Harry Kane MBE | Performances
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Why do you not rate Kane’s all round game? His hold up play is quality, he drops deep a lot and his passing range for a striker is also quality. Kane is far from just a poacher so it just sounds like you haven’t really seen him play much. He scores from outside the box, inside the box, curling shots, volleys, headers. What makes you think Kane is just a poacher... let me guess the one game against Tunisia?
So you did, I dunno what I was looking at.
The only weird thing about Kane is that he struggles to score vs United, which I can't say I am sad about. Long may it continue 
This was brought up so many times, this is wrong. They consider top 6 as fixed but it never was. For example, in Klopp's first season Liverpool didn't finish in top 6 but they still considered them as top 6, same with Chelsea when they finished 10th and ManUtd 7th.
It should be counted by taking the teams that finished top 6 in that particular season.
Traditionally these are what you class as the big games, I get your point but if the point was Kane scores more in the bigger games, then the data is correct.
Of course Kane scored more in big games. Before this season I compiled stats for goal scored against actual top 6 teams.
It's much closer than the one you psoted.
Lukaku scored 8 in 22,
Kane scored 8 in 19 games.
They don't say top 6, they say "big 6" which is fixed. A game against Burnley doesn't count just because they happen to be in 5th when you play them.
Then the stat don't make any sense.
But its irrelevant since we were talking about scoring in big games... so we need to use the "big 6"
Dude, read the post I quoted.
Clearly the stats I posted were relevant to the discussion
Of course it makes sense. Just because Liverpool happen to be 7th doesn't mean United-Liverpool doesn't qualify as a big game.
Did he have a touch aside from the two goals?
I mean, fair play that's his job and he did it but where was he for the rest of the 90 minutes?
I mean, fair play that's his job and he did it but where was he for the rest of the 90 minutes?
No, I'm not talking about your post, I'm talking about that article which is a nothing article.
If you are talking about big games then I'm sure that article excluded his goals against Chelsea in FA cup QFs, against City in league cup semi finals.
It's a very narrowly defined criteria which excludes his goals against City X2, Liverpool X2, Arsenal which he scored in league in 2013-14 season. He also scored against Arsenal in QFs of FA cup in that season.
Before that in 2012-13 season he scored hat trick against league champions Manutd and also Liverpool.
It sort of tailored stats if you exclude his best season against big 6 or exclude cup competition in latter stages against big 6.
Its no tailored stats, its stats which include times when all of the players were playing in the PL talking about PL goals.
It's a nothing stats as it excludes lot of other factors and it's only since Leicester are promoted to PL, what sort of stats is that?
Can you say Vardy did better against top 6 since Leicester were promoted? Absolutely.
Can you pick Lukaku stats only from when Leicester were promoted? Not sure how that makes sense. He has his best goal scoring season in 2013-14 and Leicester were promoted in 2014, so to fit into this criteria, we are excluding his best season.
So had someone posted stats in 2014 then Lukaku would have been ultimate big game player?
Stats should include Vardy's record in PL, Lukaku's record in PL and Kane's record in PL, not since Vardy was promoted to PL.
Actually if you're comparing players it makes sense to compare them over the same timeline. Anyway this is a silly argument, fact is Kane is the better big game player which was the point which I was making, which you don't even disagree with
Not really, you can easily compare then over their PL career and then check mins per goal against big 6 or games per goal against big 6. By considering only from 2014 they have excluded Lukaku's best season.
So if we are comparing Kane and Lukaku then it doesn't make sense to include stats only from 2014-15 when Kane has played in PL in 2012-13 season and also 2013-14 season, so if you consider that, then record against big 6 will be lot closer.
The stats you have posted have considered timelines for Vardy but Kane played before too, so yeah their big game record is closer than what the article stated.
We'll agree to disagree. If Lukakus best season was before 2014 and he hasn't been able to replicate that 4/5 years later it kind of makes the point.
Most recent data is most relevant to saying who is the better big game player right now.
Yes he did. Received the ball in different areas of the final 3rd and tried to interlink with players around him.
He did a good job for us yesterday.
I don't think anyone is arguing who is better big game player, it's about that particular article which is so poor and ignores lot of things.
How can they consider record against big 6 and then ignore the games in cup competitions against big 6.
Kane is obviously better player and better big game player but the stats that are posted are wrong or ignores lot of things.
Fair point, it was looking at league goals, I don't agree with having to go back prior to 2014 however.
I've rarely seen Kane create anything for himself or teammates, and he equally needs a lot of service to score goals, which he gets from the likes of Eriksen. Lukaku gets no way near as much supply playing for United, there was a statistic somewhere saying it was virtually half that of Kane, Aguero in terms of chance creation.
