Shearer didn't choose to stay. He did move. Just made the wrong move!
Harry Kane MBE | Performances
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Shearer didn't choose to stay. He did move. Just made the wrong move!
I wonder how many footballers would turn down staying where they are for 2 or 3 times the salary and giving the impression that they're super loyal, to rapture from 1,000s of fans.
The problem is football players don't think too far ahead, and assume a club will always have the money to buy them.
Certified classic
Uh, no. He signed a long-term contract when he could have gone to a big club. How is that not choosing to stay? Do you think Shearer and Le Tissier were hoping their teams would never win anything? There's no difference.
People need to stop linking Shearer and Le Tissier.
Shearer DID make his big move, but picked the wrong team.
Le Tissier was never open to a move at all.
The poster I'm quoting made that connection.
Fair doing.
Is great the right word? Dont think I've managed to finish it, hurts too much.
Is great the right word? Dont think I've managed to finish it, hurts too much.
Great in the sense yesterday was a great watch.
The second hand embarrassment is strong with this oneIs great the right word? Dont think I've managed to finish it, hurts too much.
The second hand embarrassment is strong with this one
Feel bad for him, he had a great game besides the missed penalty. He's one of the true world class strikers in the game.
Sadly he didn't moved on on time and he'll probably end up his career trophyless.
Sadly he didn't moved on on time and he'll probably end up his career trophyless.
I do fear we'll move for him in a few years, and the threads will be awash with talk of how he can barely run and we've done it again.
I liked Schneider's creativity and versatility a lot and Di Natale had one of the better post-30 careers of anyone ever, but Kane is on a different level and while I'm too young to say, seemed like Socrates was too.
I sometimes forget Kane has never won a league cup. Spurs won one a few years before he debuted so it seems like they've been trophy-less as a club as long as Kane, or that he would have been around for that one as a young striker, but he was still in the youth and hadn't gone on his series of loans yet even.
Makes some very good points, this is why I don’t want him at Utd tbh
Jenas digging him out for being injured and missing some big games isn't much of an argument.
Last edited:
No, but at the same time those injuries (and poor performances) mean that unfortunately for Kane (added on to the no trophies so far) he has glaring omissions from the history books. It's unfair to blame Kane though for the other night, he was good aside from the miss.
That's not what he just done in that interview, did you listen to all of it?
Hard to argue against that.
It's all well and good being a good goal scorer but how many of them are memorable and led to winning anything? That's the one thing that will hurt his legacy the most, adding those trophies to his resume would have made a massive difference to his reputation. In the end of the day he had his chances to make a big move but didn't take them for reasons we will probably never find.
You can't be good if you missed out a peno in a crucial match. It's a fine line a main striker must be able to handle the pressure or you're not good.
Champions made a meal out of these crunches. He bottled it. It wasnt even a save. It's an embarrassing miss for a star striker
Most title winners striker had their hairy moment where their bottle meant winning of losing. They took their chances, Harry didnt. Doesnt matter how good he was in the 89 other minutes.
Fair or not.. history are cruel. The difference between legend and has been could have been one miss
Watched the highlights on MOTD today (because we were in a pub and having fun and not watching the game as nerdily close) and my World Cup rabid (massive basketball fan but generally very casual soccer fan) girlfriend started to drift into space and got contemplative and depressed while Jenas was talking.
He gets on my nerves because he doesn't even get on my nerves, which would be something.
Kane hasn't had a big game career, but him having some injuries and Spurs teammates is probably the main reason why. He and Rooney are neck and neck for me. Kane is a bit boring to watch, worse dribbler and less versatile than Rooney but far more consistent on the ball (shooting and passing). They'd have been great together in a 3-5-2 with some wingbacks.
What? That's a bizarre take.
So if a defender plays a 10/10 match and then scores an OG they can't have had a good game?
If he doesn't score the equally important first penalty England wouldn't even have been close at 83 mins. The only reason England had a shot at getting to extra time was because of Kane who had a very good game.
A tiny minor footnote. Nobody remember loser.
Sorry. I dont make the rules. Nobody would talk about Kane in 10 years time about how good his game in the QF.
The only reason or at least the main reason England is out is also because he missed his penalty. It goes both ways.
It is a team game, none of his teammates created chances or scored to win the game - they are equally culpable. Foden and Bellingham were not good in the game yet all the focus is on Kane who played better than most on the pitch.
Thats not really what he said?
He is absolutely correct in saying that some of the highlights of Spurs in recent years where matches where Kane didnt feature. Its a simple fact.
it’d be a shame if all of his goals were ultimately meaningless, hope he goes Bayern or somewhere to statpad some trophies, maybe a CL
Why do we need to talk about it in 10 years time? He had a good game and missed a penalty, it happens. It doesn't mean he had a bad game, just a bad moment.
Just like if he has no trophies. He won't be remembered as a bad striker, he'll be remembered as a very good striker but not one of the elites.
He has been carrying England on his very own, and even more nowadays with Sterling out of form and no other clear leader or driving force in the team?
Saka was England's best player against France.
Here is a list of great players who have missed penalties in massive games - Marco Van Basten, Zico, Michel Platini, Roberto Baggio, Franco Baresi, Diego Maradona, Lionel Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo.
Kane took the second penalty (and the greatest responsibility, again, after so many times in the recent years) in spite of being clearly uncomfortable with that, even admitting it openly after the game to apologise and offload the burden.
He should be taking that penalty to be fair, his previous record for scoring has been excellent, there's no reason for any other player to take it.
My point was that Kane hasn't been carrying the England team this tournament. Saka has been great and also Foden when he got a chance to play. Then you also had Rashford on the bench who had an excellent world cup.
None of them can be good though mate.
Isn't this the point though, in terms of his legacy? He should arguably be a player that people remember as one of the very best, but in years to come he probably won't be, and it will be because of his CV.
I'd be very surprised if he isn't regretting some of the choices he's made in his career.
Yes, but we weren't discussing legacy, we were discussing if he had a bad game or not against France. One missed penalty does not equal a bad game. In this case it was the difference between a good and an excellent performance for Kane. I used the other point to make out that just because you don't have trophies it doesn't suddenly make you a bad striker in your career.
Last edited:
Sums him up. He's a human tranquilizer without the fun spacey feeling of many other tranqs.