Harry Kane | "I will be staying at Tottenham this summer and will be 100% focused on helping the team achieve success."

Man, to think one of England's best strikers in a long time (and potentially one of the best strikers over the last few years) will have a pathetic achievements list when he finally becomes a pundit on Sky Sports.

HARRY KANE
Euro 21 finalist & played for Tottenham.

He'll be sitting next to someone like:

MARC ALBRIGHTON
Premier League & FA Cup winner.
 
Dirty Schwein said:
Man, to think one of England's best strikers in a long time (and potentially one of the best strikers over the last few years) will have a pathetic achievements list when he finally becomes a pundit on Sky Sports.

HARRY KANE
Euro 21 finalist & played for Tottenham.

He'll be sitting next to someone like:

MARC ALBRIGHTON
Premier League & FA Cup winner.
Click to expand...
True, but they‘ll probably spin it into England and Tottenham legend.

I‘m more afraid of not being able to follow the valuable depth of inside knowledge he will undoubtedly be sharing with us in his charming and winning manner.
 
Saying “this summer” as opposed to ‘this season’

Ooo Harry, you tease!
 
Lukaku went for 98mil, and Kane is a level above Lukaku as a striker, Grealish went for 100mil, English tax on top of a great talent. So what is Kane worth? He was both the golden boot winner and assist leader last season, English tax, Levy tax? City would be having to fork out 130mil+ for him. Or 100mil plus a player valued at around 50mil that Spurs need to have Levy consider it.

I do not get this thread making a big deal of his age, he just turned 28, Son and De Bruyne are older, Lukaku, Maguire and Pogba the same age, are these players nearly finished? Chelsea just threw down 100mil on a 'finished' 28 year old Lukaku. Kane is also not someone who relies on his pace like a Bale, what makes him great is his all round footballing ability and lethal finishing.
 
RUCK4444 said:
So this crazy contract he signed at Spurs has properly bitten him on the arse, as it should have.

Absolutely brain dead decision that was, why on earth he signed it when the world was his oyster, truly bizarre decision.
Click to expand...
The incompetence of his agents has cost him 10's of millions in career earnings both for the contract he signed when he should have been getting the going rate on a world scale of a top striker as well as what he could've earned this window for moving.

Even if he renegotiates with Levy, he'll not get near what would have been the going rate for a top striker at the point he signed the last contract, let alone a new one.

Both he and his brother as well as whoever ironed out that last, clause-free deal have come out of this looking like simpletons who should be nowhere near a shark like Levy. He [Levy] has to have had several laughs along the way dealing with such dim people.
 
Scroto Baggins said:
Lukaku went for 98mil, and Kane is a level above Lukaku as a striker, Grealish went for 100mil, English tax on top of a great talent. So what is Kane worth? He was both the golden boot winner and assist leader last season, English tax, Levy tax? City would be having to fork out 130mil+ for him. Or 100mil plus a player valued at around 50mil that Spurs need to have Levy consider it.

I do not get this thread making a big deal of his age, he just turned 28, Son and De Bruyne are older, Lukaku, Maguire and Pogba the same age, are these players nearly finished? Chelsea just threw down 100mil on a 'finished' 28 year old Lukaku. Kane is also not someone who relies on his pace like a Bale, what makes him great is his all round footballing ability and lethal finishing.
Click to expand...

Kane has ankles made of balsa wood. He's going to age as a footballer like bread, not wine.
 
Gentleman Jim said:
Yes but I put my head above the parapet and said what I believed to be true. Do any of us really know what goes on in the war rooms of football clubs?

Personally I didn't want him at that price.
Click to expand...
How does that make any difference to you as a fan? You said in another thread that Grealish is fair market value for £100m. But you think Kane isn’t?
 
Last season Kane had 49 apps for Spurs & 16 for England = 65 apps
[/QUOTE]
TsuWave said:
You're such an emotional person :lol: I said I personally don’t want us to go Kane’s direction due to him nearing 30, declining athleticism and recently having injury issues. Your reply “he played more than Haaland but let’s make up a narrative”. What narrative?How does that invalidate any of what I said?
Click to expand...
I'm not being emotional, just find it funny you say he has declining athleticism when he's played more games than a physical specimen in Haaland. In fact in the past 3 seasons he's played more and more games so this "declining athleticism point" is just a narrative. Yeah, he's older and yeah he will decline. But a scenario of Kane declining is not likely to happen before one where Haaland joins and Raiola causes a circus in year two to shift him back out.
cjj said:
Unless you're posting from the future, he isn't.
Click to expand...
Even more of a valid reason.
 
duffer said:
Kane has ankles made of balsa wood. He's going to age as a footballer like bread, not wine.
Click to expand...
He had 2 niggling ankle injuries last year and missed 7 days in Feb, then 6 days in April.

