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

[Lewnited]

2nd best striker in world football for me. The only reason I don't like talking about this story is that it's not feasible, but I'd be more than happy to see us break the bank for him as long as we could still get a central midfielder.

His play style is tailor made for our current squad with our two inside forwards and Bruno, who often finds himself as the furthest man forward. His impact would be Bruno esque and he'd push us as close to the top level as we've been in almost a decade.

 

[Adam-Utd]

Think it's fair to say with Cavani staying we won't be signing kane, at least not this year.

He'll be at City IMO.

 

[matsdf]

In my humble opinion, paying £90M for a 27-year old Harry Kane would be one of the stupidest transfers Man United has ever done. Look at Ed Cavani and what he does on the pitch and then compare him to Kane, who is basically a somewhat improved Lukaku-style attacker. We don't need that and Kane is nothing like Cavani. And while 27 is not old, he is not young, either. I can see Kane declining at 29 or 30, so we may get only 2-3 years out of him for that amount of money? And he is not the ideal style of striker for us? Meh. Hard pass

Why is he not the ideal style for us? Imagine him with Rashford and Greenwood as a front three, doesn't look too bad to me.

 

[Bogga]

With Cavani staying I just can't see us shelling that amount on a forward... Clickbait

 

[yumtum]

Hasn't he got a chronic ankle issue? 28 at the start of the new season and no doubt Levy wouldn't accept less than £100m - makes this transfer impossible.

Hopefully we're not stupid enough to drop a huge wad on this guy.

 

[romufc]

Kane doesn’t suit our team as much as many say he does IMO. He and Bruno will be getting in each other’s way.

Kane’s first instinct is to come towards the ball. I’ve watched him closely this season, including yesterday, and again - his instinct now is to come short and link. As the great footballing cliché goes, this is only likely to increase as he ages, as players drop deeper and deeper with age.

While Kane is a top player, I don’t see him and Bruno being a good fit. In fact, I don’t see this 4231 working best for him at all, which I still don’t believe we should be playing anyway. In a 433 - coming short and linking with the wingers is most ideal. Teams play false 9s for instance in this sort of system. Dropping into the pocket all the time in a team with a dedicated #10 isn’t ideal for me. Cavani, for example, believes in attacking the box when we are attacking. Playing on the shoulder. Getting in behind. Bruno, and others, then try to find him.

The wide players we have has been criticised for years for drifting and floating. Not wanting to attack the penalty box instinctively. Then Cavani came in to ‘teach’ them all the areas in which goals are scored. With Kane, I worry that we will again have everyone wanting to get on the ball and not go beyond it.

Kane knows that he doesn’t have the pace to start sprinting forward whenever we are on the move. Injuries and age to a lesser extent are taking a toll (he was never that quick anyway tbh) and now he is looking for others to do the penetrative running. He’ll get that from Rashford perhaps, that’s about it. Haaland, by comparison, is heading in the other direction as soon as we are within 40 yards of goal. That is what a #10 wants to see ahead of him, not to lift his head and see his 9 running towards him. As I said, this will likely worsen with age for Kane. Soon he will be saying Bruno’s spot is his preferred position altogether I suspect, with quotes like how it fan ‘prolong his career’ starting to float about.

Are you serious? Have you watched the way Bruno plays?

How often does Bruno run behind the striker? Look at the goal V Leicester in the league, the goal against Roma?

He would be perfect link up with Bruno. We also have Rashford who likes to run in behind, so he can find that ball.

What we lack is hold up play, Harry Kane is brilliant at that and can find a pass, so I can see his link up with Bruno being brilliant.

Finally, if you have watched him closely, why do Spurs score so many counter attacking goals and him being one of the top scorers if he can't spring forward?

 

[Floyd]

In my humble opinion, paying £90M for a 27-year old Harry Kane would be one of the stupidest transfers Man United has ever done. Look at Ed Cavani and what he does on the pitch and then compare him to Kane, who is basically a somewhat improved Lukaku-style attacker. We don't need that and Kane is nothing like Cavani. And while 27 is not old, he is not young, either. I can see Kane declining at 29 or 30, so we may get only 2-3 years out of him for that amount of money? And he is not the ideal style of striker for us? Meh. Hard pass

No white text

This has to be a wind-up. Has to.

And £90M would be an absolutely fantastic price for us, and therefore would never happen.

 

[lsd]

His injury record is not as bad as its made, he's only missed 5 games this season. But on 19/20 he missed 16 games and in 18/19 he missed 17. He's been "healthy" actually this season.

