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

[Hester_manc]

I do not think there can be any doubt that Kane would rather go to Manchester City. He has always been loyal to Tottenham and has been interested in achieving success with them. Now he has realized that it probably is not going to happen. Kane is 27 years old and if he is to win anything big, he will have to leave Tottenham, which he loves. Therefore, he will of course switch to the club where he is most likely to win something big very soon. That is why he does not choose Manchester United. We are a long way from being a realistic bid for an English champion or a victory in the CL. Manchester City, on the other hand, are English champions and in the CL final. Kane does not have time to switch to United as a 27-year-old and help build the team. If he is to leave Tottenham, it is to be sure of success while still being a top player himself.

 

[Kaizane]

Hate to be that guy, but our name being banded about in the same sentence as Kane is just PR in motion, beneficial for the club because it creates an illusion of interest, meaning the brand is preserved and the journos get their clicks.

 

[giorno]

That's not true actually.

Why do people act as if Kane is finished? He is 27, if a PL team needed a ST and had £100m spare, Kane would be a no brainer.

1. PL proven striker
2. 20+ goals season in season out
3. He can play in different systems
4. He is a leader

What makes someone smart to go for Haaland? How many 90 mins of Haaland have you watched?

How good is he at holding the ball up?
How good is he at bringing people into play?

Because Haaland is 20. He's already nearly as good, and he has 10/15 years ahead of him. Kane is 27, significantly fewer years ahead. If Haaland misses a season to injury, it's no big deal. If Kane does, it is. Kane has no resale value, Haaland does. Look what happened with Hazard. For the same money, Kane is quite simply a much bigger risk for his club, whereas Haaland is pretty much risk-free

Which is not to say that Kane would be a bad investment, just that Haaland is a better one, at present. Would be a slightly different story without COVID, but that's irrelevant now...

 

[justsomebloke]

That's not true actually.

Why do people act as if Kane is finished? He is 27, if a PL team needed a ST and had £100m spare, Kane would be a no brainer.

1. PL proven striker
2. 20+ goals season in season out
3. He can play in different systems
4. He is a leader

What makes someone smart to go for Haaland? How many 90 mins of Haaland have you watched?

How good is he at holding the ball up?
How good is he at bringing people into play?

He's not finished, and it is a legitimately arguable question which of the two is the best player right now. Kane is certainly more well-rounded (as he should be, at 27). On the other hand, he doesn't match Haaland in some areas of the game, and Haaland has significantly outscored and outperformed him in the CL over a long stretch of games.

Personally I might favor Kane in the short run, but if you poll 100 football experts on who's the best player right now and ask me to place a bet on the outcome of the poll, my money is on Haaland.

Long term, I don't think there's any question who the best option is. Not just because Haaland will be great for a longer time than Kane simply because he's younger, but also because you'd expect his peak level to be higher than Kane's.

Also, some consideration should be given to Kane's recurring injury trouble the last couple of seasons, including for the issue of short term impact.

 

[romufc]

Because Haaland is 20. He's already nearly as good, and he has 10/15 years ahead of him. Kane is 27, significantly fewer years ahead. If Haaland misses a season to injury, it's no big deal. If Kane does, it is. Kane has no resale value, Haaland does. Look what happened with Hazard. For the same money, Kane is quite simply a much bigger risk for his club, whereas Haaland is pretty much risk-free

Which is not to say that Kane would be a bad investment, just that Haaland is a better one, at present. Would be a slightly different story without COVID, but that's irrelevant now...

That's fair enough, I appreciate where people are coming from in respects to age. The poster said if you have spare £100m.

If I was given the opportunity this summer, a choice between both I would take Kane, for the reason that he is more likely to win us the league in the next 2 years than Haaland is.

I am not concerned about making money or selling for profit, I want to see us lift the PL / CL.

 

[Bwuk]

Unless we can include players to lower the fee I think it’d be daft to spend our entire budget on him. Glaring weaknesses elsewhere in the squad.

 

[sglowrider]

Kane's 28 in nine week's time.

Tick tok.

