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

[Abraxas]

Completely unprofessional from Kane.

When you sign these new contracts on eye watering amounts I think you have to be prepared to act properly at all times. If you start throwing the toys out there is just no excuse in my eyes.

You can't on the one hand leverage your power as a key player into extortionate wages and then simultaneously expect the club to want to sell you. The reason they gave that contract to Kane was to show his value and protect their own investment in him, both are pretty obviously key reasons that he would be an unlikely sale. You sign that with your eyes wide open, I wouldn't trust any gentleman's agreement in modern football, I'd only trust the bit of paper being signed.

The reality is that if the eventuality Kane wanted to bring about was his future sale, he should have never have signed a contract. That means taking a slight risk on his own form and fitness, accepting lesser wages for a period - eventually Levy would sell, or at least the chance is large. But no he expects to win on all ends and some people think that is correct behaviour.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Again.

Did you choose to ignore what I wrote, where I clearly corrected myself or did you simply not understand it?

OMFG you said...

..... Kane’s an Arsenal fan and spent many years as a youth team player (all be it at junior level) at Arsenal before moving to Spurs

He DIDNT, he spent less than a year there and he didn't move from Arsenal to Spurs either.

 

[Mickeza]

You seem to have ignored his age (which effectively means no resale value) and his increasing propensity to get injured. Both of which should be factored into the fee. That being said, I would love nothing more than Levy playing hardball and stinging City for £180m, just so we can all laugh at the nonsense that is FFP.

No I haven’t ignored them. He’s just turned 28 not 38. And his injury record is overstated. Varane at the same age and a CB just went for 45m - how much do you think he’d have cost with 3 years on his deal? And how much more valuable do you think arguably the best striker in world football is compared to a CB?

 

[CM]

They are paying £100m for Jack Grealish, you think a 25-30 goal a season player (for CIty) is worth just £20M for than Grealish . Id say £150m cash and he can go, I have no idea why United fans are in support of City getting Kane on the cheap.

You ought to have a look at the Grealish thread fella. He's a lock for Balon d'Or next year apparently.

 

[RedCheekz]

I think city really dropped the ball here bidding the same amount for grealish. Doing that put the ball firmly in levy court because how can they value grealish the same when Kane achieved so much more.
Levy also now ain’t no longer the bad guy with Kane going on strike, he’s really played this well! He just now needs get £150+ million for the injured crock and then reinvest in the usual crap as he normally does
I can see this dragging on and hopefully so, also if he does sign he won’t have full pre season fitness and probably be slow start to the season.

 

[OL29]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

*Looks at Gary Neville*

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

You ought to have a look at the Grealish thread fella. He's a lock for Balon d'Or next year apparently.

Agreed, he's a good player no doubt, Balon d'Or maybe a stretch.

 

[Lemansky]

I agree that Kane is worth more than 100 million in the current market, but 180 million for a 28 year old is insane.

I do wonder if it's worth holding onto players in these cases. Yes, you show that you're not to be bullied, but at what cost? The damage to the dressing room and the potential burning of bridges(no superstar will ever fall for Levy's "trap" again) is also costly. And you're only delaying the inevitable. Why not start on the rebuild ASAP?

It’s very poor management by Spurs. They should have used the summer rebuilding the squad. They now have an excellent DOF with superb knowledge and network in the game.

Spurs have made this mistake multiple times in the past tough.They simply hold on players for to long and fail to sell when they really should cash in. I personally like that they stick to their price regarding Kane tough. They have all the right to do so, but they effectively will keep an unhappy player.

 

[devilo]

No I haven’t ignored them. He’s just turned 28 not 38. And his injury record is overstated. Varane at the same age and a CB just went for 45m - how much do you think he’d have cost with 3 years on his deal? And how much more valuable do you think arguably the best striker in world football is compared to a CB?

You clearly did ignore them, as you included neither in your list of compelling reasons for justifying a fee of £180m for Kane. Dreamland.

