Harry Kane MBE | Performances

Wasn't his best overall game, to be honest. His hold up play was not up to the standards it normally is and wasn't involved that much, even in the first half when we were creating chance after chance. However, in times of need, big players need to step up, and he certainly did that yesterday.

Kane is probably the only consistent finisher in our starting XI, and if we're to progress quite far in the world cup, then he'll have to be firing.

Good start to the competition.
 
TheReligion said:
Oppo fan in disguise

@EyeInTheSky one for you
Click to expand...

@Red4Ever I agree Kane is the better player because Lukaku played at utter shite clubs before he joined United and Kane played and plays for Tottenham during that same period. So it’s an apples to apples comparison.

Lukaku scoring record at his previous shite clubs is not as good as Kanes record at his current shite club.
 
EyeInTheSky said:
@Red4Ever I agree Kane is the better player because Lukaku played at utter shite clubs before he joined United and Kane played and plays for Tottenham during that same period. So it’s an apples to apples comparison.

Lukaku scoring record at his previous shite clubs is not as good as Kanes record at his current shite club.
Click to expand...

I’ve read this 4times and still don’t know what the feck your on about :lol:. Lukaku’s goal scoring rate has dropped since joining a “not shite club” how the feck does that work, cafe gold right there?
 
red4ever 79 said:
What because a sane person dares to have an opinion. Just because this is a Utd forum doesnt mean we have to lie and make up cr*p to make our players look better than they are. People in this thread trying to say Lukaku is better than Kane, state of this place
Click to expand...

You are an utter disgrace.

Go and sell Pogba and sack Mourinho elsewhere . This is a thread about Harry Kane you melon.
 
InLevyITrust said:
I’ve read this 4times and still don’t know what the feck your on about :lol:. Lukaku’s goal scoring rate has dropped since joining a “not shite club” how the feck does that work, cafe gold right there?
Click to expand...

That's not true.

Since making his debut for Anderlecht in 2009 to signing for United in 2017, Lukaku has maintained a 1 in 2 goals to games ratio. He managed to equal that impressive record for United last season.

2009–2011 Anderlecht 73 (33)
2011–2014 Chelsea 10 (0)
2012–2013 → West Bromwich Albion (loan) 35 (17)
2013–2014 → Everton (loan) 31 (15)
2014–2017 Everton 110 (53)
2017– Manchester United 34 (16)
 
Random Task said:
That's not true.

Since making his debut for Anderlecht in 2009 to signing for United in 2017, Lukaku has maintained a 1 in 2 goals to games ratio. He managed to equal that impressive record for United last season.

2009–2011 Anderlecht 73 (33)
2011–2014 Chelsea 10 (0)
2012–2013 → West Bromwich Albion (loan) 35 (17)
2013–2014 → Everton (loan) 31 (15)
2014–2017 Everton 110 (53)
2017– Manchester United 34 (16)
Click to expand...

Honestly you should be a politician :lol:, you would have my vote.
 
Two good goals, but he was a passenger last night. But I guess that is what it is about at the end of the day, putting the ball in the back of the net.
 
He was God awful yesterday. Ambling about trying to play no.10 despite the fact he's not very good at it, couldn't be arsed running and we were also playing 3 other (actual) no.10s.

England will get dicked if he plays like that against Belgium.
 
TwoSheds said:
He was God awful yesterday. Ambling about trying to play no.10 despite the fact he's not very good at it, couldn't be arsed running and we were also playing 3 other (actual) no.10s.

England will get dicked if he plays like that against Belgium.
Click to expand...

Lol how the feck is this Kane’s fault? There should only be one no. 10. Sterling isn’t a 9, and Dele and Lingaurd need to do more than just a 10.
 
TwoSheds said:
He was God awful yesterday. Ambling about trying to play no.10 despite the fact he's not very good at it, couldn't be arsed running and we were also playing 3 other (actual) no.10s.

England will get dicked if he plays like that against Belgium.
Click to expand...

This thread is just weird now.
 
RobinLFC said:
Great stats. I don’t see the only important one, goals scored. It also proves that Kane scores more goals with less shots.

You’re either wumming or just plain stupid.
Click to expand...
To be fair I'm sure you said Lukaku misses far more big chances, these statistics prove that he doesn't.
 
MUFC OK said:
To be fair I'm sure you said Lukaku misses far more big chances, these statistics prove that he doesn't.
Click to expand...
Your stats also prove that Kane scores more goals with less shots on goal though.

