Kane goes Awol

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mourinhonista

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Feb 7, 2016
Messages
1,039
Location
Munich
LilyWhiteSpur said:
Ok so smaller than Elite clubs should simply have no protection from the Elite teams, is that really what you want football to be? If City/Munich/Chelsea came tomorrow for Bruno, Bruno says he wants to leave, you would have no problem allowing him to do so as he "is unhappy in his working environment"?
Click to expand...
Kane's been there for years and just has a few years left in the tank. Kane shouldn't leave for free, his contract protects that, but demanding £160 mil. isn't fair game.

If United didn't pay a dime for Bruno and if were here for years and says he wants to try something new, personally, i wouldn't stand in the way. Demanding £160 mil. and then wondering when the players is unhappy is standing in the way, IMO.

gazbradley said:
I agree £160 mil is probably too much but £120-130 I could agree with, the fact you think less than £100 mil is crazy to me. It’s a tricky one when City are reportedly making offers of £100 mil for Grealish I can see why Levy would want a lot more. We’re talking about the England captain and talisman and selling to a league rival, he’d also be almost impossible to replace and has a long contract. Add in he’s usually one of the top scorers in the league if not the top scorer and you can easily see why he’s worth so much more than Grealish. Also Grealish is due to turn 26 soon and Kane only just turned 28 so the age argument makes no sense really.
Click to expand...
Grealish has about two more years as a top level footballer than Kane -age wise. To me that would be worth more money. Letting Kane leave for a 'reasonable' price (£75-£100 mil.) could be a sign of goodwill for years of world class performances and giving up more money he'd easily could have gotten elsewhere.

Spurs and City aren't rivals, Spurs haven't won the league for ages, they just happen to play in the same division. How it has come to that was unfair and comparable to winning the lottery, but that's for another story.
 

lilcurt

Full Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
3,588
Location
Birmingham
Scroto Baggins said:
Were any big teams in for Son? Seems he has always been rated a notch below the truly world class wide players for some reason.
Click to expand...
Probably because everyone knows to get a top player from Spurs will cost a fortune. More reason to run your contract down. With a year left any team in the league would take Son. Imagine many others on the continent would too.
 

pratyush_utd

Can't tell DeGea and Onana apart.
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Messages
8,430
Mourinhonista said:
Kane's been there for years and just has a few years left in the tank. Kane shouldn't leave for free, his contract protects that, but demanding £160 mil. isn't fair game.

If United didn't pay a dime for Bruno and if were here for years and says he wants to try something new, personally, i wouldn't stand in the way. Demanding £160 mil. and then wondering when the players is unhappy is standing in the way, IMO.



Grealish has about two more years as a top level footballer than Kane -age wise. To me that would be worth more money. Letting Kane leave for a 'reasonable' price (£75-£100 mil.) could be a sign of goodwill for years of world class performances and giving up more money he'd easily could have gotten elsewhere.

Spurs and City aren't rivals, Spurs haven't won the league for ages, they just happen to play in the same division. How it has come to that was unfair and comparable to winning the lottery, but that's for another story.
Click to expand...
You mention that and then you suggest he should go for less than Grealish who has been no where near the same level. If Grealish is worth 100m then Spurs are right to demand 140-160m.
 

Hernandez - BFA

The Way to Fly
Joined
Jan 5, 2011
Messages
17,310
This is what I hate most about footballers, apart from diving.

Just put in a transfer request. Everyone knows you want to leave, so just put one in and don’t be sly about it by not turning up to training.

He loses some loyalty bonus - so bloody what. He’s rich as he is, and he’ll make a whole lot more at City.

I think it should be a rule where clubs should refuse to sell want-away players until they put in a transfer request.
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
50,372
Location
Birmingham
adexkola said:
Really interesting (not) to see the vitriol towards Kane and Levy manifest in many posts in this thread.

Can't blame Kane for signing a 6 year contract though. Footballers have to think long term; their earning potential is limited post career.

Also can't blame Levy for wanting to hold onto an irreplaceable asset. 100M doesn't cut it IMO.

If I was Kane I'd milk the contract, leave on a free, then sign for a club that could surround me with quality for the trophy part.
Click to expand...
He would be 31, slower than a glacier and God knows what physical condition. He can bank on being in demand by top clubs then.
 

alexthelion

Full Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2019
Messages
3,623
Mourinhonista said:
Making unreasonable demands for a player who's been there for years and friendly told them he wants to leave because it's about his last chance to win something meaningful. I mean, about 160 mil. (pounds) in covid times, c'mon man.
Click to expand...
The only unreasonable behaviour is from Kane.