Unless you refer to the 18/19 and 19/20 seasons where he did miss more, I think his injury record is fine. You could argue he's put them aside now after playing what 40 games 2 seasons ago and 50+ games last season. That's not exactly representative of a player who's ankles are "made of balsa wood".
 
VP89 said:
He had 2 niggling ankle injuries last year and missed 7 days in Feb, then 6 days in April.

Unless you refer to the 18/19 and 19/20 seasons where he did miss more, I think his injury record is fine. You could argue he's put them aside now after playing what 40 games 2 seasons ago and 50+ games last season. That's not exactly representative of a player who's ankles are "made of balsa wood".
Click to expand...

He's had at least 7 ankle injuries, it's absolutely a real concern.

https://www.90min.com/posts/every-ankle-injury-harry-kane-since-2016-how-long-he-missed
 
VP89 said:
It's a concern if he can't put them aside - but he's quite clearly gotten over them now. It appears he gets niggling injuries as much as any other player but no player who is that fragile would be capable of putting in the games he did last season.
Click to expand...

He was out with ankle issues on two separate occasions just last season. One of those occasions involved him injuring both ankles at different times during the same match. https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/55850070

I hope for England's sake he gets over them but he clearly hasn't yet.
 
Last edited:
duffer said:
He was out with ankle issues on two separate occasions just last season.

I hope for England's sake he gets over them but he hasn't yet.
Click to expand...
For 6 days and 7 days. It's really nothing - players without long term injuries face can face that in any given campaign.
 
duffer said:
He's had at least 7 ankle injuries, it's absolutely a real concern.

https://www.90min.com/posts/every-ankle-injury-harry-kane-since-2016-how-long-he-missed
Click to expand...

The cause of these injuries are more telling than the injuries its self, nearly all those were cause by collisions/tackles with other players, he gets much to involved sometimes and there is no doublt he is overplayed. Its not like Harry is running around and falling over because of weak ankles, its a case of why let the facts get in the way of a headline. There are many players with far, far, far worse injury records in the PL, who are younger than him also.
 
LilyWhiteSpur said:
The cause of these injuries are more telling than the injuries its self, nearly all those were cause by collisions/tackles with other players. Its not like Harry is running around and falling over because of weak ankles, its a case of why let the facts get in the way of a headline.
Click to expand...

You can't tell me his ankles are not a concern. I remember wincing everytime Essien even rubbed his knee during a match, it's gotta be similar for you with Kane and his delicate ankles.
 
duffer said:
You can't tell me his ankles are not a concern. I remember wincing everytime Essien even rubbed his knee during a match, it's gotta be similar for you with Kane and his delicate ankles.
Click to expand...

Not really, and that's me being honest, its over played. You go and watch the incidents, most of the injuries were Kane over exiting himself, these were brushes with other players they were all pretty hard challenges. Look at the number of games he completed this season, they arent the numbers of someone who has a chronic injury. You can seriously compare it to Essian's who frequently missed larges chunks of the season.

Do you think Pulisic is injury prone?
 
duffer said:
You can't tell me his ankles are not a concern. I remember wincing everytime Essien even rubbed his knee during a match, it's gotta be similar for you with Kane and his delicate ankles.
Click to expand...

His injury record is so overblown now that it's just a lazy thing to say. The majority of his ankle injuries have been from contact from other players not because he has some intrinsic weakness there. Also he hasn't missed that much football in his career when you compare him to most other players.
 
I don't usually advocate this but if Kane seriously wants to move, he need to literally go on strike. Don't turn up for training sessions, submit a transfer request and refused to play. This is his one and only opportunity. I don't think City will come back for him next season as Haaland is available. That is literally the only way to deal with Levy. What was him and his agent thinking signing a 6 year contract 3 years ago knowing Levy's tough stance and history of making it so difficult for players to move.
 
VP89 said:
Last season Kane had 49 apps for Spurs & 16 for England = 65 apps
Click to expand...
I'm not being emotional, just find it funny you say he has declining athleticism when he's played more games than a physical specimen in Haaland. In fact in the past 3 seasons he's played more and more games so this "declining athleticism point" is just a narrative. Yeah, he's older and yeah he will decline. But a scenario of Kane declining is not likely to happen before one where Haaland joins and Raiola causes a circus in year two to shift him back out.