The very initial point I was replying to, is that I thought it was mind-boggling that someone would not swap Lukaku for Kane, and I very much stand by it. All the other discussion about which seasons and competitions to take into account is just semantics, although I also stand by the fact that Lukaku doesn't come near Kane's goal-scoring record in the Premier League. TheReligion can act absurdly with his "102 vs 108 is close" bullshit if he wants to, but if you extrapolate the sample size available, it's like this:

Kane - 108 goals in 157 games - 0.69 goals per game
Lukaku - 102 goals in 220 games - 0.47 goals per game

If Kane keeps on scoring like he has been, and all the signs are there that he will, he'll have 152 goals by the time he reaches the amount of games Lukaku is currently on. That's a 50 goals difference, which proves my "nowhere near" point. Looking at total goals scored without taking into account that Lukaku has had almost two full seasons more in the PL than Kane is just deliberately being thick.

The poster I was initially replying to can have other reasons why he'd choose Lukaku over Kane, maybe he just doesn't like the latter or whatever, but purely looking at their play and their stats, it's clear that Kane is in the top tier of strikers in the world and Lukaku is not. Fwiw almost everyone, including the posters arguing with the "nowhere near" stuff, agree with me on that.
 
red4ever 79 said:
Wouldnt mind swapping Pogba for Kane. Then again even with Kane in our team with the supply of Valencia and Young , combined with the Mourinho tactics, he probably wouldnt score so many
Click to expand...

red4ever 79 said:
What because a sane person dares to have an opinion. Just because this is a Utd forum doesnt mean we have to lie and make up cr*p to make our players look better than they are. People in this thread trying to say Lukaku is better than Kane, state of this place
Click to expand...
State of you to be fair, I said I wouldn't swap Lukaku for Kane, not the he is better, and I stand by that. There is such thing as personal preference and I prefer a striker in the mould of Lukaku to one like Kane, to suggest it is absurd to compare the two shows ignorance when you consider they are the same age, play for two of the top 4 clubs, both have over 100 PL goals by 24, number 9 for their country etc.
 
To be fair to Lukaku, his early debut goes against him when counting his goals to games ratio.
Its like Ronaldo playing for us at 18, imagine what his stats would look like if he had Kane's path to first team football and didn't have 30/40 games as a kid learning the game.
 
InLevyITrust said:
Lol how the feck is this Kane’s fault? There should only be one no. 10. Sterling isn’t a 9, and Dele and Lingaurd need to do more than just a 10.
Click to expand...

How is it Kane's fault he didn't run, wasn't ever in the box and was crowding into an overcrowded area of the pitch for no reason? Youre right, must have been Alli's fault. :wenger:
 
RobinLFC said:
Great stats. I don’t see the only important one, goals scored.

You’re either wumming or just plain stupid.
Click to expand...
breakout67 said:
@Don _ Conte opinion is worthless when it comes to Lukaku, he/she is salty about Lukaku not coming to Chelsea and is still adamant that Morata is better.

Anyone that thinks Morata is better than Lukaku and questions someone that says Lukaku is better than Kane is a hypocrite.

Its obvious that Morata is a 3rd tier striker, Lukaku is a 2nd tier striker and Kane is a 1st tier striker.
Click to expand...

If you had the intelligence to actually comprehend what I said.

Lukaku had a better season than Morata and yet as I'v said there output in goal/min ratio was similar, this is where I said stats are deceiving because you can clearly see Rom had a better season.

In the same way that people in here could put up any statistic they like, but just simply by watching football you can see Kane is leagues above Rom and the comparison is just really embarrassing.
 
RobinLFC said:
Your stats also prove that Kane scores more goals with less shots on goal though.

The very initial point I was replying to, is that I thought it was mind-boggling that someone would not swap Lukaku for Kane, and I very much stand by it. All the other discussion about which seasons and competitions to take into account is just semantics, although I also stand by the fact that Lukaku doesn't come near Kane's goal-scoring record in the Premier League. TheReligion can act absurdly with his "102 vs 108 is close" bullshit if he wants to, but if you extrapolate the sample size available, it's like this:

Kane - 108 goals in 157 games - 0.69 goals per game
Lukaku - 102 goals in 220 games - 0.47 goals per game

If Kane keeps on scoring like he has been, and all the signs are there that he will, he'll have 152 goals by the time he reaches the amount of games Lukaku is currently on. That's a 50 goals difference, which proves my "nowhere near" point. Looking at total goals scored without taking into account that Lukaku has had almost two full seasons more in the PL than Kane is just deliberately being thick.

The poster I was initially replying to can have other reasons why he'd choose Lukaku over Kane, maybe he just doesn't like the latter or whatever, but purely looking at their play and their stats, it's clear that Kane is in the top tier of strikers in the world and Lukaku is not. Fwiw almost everyone, including the posters arguing with the "nowhere near" stuff, agree with me on that.
Click to expand...
I was simply rebutting your statement that Lukaku misses more big chances than Kane.

