Ronaldo is apparently staying next season regardless of champions league football. I very much doubt you could fit both in the same side unless Kane played deeper, or we went two up top.
Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player
- Thread starter LawCharltonBest
- Start date
Ronaldo needs to accept being a sub or get shipped out
Rooney was a second striker and there was far more to his game then being a goalscoring machine (which he wasn't). I've watched Kane regularly and I really can't understand the hype. He's a great goal poacher but his movement is not that great, his football is meah and so is his technique. If Kane is worth 100m then how much would a Batistuta, a Shearer, an RVN let alone a Van Basten would cost?
touche
You clearly have not watched him enough
His technique and movement are class. You can't have watched him that regularly.
Apart him lacking a bit of speed and agility he has a complete game.Calling him a goalscoring machine is complete nonsense when he also lead the league in assists last year and there's a regular debate (mainly for England) about whether he needs to be more of a poacher.
Coutinho was a player whos game was often built on beating a player. Kane is not. Kanes style of play is actually very close to Lewas, and the latter ages like fine wine.
If city get haaland I can see us getting Kane… we will want to try and out do them with a marquee signing. Don’t see how Kane would fit into the team though if ronaldo stays.
Don’t think he will want Utd if Spurs get top 4
The idea that people within United are talking about signing a 29-year-old Kane for 100m, even moreso this being a logical response to City getting Haaland, would be terrifying to me if I was Ten Hag. A sure sign that despite whatever influence Rangnick might have exerted, the club still fundamentally doesn't get what it means to become a football-first club again rather than a brand maintenance operation.
Is it that good footballers (who I suspect are well known because they are good footballers) are only of commercial value and not footballing value? This keeps getting repeated in this thread. ‘Would be another commercial signing’. Why, because the cat is out of the bag that Kane is a good striker now? No club would want to sign Harry Kane for footballing reasons or something? He’s hardly a Spice Boy, and is a popular footballer because he’s a top one. That should not be used against the club. Kane didn’t get his name modelling underwear.
The rationale that a club that needs a centre forward is not thinking straight because they are going after the best one is confusing to me.
This ticks all the boxes of a United transfer.
1) Massive fee
2) Unsure of how they fit into the team properly (Because we don’t know what sort of identity we are trying to create as a team going forward)
3) A player who looks like their best years are behind them
4) Injury problems
5) Popular player
1) Massive fee
2) Unsure of how they fit into the team properly (Because we don’t know what sort of identity we are trying to create as a team going forward)
3) A player who looks like their best years are behind them
4) Injury problems
5) Popular player
It makes more sense when you consider the other contextual details. The story may be total bollocks. But if true the story is that the club wants to sign a 29-year-old CF for 100m despite having a limited budget and a ton of needs and part of the rationale is linked to another club signing a different big name CF. That's not thinking straight, or at least thinking more about how to maintain the brand more than thinking about how to best rebuild the team.
Woodward would be all over this.
It should go without saying that United would want to sign Kane because City are signing Haaland is likely nonsense. United would have wanted to sign Kane long before Haaland had any relevance at all.
Regarding the budget, nobody knows what it is, the finances and structure of any deal, how much we will bring in this summer and also the insinuation that even without signing Kane, we would otherwise bring in the 8 players this place seems to think we need is almost certainly wide of the mark anyway. We won’t sign a whole team regardless. And I don’t see how buying the best striker in the PL for a team that needs a striker cannot be thinking about how to rebuild the team.
I’ve said this before, but United have broken the transfer record many times since Fergie. We signed Di Maria for £60m who was one of fecking 5 players that came in that window. We signed Pogba for £90m who was one of 4. We bought Maguire for £80m and still spent big on AWB and a reasonable fee on James. There is little to indicate that spending 100m on a player means we cannot or will not strengthen other areas, especially with all the quality players out of contract this summer. I suspect we will buy no more than 4 anyway, and I believe even if we bought Kane, we would still add another 3. All of those would be players we feel are good enough to play for us otherwise we wouldn’t buy them.
Personally, I don’t think Kane is the best fit for our team. Haaland is the striker we need, and suits the players that we have. But I’m also not going to act like some sort of interest in Harry fecking Kane defies rationale or logic.
Depends how much money we throw at him. We’re still bigger then spurs even without top 4 to be honest.
People don't know what respect is nowadays anymore. You can of course discuss with the player about a separation, but you don't "ship out" a player like CR7.
You're taking exception to semantics, whether you discuss separation or not, you are still shipping the player out at the end of the day.
Any player that is surplus to requirements should be moved on, especially one on his wages.