 

[romufc]

He's not finished, and it is a legitimately arguable question which of the two is the best player right now. Kane is certainly more well-rounded (as he should be, at 27). On the other hand, he doesn't match Haaland in some areas of the game, and Haaland has significantly outscored and outperformed him in the CL over a long stretch of games.

Personally I might favor Kane in the short run, but if you poll 100 football experts on who's the best player right now and ask me to place a bet on the outcome of the poll, my money is on Haaland.

Long term, I don't think there's any question who the best option is. Not just because Haaland will be great for a longer time than Kane simply because he's younger, but also because you'd expect his peak level to be higher than Kane's.

Also, some consideration should be given to Kane's recurring injury trouble the last couple of seasons, including for the issue of short term impact.

Those are all valid points, the age is the key one here. Kane is the finished article but Haaland isn't.

Can we afford Haaland taking a season or 2 to settle ? Look at Werner, he was producing Haaland numbers in the bundesliga.

Kane would not be used the way he was at Spurs, we have players that would rotate. He surely wouldn't start league cup games.

Again, I agree if its a long term solution Haaland is the right choice but we have Greenwood as well.

I would prefer a short term solution if that means we can win the league in the next year or 2.

 

[Isotope]

that's nail in the coffin for Martial, imho. No way we need 3 established strikers while playing 1 up front (and 3-4 other positions to improve).

 

[MiceOnMeth]

Sounds very Sanchezish.

But key difference is Sanchez wasn't coming off a season where he scored and assisted in 35 goals in the premier League

 

[Lemon Moon]

I'm not 'dooming & glooming' but he will go to City IF he goes anywhere.

He obviously wants guaranteed trophies, Citeh are the only true option that can provide this.

That being said, if he does go there and stays fit. We won't be winning the league anytime soon.

 

[Zoo]

 

[duffer]

"I want to leave but won't actually ask to leave, because that might cost me money".

 

[Lennon7]

As much as it’s true Greenwood’s progression may be pushed back a couple years, these are the sort of signings we need to make if we’re going to compete for the title again.

 

[Can7onA]

He's noh Finish, he's English.

 

[sglowrider]

As much as it’s true Greenwood’s progression may be pushed back a couple years, these are the sort of signings we need to make if we’re going to compete for the title again.

Not really. Scoring goals is less of a problem than letting in goals. Its a very imbalanced squad that's been let to fester for years now.

 

[Lennon7]

Not really. Scoring goals is less of a problem than letting in goals. Its a very imbalanced squad that's been let to fester for years now.

Point is we can’t miss out on players like this when they become available. A centre back and defensive midfielder are massive priorities, but Kane is Kane

 

[theklr]

I rather have Sancho than Kane, but if it means City get him PL will be boring

 

[sglowrider]

Point is we can’t miss out on players like this when they become available. A centre back and defensive midfielder are massive priorities, but Kane is Kane

We cant be expected to spend Kane money and then have much left for the other two positions. Its all about priorities.

 

[justsomebloke]

Those are all valid points, the age is the key one here. Kane is the finished article but Haaland isn't.

Can we afford Haaland taking a season or 2 to settle ? Look at Werner, he was producing Haaland numbers in the bundesliga.

Kane would not be used the way he was at Spurs, we have players that would rotate. He surely wouldn't start league cup games.

Again, I agree if its a long term solution Haaland is the right choice but we have Greenwood as well.

I would prefer a short term solution if that means we can win the league in the next year or 2.

Depends what you mean by "the finished article". Most would consider him one of the 3-5 best strikers in the world, that's pretty finished. He is already, at the very least, Kane's approximate equal.

I'm sorry, but I think your Werner point in relation to Haaland is a really bad and pointless one. Also, it ignores Haaland's enormous scoring in the CL, over several season. Also, it's not a very good point in any case (Lewandowski? Aubameyang?). There is also no comparison between Haaland and Greenwood, I think.