So he has missed nearly 40 games in the last three seasons. That's not healthy by any standard

 

[cyberman]

So he has missed nearly 40 games in the last three seasons. That's not healthy by any standard

And he rushes back from injury so it should be longer. Add in the half fit, ineffective games and its a lot higher

 

[Rozay]

Are you serious? Have you watched the way Bruno plays?

How often does Bruno run behind the striker? Look at the goal V Leicester in the league, the goal against Roma?

He would be perfect link up with Bruno. We also have Rashford who likes to run in behind, so he can find that ball.

What we lack is hold up play, Harry Kane is brilliant at that and can find a pass, so I can see his link up with Bruno being brilliant.

Finally, if you have watched him closely, why do Spurs score so many counter attacking goals and him being one of the top scorers if he can't spring forward?

Yes, I am serious. And oddly enough, I have seen Bruno play before.

My take on Bruno’s game is that when he receives the ball, he needs players running away from him, not towards him. Despite goals that he has managed to score by getting into the box, the more common trait of his game is to look to quickly release forwards ahead if him.

And Spurs score many counter attacking goals because Kane releases the runners that are going beyond him. Bruno is the one doing the releasing, he may like to get forward but like Kane, hasn’t got the speed to be the player we are trying to release on the counter. Dortmund also score many counter attacking goals, but Haaland isn’t the one playing the ball over the top or into space - he’s the one the ball is being played in to. Basically, that will not be Harry Kane. And if it is, he will have to hold it up and wait.

Simply put, if Bruno receives the ball in the transitional phase, he would be better served looking up and seeing Haaland running towards the goal than Kane running towards him. Which he will do because he knows he can’t beat anyone in a race. A couple of years and a couple of ankle injuries later, Kane will be playing almost behind Bruno altogether.

Apparently ‘what we lack is hold up play’, which is news to me, as it keeps changing. The most consistent trait we have been said to lack from our centre forwards or forwards altogether is a natural striker’s instinct. The first thought to attack the box. Now people are acting like this conversation has never happened or something. When everyone has been saying all season how ‘Martial doesn’t score that goal because he wouldn’t be in there’, or how our forwards all want to come towards the ball in general. The amount of times I’ve heard ‘Cavani is their best striker. In fact, I’d say he is their only real striker. The others all prefer to drift and float’.

Kane is a brilliant player and one of the best in the world, but I’d take Haaland ahead of him (if given the choice) as I feel he’d compliment us better and score more goals than Kane. He will spend more time occupying the penalty box and will dominate it. He is also rapid so he is perfect for finishing off the counter, not starting the counter, which we don’t need him to do. And that is before you even start to consider the fact that he is 20 and Kane is 27/28.

If we played a 433, I’d say Kane would be best suited. In a team that plays an actual #10, then I think a striker that will get out of his way and focus on being a #9 is what is needed.

 

[Rolaholic]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

• The Glazers are ready to sanction a £90m Manchester United bid for Harry Kane as they desperately attempt to quash fan fury.

 

[OleBoiii]

Ah damn, he said 'prizes' instead of 'trophies'. Better look elsewhere

 

[Damien]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

"The Sun" tells me all I need to know about the reliability of that.

 

[Samid]

"The Sun" tells me all I need to know about the reliability of that.

I didn't even get that far. Whenever it says "Papers:" in the tweet you just know they've picked up all kind of clickbait nonsense from the gutter press.

 

[::sonny::]

Swap with martial

 

[Eckers99]

Yes, I am serious. And oddly enough, I have seen Bruno play before.

My take on Bruno’s game is that when he receives the ball, he needs players running away from him, not towards him. Despite goals that he has managed to score by getting into the box, the more common trait of his game is to look to quickly release forwards ahead if him.

And Spurs score many counter attacking goals because Kane releases the runners that are going beyond him. Bruno is the one doing the releasing, he may like to get forward but like Kane, hasn’t got the speed to be the player we are trying to release on the counter. Dortmund also score many counter attacking goals, but Haaland isn’t the one playing the ball over the top or into space - he’s the one the ball is being played in to. Basically, that will not be Harry Kane. And if it is, he will have to hold it up and wait.

Simply put, if Bruno receives the ball in the transitional phase, he would be better served looking up and seeing Haaland running towards the goal than Kane running towards him. Which he will do because he knows he can’t beat anyone in a race. A couple of years and a couple of ankle injuries later, Kane will be playing almost behind Bruno altogether.

