Harry Kane MBE | Performances | Jan 2020: Torn hamstring, won't return to training until April

lysglimt

Full Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
9,465
I just can't see Spurs having a realistic chance of reaching top-4 without Kane. The guy has scored more than 1/3 of their League goals in the last 4.5 seasons.

But his stats at Spurs over the last 18 months are interesting. In 15/16 through17/18 - he basically scored ever 1.2 game or so.

During his last 18 months - those stats have dropped to one goal every 1.8 game or so. The question of course being - have Spurs suffered because of him not performing as well, or has Kane suffered because Spurs haven't performed as well.

And he turns 27 this summer - I just can't see Kane staying more than 1 more season unless Spurs improves a lot.
 

InLevyITrust

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2017
Messages
8,288
Location
Northern Ireland
Supports
Tottenham
I just can't see Spurs having a realistic chance of reaching top-4 without Kane. The guy has scored more than 1/3 of their League goals in the last 4.5 seasons.

But his stats at Spurs over the last 18 months are interesting. In 15/16 through17/18 - he basically scored ever 1.2 game or so.

During his last 18 months - those stats have dropped to one goal every 1.8 game or so. The question of course being - have Spurs suffered because of him not performing as well, or has Kane suffered because Spurs haven't performed as well.

And he turns 27 this summer - I just can't see Kane staying more than 1 more season unless Spurs improves a lot.
You are basing his all round performance on goals alone, his down turn on goals has coincided with the Eriksen mess and the shite performance of the team in the last 12 months. He has had to drop deeper to do the job Eriksen was doing. Whats his goal return for England like in the last 12 months?
 

DWelbz19

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
19,772
Vardy is top, but Kane really does perform for England. May even be fair to say he's a better player for England than he is for Spurs these days.

Still... I think a front three of Sancho - Rashford - Sterling has a bit more flexibility and fluidity to it than having Kane as the no.9 does. Whether that means it'll be better? Not sure.
 

saivet

Full Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
17,312
England dont have him. He's retired from international duty.
Vardy said he'd consider coming back if needed. I think if Kane is out of the Euros and Southgate wants him to lead the line, he'll come out of retirement.

Don't see him coming back if Southgate is planning on playing Abraham or Rashford as the no.9 though.
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
15,575
Location
Scotland
Supports
Everton
England dont have him. He's retired from international duty.
If you start Vardy in every game at the Euros he'd definitely come out of retirement and I reckon we should. Him with Rashford/Sancho/Sterling on the wings and Maddison or Grealish behind would be top.
 

Kostur

海尔的老板
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
28,423
Location
Poland, Kraków
If you start Vardy in every game at the Euros he'd definitely come out of retirement and I reckon we should. Him with Rashford/Sancho/Sterling on the wings and Maddison or Grealish behind would be top.
Okay but who'll score penalties for England then?

Also bloody hell, you just made me realise Grealish is actually English. Thought he was Irish.
 

Rhyme Animal

Modmins said "freeze" and I got numb
Joined
Sep 3, 2015
Messages
5,110
Location
Nonchalantly scoring the winner...
If you start Vardy in every game at the Euros he'd definitely come out of retirement and I reckon we should. Him with Rashford/Sancho/Sterling on the wings and Maddison or Grealish behind would be top.
Completely agree, on all counts.

And I'd go further and say that, in my opinion, a fit Vardy is a better, more tactically flexible striker than a fit Kane.
 

Maluco

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
141
I think Spurs really need to be careful with Kane. There is probably a push from the player to keep playing every game because he just loves scoring goals, but it is all going to catch up with him.

He is being rushed back from injuries and overplayed (we can twist stats, but he rarely gets game time off), and he isn’t the most athletic player. He is a fantastic finisher and has amazing vision and link up play, but he doesn’t strike me as naturally athletic. Although appearances can be deceiving.

We have seen it before though, even with great hope English strikers. Owen finished in his mid twenties, Rooney not really making it until thirty. Yes, Kane started later, but he also has problems with his ankles and is now developing muscle injuries on top of that. It is his body saying he needs a break.

