Which is why he was happy to stay at spurs. Spurs no longer competing = go to a club that is. I.e. maybe us. van Persie did it, and succeeded. Maybe Kane sees something in that.
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
He could sign an improvement on his existing contract if Levy simply won't sell until he has a year left.
Levy will somehow yield to the pressure but Spurs could have a lot riding on Kane being there right to the end. It's difficult to see Spurs competing very soon but Kane will be very important if they can bounce back.
Levy will somehow yield to the pressure but Spurs could have a lot riding on Kane being there right to the end. It's difficult to see Spurs competing very soon but Kane will be very important if they can bounce back.
We aren’t competing though, there is huge difference between a Man Utd-team a few years ago under Sir Alex and the current team under Ole Solskjær. If you want to compete and automatically win things, United is not the place to be honest. City would make a lot of sense and I wouldn’t begrudge him for making the move, it must be very fun to play as a striker under Pep and with de Bruyne feeding the chances. At City, Kane has the potential to score 1:1 over a season, I wonder what his Fantasy-price will be.
See, this is where I and the caf in general seem to have a massive schism in our views. We were literally top of the league this calendar year, and we've got to every semi final you can imagine in the last two years - if you can defend going out in a semi final as anything, that's 'competing'. We beat Paris St Germain and Man City away from home.
Yeah we are FAR from perfect but I said a few years ago if you replaced Lingard with a much better 10 we would become an extremely good side - and we did that with Bruno. If we add another player of his quality in any position on the pitch - but specifically among our front 3 in my opinion - then we will be an even stronger competitor if not a champion level team ourselves.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Basically sums up Sky and the general football media for me. Have been trying to sell Kane for years and they are frothing at the mouth now it might happen.
I don't think it's the same though. I'm not a fan of Gary Neville (neither do I dislike him), but your season is pretty much over after the loss v Villa. You can still get Conference League place but don't think you really want that. Your season is pretty much over and our wasn't close to end when there were Raiola/Pogba comments and there's some comments from Raiola all the time, it's been an issue more or less since he came, while Kane has always been professional and don't think he or his agent ever created any drama at Tottenham.
I still think this interview with Neville shouldn't have been released before season ended, after Leicester would've been more convenient moment but still better now than few weeks or months ago.
Its double standards mate, pure and simple.
In truth, I don't think Kane would be the ideal signing given the shape of the squad right now. I'd go for Sancho, a partner for Maguire (Varane preferably) and Frank Kessie.
Also, I have a sly feeling he's going to fail when he leaves Spurs. That's nothing more than a gut feeling though.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I wouldn't be surprised if City ended up signing him.
There is one glaring weakness in their team: striker. They have no other area in the team that needs signings, so they can spend their entire transfer budget on him.
He has the passing ability that Guardiola likes. He is hardworking, and will drop deep. He will help defend. To be honest, he is perfect for Manchester City.
There is one glaring weakness in their team: striker. They have no other area in the team that needs signings, so they can spend their entire transfer budget on him.
He has the passing ability that Guardiola likes. He is hardworking, and will drop deep. He will help defend. To be honest, he is perfect for Manchester City.
If Ian Cheeseman says it , it must be true
I would presume Spurs want 100m and players, so that the total value would be around 150m, which is the reported figure. Also, 120m figure has been reported, so it must be 120m upfront with no other players involved. City is probably going for the 100m deal. United should come up with 120m and get Kane.
I can see Kane decling very quickly once he hits his early 30's like Rooney did.
He's a fantastic player but I hope we stay away. For the amount of money stated you would want 10 years out of a player. Surprised City are after him over Haaland, however I read somewhere that they don't like doing business with Riola so that might be the reason.
He's a fantastic player but I hope we stay away. For the amount of money stated you would want 10 years out of a player. Surprised City are after him over Haaland, however I read somewhere that they don't like doing business with Riola so that might be the reason.
Yeah Glazers don't pay gigantic transfers for players with no resale value. Can't see him coming here.
Why? He’s nothing like Rooney. He is a lot more like Shearer but hasn’t suffered such bad injuries. Shearer scored 121 of his 260 premier league goals after Kane’s current age. Two other relatively similar (but inferior) players Les Ferdinand and Teddy Sheringham scored 113 and 111. It would be a surprise if we didn’t get 7 years and 120+ league goals out of him in my view.
I get what you're saying, however football in the 90's and early 2000's was completely different to the levels of intensity played today. The players are running much further now with greater physical demands on the body than 20/30 years ago.