He signed for 6 years, that's his problem if he now wants to move. Shouldn't have signed for so long. Going AWOL just shows what a cnut he is.
 

Dominos

Full Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
7,004
Location
Manchester
duffer said:
Kane needs to make a statement about a "gentleman's agreement" otherwise he seems like an unprofessional whiner.
Click to expand...
What possible agreement could have been made that Levy has broken?

If the agreement was "you can leave if the right offer comes in", then Levy dictates what the value of the offer needs to be and if City don't meet that number then he's not broken any agreement. If the agreement was "you can leave if we get a bid of 100 million", then they should have said let's add that to the contract, and if Levy refused to put it in the contract then clearly he's full of shit.

Footballers signing these long term contracts and then expecting they'll just be able to walk over the another club whenever they feel like baffles me.
 

kingwaynerooney

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
215
Supports
United
Spurs should just take the money. Yeah, they wasted the bale money but they aren't winning anything with Kane either. Take the money and hope for the best from new signings.
 

antohan

gets aroused by tagline boobs
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
42,175
Location
Montevideo
Pickle85 said:
You'd have thought that Levy wouldn't bench Kane. Similarly, given the proximity to a world cup, if he does play you'd assume that Kane wouldn't half arse it. A lot of assumptions there, I appreciate!
Click to expand...
I think the latter assumption is the more relevant one. Levy has nothing to lose really.
 

dinostar77

Full Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2014
Messages
7,260
Hernandez - BFA said:
This is what I hate most about footballers, apart from diving.

Just put in a transfer request. Everyone knows you want to leave, so just put one in and don’t be sly about it by not turning up to training.

He loses some loyalty bonus - so bloody what. He’s rich as he is, and he’ll make a whole lot more at City.

I think it should be a rule where clubs should refuse to sell want-away players until they put in a transfer request.
Click to expand...
A very good point and a valid one. I hate when a player wants to leave won't pit in an offical transfer request, but then wants all his "loyalty" bonus etc paid up.
 

antohan

gets aroused by tagline boobs
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
42,175
Location
Montevideo
Enigma_87 said:
Spurs don't have that much assets in their team to put Kane on the bench like we or Real have. Putting him on the bench effectively ends their season as they don't have the players to replace his influence. Of course it goes two ways and all parties will lose in such scenario but I reckon Spurs loses the most if Kane throws a strop and Levy will cut his losses.

Modric IMO was a steal for Real at 30m. He didn't go to a rival, so Levy at least blocked that move, but he was worth more at that time/market. Berbatov and Bale were sold in the same window when they were targeted. Kane won't be sold for pennies that's for sure, but if he does want to go he will go at some point - be it this year or next.
Click to expand...
Kane is going nowhere for 100M with three years left on his contract. 150M and he is gone, very likely, but not for any less than that.

They don't need to bench him, nor will they, because Kane himself needs to be playing and playing well as his only hope for silverware right now is Qatar.

He can throw a tantrum now, but not beyond transfer deadline.

Re: other trio, two of them cost an absolute fortune and Modric was relatively cheap but beyond our reach. I would have preferred expensive.
 

Womp

idiot
Joined
Jun 23, 2013
Messages
9,262
Location
Australia
Suedesi said:
BTW, Inter rejected EUR 100m + Alonso from Chelsea for Romelu Lukaku. I reckon, Harry Kane is worth about 140m GBP.
Click to expand...
Difference is - Lukaku doesn't want to leave and Inter don't want to sell. Kane absolutely does want to leave and is trying to force the move publicly, that will influence the potential price.
 

PoTMS

Full Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
16,391
How do footballers at Spurs still not get it? Fecking idiots. There's no gentleman agreements' with Levy.
 

manutddjw

Full Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
3,700
Location
Canada
I think what Kane is probably most upset about is the price tag Levy is putting on his head more than anything else. He alluded to this during the Euros where made the comment that with his age and not having resale value. City just publicly bid 100M for Grealish which I’m sure they would offer the same for Kane.

I guarantee someone from City told people in Kane’s camp that a 100M bid was scoffed at which is why he’s taken this drastic step.
 

SplitzMagic

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 6, 2013
Messages
329
Location
M16
lilcurt said:
Probably because everyone knows to get a top player from Spurs will cost a fortune. More reason to run your contract down. With a year left any team in the league would take Son. Imagine many others on the continent would too.
Click to expand...
Son for Martial straight swap would be lovely :drool:
 

Jacob

Full Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
25,577
Now more players will run down their contracts at Spurs. Nice one, Levy.
 