It's known that Kane has a better scoring rate, he scored twice as many league goals last season, I'm not arguing that. I wouldn't want to swap for reasons I've stated before, basically that I think Lukaku has the better all round game - is more creative, has more assists, running the channels, more pace, explosiveness, greater crossing, makes more space for his teammates, is less selfish - Kane has scored a few more goals at a better rate.

We also create far less chances for him than Spurs do for Kane. That is a fact. I believe Lukaku in that Spurs team would score more and conversely Kane less playing for United. I don't think there is much between them with all things considered.
 
MUFC OK said:
I was simply rebutting your statement that Lukaku misses more big chances than Kane.

It's known that Kane has a better scoring rate, he scored twice as many league goals last season, I'm not arguing that. I wouldn't want to swap for reasons I've stated before, basically that I think Lukaku has the better all round game - is more creative, has more assists, running the channels, more pace, explosiveness, greater crossing, makes more space for his teammates, is less selfish - Kane has scored a few more goals at a better rate.

We also create far less chances for him than Spurs do for Kane. That is a fact. I believe Lukaku in that Spurs team would score more and conversely Kane less playing for United. I don't think there is much between them with all things considered.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, agree to disagree then, I think I rate Kane a bit higher than you do and Lukaku a bit lower so it's easy to see where the problem is.
 
MUFC OK said:
I was simply rebutting your statement that Lukaku misses more big chances than Kane.

It's known that Kane has a better scoring rate, he scored twice as many league goals last season, I'm not arguing that. I wouldn't want to swap for reasons I've stated before, basically that I think Lukaku has the better all round game - is more creative, has more assists, running the channels, more pace, explosiveness, greater crossing, makes more space for his teammates, is less selfish - Kane has scored a few more goals at a better rate.

We also create far less chances for him than Spurs do for Kane. That is a fact. I believe Lukaku in that Spurs team would score more and conversely Kane less playing for United. I don't think there is much between them with all things considered.
Click to expand...

Kane is quite a bit technically superior to Lukaku - this means his hold up play is far superior, he's better in the air and he's a better, more consistent passer in and around the box and he's less likely to break moves down by losing the ball. His superior touch and ball control means the ball "sticks" up top much more reliably than it does for Lukaku (part of the reason that United's attacks break down more often compared to Spurs is that Kane anchors so many moves).

Lukaku is a great athlete and he does give you the ability to play on the shoulder of defences in a way Kane does not (though Kane is faster than people seem to think he is), but his inferior hold up play, aerial ability and close control leave him a level below Kane in terms of building an attack. There's a lot of talk about Spurs attack creating more chances for Kane, but he's a huge part of that chance creation as he allows and assists attacks to build behind him, bringing people into play and providing a secure outlet to play the ball up to under pressure.

I actually quite rate Lukaku's finishing ability, and it's close to Kane's imo - both are terrific finishers with both feet and from unorthodox positions. It's the other stuff before the finishing that is what truly separates Kane from nearly any other striker in the world.
 
breakout67 said:
@Don _ Conte opinion is worthless when it comes to Lukaku, he/she is salty about Lukaku not coming to Chelsea and is still adamant that Morata is better.

Anyone that thinks Morata is better than Lukaku and questions someone that says Lukaku is better than Kane is a hypocrite.

Its obvious that Morata is a 3rd tier striker, Lukaku is a 2nd tier striker and Kane is a 1st tier striker.
Click to expand...
I agree with this tier system
 
cyberman said:
To be fair to Lukaku, his early debut goes against him when counting his goals to games ratio.
Its like Ronaldo playing for us at 18, imagine what his stats would look like if he had Kane's path to first team football and didn't have 30/40 games as a kid learning the game.
Click to expand...
To be fair, if you are really talented, you can start playing at 18 or younger. Owen, Gerrard, Rooney, Sterling and Messi all started playing regularly as teenagers too, didn't they?
 
vadimivich said:
Kane is quite a bit technically superior to Lukaku - this means his hold up play is far superior, he's better in the air and he's a better, more consistent passer in and around the box and he's less likely to break moves down by losing the ball. His superior touch and ball control means the ball "sticks" up top much more reliably than it does for Lukaku (part of the reason that United's attacks break down more often compared to Spurs is that Kane anchors so many moves).

Lukaku is a great athlete and he does give you the ability to play on the shoulder of defences in a way Kane does not (though Kane is faster than people seem to think he is), but his inferior hold up play, aerial ability and close control leave him a level below Kane in terms of building an attack. There's a lot of talk about Spurs attack creating more chances for Kane, but he's a huge part of that chance creation as he allows and assists attacks to build behind him, bringing people into play and providing a secure outlet to play the ball up to under pressure.

I actually quite rate Lukaku's finishing ability, and it's close to Kane's imo - both are terrific finishers with both feet and from unorthodox positions. It's the other stuff before the finishing that is what truly separates Kane from nearly any other striker in the world.
Click to expand...