 

[kerryman]

I do not think there can be any doubt that Kane would rather go to Manchester City. He has always been loyal to Tottenham and has been interested in achieving success with them. Now he has realized that it probably is not going to happen. Kane is 27 years old and if he is to win anything big, he will have to leave Tottenham, which he loves. Therefore, he will of course switch to the club where he is most likely to win something big very soon. That is why he does not choose Manchester United. We are a long way from being a realistic bid for an English champion or a victory in the CL. Manchester City, on the other hand, are English champions and in the CL final. Kane does not have time to switch to United as a 27-year-old and help build the team. If he is to leave Tottenham, it is to be sure of success while still being a top player himself.

100% agree, if he's leaving Spurs because he wants to win titles he'll be going to City over us. We're not that much better than what he's leaving tbh so why would he choose us...

 

[redrobed]

His preference is to join Utd despite the fact that we won’t offer the same transfer funds or wages that Chelsea, City, Madrid and Liverpool are offering. He’s happy to forego the difference in wages in order to push through a move to us which is pretty exciting.

 

[tenpoless]

The only English player who could speak Bosnian. This man would have been as popular as Houdini if they lived in the same era.

 

[romufc]

Depends what you mean by "the finished article". Most would consider him one of the 3-5 best strikers in the world, that's pretty finished. He is already, at the very least, Kane's approximate equal.

I'm sorry, but I think your Werner point in relation to Haaland is a really bad and pointless one. Also, it ignores Haaland's enormous scoring in the CL, over several season. Also, it's not a very good point in any case (Lewandowski? Aubameyang?). There is also no comparison between Haaland and Greenwood, I think.

He isn't on equal terms with Kane.

Kane has produced PL on a consistent level since 14/15 and also has had CL goals too.

Haaland is getting there but he is not there yet.

Why is Wener a bad pointless one?

Werner in Bundesliga

19/20 - 28 goals 8 assists
18/19 - 16 goals 9 assists
17/18 - 13 goals 8 assists
16/17 - 21 goals 7 assists

It is clear the PL is a tougher competition, are you saying they are the same standard?

 

[Rolaholic]

 

[duffer]

His preference is to join Utd despite the fact that we won’t offer the same transfer funds or wages that Chelsea, City, Madrid and Liverpool are offering. He’s happy to forego the difference in wages in order to push through a move to us which is pretty exciting.

Have you just made that all up or could you post a source?

 

[red woppit]

that's nail in the coffin for Martial, imho. No way we need 3 established strikers while playing 1 up front (and 3-4 other positions to improve).

Certainly sounds like it, although he is a alternative to Rashford on the left, and I suppose if we don't sign another striker, then Martial, Greenwood or even Rashford could play there at a pinch, but none of them look a natural striker, perhaps Greenwood in 2 or 3 seasons time.
I wonder if we'll go for someone like Toney if Brentford don't get promotion, who would still have a good sell on value if he didn't make it at OT, but even he would be around £30 million probably, unless we can give them Jones or James, or a loan deal for one of our youngsters. Brentford seem a very well run club, and play good football.

 

[drdoityourself]

He's 28, picks up a pretty bad ankle injury every year and would cost a fortune. He is starting to become more of a playmaker with Son doing most of the running. Meanwhile we'd have a pretty free run it seems on Sancho who was born in 2000. There is no one in this squad that I see nailing down that right side permanently so it's a massive need. The front role is set for the short term by Cavani and for the long term there is so much to like about Greenwood. For me it seems a simple decision.
Kane's numbers are still very impressive, he is still a top tier player, but the signs are there that he has already peaked. Let's not do another Sanchez move and make the smart decision.

 

[Devil may care]

He'll probably end up staying at Spurs due to Levy being impossible to deal with, from a United perspective he's obviously one of the top 2 strikers in the world, but we re-signed Cavani and if people want Sancho you can't have both.

 

[sglowrider]

His preference is to join Utd despite the fact that we won’t offer the same transfer funds or wages that Chelsea, City, Madrid and Liverpool are offering. He’s happy to forego the difference in wages in order to push through a move to us which is pretty exciting.

