Harry Kane | "I will be staying at Tottenham this summer and will be 100% focused on helping the team achieve success."

[RDCR07]

What if Levy set the price at 200mil? IMO, Kane has already stayed a very long time at Spurs because he loves the club. Kane can easily get much higher salary at other club had he not stayed with Spurs for so long. But at his age now, Levy should listen to realistic offer and let him go to have new challenges elsewhere to fulfill his dreams.

The realistic fee is around 100 to 120mil in the current COVID-19 situation. If this was the price, I think City or other major clubs can pay this. But it seems, Levy want much higher.

Who are you tell to Levy what to charge for his player? It’s your opinion he is worth £100-120m. But it’s Levy’s opinion he is worth £150m. Yeah Kane will get a higher salary had he signed for City but he was happy he was getting a raise at Spurs that he signed a 6 year contract.

If Levy had a “gentlemen’s agreement” with Kane then Kane had a contractual agreement, which is actually a legally binding doc that, to play for Spurs for the next 6 years when he signed the contract. You don’t get to leave just cause you’re bored or you don’t want to play anymore.

 

[diarm]

Who are you tell to Levy what to charge for his player? It’s your opinion he is worth £100-120m. But it’s Levy’s opinion he is worth £150m. Yeah Kane will get a higher salary had he signed for City but he was happy he was getting a raise at Spurs that he signed a 6 year contract. If Levy had a “gentlemen’s agreement” with Kane then Kane had a contractual agreement, which is actually a legally binding doc that, to play for Spurs for the next 6 years when he signed the contract.

While I agree with the general idea that Levy is well within his rights to charge whatever he deems fit for the player under contract, I do find it funny that Levy's opinion of his transfer value does not match the wage he pays him.

Obviously that is just more evidence of Kane's naivety and his brothers ineptitude, but a part of me does think it's a bit rich that Levy pays the player the wages of a £70-100m player, but wants significantly more than that to sell him.

 

[Mr Smith]

Isnt the 'speculation' that him and Levy agreed on a 100mil offer and he can leave?. I know i would be pissed if that was agreed, even if not on paper, and then Levy comes out wanting 150mil.
Anyway its Kane's fault anyway as he was so stupid to not put a release clause in that deal he signed.

In fact this whole saga is tedious as hell as you know 99% that he will be a City player by the end of the window.

I'm actually convinced that he won't be. Levy has no need to sell, and even if City did come up with the 150mil that he wants, it's almost too late in the window for Spurs to spend it. I said at the start of the window that Kane would stay and I'm honestly more convinced than ever at this stage.

 

[RDCR07]

While I agree with the general idea that Levy is well within his rights to charge whatever he deems fit for the player under contract, I do find it funny that Levy's opinion of his transfer value does not match the wage he pays him.

What does wages paid have to do with the transfer fee?

 

[Yakuza_devils]

Who are you tell to Levy what to charge for his player? It’s your opinion he is worth £100-120m. But it’s Levy’s opinion he is worth £150m. Yeah Kane will get a higher salary had he signed for City but he was happy he was getting a raise at Spurs that he signed a 6 year contract.

If Levy had a “gentlemen’s agreement” with Kane then Kane had a contractual agreement, which is actually a legally binding doc that, to play for Spurs for the next 6 years when he signed the contract. You don’t get to leave just cause you’re bored or you don’t want to play anymore.

This is exactly my point in the first place, Levy is the last person you want to have a gentleman agreement with. His evaluation of players differ depending whether he is selling or buying players.

He is well within his rights to evaluate Kane to be 200mil player or more. But general consensus in the market he is not worth the price whatever Levy is asking for now.

I believe eventually Kane will be sold but without the respect and dignity he deserve after contributed so much for Spurs.

 

[diarm]

What does wages paid have to do with the transfer fee?

They are both measures by which to value a player.

Both Levy and Kane are well aware of the market value of footballers around them. By offering him a contract on £200k a week, Levy was showing Kane that he valued him at around the same level as counterparts such as Martial, Maguire, Van Dijk and Chilwell, players who have gone for between £50 and £100m in recent windows. By accepting that offer, you could well say Kane was happy to agree with that valuation.

Now Levy is saying that £100m is not enough to buy Kane, and that he is a £150m or more player. Well that is fine, that's his prerogative - but Kane is certainly within his rights to question why that value is suddenly so much higher than the value Levy set when negotiating his wages.

When you start talking about £150m for players, the wages tend to reflect those valuations. Mbappe is on £400k a week, Lukaku has just signed something similar following his £100m+ transfer. God only knows what Neymar is on.