Apparently ‘what we lack is hold up play’, which is news to me, as it keeps changing. The most consistent trait we have been said to lack from our centre forwards or forwards altogether is a natural striker’s instinct. The first thought to attack the box. Now people are acting like this conversation has never happened or something. When everyone has been saying all season how ‘Martial doesn’t score that goal because he wouldn’t be in there’, or how our forwards all want to come towards the ball in general. The amount of times I’ve heard ‘Cavani is their best striker. In fact, I’d say he is their only real striker. The others all prefer to drift and float’.

Kane is a brilliant player and one of the best in the world, but I’d take Haaland ahead of him (if given the choice) as I feel he’d compliment us better and score more goals than Kane. He will spend more time occupying the penalty box and will dominate it. He is also rapid so he is perfect for finishing off the counter, not starting the counter, which we don’t need him to do. And that is before you even start to consider the fact that he is 20 and Kane is 27/28.

If we played a 433, I’d say Kane would be best suited. In a team that plays an actual #10, then I think a striker that will get out of his way and focus on being a #9 is what is needed.

I think one of the benefits of Kane over Haaland is his versatility. Yes, he's very good at dropping deep but I think at least part of that is down to Spurs asking him to do 2 jobs to make up for their lack of a high level number 10. When Alli was at his best, they worked really well together and Bruno likes to occupy the same advanced positions that Alli did under Poch. Plus, Kane is more than capable of limiting that side of his game and 'just' being an upgrade on Cavani.

As good as Cavani and Zlatan have been, there's also been regret that we didn't sign either of them at their peak. That's where we are right now with Kane. This could be the chance to rectify those mistakes and have a World Class striker for the next 5 years.

 

[::sonny::]

Levy wanted 60 million for Danny Rose and 90 million for Dier

He would ask for Kane at least 250 millions

 

[NK86]

In my humble opinion, paying £90M for a 27-year old Harry Kane would be one of the stupidest transfers Man United has ever done. Look at Ed Cavani and what he does on the pitch and then compare him to Kane, who is basically a somewhat improved Lukaku-style attacker. We don't need that and Kane is nothing like Cavani. And while 27 is not old, he is not young, either. I can see Kane declining at 29 or 30, so we may get only 2-3 years out of him for that amount of money? And he is not the ideal style of striker for us? Meh. Hard pass

Kane being a Lukaku style striker! Have you actually ever seen the two play?
Honestly if that's your assessment of Kane, there's no point even discussing this with you.

Kane is an absolute brilliant all-round attacker and if we were to land him, we will definitely be running for the PL next season.

 

[Hughes35]

In my humble opinion, paying £90M for a 27-year old Harry Kane would be one of the stupidest transfers Man United has ever done. Look at Ed Cavani and what he does on the pitch and then compare him to Kane, who is basically a somewhat improved Lukaku-style attacker. We don't need that and Kane is nothing like Cavani. And while 27 is not old, he is not young, either. I can see Kane declining at 29 or 30, so we may get only 2-3 years out of him for that amount of money? And he is not the ideal style of striker for us? Meh. Hard pass

Wow. No offence but I disagree with literally every single word of this.

I can only presume you have barely ever watched Kane / Lukaku play.

 

[Hughes35]

And he rushes back from injury so it should be longer. Add in the half fit, ineffective games and its a lot higher

So he has missed nearly 40 games in the last three seasons. That's not healthy by any standard

It is by Phil Jones standards.

Missing 13 games a season out of 50+ games really isn't bad at all. I would be absolutely delighted if we signed him and he played 40 games a year for us.

 

[Rozay]

I think one of the benefits of Kane over Haaland is his versatility. Yes, he's very good at dropping deep but I think at least part of that is down to Spurs asking him to do 2 jobs to make up for their lack of a high level number 10. When Alli was at his best, they worked really well together and Bruno likes to occupy the same advanced positions that Alli did under Poch. Plus, Kane is more than capable of limiting that side of his game and 'just' being an upgrade on Cavani.

As good as Cavani and Zlatan have been, there's also been regret that we didn't sign either of them at their peak. That's where we are right now with Kane. This could be the chance to rectify those mistakes and have a World Class striker for the next 5 years.

I think I differ on some of the detail personally. Mainly in that he could just as easily switch to a more Cavani-like style and he is playing like this out of instruction.

