Irwin99
Full Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2018
- Messages
- 9,399
Ronaldo is apparently staying next season regardless of champions league football. I very much doubt you could fit both in the same side unless Kane played deeper, or we went two up top.
Ronaldo needs to accept being a sub or get shipped outRonaldo is apparently staying next season regardless of champions league football. I very much doubt you could fit both in the same side unless Kane played deeper, or we went two up top.
Rooney was a second striker and there was far more to his game then being a goalscoring machine (which he wasn't). I've watched Kane regularly and I really can't understand the hype. He's a great goal poacher but his movement is not that great, his football is meah and so is his technique. If Kane is worth 100m then how much would a Batistuta, a Shearer, an RVN let alone a Van Basten would cost?He has consistently scored 20 plus goals ?
He is not far from beating Rooney's international record?
Are you saying Rooney was over rated?
toucheRashford by a distance
You clearly have not watched him enoughRooney was a second striker and there was far more to his game then being a goalscoring machine (which he wasn't). I've watched Kane regularly and I really can't understand the hype. He's a great goal poacher but his movement is not that great, his football is meah and so is his technique. If Kane is worth 100m then how much would a Batistuta, a Shearer, an RVN let alone a Van Basten would cost?
His technique and movement are class. You can't have watched him that regularly. Apart him lacking a bit of speed and agility he has a complete game.Rooney was a second striker and there was far more to his game then being a goalscoring machine (which he wasn't). I've watched Kane regularly and I really can't understand the hype. He's a great goal poacher but his movement is not that great, his football is meah and so is his technique. If Kane is worth 100m then how much would a Batistuta, a Shearer, an RVN let alone a Van Basten would cost?
Coutinho was a player whos game was often built on beating a player. Kane is not. Kanes style of play is actually very close to Lewas, and the latter ages like fine wine.People have used this line of thinking for countless footballers over the years and 99% of them declined just like regular players. Even players who don’t rely on pace still lose that burst/bit of sharpness as they grow older which is essential. Look at for example Coutinho who didn’t rely on pace, but now that he’s lost that little bit of acceleration is half the footballer. Kane will in all likelihood (there are always exceptions) start to decline within a few years just like most footballers when they hit 31ish.
Don’t think he will want Utd if Spurs get top 4If city get haaland I can see us getting Kane… we will want to try and out do them with a marquee signing. Don’t see how Kane would fit into the team though if ronaldo stays.
Is it that good footballers (who I suspect are well known because they are good footballers) are only of commercial value and not footballing value? This keeps getting repeated in this thread. ‘Would be another commercial signing’. Why, because the cat is out of the bag that Kane is a good striker now? No club would want to sign Harry Kane for footballing reasons or something? He’s hardly a Spice Boy, and is a popular footballer because he’s a top one. That should not be used against the club. Kane didn’t get his name modelling underwear.The idea that people within United are talking about signing a 29-year-old Kane for 100m, even moreso this being a logical response to City getting Haaland, would be terrifying to me if I was Ten Hag. A sure sign that despite whatever influence Rangnick might have exerted, the club still fundamentally doesn't get what it means to become a football-first club again rather than a brand maintenance operation.
It makes more sense when you consider the other contextual details. The story may be total bollocks. But if true the story is that the club wants to sign a 29-year-old CF for 100m despite having a limited budget and a ton of needs and part of the rationale is linked to another club signing a different big name CF. That's not thinking straight, or at least thinking more about how to maintain the brand more than thinking about how to best rebuild the team.Is it that good footballers (who I suspect are well known because they are good footballers) are only of commercial value and not footballing value? This keeps getting repeated in this thread. ‘Would be another commercial signing’. Why, because the cat is out of the bag that Kane is a good striker now? No club would want to sign Harry Kane for footballing reasons or something? He’s hardly a Spice Boy, and is a popular footballer because he’s a top one. That should not be used against the club. Kane didn’t get his name modelling underwear.
The rationale that a club that needs a centre forward is not thinking straight because they are going after the best one is confusing to me.
Woodward would be all over this.This ticks all the boxes of a United transfer.
1) Massive fee
2) Unsure of how they fit into the team properly (Because we don’t know what sort of identity we are trying to create as a team going forward)
3) A player who looks like their best years are behind them
4) Injury problems
5) Popular player
It should go without saying that United would want to sign Kane because City are signing Haaland is likely nonsense. United would have wanted to sign Kane long before Haaland had any relevance at all.It makes more sense when you consider the other contextual details. The story may be total bollocks. But if true the story is that the club wants to sign a 29-year-old CF for 100m despite having a limited budget and a ton of needs and part of the rationale is linked to another club signing a different big name CF. That's not thinking straight, or at least thinking more about how to maintain the brand more than thinking about how to best rebuild the team.