 

[Blood Mage]

If Kane leaves it's midtable mediocrity for Spurs for the next decade or so. I'd even fancy Arsenal to finish ahead of them.

 

[Compton22]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[ha_rooney]

Unprofessional from Kane. He chose to sign his contract knowing how shrewd Levy is when it comes to negotiations, so he should’ve included a release clause or a reduced length of extension.

Spurs are right to hold out for whatever they deem he is worth. I think City will sign him eventually, cash+players.

 

[Mickeza]

You clearly did ignore them, as you included neither in your list of compelling reasons for justifying a fee of £180m for Kane. Dreamland.

No I just decided they were bollocks. Harry Kane played in 35/38 PL games last year. You’re just parroting the usual nonsense.

 

[The Purley King]

It all depends on what the gentleman's agreement was, which we'll probably never find out.
If Levy has gone back on his word (what a shock that would be) then Kane is entitled to go on strike in my opinion. It would also make Levy a bounder and a cad, certainly not a gentleman

 

[Walters_19_MuFc]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

*Looks at Gary Neville*

Facts!

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Crazy guy.

I don't think it is crazy. Grealish is more likely to have resale value than Kane when it comes to the end of his contract. Kane would be 33 at the end of his and with his persistent ankle problems it wouldn't be a surprise if he was done at the top level at that point. Grealish's numbers were elite across Europe last season when it came to chance creation. Whilst he only has one season to show at that level there's a big chance that he becomes one of Europe's top creative players at City.

 

[Lemansky]

Grealish is 100m and 2 years younger. You either ridiculously overrate Grealish or seriously underestimate how in short supply a player like Kane with his scoring and assist numbers is in world football. He’s worth 150m easily and everyone would have said that would be the fee back in May if you were told Kane was being sold this summer before him and City colluded into getting 100m out there. They’re trying to bully Spurs into accepting a fee way below his value and they can go feck themselves. That would be my response if I was Levy anyway.

It’s a Covid rampaged market. His market price ain’t 150 million as no club in the world gonna pay that. Good for Spurs not being bullied, but that ain’t an negotiating tactic, it’s basically saying the player ain’t for sale.

 

[OleBoiii]

When you sign these new contracts on eye watering amounts I think you have to be prepared to act properly at all times. If you start throwing the toys out there is just no excuse in my eyes.

Maybe it's because I'm more of a "common man", but if they made a gentleman's agreement behind closed doors and Levy dishonors it now, then I don't blame Kane one bit. In that case, the only argument Levy has left is; "a contract is a contract". Just because you have a contract it does not mean that you're ethically in the right.

You could argue that Kane was stupid for making such a deal, but he's not morally in the wrong, imo.

That is assuming that they did make an agreement, though. If Kane just got cold feet after signing the contract then he's a dick. In that scenario it wouldn't be Levy's fault.

 

[balaks]

If Kane leaves it's midtable mediocrity for Spurs for the next decade or so. I'd even fancy Arsenal to finish ahead of them.

I don't think so - we will have a huge amount of cash to spend on refreshing the squad which is badly needed.

 

[Loon]

I wonder what the specifics are? Kane had a verbal agreement with Levy and Levy has not accepted the amount City are prepared to pay? I thought the other day City had shied away from a Kane deal?

 

[JB7]

Traore and El Ghazi play on the left, Buendia and Bailey would be attacking options to replace Grealish’s creativity.

Traore played literally all his football for Villa from the right.

So basically they are replacing Grealish in the same way that we have signed Sancho to replace Rashford then. As in, a different type of player playing in a different position but generally in an attacking area so it must mean the end for Marcus.

 

[Adisa]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

*Looks at Gary Neville*

RedCafe would be up in flames, people foaming in the mouth shouting all sort of expletives.

 

[Deery]

Surely you can see that we did the same with Ronaldo when he wanted to go after winning the Chamions league with us? Doing the same with Pogba now (maybe not unhappy but you know what I mean).