Even more of a valid reason.
[/QUOTE]
Just one point, when Haaland is ready to leave again he will have resale value whereas Kane in 2 years is older and depreciated in value
 
balaks said:
His injury record is so overblown now that it's just a lazy thing to say. The majority of his ankle injuries have been from contact from other players not because he has some intrinsic weakness there. Also he hasn't missed that much football in his career when you compare him to most other players.
Click to expand...
Don't care what anyone says, if you injure your ankle nine times, it's no longer accidental or coincidental.
 
golden_blunder said:
Just one point, when Haaland is ready to leave again he will have resale value whereas Kane in 2 years is older and depreciated in value
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's one reasonable suggestion to have Haaland > Kane.

But for me as a player it's Kane > Haaland, and he comes circus free. In either case I think we'll get 5 years tops of top performances, for differing reasons.
 
Castia said:
What a way to tarnish yourself. Same happened to Rooney, club legend and rightly one of our great players but for me his legacy is tarnished because of the transfer requests.
Click to expand...
Completely different scenarios, one had one multiple PL and a CL and submitted a transfer request as he wasn't sure we'd stay at that level because of our transfers. The other wants to move just to win a trophy because his team are that shit they can't even qualify for the Europa League.
 
VP89 said:
Yeah, that's one reasonable suggestion to have Haaland > Kane.

But for me as a player it's Kane > Haaland, and he comes circus free. In either case I think we'll get 5 years tops of top performances, for differing reasons.
Click to expand...
I personally think as a goal scorer Haaland is more of the striker that ole likes, someone who will knock his granny over to get in on a chance. Whereas Kane is starting to drop deeper as he gets older ala Sheringham. With that type you need another to play alongside in my opinion.
But depends what ole sees his strikers as being
 
golden_blunder said:
I personally think as a goal scorer Haaland is more of the striker that ole likes, someone who will knock his granny over to get in on a chance. Whereas Kane is starting to drop deeper as he gets older ala Sheringham. With that type you need another to play alongside in my opinion.
But depends what ole sees his strikers as being
Click to expand...
Yeah you're right, but that's why I like Kane more. He can drop into that role if needed to really influence the game from midfield areas and know that Sancho, Rashford, Bruno are all ready to make smart runs for him. Or he can be the pinnacle of the attack and be fed by Sancho/Bruno. With Rashford and Greenwood being goalscorers, he will have a partner if needed too - and they would work channels and drift just like Son would. For me he can do everything, whereas Haaland does his business in that 12 yard box.
 
LilyWhiteSpur said:
:lol: :lol: you really couldn't write it, on Bluemoon 60% wanted him, Spurs were dying to sell or we would do a Leeds and Levy was a selling Chairman (probably the biggest crock of shit of the lot.) I tried to explain to one of your fellow supporters the differences in debt, but his response was (debt was debt). I was then banned after pointed out that Abu Dhabi is the capital and the second-most populous city of the United Arab Emirates. He seemed to think there was no connection to the UAE.......
Click to expand...
I was one of the 40%. There’s no right or wrong answers on those polls just opinions.
There are idiots and WUMS on Bluemoon the same as on Red Cafe and Glory Glory.
 
Chief123 said:
How does that make any difference to you as a fan? You said in another thread that Grealish is fair market value for £100m. But you think Kane isn’t?
Click to expand...
Kane at 100m total is about right IMO. 150ish is too much.
 
Gentleman Jim said:
I don’t particularly but just blowing everyone out of the water takes away any element of sport about it. There’s not much left as it is.
Click to expand...
Your club wins the lottery, spends billions to setup a squad, blows away every team that used to beat you 8-0 at some point of time and you are thinking now is a good time to take the moral high ground?
 
Harry: "I'm ready to give it all! But more money and release clause please"

Daniel Levy: "no"

 
Sassy Colin said:
It seems bizarre that Spurs would turn down £150M, or whatever, for Kane.

I can only imagine that they can't find a replacement top striker in the £60M-£80M price range who actually wants to play for them.
Click to expand...

City never offered £150m.
 
Since 2015 -

Harry "old man glass ankles" Kane:
Games missed - 56
Days missed - 312

Jack Grealish:
Games missed - 58
Days missed - 371
 
Gentleman Jim said:
A bit rich coming from you, mate or do you put Asterix’s next to your recent honours as many ask us to?
Click to expand...

Asterix?

Its not "rich coming from me". It comes from me with experience. I've seen a load of Chelsea fans try to kid themselves about reality.

I don't pretend Chelsea don't spunk a feckload. We did, we do and there's still no asterisk, Obelisk, Getafix or Mickey Mouse next to any of either sides trophies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.