Eh? My cousin's laundromat's soap detergent's supplier's brother in law who also provides laundry detergent to the Cheese Room said otherwise. He said that Kane's going to the Mighty Shrimpers of Southend.

 

[DULLAGHAN]

I really don't understand people who'd prefer us spend £100m on Sancho or Halland. Both play in a weaker league and are unproven in the premier League. (Look at Werner at Chelsea) If we were the finished article like city then by all means sign the best young talent.

We are nearing a decade without a league title, we haven't had a meaningful impact on the champions League since Nani got sent of for being too flexible. We don't need good young prospects who might cut it in England, we need the best striker in the country, a player who is genuinely world class. We need the man who scores that half chance when it's 1-1 and we're about to drop points.

If we have the money we need to buy Kane, it's that simple. Worry about who will be good or who will have resale value in 5 years in 5 years time. In the meantime sign the player who will win us titles for the next 5 years.

 

[Adnan]

Buildup is the biggest issue for me. But I don't know how were going to fix that. I see us and from the defensive third to the attacking third, the quality of our passing is, frankly, abysmal.

AWB - not a passer
Fred - inconsistent passr
Mctominay - passes like a CB
Pogba - creative passer when given time and space. Does his work further up the pitch
Bruno - creative passer. Less involved in buildup and more in final third
Rashford - passes like a striker
Greenwood - passes like a striker
Cavani - no use on the buildup

The way I see it Sancho adds some passing quality to our buildup for sure. He's one of the better wingers in terms of link up play etc

But even when it comes to the other addictions - DM, CM, right back, don't you feel this team needs more people who are comfortable in the ball and can link play together and set things up for the final third. Players like Rice /Ndidi will only add to how limited we are, and well coninue to be a clumsy team.

Or do you think it's also down to poor coaching that we have these issues?

Completely agree mate. All our players should be of a higher technical level. But sadly we have several who aren't of the required standard and that has to change. Sancho last season was playing ahead of Hakimi and Witsel and on occasion Dahoud who are all technically superior to AWB and McTominay who occupy the right side.

As far as the coaching goes, from my observation the team has shown good performances playing a structured style from a defensive POV. But I haven't seen the current team show the ability to play in a structured set up offensively, which could be down to us having a weak midfield when it comes to transitioning play. So I'm reserving judgement until next season and expect a more cohesive plan when it comes to playing a more expansive game.

 

[Rilz]

Completely agree mate. All our players should be of a higher technical level. But sadly we have several who aren't of the required standard and that has to change. Sancho last season was playing ahead of Hakimi and Witsel and on occasion Dahoud who are all technically superior to AWB and McTominay who occupy the right side.

As far as the coaching goes, from my observation the team has shown good performances playing a structured style from a defensive POV. But I haven't seen the current team show the ability to play in a structured set up offensively, which could be down to us having a weak midfield when it comes to transitioning play. So I'm reserving judgement until next season and expect a more cohesive plan when it comes to playing a more expansive game.

Agreed, in midfield we need a monotome, someone who has a quick thought and execution of pass. Bruno is the killer in our team, we need someone to get the ball into him consistently either direct, or over the top.

We've been saying it for years but its exactly what scholes did for us, and what xavi did for barca, just keep the ball moving forwards.

 

[Siorac]

But key difference is Sanchez wasn't coming off a season where he scored and assisted in 35 goals in the premier League

As a matter of fact, Sanchez scored 24 and assisted 11 in the Premier League in 16/17.

 

[shamans]

Have said numerous times since this news broke last night that IF we didn't already have issues at CB, DM & RW then yes despite having Edi would still happily see us break the bank for him but we do so it's a non starter for me

Doesn't matter. Kane doesn't need a midfield.

 

[Adnan]

Agreed, in midfield we need a monotome, someone who has a quick thought and execution of pass. Bruno is the killer in our team, we need someone to get the ball into him consistently either direct, or over the top.

We've been saying it for years but its exactly what scholes did for us, and what xavi did for barca, just keep the ball moving forwards.

Absolutely, and Pogba isn't that player from deeper, because defensively he isn't good enough. So you either buy for the role in question or promote from within, with a view to developing the player for the role.