Kane is far more Inzaghi than RVP, RVP had superior technique to Kane, he could score any type of goal from anywhere. If you take away hard goal scoring stats, Kane is not particularly impressive as a player.
Thought he was largely anonymous yesterday and all the best play went through Trippier, Alli and Lingard. However, he scored two goals and that's all that matters at the end of the day.
Pretty much
I've seen him play countless times and I always get the same impression. Let me clarify, in no way do I not rate him, my original point was that in comparison to Lukaku, there is not much between the two in terms of ability. Kane is world class in most peoples books but in my view he's primarily a poacher, so was Van Nistelrooy and it doesn't stop him being one of the best strikers of all time.
Yourself and a fair few Spurs fans need to take a day off from trying to bring everyone around to your way of thinking about Kane. Or is that all that's left to cling to in the absence of trophies?
I'm sorry but most of that simply isn't true.
Lukaku doesnt come close to Kane's PL goal scoring record? Lukaku 102 Kane 108. Not sure how you define close but they are pretty much equal in that sense.
Lukaku and Kane had very similar performances yesterday. Both limited involvement, both with two goals.
Not really sure where you have seen Kane create and score goals himself either, least not more so than Lukaku who has actually developed his all round game over the last 12 months.
Lol come on biglad put in the matches played in those figures, you sound like a politician.
Did you just quote yourself and ask yourself if you are sure?
There is nothing wrong in asking yourself if you are sure about something. I do it all the time
Speaking of which. I think this guy should've asked himself if he was sure, before posting this:
Opening up spaces for the more pacey Lingard/Dele/Sterling to run in behind. Like the chance when Lingard hit the post where Kane drags the defender as wide as he can and opens up a huge gap which Lingard could exploit with his speed against his much slower marker. In the second half, Tunisia did a better job at cutting off the passing lanes from the midfield and England looked clueless until Rash & Loftus-Cheek came on and started taking on their (more tired) opponents. But this is not solely a Kane problem, it has plagued England for ages: The inability to create chances when the spaces become really tight.
If my memory serves me right, he's the first English international to score two goals in a WC game since Lineker in 1990 (or 1986, if we go by 90 minutes and take into consideration that Lineker needed extra-time to score his second penalty vs Cameroon in Italy 1990). Players like Shearer, Owen, Rooney, Cole and Gerrard, Lampard, Beckham never achieved this. Kane did it in his first WC appearance. I think congrats are in order for his performance yesterday, nothing less.
It's the WC, i feel we should all cheer up a bit. We'll have plenty of time from mid-August onward to argue about who's better between Lukaku and Kane. As someone whose country is not represented in the WC, i can't even begin to explain how many neutrals, especially young ones, both are winning over with their performances and their goals.
I've seen him play countless times and I always get the same impression. Let me clarify, in no way do I not rate him, my original point was that in comparison to Lukaku, there is not much between the two in terms of ability. Kane is world class in most peoples books but in my view he's primarily a poacher, so was Van Nistelrooy and it doesn't stop him being one of the best strikers of all time.
Yourself and a fair few Spurs fans need to take a day off from trying to bring everyone around to your way of thinking about Kane. Or is that all that's left to cling to in the absence of trophies?
We aren’t discussing Spurs or United here, is that he last getout clause? We are discussing Kane and Lukaku, comments like that just ruin any debate to be had. Spurs are quite rightly proud of Kane, why shouldn’t we be? You think that Lukaku is the better player, basically Kane isn’t as good, that’s your own opinion and I respect that.
105 vs 69 in the least four years is what I'd class doesn't come close.
Well..it is Arsenal after all...
Kane could play as a number 10 as he's a really good footballer. He's under rated because he plays as a number 9 with his back to goal. But if you look at his through balls and cross field passes when he is moving towards goal, you'll see why he was initially compared to Sheringham. He's a very good footballer, playing a role that doesn't give him the opportunities to show it. He's much closer to RVP than he is Inzaghi, though I can totally understand why you think the opposite, as the role he plays limits what he can do. Look how limited Ronaldo's game has become and he doesn't even play with his back to goal like Kane.
There you go, I saw that stat in the Lukaku v Morata thread last year and believed it for an entire year!
Has anybody any magic beans for sale? I'll take them off your hands..
There's obviously two agendas here, one trying to downplay Lukaku and one trying to downplay Kane.
Why else would you only look at goals scored without games to make Lukaku look better, or only at premiere league goals to make Kane look better.
Lukaku is better at supplying forwards and running the channels, but Kane is a better goal scorer and can hold the ball up better. You'd say that Kane is probably the better striker.
Why else would you only look at goals scored without games to make Lukaku look better, or only at premiere league goals to make Kane look better.
Lukaku is better at supplying forwards and running the channels, but Kane is a better goal scorer and can hold the ball up better. You'd say that Kane is probably the better striker.