Winzaghi

Full Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
318
Supports
Aston Villa
Hernandez - BFA said:
This is what I hate most about footballers, apart from diving.
Click to expand...
Which he's also no stranger to. I like how everyone was initially shocked by what he did and how it was "out of character". Why, because he interviews well? On the pitch, he'll do anything to get the upper-hand, so it's not surprising he'd be the same way about his transfer.
 

MattyLT

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
310
Pickle85 said:
Are you comparing what Kane's doing to fraud and theft? Because if so, it's a bit silly.
Click to expand...
To not abide by a legally binding contract definitely is fraudulent behaviour. And if we were talking about, say, a used-car salesman here, rather than a professional footballer, I doubt we'd even be having this discussion. The club is expected to pay him, and he's expected to show up for work. That's the mutual agreement, legally binding, signed by both parties under no duress.
 

Winzaghi

Full Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
318
Supports
Aston Villa
Also, there's no such thing as a "gentleman's agreement", either get it in writing or suck it up. I learned that the hard way in my first ever job when I was younger. But I'm a nobody and it was some third rate job in the middle of nowhere and I didn't have an agent I was paying money to get these types of things right.
 

amolbhatia50k

Sneaky bum time - Vaccination status: dozed off
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
95,676
Location
india
Mourinhonista said:
Kane's been there for years and just has a few years left in the tank. Kane shouldn't leave for free, his contract protects that, but demanding £160 mil. isn't fair game.

If United didn't pay a dime for Bruno and if were here for years and says he wants to try something new, personally, i wouldn't stand in the way. Demanding £160 mil. and then wondering when the players is unhappy is standing in the way, IMO.



Grealish has about two more years as a top level footballer than Kane -age wise. To me that would be worth more money. Letting Kane leave for a 'reasonable' price (£75-£100 mil.) could be a sign of goodwill for years of world class performances and giving up more money he'd easily could have gotten elsewhere.

Spurs and City aren't rivals, Spurs haven't won the league for ages, they just happen to play in the same division. How it has come to that was unfair and comparable to winning the lottery, but that's for another story.
Click to expand...
Kane and Grealish aren't in the same bracket in terms of quality of peformances no matter the fascination the caf has for the latter. Kane has been miles better.

Spurs don't owe anybody anything (apart from their debt ..). They have arguably the PL's best player, teams need to break the bank for him. He's worth much more than Grealish imo
 

Winzaghi

Full Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
318
Supports
Aston Villa
amolbhatia50k said:
Kane and Grealish aren't in the same bracket in terms of quality of peformances no matter the fascination the caf has for the latter. Kane has been miles better.

Spurs don't owe anybody anything (apart from their debt ..). They have arguably the PL's best player, teams need to break the bank for him. He's worth much more than Grealish imo
Click to expand...
Gotta agree. He's only 2 years older than Grealish too. We're talking about arguably the best striker in the world. He's not going to be just 100m.
 

amolbhatia50k

Sneaky bum time - Vaccination status: dozed off
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
95,676
Location
india
Winzaghi said:
Also, there's no such thing as a "gentleman's agreement", either get it in writing or suck it up. I learned that the hard way in my first ever job when I was younger. But I'm a nobody and it was some third rate job in the middle of nowhere and I didn't have an agent I was paying money to get these types of things right.
Click to expand...
Also I doubt this agreement had a specific fee like 100 million. If it did then I can see player being furious but anything else simply relates to Spurs being open to accept a fee that meets their valuation
 

Flytan

New Member
Joined
May 20, 2013
Messages
3,754
Location
United States
Honestly if he's going to go to City I kinda like that he's going to ruin his relationship with Tottenham and their fans first.
 

Oldyella

Full Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
5,838
For so long everyone's criticised Kane for having his comfy shoes on and showing no ambition, now he's finally pushing for that move. Wrong way about it, yes, but he's finally showing some balls.
 

Jibbs

New Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2013
Messages
2,238
LilyWhiteSpur said:
Ok so smaller than Elite clubs should simply have no protection from the Elite teams, is that really what you want football to be? If City/Munich/Chelsea came tomorrow for Bruno, Bruno says he wants to leave, you would have no problem allowing him to do so as he "is unhappy in his working environment"?
Click to expand...

You can not compare United with Spurs. Spurs are a small team and notoriously bad at keeping players happy.
 