Levy is having his cake and eating it. He can do that because Kane and his brother were so monumentally stupid when negotiating that last deal, but their naivety doesn't change the fact that Levy is being a bit of a dick.

 

[NK86]

They are both measures by which to value a player.

Both Levy and Kane are well aware of the market value of footballers around them. By offering him a contract on £200k a week, Levy was showing Kane that he valued him at around the same level as counterparts such as Martial, Maguire, Van Dijk and Chilwell, players who have gone for between £50 and £100m in recent windows. By accepting that offer, you could well say Kane was happy to agree with that valuation.

Now Levy is saying that £100m is not enough to buy Kane, and that he is a £150m or more player. Well that is fine, that's his prerogative - but Kane is certainly within his rights to question why that value is suddenly so much higher than the value Levy set when negotiating his wages.

When you start talking about £150m for players, the wages tend to reflect those valuations. Mbappe is on £400k a week, Lukaku has just signed something similar following his £100m+ transfer. God only knows what Neymar is on.

Levy is having his cake and eating it. He can do that because Kane and his brother were so monumentally stupid when negotiating that last deal, but their naivety doesn't change the fact that Levy is being a bit of a dick.

Levy maybe a dick, but he is doing what is best for the club. I don't see a problem in it. Ronaldo, when he was sold, was the most expensive player. Was his wages at United at that time reflecting as the highest paid player in the world? I seriously doubt that. So this notion that the current wages and the future sell-on value of a player must be directly proportionate is silly, especially considering how the transfer fees have exploded since the Neymar transfer.

Going by your logic, if City do sign Kane for 50-60 mil as his current wages are around 200k/week, then his salary at City should remain similar to his current wages. Why should he get a major bump?

It's common sense that the club buying you at those prices will give you a wage on par with the amount they have spent on your transfer. Expecting the current club to somehow reduce their transfer fee when the new deal was negotiated 3-4 years prior is being disingenuous.

Also, feck City. Hopefully Spurs can hold on to him. Why on Earth would anyone be bothered about Kane's desires to win something while that is directly strengthening a close rival.

 

[diarm]

Levy maybe a dick, but he is doing what is best for the club. I don't see a problem in it. Ronaldo, when he was sold, was the most expensive player. Was his wages at United at that time reflecting as the highest paid player in the world? I seriously doubt that. So this notion that the current wages and the future sell-on value of a player must be directly proportionate is silly, especially considering how the transfer fees have exploded since the Neymar transfer.

Going by your logic, if City do sign Kane for 50-60 mil as his current wages are around 200k/week, then his salary at City should remain similar to his current wages. Why should he get a major bump?

It's common sense that the club buying you at those prices will give you a wage on par with the amount they have spent on your transfer. Expecting the current club to somehow reduce their transfer fee when the new deal was negotiated 3-4 years prior is being disingenuous.

Also, feck City. Hopefully Spurs can hold on to him. Why on Earth would anyone be bothered about Kane's desires to win something while that is directly strengthening a close rival.

United were paying Ronaldo enormous wages by the time he left. I remember there was £200k a week on the table which was right up there with the highest paid players anywhere at the time. (It's also, coincidentally, the same £200k a week that reflects the transfer fee he went for then, that £200k seems to match in transfer fees now, for all the talk of fees exploding since Neymar).

There have also been several times where a club has turned down a significant offer for a player, only for the player to demand wages that reflected the value of the offer turned down. That's pretty commonplace.

And finally, yes feck City. I'll be delighted if they don't get Kane. That doesn't prevent me from having a rational, grown up conversation about the specifics of this situation.

 

[NK86]

United were paying Ronaldo enormous wages by the time he left. I remember there was £200k a week on the table which was right up there with the highest paid players anywhere at the time. (It's also, coincidentally, the same £200k a week that reflects the transfer fee he went for then, that £200k seems to match in transfer fees now, for all the talk of fees exploding since Neymar).

There have also been several times where a club has turned down a significant offer for a player, only for the player to demand wages that reflected the value of the offer turned down. That's pretty commonplace.

And finally, yes feck City. I'll be delighted if they don't get Kane. That doesn't prevent me from having a rational, grown up conversation about the specifics of this situation.

Again, barely any club in the world would offer a new contract to a player who is barely half way through his existing contract. There are exceptions to all cases but they are few amd far between.
When Ronaldo signed the new deal (1 year before he was actually sold and the year where Blatter made those crazy slave remarks), he did it to protect his value for the club and to also ensure he is protected in case something happens during the season. SAF gave him his word that they would sell him for 80mil and that was intimated to Madrid quite early as the transfer went through quickly.

