Yeah, I was saying this the other day. I agree - his reputation has taken a bit of a dive. You will always get certain people in the media who love him and will gladly spread some propaganda, but he is getting pelters by others. All to be another cog in the wheel at that soleless hole they call the Etihad
Harry Kane | "I will be staying at Tottenham this summer and will be 100% focused on helping the team achieve success."
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Did he refuse to train, and did he miss games?
For international contingent of Man Utd supporters, it’s honestly of zero significance whether a player is British. Only performance levels matter, and that’s all
Fair enough, they do attract a share of those type of players for better or worse they get a decent living and sometimes huge exits. Also cant blame Mr Levy for holding on to assets / valuation. Spurs looked good and then fell off a cliff. Kane can only blame himself for penning that sort of long contract with no exit strategy.
I mean it was in the summer during the off-season, so he couldn't have even if he wanted to.
He handed in his transfer request shortly after Liverpool won it in 2005 no?
Because he wants to go to City and win something?
Of course City could up their bid if they wanted to, but there’s a stand-off/difference of opinion as to his value.
Kane would not be taking a wage cut ….in fact he’d be earning more than if he remained at Spurs.
So true it hurts.
Imagine being so much of a bellend that public support sided with Levy against you. Absolute tool.
I actually feel bad for Kane tbh,he is 28 and has given his heart out whenever he has played for Spurs. Before this saga he has always been a model professional and I am not sure how you can hold this transfer against him.
As for the holding out bit I can understand people not liking that but considering Levy’s reputation I am not surprised at all. Kane knows that he has to push a bit or Levy won’t budge. Of course Levy works for Spurs and his duties are towards Spurs only, but not sure it’s a good luck ever for any club for future contract extensions. Some people will use the well hey Kane shouldn’t have signed the contract if he didn’t want to stay, even though that contract is actually the reason they are getting 150 million for him
As for the holding out bit I can understand people not liking that but considering Levy’s reputation I am not surprised at all. Kane knows that he has to push a bit or Levy won’t budge. Of course Levy works for Spurs and his duties are towards Spurs only, but not sure it’s a good luck ever for any club for future contract extensions. Some people will use the well hey Kane shouldn’t have signed the contract if he didn’t want to stay, even though that contract is actually the reason they are getting 150 million for him
Assuming Kane stays at Spurs this season and we miss out on Haaland next summer, would you be happy with the club spending £100+million on Kane in that summer?
Hardly. For 100 million when he's 29?
Why not? If he helps the club to its 21st title or the champions league, would you say it would have been worth it? 29 is hardly retirement age either, we'd be getting a premier league proven goalscorer at the peak of his career for a couple of years at least.
No way that will be the price then.
I don't trust him to lead us to a title. I think he'd be a bad fit and we'd need to build the team around him. That would be bad for our general attacking cohesion.
As in you expect it to be higher or lower?
Who says anything about him having to bear the burden of leading the team to the title? He'd already have leaders like Bruno, Maguire and Varane in the side, and plenty of attacking talents around him like Sancho, Rashford and Greenwood to share the attacking burden. What he'd give us is 25+ goals a season, which coupled to the goal contribution from the rest of our team would put us up there and contenders you'd imagine. As for him being detrimental to our attacking cohesion - how so?
He'd be over 100m. The pressure would be on him to get at least 25 goals a season or be labeled a flop. We wouldn't want that to happen. As he plays right now he operates in the same spaces as Bruno, and so I'd be worried about Bruno being moved out of position to get the highest possible goal tally for Kane. That is a bad idea.
We are building a really flexible attack, where we have 5 really good options who all offer a different threat and none of whom are guaranteed starters. That maximises our unpredictability and is currently a massive advantage. Buying Kane would really undermine that, imo, and would bring a load of unnecessary pressure onto the club, as the media would be on us for not getting the best out of England's finest.
I don't disagree with most of that, but not convinced he'd necessarily hamper Bruno. In our current setup - perhaps, but assuming we push forward with playing a more attack minded 4-3-3, then I don't see that necessarily being a detriment to Bruno, nor the team. Bruno himself might score less goals, but that's not to say he won't continue being an productive behemoth in our side. Its also worth remembering that Kane likes to drop deep to help influence games in teams that don't have the necessary creative output from midfield - neither Spurs nor England for that matter have a Bruno type player, so I don't think he'd feel the need to drop as deep as he does for his club and country if he were playing for United.
When Kane played for England he dropped into the same spaces. I hoped he'd show he could be a pure goalscorer, operating mainly in the box and being really productive, but for me he didn't do that. I like how we look with this really flexible front line.
Really, my fear with Kane is that the deal would be hyped to the stratosphere. Kane, for whoever he moves to, will not just be expected to be a 20 goal player. He will be expected to be the standout talisman for his team. For us that puts him in competition with Bruno, and honestly I can't be fecked with the media narrative that I can see brewing. Shit, there's already a narrative that Bruno and Pogba can't play together, usually used to attack Pogba. That sort of thing can destabilise team harmony.