I think experience tells us that forwards with ability tend to drop deeper over time. This is largely for physical reasons. Kane is still strong, but he isn’t that quick. I’m also projecting here and hypothesising as to how the next few years will go. I see him continuing to drop deep, personally. There’s more space back there. I see Rooney as a good template, to an extent, of how things will go. He

I also suspect that he likes playing as he does now. He is getting loads of assists and everyone is telling him how brilliant he is as a result.

Anyway, if we signed Kane tomorrow, I’d be happy, and I would of course expect him to improve us. But I don’t think the style is as good a fit as Haaland, and I do have concerns about his body declining over the next couple of years (which would lead to him continuing to drop deep). Once the mobility goes, I think his game will decline sharply. But in the shorter term, he’d be great.

He’ll get us goals, especially as he’ll no doubt take Bruno’s penalties off him, which will see Bruno in turn start posting more ‘normal’ figures. Basically, he’s a brilliant player, and will make us better, but Haaland will compliment what we have, to me.

I’ve read a number of times, when Haaland was newer and cooler perhaps, that Kane is more suited to City whereas Haaland suits us better. I’d concur with that view, although it seems that nobody thinks that anymore as Kane links grow!

 

[Giggsy13]

Levy will ask for something ridiculous like £90 to £100 PLUS Mason Greenwood. Absolute non-starter. Kane made his own mess by signing an extension with Spurs. He should consider firing his agent and getting psychiatric help for depression knowing, as he’ll be staying at Spurs for the foreseeable future.

 

[Eckers99]

I think I differ on some of the detail personally. Mainly in that he could just as easily switch to a more Cavani-like style and he is playing like this out of instruction.

I think experience tells us that forwards with ability tend to drop deeper over time. This is largely for physical reasons. Kane is still strong, but he isn’t that quick. I’m also projecting here and hypothesising as to how the next few years will go. I see him continuing to drop deep, personally. There’s more space back there. I see Rooney as a good template, to an extent, of how things will go. He

I also suspect that he likes playing as he does now. He is getting loads of assists and everyone is telling him how brilliant he is as a result.

Anyway, if we signed Kane tomorrow, I’d be happy, and I would of course expect him to improve us. But I don’t think the style is as good a fit as Haaland, and I do have concerns about his body declining over the next couple of years (which would lead to him continuing to drop deep). Once the mobility goes, I think his game will decline sharply. But in the shorter term, he’d be great.

He’ll get us goals, especially as he’ll no doubt take Bruno’s penalties off him, which will see Bruno in turn start posting more ‘normal’ figures. Basically, he’s a brilliant player, and will make us better, but Haaland will compliment what we have, to me.

I’ve read a number of times, when Haaland was newer and cooler perhaps, that Kane is more suited to City whereas Haaland suits us better. I’d concur with that view, although it seems that nobody thinks that anymore as Kane links grow!

Some do but plenty (Zlatan, Cavani, Lewandowski, Aguero etc) don't. The ones who rely on pace might have to adapt their game more but we've seen ourselves how intelligent older strikers can become more efficient in their movements and still score goals. If they have the knack of being in the right place at the right time, which he does, they can stay effective until their mid 30s.

My main concern would be him staying fit.

As for Haaland, he's always seemed more attainable than Kane, hence the constant speculation. Nobody has been given any encouragement regarding Kane - until possibly very recently - whereas Haaland is being publicly hawked around by his agent (another reason to avoid).

The time seems right for Kane to move and he himself seems more open to the idea than ever. That guarantees that he becomes talked about more on the Caf.

 

[Escobar]

Not sure about this. He's a great striker but we have so many weaknesses in our squad that we also need to address. His injury record is a worry too

 

[Rolaholic]

Check the timestamp of that tweet, might be why you can't open the link

 

[Rozay]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I cant open the source link. Is this serious

It may well have been 6 years ago.

 

[Giggsyking]

Check the timestamp of that tweet, might be why you can't open the link

 

[Giggsyking]

deleting it

 

[Dan_F]

Signing Cavani on a two year deal, then spending £100 million on Kane would be the most post-SAF United thing ever.

 

[Woodzy]

I find it bizarre how people complain about his injury record despite him consistently being one of the top 3 strikers in the league for something like the past 5 seasons.

Let’s be honest, he may miss a big chunk of football now and again but he is still indispensable for Spurs and it’s clear that if he can do for us what he does for them then he is worth a punt.