Although pace isn’t a massive side of Harry’s game, I can see his body starting to break down if he isn’t protected from himself. Tottenham have gold dust in Kane and need to protect what they have in him.

They would be best served using yet another spell on the sidelines to finally get an able deputy, who they can feel will contribute properly, so they can avoid having a broken down Kane at 30.
 

balaks

Full Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
8,103
Location
Northern Ireland
Supports
Tottenham Hotspur
Completely agree, on all counts.

And I'd go further and say that, in my opinion, a fit Vardy is a better, more tactically flexible striker than a fit Kane.
All Vardy can do that Kane can't is have the pace to run after balls over the top of defenders and get in behind. What he can't offer which Kane can is hold-up play and his passing ability when setting up attacks. Vardy is much more limited as a footballer than Kane is and if anything is only really good if you play one tactic (getting him to run onto balls with his pace) rather than Kane who can do way more and be effective in more tactical moves because his overall standard of play is that much better. Some rather odd views in this thread.
 

Dancfc

Full Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
1,799
Supports
Chelsea
He is by far the best striker England have, it's not even close.
Match fit no one's denying that, but there's a very big chance Kane will be short of sharpness come the summer.

I can't recall a single time rushing Kane back has worked well, I remember the game you finally broke your Stamford Bridge hoodoo he was coming back from an injury and I was actually disappointed he wasn't immediately thrown back in.
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
15,575
Location
Scotland
Supports
Everton
All Vardy can do that Kane can't is have the pace to run after balls over the top of defenders and get in behind. What he can't offer which Kane can is hold-up play and his passing ability when setting up attacks. Vardy is much more limited as a footballer than Kane is and if anything is only really good if you play one tactic (getting him to run onto balls with his pace) rather than Kane who can do way more and be effective in more tactical moves because his overall standard of play is that much better. Some rather odd views in this thread.
I agree that Kane is a better striker overall than Vardy and a fully fit Kane I would rather have than a fully fit Vardy but it isn't as big of a stretch as you're insinuating. Kane has definitely regressed a bit (probably due to the niggling injuries and decline of Eriksen as you mention) which means he has had to adjust a little bit in playing style but he definitely hasn't been as good as he's been prior to the World Cup really. Since then he's sort of levelled off. Vardy is an outstanding player if you play to his strengths as you allude to and there isn't really a striker in football that can be as lethal as him in that regard. If Kane is going into the Euros on a level of 75% fitness and Vardy isn't injured then it makes complete sense to take Vardy. The England set-up with pace in the attacking trio and hopefully a creative 10 or 8 behind (Southgate will see how much we need a creative force like Maddison/Grealish I reckon) suits Vardy more than Kane.
 

balaks

Full Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
8,103
Location
Northern Ireland
Supports
Tottenham Hotspur
I agree that Kane is a better striker overall than Vardy and a fully fit Kane I would rather have than a fully fit Vardy but it isn't as big of a stretch as you're insinuating. Kane has definitely regressed a bit (probably due to the niggling injuries and decline of Eriksen as you mention) which means he has had to adjust a little bit in playing style but he definitely hasn't been as good as he's been prior to the World Cup really. Since then he's sort of levelled off. Vardy is an outstanding player if you play to his strengths as you allude to and there isn't really a striker in football that can be as lethal as him in that regard. If Kane is going into the Euros on a level of 75% fitness and Vardy isn't injured then it makes complete sense to take Vardy. The England set-up with pace in the attacking trio and hopefully a creative 10 or 8 behind (Southgate will see how much we need a creative force like Maddison/Grealish I reckon) suits Vardy more than Kane.
Don't get me wrong - if Kane isn't fit enough then he shouldn't play and yes Vardy is a great option. Some folk appeared to be suggesting that even if Kane was fit there were better options.
 

Freeney

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 14, 2013
Messages
97
Not sure if missing Kane would be all that bad for England. He gets way to selfish in tournaments and looks slow and tired.