More and more players are running down their contracts because clubs don't want to sell for a cheap price.

Players in their last year (via transfermarkt);
Mbappe
Goretzka
Pedri
Pogba
Kessie
Camavinga
Dybala
Dembele
Ronaldo
Belotti
Stones

Not all, but definitely a good few on there who are very keen to leave but clubs have invested a huge amount of money in don't want to see them just leave. It's give and take. Players and clubs both should know where each other lay.

Look at Sancho last season as another example. On a human level, it does seem strange that you can dictate who and where you go in the space of a contract but players know that to be the case.

It's not a Levy and Spurs thing here, its a widespread trend that's been happening for years. Contracts are signed and from there battle lines are drawn. As a player, I would have thought it madness to sign long contracts to be honest, I don't blame either the club or the player from this point. Interesting to see how it plays out.

Aye and what happened us with Ronaldo we had to let him go it’s their Ronaldo moment, they’ll be alright though will only take them 10 years to get back to where the are now.

 

[balaks]

It all depends on what the gentleman's agreement was, which we'll probably never find out.
If Levy has gone back on his word (what a shock that would be) then Kane is entitled to go on strike in my opinion. It would also make Levy a bounder and a cad, certainly not a gentleman

Levy has agreed to sell him if City meet the clubs valuation - that's the agreement. The ball is in City's court. Who do you think should set a players valuation - the player or a club chairman?

 

[Random Task]

Not really, without a contract he’d walk on a free because he has a contract, Spurs will get a record fee for him.

Yeah, I get that, but the previous point still stands. Going on strike to force a move at the very least devalues the concept of a contract. The club is essentially being held to ransom by a legally contracted player who signed a deal to play for the club for an indeterminate number of years.

I don't know, just seems wrong.

 

[copen1945]

Spurs should hold Kane to the contract. The strike made this into a matter of principle. Other Spurs players would do the same. Even though he has just signed an extension, Son might seek the greener pasture. I also hope United would never be the instigator for such unprofessional behavior.

 

[OleBoiii]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Good point

 

[Chief123]

He's been a loyal player for Spurs. City offered £100mil for him which spurs refused. Which is nuts in a covid environment. We all know how difficult levy can be. If Kane doesnt want to work for spurs anymore then he shouldnt have to. Levy just needs to be reasonable, which is an oxymoron as levy never is.

Kane has to call his bluff, and stuff like not turning up to training is a last resort to show levy he wants out.

The parellels to batistuta leaving fiorentina to join Roma (under capello) to win the scudetto are there.

That’s completely the wrong way to think how it should work. Just because a footballer wants to leave and not play for the club anymore doesn’t mean he should just get his wish.

Based on that view, what is the point of a contract from the clubs perspective? If you are saying he should be allowed to leave because he doesn’t want to play anymore. Then contracts are useless and only benefit the player.

If he Kane didn’t want to have the risk of being in a situation where he was at the mercy of the club, then he shouldn’t have signed a 6 year contract. He was happy to do so to secure his future. Can’t have it both ways.

 

[Mickeza]

It’s a Covid rampaged market. His market price ain’t 150 million as no club in the world gonna pay that. Good for Spurs not being bullied, but that ain’t an negotiating tactic, it’s basically saying the player ain’t for sale.

Grealish is a COVID rampaged market. If city want him they can pay a fee that reflects his value. It isn’t difficult. They don’t get to set the price and make him go on strike.

 

[Random Task]

Levy has agreed to sell him if City meet the clubs valuation - that's the agreement. The ball is in City's court.

How would the Spurs fans react to Kane going on strike?

We have a similar situation with Pogba, who may be leaving on a free at the end of the season.

 

[UnitedSofa]

Did you read the latter part of that & not understand it or did you just choose to ignore it?

Ok, it may have been 1 year and not “many years” - but he was a part of their academy.

OMFG you said...


He DIDNT, he spent less than a year there and he didn't move from Arsenal to Spurs either.

Oh for crying out loud if you want to be specific, get specific.