 

[NewGlory]

I'd be really interested to know what your take on a 'Lukaku-style attacker' is because personally I see no similarities between Lukaku and Kane at all. And aside from pace, I would say there is no area in which Kane is not significantly superior to Lukaku, both as a striker and as a footballer generally. Indeed, Kane is probably a superior all-round footballer than Cavani, better at dropping deep and play-making, and at least as capable of being a focal point in an attack. Lukaku's not great at either of these things - or at least wasn't for us.

Now I'm not necessarily advocating Kane's signing, but I don't see how he wouldn't be an upgrade on Cavani, nor how he might be comparable to the version of Lukaku we saw playing for us.

Cavani's clever movements in and around the box, brilliant positioning and hunger for poaching, creating goals out of boring situations is something that is completely foreign to Kane. Kane mostly runs into the box, while Cavani circles the box like a predator preparing to go for a kill. How can you even compare the two?

Cavani is a quintessential creative Latin-American style striker. Harry Kane is highly skilled, very boring British striker that needs to be well-fed by midfield to score predictable goals.

Also Cavani is undoubtedly world class. Harry Kane is cherished in EPL but nobody outside English football rates him as anything special. Good, sure - world class? feck no

 

[Pagh Wraith]

No well-run club with a smart transfer strategy should even consider Kane at this point in my opinion. Even more so in Covid world. That ship has sailed.

 

[Raredaredevil]

He shot himself in his foot by signing that long-term contract. Negotiating with Levy would be a bitch. I reckon if there's any clubs who can afford him now its only PSG, City and maybe us. I can't see him going anywhere. He is too loyal to Spurs and he won't force a transfer out.

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

Cavani's clever movements in and around the box, brilliant positioning and hunger for poaching, creating goals out of boring situations is something that is completely foreign to Kane. Kane mostly runs into the box, while Cavani circles the box like a predator preparing to go for a kill. How can you even compare the two?

Cavani is a quintessential creative Latin-American style striker. Harry Kane is highly skilled, very boring British striker that needs to be well-fed by midfield to score predictable goals.

Also Cavani is undoubtedly world class. Harry Kane is cherished in EPL but nobody outside English football rates him as anything special. Good, sure - world class? feck no

Everyone can have their opinion, that's what makes football so great but this is probably the worst take I have seen on here in some time. Well Fed by midfield? He's been banging in goals with a midfield behind him of Harry Winks and Moussa Sissoko.

 

[Martialfc]

Haaland would be better for us than Kane. I understand people are concerned about Kane’s ability to run behind. It’s not something that I have seen him do often. We need to break the bank for Haaland even if he is a client of Mino

 

[redshaw]

I find it bizarre how people complain about his injury record despite him consistently being one of the top 3 strikers in the league for something like the past 5 seasons.

Let’s be honest, he may miss a big chunk of football now and again but he is still indispensable for Spurs and it’s clear that if he can do for us what he does for them then he is worth a punt.

If we did ever sign Kane the key is to have him fit for the business end of the season. Spurs have been in two finals with him not fit. Would be awful for us to reach a CL final with Kane missing or coming back too early at 60-70% just to play.

 

[Knux]

PSG would be a good move for him. Soon to be 30. Get a fat paycheck, only play when fit, win some trophies in a less competetive league and reunite with Poch. They have the money and are probably looking for a Icardi/Kean replacement.

 

[Apokalips]

I find it bizarre how people complain about his injury record despite him consistently being one of the top 3 strikers in the league for something like the past 5 seasons.

Let’s be honest, he may miss a big chunk of football now and again but he is still indispensable for Spurs and it’s clear that if he can do for us what he does for them then he is worth a punt.

The problem is having an indispensable member of the team unavailable for big games in crunch time leads to huge problems at important times.

 

[MattofManchester]

I find it bizarre how people complain about his injury record despite him consistently being one of the top 3 strikers in the league for something like the past 5 seasons.

Let’s be honest, he may miss a big chunk of football now and again but he is still indispensable for Spurs and it’s clear that if he can do for us what he does for them then he is worth a punt.

Bit weird, given our history of gambling on injury prone players upfront(Van Nistelrooy and Van Persie).

Seemed to have worked out pretty well.

 

[UnitedSofa]

Signing Cavani on a two year deal, then spending £100 million on Kane would be the most post-SAF United thing ever.

Scoring double figures despite being injured and not playing as much as we’d like, a great leader and has experience to share with Greenwood/Rashford & signing a top quality striker (though I do remain cautious of his injury record) - I’d say it’s a shrewd piece of business and nothing to turn your nose up at