Depends how much money we throw at him. We’re still bigger then spurs even without top 4 to be honest.Don’t think he will want Utd if Spurs get top 4
People don't know what respect is nowadays anymore. You can of course discuss with the player about a separation, but you don't "ship out" a player like CR7.Ronaldo needs to accept being a sub or get shipped out
You're taking exception to semantics, whether you discuss separation or not, you are still shipping the player out at the end of the day.People don't know what respect is nowadays anymore. You can of course discuss with the player about a separation, but you don't "ship out" a player like CR7.
Get him on a boat and ship him out. Don’t care who his name is.People don't know what respect is nowadays anymore. You can of course discuss with the player about a separation, but you don't "ship out" a player like CR7.
We won't hence it doesn't make senseIf we signed him and we won the league. No one would give a feck
Only we can pay a sub that muchRonaldo needs to accept being a sub or get shipped out
I don’t give a shit about the money, it’s not mine.Why do you all care about how much it costs…?
If the Glazers had a track record of unearthing cheap gems then fair enough… but, they really don’t.
Kane’s the best CF in the PL, I find it surreal that you all are saying ‘nah’ like it’s your money!
that’s not true, his movement is absolutely world class as is his technique. His passing is sublime.Rooney was a second striker and there was far more to his game then being a goalscoring machine (which he wasn't). I've watched Kane regularly and I really can't understand the hype. He's a great goal poacher but his movement is not that great, his football is meah and so is his technique. If Kane is worth 100m then how much would a Batistuta, a Shearer, an RVN let alone a Van Basten would cost?
If United can't get past the obvious signings on ridiculous fees (Rice, Kane, AWB, Maguire etc) then we might as well sack the entire football side of the club and let Arnold play real life football manager. What's the point of having a DOF, a technical director and scouts if their only solution to the problem is spending ridiculous money on the likes of Kane and Maguire?For those asking us to avoid Kane, who do you see then as a viable alternative? Leave the Mbappes and Hallands out please as they are quite frankly unattainable for a club like ours as things stand
Harry Kane will be 29 by the time he'll play for United.29 isn’t old. You’re all mental in thinking so, especially since he’s still 28!
I mean if you think Rooney had way more than being a goal scoring machine and Kane doesn't, I am not sure which games of Kane you are watching. He has 6 assists this season, 17 last season. His technique is meh? Wow.Rooney was a second striker and there was far more to his game then being a goalscoring machine (which he wasn't). I've watched Kane regularly and I really can't understand the hype. He's a great goal poacher but his movement is not that great, his football is meah and so is his technique. If Kane is worth 100m then how much would a Batistuta, a Shearer, an RVN let alone a Van Basten would cost?
Wayne Rooney had a total of 103 assists in the EPL as opposed to Harry Kane's 39 assists. You can figure out the difference.I mean if you think Rooney had way more than being a goal scoring machine and Kane doesn't, I am not sure which games of Kane you are watching. He has 6 assists this season, 17 last season. His technique is meh? Wow.
Yeah, but barely. Freshly turned 29 isn’t fecking old, we could have him for 4 years and still be 32 in his final season.Harry Kane will be 29 by the time he'll play for United.
I am not saying Rooney is over rated.Wayne Rooney had a total of 103 assists in the EPL as opposed to Harry Kane's 39 assists. You can figure out the difference.
I am defending the argument that Rooney had more to his game then Kane does. As said, I don't rate Harry Kane, at least vis a vis his price tag. That's my personal opinion. I didn't rate Maguire and said so even though most of the posters here saw him like the second coming of the Christ back then. Don't take me wrong, if he signs then I wish to end up looking silly. My ego is worth nothing compared to what is good for the club.I am not saying Rooney is over rated.
You're the one calling the most over rated English player when his goal scoring record speaks for itself for a team that doesn't even challenge for trophies.
Fair enough, that my bad, I thought you were generally saying he is over rated. Obviously £100m or more for a 29 year old is a bit of a waste.I am defending the argument that Rooney had more to his game then Kane does. As said, I don't rate Harry Kane, at least vis a vis his price tag. That's my personal opinion. I didn't rate Maguire and said so even though most of the posters here saw him like the second coming of the Christ back then. Don't take me wrong, if he signs then I wish to end up looking silly. My ego is worth nothing compared to what is good for the club.