Kane has already played a lot of intense matches (like Rooney did at the same age) especially when playing under Pochettino, and I think in the next 3 years, the number of games under his belt will catch up with him. That doesn't mean he'll stop scoring goals. I just think when you factor in his £100-150m transfer fee and his potential £350-£400K a week salary there are better alternatives, like 20 year old Haaland. If we are prepared to deal with his agent (big if!), then Haaland could average 35-40 goals a season for 10 years, and even then he'll still be only 30 years old.
Let's get Sancho, a CDM, and a CB this summer and then focus on replacing Cavani next summer.
Last edited:
Does Kane rely on work rate or pace? if so we should expect him to get worse after 30/31.
No, he isnt particularly quick
Havent seen todays Sunday Times then? Utd seem to be doing alot of ground work for the transfer. They wouldnt be doing that if glazers hadn't approved it.
it’s quite a thorough article.
it obviously makes sense for United to put forward a proposal.
his ankle injuries are definitely a concern, he gets one every year it seems.
Kane is obviously brilliant but for the investment I think we’d be better getting behind cavani this year, signing sancho who will improve our wide issues, then go all out for haaland next summer.
At the very least United should be ensuring that City don’t get a free run at him and have to put pressure on their wage structure.
I ding think Haaland will be available next year, I think there’s a good chance he goes this summer.
Not a chance. It seems blatantly obvious Haaland isn't going anywhere this year.
The collective idea of football fans lamenting over a potential signing because said player won’t be as good at age 31 is so bemusing to me. Firstly, that’s over 3 years away for Kane, which is a long time in football. We’d be signing Harry Kane so he can score a shitload of goals and try and win us some trophies now. We don’t care whether he can still run at his VO2 max in 5 years time.
And more importantly, Harry Kane is a top five striker in world football. Literally, the other four best strikers are very much over the age of 30.
And more importantly, Harry Kane is a top five striker in world football. Literally, the other four best strikers are very much over the age of 30.
they’ve stated he won’t be going anywhere this year, where as sancho can. the smart play is get sancho now and haaland next. let city get kane (but bump up the price) and then have a free run at haaland next year.
greenwood might even evolve enough to not warrant haaland anyway, if Amad flourishes like we hope we might be looking fine.
wouldn’t be so sure. A £100m bid will be tempting to Dortmund, and next summer there will be a dozen clubs who can afford his release clause - so whoever gets to that sort of figure knocks out the competition.
there’s no way anyone can be as definitive as your post is.
potentially we can’t be sure. People at football clubs don’t tell the truth.
we certainly won’t get a free run at him next year, a dozen clubs can afford his release clause - which is why it’s tempting for someone to step in this summer when there will be far less competition - but obviously that comes at a premium.
would love to get Sancho this summer for £80m, then Haaland for his release clause next year. But getting one of Kane/Haaland is a priority - and a bird in the hand…
It doesn't make sense for Dortmund to sell this year though. They would make more money sure, but they are the club who let Lewandowski leave on a free rather than sell for a few million. Similarly he is worth more for them playing this year, getting them to finish in top 4 again.
Yeah for other teams it's better to pay a premium this summer to get a freer run at him...
Exactly.
Kane is guaranteed goals for 5+ years. Not like he is dependent on pace. With his passing/assists he will be useful for a long time.
For us, we have too many areas to fix to spunk 100m+ on one player.
With a name like that he should’ve been Spurs correspondent. He would even have his own room
That’s not his real name, he just used to wear a cheese slice on his head because it was good for his spots.
It is us or City. If Kane goes to City we have ZERO chance of winning the league next year.
World class CFs don’t come around often and we are one of only two viable options. Not only does it massively strengthen our hand, City will struggle without bringing in a CF this summer. They really aren’t that great (they were 8th at Christmas!) and have benefitted massively from weak competition both in England and Europe this season.
If we have any serious considerations for winning a league title any time soon we HAVE to sign Kane.
We can still get a CB and a cheap option at right back. If we can re-sign Pogba, and make do with Greenwood, James, Amad at RW this squad can compete with City.
World class CFs don’t come around often and we are one of only two viable options. Not only does it massively strengthen our hand, City will struggle without bringing in a CF this summer. They really aren’t that great (they were 8th at Christmas!) and have benefitted massively from weak competition both in England and Europe this season.
If we have any serious considerations for winning a league title any time soon we HAVE to sign Kane.
We can still get a CB and a cheap option at right back. If we can re-sign Pogba, and make do with Greenwood, James, Amad at RW this squad can compete with City.
Snipers dream ?
Such a nice lad though
Even if we offered same fee and wages as City he will definitely not come to Utd. He wants to play for an incredible manager in a phenomenal team that is set up to win the big pots now. He doesn't want to be part of an infinite rebuild at this stage of his career.
Who the feck is Ian?
Bobs mate.
What the feck is a Bob?