 

[justsomebloke]

He isn't on equal terms with Kane.

Kane has produced PL on a consistent level since 14/15 and also has had CL goals too.

Haaland is getting there but he is not there yet.

Why is Wener a bad pointless one?

Werner in Bundesliga

19/20 - 28 goals 8 assists
18/19 - 16 goals 9 assists
17/18 - 13 goals 8 assists
16/17 - 21 goals 7 assists

It is clear the PL is a tougher competition, are you saying they are the same standard?

I'm saying it is pointless to compare Werner with Haaland, who is a player of an entirely different calibre. Also, I am saying that the fact PL is a better league than the BL does not mean that you can assume a player who performed well in the Bundesliga would perform less well in the PL. There are many, many examples to the contrary.

Haaland has outperformed not just Kane, but everyone else in the CL. It took Kane 24 CL games to reach 20 goals, which was a record at the time. Haaland has 24 goals in his first 20 CL games. After 20 European outings, Kylian Mbappé had scored 12 goals, Lionel Messi eight, Robert Lewandowski six and Cristiano Ronaldo just one.

So, sorry, but if you think of Haaland as some sort of unfinished super prospect while Kane is polished finished product, that's just wrong. Haaland is a world class player, right now. As far as scoring is concerned, he is way ahead of what any other active player was at the same age. Messi and Ronaldo included. And he is also probably ahead of any other player save Lewandowski if you don't take age into concern. "Not there yet"? If outscoring everyone in the history of the CL isn't being there yet, what is?

Now, as pointed out, football is more than goal scoring, otherwise this wouldn't even be an issue. But there's just no way you can build any sort of reasonable case that Kane is clearly a better player than Haaland at this point. Close enough to argue one way or the other, yes. But not more than that.

 

[romufc]

I'm saying it is pointless to compare Werner with Haaland, who is a player of an entirely different calibre. Also, I am saying that the fact PL is a better league than the BL does not mean that you can assume a player who performed well in the Bundesliga would perform less well in the PL. There are many, many examples to the contrary.

Haaland has outperformed not just Kane, but everyone else in the CL. It took Kane 24 CL games to reach 20 goals, which was a record at the time. Haaland has 24 goals in his first 20 CL games. After 20 European outings, Kylian Mbappé had scored 12 goals, Lionel Messi eight, Robert Lewandowski six and Cristiano Ronaldo just one.

So, sorry, but if you think of Haaland as some sort of unfinished super prospect while Kane is polished finished product, that's just wrong. Haaland is a world class player, right now. As far as scoring is concerned, he is way ahead of what any other active player was at the same age. Messi and Ronaldo included. And he is also probably ahead of any other player save Lewandowski if you don't take age into concern. "Not there yet"? If outscoring everyone in the history of the CL isn't being there yet, what is?

Now, as pointed out, football is more than goal scoring, otherwise this wouldn't even be an issue. But there's just no way you can build any sort of reasonable case that Kane is clearly a better player than Haaland at this point. Close enough to argue one way or the other, yes. But not more than that.

I didn't realise getting CL goals = best player.

How many 90 minutes of Dortmund have you watched to judge that?

Have you ever heard of something called purple patch? Just because Haaland has done it for 18 months doesn't mean he is the finished product.

So are you also trying to say because he done it quicker than the ones mentioned he is better than Mbappe, Messi, Ronaldo?

If so, you are deluded.

 

[justsomebloke]

I didn't realise getting CL goals = best player.

How many 90 minutes of Dortmund have you watched to judge that?

Have you ever heard of something called purple patch? Just because Haaland has done it for 18 months doesn't mean he is the finished product.

So are you also trying to say because he done it quicker than the ones mentioned he is better than Mbappe, Messi, Ronaldo?

If so, you are deluded.

Now you're just being absurd. If you've nothing better to contribute than twisting arguments into strawmen, then don't bother.

 

[KiD MoYeS]

The Times and The Guardian both going with Kane to City story, I'd be inclined to agree.