I corrected myself and in fact if you want to get specific Harry himself has said he spent TWO years there

Poor source as its a report on an Instagram LIVE so can’t get the replay for evidence

“I went to Arsenal academy at about six or seven,” Kane said. “That’s the truth, I was there for two years – they released me, but I won’t go into details why. I went back to Ridgeway Rovers. Tottenham picked me up when I was 1

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/tbrf...arry-kane-discusses-arsenal-academy-exit/?amp

 

[Deery]

Traore played literally all his football for Villa from the right.

So basically they are replacing Grealish in the same way that we have signed Sancho to replace Rashford then. As in, a different type of player playing in a different position but generally in an attacking area so it must mean the end for Marcus.

Goals and assists you’re looking to replace does it matter when Grealish played across the front 3?

Bailey can play left and right I’ve heard and Beundia can play central, that’s if you add JWP as well

 

[TheGame]

Completely unprofessional from Kane.

When you sign these new contracts on eye watering amounts I think you have to be prepared to act properly at all times. If you start throwing the toys out there is just no excuse in my eyes.

You can't on the one hand leverage your power as a key player into extortionate wages and then simultaneously expect the club to want to sell you. The reason they gave that contract to Kane was to show his value and protect their own investment in him, both are pretty obviously key reasons that he would be an unlikely sale. You sign that with your eyes wide open, I wouldn't trust any gentleman's agreement in modern football, I'd only trust the bit of paper being signed.

The reality is that if the eventuality Kane wanted to bring about was his future sale, he should have never have signed a contract. That means taking a slight risk on his own form and fitness, accepting lesser wages for a period - eventually Levy would sell, or at least the chance is large. But no he expects to win on all ends and some people think that is correct behaviour.

Exactly this. If he wants to leave, he should hand in a transfer request and continue fulfilling his contract until sold. He won't because it means he won't get the pay off for the rest of his contract. Gentleman's agreement means nothing. He signed the contract, he should have insisted in specific clauses in it or even a minimum fee release clause. I don't like Levy but for the captain of club and country to behave like this, its disgraceful. If a player behaved like this for United, I guarantee there wouldn't be many supporting him.

 

[RobinLFC]

If Kane doesnt want to work for spurs anymore then he shouldnt have to. Levy just needs to be reasonable, which is an oxymoron as levy never is.

Laughable standpoint. Why still have contracts at all then if players can just decide whenever they want if they wanna continue to play for a club or not?

You say Levy needs to be reasonable, I'd say honouring a contract you signed three years ago is a quite reasonable thing to do.

 

[AjaxCunian]

Rio is spot on, and I wonder wonder why that would be.

 

[F-Red]

Completely unprofessional from Kane.

He's only due at the ground for a covid test today, he's due to start training tomorrow. He's far from an unprofessional player, especially with loyalty to such an average football team like Spurs.

 

[The Boy]

Completely unprofessional from Kane.

When you sign these new contracts on eye watering amounts I think you have to be prepared to act properly at all times. If you start throwing the toys out there is just no excuse in my eyes.

The trouble is clubs often use contracts to protect the value of the player with the intention if selling. There's a good chance he signed it with both him and Levy presuming he would leave at some point during the contract, but he agreed to a longer one so Spurs would get as big a fee as possible for him.

Obviously I don't know what has gone on behind closed doors at Spurs, but I would gamble that it is more likely that Levy, who has a history of being a complete cnut, is being the cnut in this instance than Kane, who has a history of giving his all for Spurs.

 

[roonster09]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Spot on Rio.

 

[roonster09]

One side of the argument will be - He has signed long term contract and he should respect that.

Other side would be - he had gentlemen agreement with Levy.

I don't know why players, especially the top ones don't insist for release clause.

 

[Wilt]

Spurs will have to sell. Kane can easily afford to sit it out.

In his mindset he’s no longer a Spurs player, he’s said his goodbye‘s. There’s no point keeping a player who wants out.