Barca kept Messi too long, we know what happened there
Get him on a boat and ship him out. Don’t care who his name is.
Too old, but he wants to leave Spurs in order to actually win something in his career before It's too late, so for all of us saying we don't want him, he would never come here in the first place.
Have said it before and will say it again I would be buzzing with him IF it was our only issue in the first XI but it's definitely not
He’ll be 29 by the time next season starts, already seems to be on the decline, massive injury concerns and the price tag would be eye-watering. He bottled it when he last renewed his contract.
No one can question his quality.. but that ship has sailed! Hopefully
No one can question his quality.. but that ship has sailed! Hopefully
For those asking us to avoid Kane, who do you see then as a viable alternative? Leave the Mbappes and Hallands out please as they are quite frankly unattainable for a club like ours as things stand
I'd absolutely love if we signed this guy, Brendan Rodgers would make him into a beast for us next season. I can see it now.
Ronaldo Kane
Bale McFred Lingard
Shaw Maguire Varane AWB
Henderson
It would be a masterpiece. Rashford as impact sub. The only shame is that that team may not grace a CL until the year after, but we'd surely win it fairly easily.
Ronaldo Kane
Bale McFred Lingard
Shaw Maguire Varane AWB
Henderson
It would be a masterpiece. Rashford as impact sub. The only shame is that that team may not grace a CL until the year after, but we'd surely win it fairly easily.
We won't hence it doesn't make sense
Only we can pay a sub that much
If United has the money needed to get Kane then the wisest would be to buy 3 cheaper players. The squad is lacking quality in several positions. It doesn’t matter how good your striker is if your team has no decent defensive midfielder or Full backs.
We don't need Kane. This club will never learn
I don’t give a shit about the money, it’s not mine.
What I do care about is buying one player in the form of Kane and not being able to fix the midfield because we paid silly money for him, and then getting dragged over a barrel for every other player we try to sign.
Along with that, we’ve seen that these big money transfers just upset the squad balance when people realise he’s on more than others and playing like shit.
Sanchez saw half the squad get bumper new contracts they didn’t deserve and now we’re stuck with them.
How do you have Ronaldo and Kane in the same club, its only possible if you intend to play a two striker system. That is 442 diamond/flat 442 or 352 so how do you fit other major signings like Sancho and Bruno together into this set ups, not really doable.
I doubt we'll be going for Kane, most likely we'll go for a younger striker we can rotate in an out, and that is if Martial leaves, else we could go into next season with CR7 and Martial as CF and purchase elsewhere. I wouldn't mind not buying a center forward if we address 6, 8 and right wing.
I doubt we'll be going for Kane, most likely we'll go for a younger striker we can rotate in an out, and that is if Martial leaves, else we could go into next season with CR7 and Martial as CF and purchase elsewhere. I wouldn't mind not buying a center forward if we address 6, 8 and right wing.
that’s not true, his movement is absolutely world class as is his technique. His passing is sublime.
If United can't get past the obvious signings on ridiculous fees (Rice, Kane, AWB, Maguire etc) then we might as well sack the entire football side of the club and let Arnold play real life football manager. What's the point of having a DOF, a technical director and scouts if their only solution to the problem is spending ridiculous money on the likes of Kane and Maguire?
29 isn’t old. You’re all mental in thinking so, especially since he’s still 28!
Harry Kane will be 29 by the time he'll play for United.
I mean if you think Rooney had way more than being a goal scoring machine and Kane doesn't, I am not sure which games of Kane you are watching. He has 6 assists this season, 17 last season. His technique is meh? Wow.
Wayne Rooney had a total of 103 assists in the EPL as opposed to Harry Kane's 39 assists. You can figure out the difference.
Yeah, but barely. Freshly turned 29 isn’t fecking old, we could have him for 4 years and still be 32 in his final season.
Not everyone has to be 18 and we can pretend it will be 12 years of world class excellence. Harry is nothing like Ronaldo or Cavani
I am not saying Rooney is over rated.
You're the one calling the most over rated English player when his goal scoring record speaks for itself for a team that doesn't even challenge for trophies.
I am defending the argument that Rooney had more to his game then Kane does. As said, I don't rate Harry Kane, at least vis a vis his price tag. That's my personal opinion. I didn't rate Maguire and said so even though most of the posters here saw him like the second coming of the Christ back then. Don't take me wrong, if he signs then I wish to end up looking silly. My ego is worth nothing compared to what is good for the club.
Fair enough, that my bad, I thought you were generally saying he is over rated. Obviously £100m or more for a 29 year old is a bit of a waste.