Nothing similar to Harry Kane's situation. He signed a contract on very large wages 3 years back and now wants Levy to bend over to City's wishes to get him for cheaper than Spurs are willing to sell for. If he is that distraught, why has he not put in a transfer request?

It seems like it's Kane who wants to have his cake and eat it too, rather than Levy.

 

[Attila]

Levy is the last person you would want to have a gentleman agreement with.

Kane has done so much for spurs and deserve to leave with respect and dignity.

What the hell is a gentleman's agreement. If Kane wanted to leave he should have inserted a release clause in his contract like Grealish did.

Levy has every right to keep him if the valuation isn't met. Didn't Kane say in a interview he should be allowed to leave for £100m. Who does he actually think be is that Levy should accept the price of two Ben Whites for him. It's not like City don't have money to burn either.

 

[SoCross]

If Grealish went for 100 million, Levy is right to ask at least for 150 million.

 

[LoneStar]

If Grealish went for 100 million, Levy is right to ask at least for 150 million.

He absolutely shouldn't budge. All this gentleman's agreement is bollocks.

100M for Grealish is crazy. Kane is easily 50M begger than him.

 

[Attila]

Why did he decide to stay at such a small club for all those years if he was just going to burn his bridges at the end?

Is it possible he is just stupid/naive?

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Why did he decide to stay at such a small club for all those years if he was just going to burn his bridges at the end?

Is it possible he is just stupid/naive?

Yes. He’s thick.

 

[sugar_kane]

Yes. He’s thick.

A bit thick perhaps but very talented, a shame he got his untalented and possibly also a bit thick brother to be in charge of his career.

 

[Abraxas]

They are both measures by which to value a player.

Both Levy and Kane are well aware of the market value of footballers around them. By offering him a contract on £200k a week, Levy was showing Kane that he valued him at around the same level as counterparts such as Martial, Maguire, Van Dijk and Chilwell, players who have gone for between £50 and £100m in recent windows. By accepting that offer, you could well say Kane was happy to agree with that valuation.

Now Levy is saying that £100m is not enough to buy Kane, and that he is a £150m or more player. Well that is fine, that's his prerogative - but Kane is certainly within his rights to question why that value is suddenly so much higher than the value Levy set when negotiating his wages.

When you start talking about £150m for players, the wages tend to reflect those valuations. Mbappe is on £400k a week, Lukaku has just signed something similar following his £100m+ transfer. God only knows what Neymar is on.

Levy is having his cake and eating it. He can do that because Kane and his brother were so monumentally stupid when negotiating that last deal, but their naivety doesn't change the fact that Levy is being a bit of a dick.

Not really, Levy has his cake and will presumably sell it for his valuation. That is normal practice for a football chairman, the first duty is to the club and its interests. Sometimes those interests will coalesce with those of an individual player, sometimes they don't and sometimes a compromise can be found which may still happen via the valuation.

It is Harry Kane that signed a deal. They do it because they get better money, and they also protect themselves in the situation of catastrophic injury, i.e. primarily for personal reasons, not for the good of the club. He has now benefitted from that for a period of time. It appears to me it is quite simply Harry Kane that wishes to have his cake and eat it, if that expression is to be applied.

 

[Robertd0803]

City not signing Kane this summer will complicate next summer no end.

Ive always reckoned Kanes decline will be pretty steep (just a hunch, not based on anything really) and given the choice between pursuing Haaland and Kane next summer if hes free Id much rather Haaland. City might feel the same way that Haaland is a better investment and drop all interest in Kane if they dont sign him this summer.

 

[djembatheking]

If Kane plays for Spurs in the Europa Conference League on Thursday will he be cup tied in the Champions League if he goes to City?

 

[dinostar77]

City not signing Kane this summer will complicate next summer no end.

Ive always reckoned Kanes decline will be pretty steep (just a hunch, not based on anything really) and given the choice between pursuing Haaland and Kane next summer if hes free Id much rather Haaland. City might feel the same way that Haaland is a better investment and drop all interest in Kane if they dont sign him this summer.

Kane's game isnt based on pace so there's nothing to suggest he'd have a steep decline.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

Kane's game isnt based on pace so there's nothing to suggest he'd have a steep decline.

The same was said of RvP and he did fell off a cliff after WC14.

Decline in physicality affects all facets of your game, being half a second slower to a challenge, to receive a pass, to get that little bit of space for shooting can be the difference between a lethal top player to a journeyman.

 

[Al-T]

If Kane plays for Spurs in the Europa Conference League on Thursday will he be cup tied in the Champions League if he goes to City?

No, UEFA abolished that a couple of seasons back.