Agree with bits and pieces.

Kane isn't better than Lukaku at heading the ball. Before this season, I posted stats for last 2 seasons (2015-16 and 2016-17),
Lukaku won 221 aerial duels compared to Kane's 111.
Lukaku won 40%, Kane 34%.
Lukaku has scored 21 headers, Kane 16.

There isn't a single metric to show Kane is better in the air. Even this season,
Kane 1.8 aerial duels per 90 mins while losing 2.3,
Lukaku 3.8 aerial duels, losing 3.3

Also according to PL website,
Lukaku has created 35 big chances in 220 games
Kane - 23 in 153 games

In general chances created, in last 2015-16 and 2016-17 season,
Lukaku created 97 chances in 6441 mis
Kane created 85 chances in 5906 mins

This season both players created 33 chances but Lukaku played 120 mins less.

Also both Kane and Lukaku were dispossessed 124 times. Kane 64 times due to unsuccessful touch, Lukaku 76 times.

Also regarding close control, Lukaku completed more dribbles with higher success rate in 2015-16 and 2016-17 season (haven't checked for 2017-18).

Kane is obviously better player but you are selling Lukaku way too short here. He is much better player than how you have described.
 
roonster09 said:
Agree with bits and pieces.

Kane isn't better than Lukaku at heading the ball. Before this season, I posted stats for last 2 seasons (2015-16 and 2016-17),
Lukaku won 221 aerial duels compared to Kane's 111.
Lukaku won 40%, Kane 34%.
Lukaku has scored 21 headers, Kane 16.

There isn't a single metric to show Kane is better in the air. Even this season,
Kane 1.8 aerial duels per 90 mins while losing 2.3,
Lukaku 3.8 aerial duels, losing 3.3

Also according to PL website,
Lukaku has created 35 big chances in 220 games
Kane - 23 in 153 games

In general chances created, in last 2015-16 and 2016-17 season,
Lukaku created 97 chances in 6441 mis
Kane created 85 chances in 5906 mins

This season both players created 33 chances but Lukaku played 120 mins less.

Also both Kane and Lukaku were dispossessed 124 times. Kane 64 times due to unsuccessful touch, Lukaku 76 times.

Also regarding close control, Lukaku completed more dribbles with higher success rate in 2015-16 and 2016-17 season (haven't checked for 2017-18).

Kane is obviously better player but you are selling Lukaku way too short here. He is much better player than how you have described.
Click to expand...

Wow great statting there. Kane is a better player than Lukaku but Lukaku is a really talented player in his own right. Praising Kane is not a slight on Lukaku at all - both are excellent. Far too many precious people posting on this thread.
 
balaks said:
Wow great statting there. Kane is a better player than Lukaku but Lukaku is a really talented player in his own right. Praising Kane is not a slight on Lukaku at all - both are excellent. Far too many precious people posting on this thread.
Click to expand...

Not sure what has that got to do with my post when I have praised and said Kane is the best striker in the league.

My point is about shitting on Lukaku as if he is second coming of Heskey.
 
roonster09 said:
Not sure what has that got to do with my post when I have praised and said Kane is the best striker in the league.

My point is about shitting on Lukaku as if he is second coming of Heskey.
Click to expand...

Sorry it wasnt directed at your post - was just a general observation of the thread.
 
balaks said:
Sorry it wasnt directed at your post - was just a general observation of the thread.
Click to expand...

Yeah agree with that. Kane is superb player and easily the best striker in the league for last 3-4 seasons, praising him doesn't mean criticising others.

Credit to him, he has stepped up at every level.
 
Mettaur said:
To be fair, if you are really talented, you can start playing at 18 or younger. Owen, Gerrard, Rooney, Sterling and Messi all started playing regularly as teenagers too, didn't they?
Click to expand...
Yeah but their goals to game ratios suffer because of it.
Funnily enough this comparison is kind of the reverse. Lukaku playing a lot of top level football from 16 to 21 odd seems to be wiped out because Kane wasn't playing at a high level then so all these stats begin from when its beneficial to Harry.
Lukaku had almost a goal every 2 games in his teens yet everything seems to be judged from the last four years.
Lukaku has more club goals and double his international tally yet its all about these last four years.
If Kane wasn't struggling on loan and played through it at Spurs then a lot of these stats wouldn't be posted.
Kane is still a better number 9 but its not based on any stats that's posted on here IMO.
 
Stacks said:
Yeah but its penalties, deflected goals and tap ins. He is like the Lampard of strikers. Nothing pretty or fancy.
Click to expand...

Messi couldn’t score a pen the other day though could he? Still have to stick them in. Nothing wrong with having a Lucky striker.

Didn’t Ronaldo score a pen and get a lucky goal against Spain for his hat-trick?

We have a great striker on form, couldn’t care less how the goals go in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.