had to pay it to get him.
Lukaku - 3 years left - Chelsea had to pay what Inter wanted to get him
Varane - one year left - 40m now or nothing next year
Sancho 2 years left - Dortmund wanted 50m more last year - they took the deal now to stop losing anymore on his transfer value next year when he'd only have a year left.
Buendia - 3 years left - never a 30m+ player but Villa had to pay it to get him
Abraham - 2 years left - Roma paid 34m (Chelsea put in a buy back clause of about 70m)
Ings - 1 year left - 31m - Villa were robbed - they could have got him for a lot less - but they wanted him before the season started so they had to stump up the cash.
Kane is being a cnut trying to force the move and City are trying to force the price down.
Levy holds all the cards here. Kane has 3 years left with no release clause, there is always a higher fee when selling to another PL club, plus the English tax. Based on that City will have to pay upwards of 120m to get him if they really want him this summer.
To a certain point, they do. If someone is happy to fork out £100mill for Grealish, why would you accept the same/similar fee for a better player in the same market? The simple answer is that you won't..You're always going to look at what comparable players are being sold for and what the market is like.There's not exactly an abundance of strikers around that deliver on a similar level to Kane, or even at a high enough level. Signing someone where the combination is years with performing at the highest level in the premier league, no need to sell, long time remaining on the contract and english, is always going to be at a solid premium. Look at Chelseas interest in Haaland and subsequently forking out around £100mill for Lukaku.
I don't think that I've seen the word "feels" being used as many times in any other transfer that I've been a witness of. More so, I'm pretty sure that this transfer already got more "feels" than probably most of those other transfers combined. Why does it matter what he feels and how is that an argument? Feel away.
If you don't want your fans to be angry with you, don't miss the training in order to force a transfer out.
If you don't want your fans to be angry with you, don't miss the training in order to force a transfer out.
Kane could be staying at spurs a lot longer then he wanted. Lewandowski as said he wants a new challenge and I’d be very surprised if city didn’t go after him for a reunion with pep. Kane’s not having much luck… maybe he’ll be our 2nd choice striker if we fail to get haaland next year?
Got to love how the narrative is about Levy playing hardball and not about the club with a bottomless pit of money trying to get him on the cheap.
It still doesn't really stack up using other player prices. In that case, as Felix, Griezmann and Coutinho cost £105m then for what Kane gives you, he should cost £250m compare to those prices. It's not a gauge you can use accurately. Ultimately, it comes down to supply and demand and a price that both sides are happy with factoring in many different variables.
Yup, it makes more sense that any agreement is a result of talks last summer, when it's said that Kane wanted to feck off but was convinced to stay and see out a full season with Mourinho and that the club would be competitive. Either way, it would surprise me if someone like Levy made a concrete promise about fees, unless that fee was very high...
Yes, he shouldn't be vilified. Only non-British players should be targeted.
Didn’t Rooney get roundly vilified by EVERYONE during that mad week he wanted out of Utd to go to City?
Has Kane got photos of mainstream journalists and pundits doing scandalous things? Why such a defence for him?
Has Kane got photos of mainstream journalists and pundits doing scandalous things? Why such a defence for him?
Which part of "to a certain point" made you think i claimed it's an exact science? Looking at fees that long ago doesn't really say anything about the current market.
Griezmann was consistently one of the best players in Spain, key player for France, 4 years left on his Atletico contract. His fee was the only one that made somewhat sense, doesn't change the fact that he never lived up to the expectations, Barcelonas desperation for Coutinho and Atletico forking out Felix's buy-out are abnormal deals, just like the fee for Dembele.
Fact is: There's not many top class strikers around, so any deals will be made at a premium. A top class striker consistently performing in the same league, price goes up as there's no concerns about having to adapt to a different league, you know what you're getting. So what are other comparable players going for, are there any comparable deals, what is the market. Standard is pretty much set in terms of the fees for Lukaku and Grealish, with Kane still having 3 years left on his contract there's no rush to sell him either and Tottenham would have to pay a hefty fee trying to get someone to replace him. His fee should easily be around £125mill
Yeah, I don't get the idea that Spurs should sell their prize asset at a cut-price deal to a club with literally infinite money just because otherwise poor old Harry will be saaaaddddd.
If it means that much to him, surely he'll be willing to hand in a transfer request to forgo his huge loyal bonus, allowing Spurs to accept a lower price for him as they won't need to pay out to him as well. Oh wait...
Why would Kane feel the need to take a wage cut to help an Oil state save money?
They can afford the fee and salary, depends how mich they really want him
So easy and simple to understand. City think they can cut corners when going for the best players.
Side note but grealish and Kane for 220 million is the biggest ripoff.
With the Ronaldo to Madrid transfer, I do think Ronaldo's form was affected in 2008/2009. I don't think it was exactly that he didn't give his all, and he still got 25 goals, but there was part of the season where his form dipped in a way that it hadn't before or since. A bit like how Sancho's form at the beginning of last season was below par.
Kane has made it clearer than either of those did that he wants to leave Spurs. I wonder if the tension between him and the Spurs fans, or just the fact that everyone knows that he doesn't want to be there, might affect his form.
Exactly. In these situation i am always on club's side. Nobody is forcing players to sign contracts. Nobody is forcing players to not throw release clause in contract. Nobody is forcing players to sign long term contracts.
Zero sympathy from me to players in these situations. Same as in opposite situation when players like Pogba or Mbappe have one year left of contract and club (through their people in media) is making pressure in public on them to sign new.
I am amazed how many fans take side of a player in these situations (Cristiano in our case). "It is his dream", "wants to win trophies", "deserves better" etc....feck off. You have contract, you are payed to play and that is it.