P-Ro

"Full Member"
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
11,329
Location
Salford
Supports
Chelsea and AFC Wimbledon
MattyLT said:
To not abide by a legally binding contract definitely is fraudulent behaviour. And if we were talking about, say, a used-car salesman here, rather than a professional footballer, I doubt we'd even be having this discussion. The club is expected to pay him, and he's expected to show up for work. That's the mutual agreement, legally binding, signed by both parties under no duress.
Click to expand...
Of course not turning up to work is fraud. Of course. Why some people post utter dogshit in here trying to pretend they know anything about employment law is just fecking baffling. :lol: :lol:
 

GodlovesUnited

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
2,398
P-Ro said:
Of course not turning up to work is fraud. Of course. Why some people post utter dogshit in here trying to pretend they know anything about employment law is just fecking baffling. :lol: :lol:
Click to expand...
It’s not fraud. Fraud involves deception or misrepresenting the situation. If Harry Kane hired a look-alike who posed as him all season, that would be fraud. Simply not showing up would be more akin to breach of contract.
 

P-Ro

"Full Member"
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
11,329
Location
Salford
Supports
Chelsea and AFC Wimbledon
GodlovesUnited said:
It’s not fraud. Fraud involves deception or misrepresenting the situation. If Harry Kane hired a look-alike who posed as him all season, that would be fraud. Simply not showing up would be more akin to breach of contract.
Click to expand...
I was clearly being sarcastic. It's mental to call not turning up to work fraud.
 

hobbers

Full Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
28,245
Mourinhonista said:
All this behavior from Spurs leads to are shorter contracts and free agency. Clubs like Spurs are making the game worse for everyone.
Click to expand...
Rubbish. Players and agents will always demand these sorts of longer term deals. It's all about financial security and certainty given how short footballers' careers are. The flip side they have to accept is that they are beholden to the club and the whims of the transfer market if they want to move.

Spurs aren't behaving any differently to any other well-run club with Kane. They signed him up to a long term deal and won't let him leave unless their value for him is met. Exactly what they should be doing. Levy would be a total moron if he let Kane leave for £100m now, let alone £50m. :lol:
 

Suedesi

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
23,873
Location
New York City
Womp said:
Difference is - Lukaku doesn't want to leave and Inter don't want to sell. Kane absolutely does want to leave and is trying to force the move publicly, that will influence the potential price.
Click to expand...
Difference is Kane in the PL is twice the player Lukaku is.
 

RedRonaldo

Wishes to be oppressed.
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
18,996
If he really wants to go he shouldn’t sign contract extension some years ago? This only makes it hard for him to move, and not turning up for training is unprofessional.
 

SmashedHombre

Memberus Anonymous & Legendus
Joined
Mar 29, 2004
Messages
31,851
Kane moving to City wouldn’t be the end of the world if it means one less competitor for Haaland next year. Similarly Chelsea and Lukaku. Either way there are positives no matter what the outcome here, so it’s fun to just sit back and see what happens.

It not being United at the forefront of the drama is quite nice.
 

Eternitiy

New Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2019
Messages
581
Please let him go, Tottenham. It is harmful for the morale of Kane and his colleagues if he is forced to continue in a situation in which he is unhappy and unmotivated.
 

Womp

idiot
Joined
Jun 23, 2013
Messages
9,262
Location
Australia
Suedesi said:
Difference is Kane in the PL is twice the player Lukaku is.
Click to expand...
He is no longer 'twice the player'. Regardless, Lukaku and Kane's circumstances are in no way comparable. One wants to leave and plays for a team which has no hope of competing/isn't in Europe, one doesn't want to leave and is playing for a team that were just crowned champions.

It's never going to be an ideal scenario to keep a player who so badly wants out of your club that he's going awol, that will have to influence their thinking around his valuation. Either way, I think he'll stay. Don't see City signing both him and Jack.
 

Dan-Utd

Full Member
Joined
May 17, 2016
Messages
200
Location
United Kingdom
Disgusting!
If Harry Kane is refusing to go into training to force through a transfer then whoever is advising him is an absolute disgrace, agents have far too big an influence in our game and it's about time rules were put into place to limit that, not just with an established player like Harry Kane but with youngsters who they encourage to move for money rather than football reasons only to end up being a flop.

Ian Holloway's Wayne Rooney rant springs to mind...


I bet Ollie has strong thoughts on Harry Kane too.
 

Zaphod2319

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
4,209
Supports
Chelsea
ESPNFC is saying there was a gentleman’s agreement at the time he signed the 6 year deal.
 

FatTails

New Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2021
Messages
1,859
“Gentleman’s agreement” :lol:

There are many, many, millions on the line. This is the kind of stuff that should be written in a contract (i.e. a release clause) not a gentlemen’s agreement!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.