I think that Haaland is a perfect fit for us, Kane less so. If we can't get Haaland I'd prefer we tried to find a striker more like Haaland, inferior to Kane but less expensive, and continued to build on what we have. Kane would feel like an impulse buy - a little like signing Lukaku when it wasn't clear how he'd fit into our team.
What you're describing is the media baggage and scrutiny United enjoy irrespective of which big name signing we recruit. It would be the same if we spent big money on Haaland or someone else. I'd actually argue the media would be more lenient on Kane with him being England's wonderboy - you can already see it with how much they're 'ooing and 'ahhing' Jack Grealish's every breath at City, or even Ben White being called a better signing than Varane by some pundits.
Spurs on verge of being kicked out of the Goofy Cup.
City looking to sign another striker now.
Looks like Kane has been given lot's of bad advice.
City looking to sign another striker now.
Looks like Kane has been given lot's of bad advice.
I think you're right that people will be more lenient on Kane cos he's England captain - but that just means they'll look for other people at Man United to blame if he doesn't hit the ground running and have a 30 goal season. Maybe Ole or Bruno. And Kane is different to Grealish because Grealish is leant to be an artist on the football pitch. Kane is a goalscorer. If Kane had played vs Spurs and not scored, and Spurs had won, I'm sure that he'd have been criticised more heavily than Grealish was. And City receive less media scrutiny than United anyway.
For those who don't like the circus around Pogba, I feel worse about the circus that is gonna be around Kane. And I don't think he's a good fit for our team. Therefore spending over 100m on him is a bad idea. We can spend that money more wisely.
Anyone saying Lukaku and Kane are comparable need their heads checked
And that is why players nowadays might prefer to see out their contract and leave for free. If you can’t blame the club, you can’t blame the player either.
I think not many people are holding the transfer against him. In my case it‘s his entitled* and childish behaviour. And up to a certain degree it’s also the way he is awful at trying to spin his shortfalls into something that isn‘t his fault, seeming to think a majority of fans will fall for it. He‘s trying to take everybody for a ride and is doing a really bad job at it.
I don‘t think Spurs owe him anymore than he owes them. He should be doing the job he is being paid for as good as he can and Spurs should continue fulfilling their side of the contract, too.
*I‘ll admit I‘m just feeling he feels entitled based upon everything reported and said. No hard facts to back it up.
Those ankles are not getting any younger. Ankle problems worsen with age and mileage.
The problem is we can't afford that type of money for somebody with no resell value, only City and PSG can.
The irony is, when we bought Pogba for 89m, we thought there is high resell value too, turns out he might just leave for free.
The thing is, we thought pogba would have resale value. Here we know he won't. No need to touch it with a ten foot pole if it's anywhere more than 70 mil.
Kane should have just trained and played the game against City. Or at least made himself available. That would have helped him in his PR war. He can just be more explicit in his comments in wanting to leave through his agent. Kind of like Pogba. 
We are experts in no resell value!
There must be some real flapping asses right now. It's going to the wire.
Hope he stays there. He's no threat to anything there.
Hope he stays there. He's no threat to anything there.
We can afford it, it’s just our owners prefer to keep all our money for themselves. #GreedyGlazers
I still haven't forgotten what Rooney did. Main reason I wasn't that bothered when Jose got rid. Made his last few seasons (where he alternated between decent and downright awful) less palatable as well.
The fact Rooney is being brought up would suggest no one has forgotten what he did. Champions League winning, record goal scoring captain and one off season comment (that was kind of true) is one of the more remembered things about him
He did it multiple times to be fair. Unless you think SAF was lying after he retired. Rooney is also just not a very charismatic person so naturally people will be less inclined to forget. He also wanted to go directly to City from United, something Kane isn't doing. Plus United had a history of success whereas everyone knows Kane would need to eventually leave Tottenham to win something. He just fecked it up.
I think ferguson set him up to be sold as he was leaving, which would have been perfect timing and true to form for him. Woodward and Moyes thought they knew better. If Rooney isn't charismatic then what the hell is Kane?
Spurs fans will cheer him every week while he's there and be glad of the goals but there won't be much warmth left imo. Certainly don't see him getting a cheer when he comes back with City or anything close. Media will continue to fawn.
Last edited:
I think the Glazers are a separate issue here. If we were debt-free and fan owned with the same income we have now I still think buying Kane for 130m would be a bad way to spend our money. Buying a player just for the goals he scores, without thinking through how he'd fit into the team, is a bad idea and a good way to undermine team chemistry.
Oh Kane isn't either. I don't think either fanbase will ever entirely forgive the player. As much as I hate to say it, Gerrard had enough to make his fans forget his desire to leave. Pogba probably can too if he ends up staying
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date