Aa an example, Bruno Fernandes played for Sporting in the Champions League in late 2019, transferred to United in January 2020 and played Europa league for us that same season.

 

[dinostar77]

The same was said of RvP and he did fell off a cliff after WC14.

Decline in physicality affects all facets of your game, being half a second slower to a challenge, to receive a pass, to get that little bit of space for shooting can be the difference between a lethal top player to a journeyman.

He's 28 years old not 35.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

He's 28 years old not 35.

And RvP was what? 31.

I don’t necessarily think that he will have a steep decline but it does happen. You never know especially with players who have a particular recurring injury like him, so dismissing that possibility out of hand because ‘his game isn’t based on pace’ is hardly convincing.

 

[dinostar77]

And RvP was what? 31.

I don’t necessarily think that he will have a steep decline but it does happen. You never know especially with players who have a particular recurring injury like him, so dismissing that possibility out of hand because ‘his game isn’t based on pace’ is hardly convincing.

Top striker who will be fine until hes 34 which 6 years away. City aren't stupid, they will have done their homework if they are going to give him a 5 year contract (if levy sells).

 

[Shane88]

Will he play today?

 

[OleBoiii]

Will he play today?

And will he walk naked into the stadium while a large woman rings a bell every few seconds and chants "shame"?

 

[Dominos]

Again, barely any club in the world would offer a new contract to a player who is barely half way through his existing contract. There are exceptions to all cases but they are few amd far between.
When Ronaldo signed the new deal (1 year before he was actually sold and the year where Blatter made those crazy slave remarks), he did it to protect his value for the club and to also ensure he is protected in case something happens during the season. SAF gave him his word that they would sell him for 80mil and that was intimated to Madrid quite early as the transfer went through quickly.

Nothing similar to Harry Kane's situation. He signed a contract on very large wages 3 years back and now wants Levy to bend over to City's wishes to get him for cheaper than Spurs are willing to sell for. If he is that distraught, why has he not put in a transfer request?

It seems like it's Kane who wants to have his cake and eat it too, rather than Levy.

Ronaldo signed his last United contract in April 2007. He was sold in June 2009.

 

[AaronRedDevil]

Either way he's going to Manchester next summer. Red or Blue. In case we don't get Haaland.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Not in the squad, and doesn't even look to have turned up complete coward in my book, get him sold. Hope he flops hard where ever he goes.

 

[Robertd0803]

Kane's game isnt based on pace so there's nothing to suggest he'd have a steep decline.

Thats true but like I said just a hunch.

 

[Robertd0803]

Not in the squad, and doesn't even look to have turned up complete coward in my book, get him sold. Hope he flops hard where ever he goes.

Dont think he was ever going to be in the squad but watch him not being present being passed off as distancing requirements or something to down play it for now.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Dont think he was ever going to be in the squad but watch him not being present being passed off as distancing requirements or something to down play it for now.

He played in the CL final right off the back of an injury, still was in the first 11 nvm the squad.

 

[Robertd0803]

He played in the CL final right off the back of an injury, still was in the first 11 nvm the squad.

Isnt he isolating though and not eligible for selection anyway though? Thought Nunos comments indicated that he was after his return from holidays but I may be way off on that one.

Bet if we were playing them and were so strongly linked with him he would be starting and score.

 

[Woodzy]

I do feel this transfer is inevitable tbh.

 

[Shane88]

Shaw and Maguire are back playing for us, why isn't he back for Spurs? Spineless.

 

[cyberman]

Am I dreaming or was it it confirmed last month that he wouldn’t be playing?

 

[Adam-Utd]

Shaw and Maguire are back playing for us, why isn't he back for Spurs? Spineless.

Think it's fairly simple.

If a transfer is ongoing between him and City then why would they want him playing?

Imagine a 90th minute Penalty and Kane steps up to take it, do you trust him to score it? what if he misses it by accident but then people think it was on purpose?

Just safer to keep him out of it.

 

[hp88]

Either way he's going to Manchester next summer. Red or Blue. In case we don't get Haaland.

He comes across as someone who’s unprofessional at the moment, wouldn’t really want him around the club if this is how he acts. He should have carried on doing what he’s getting paid to do and left his transfer in the hands of City and his agent.

 

[AjaxCunian]

The England captain, Harry Kane.

 

[hp88]

Think it's fairly simple.

If a transfer is ongoing between him and City then why would they want him playing?

Imagine a 90th minute Penalty and Kane steps up to take it, do you trust him to score it? what if he misses it by accident but then people think it was on purpose?

Just safer to keep him out of it.

Fair point but is really that big of cnut to miss on purpose?