Is Harry Kane better than Rooney?

[ArunCph]

How do we compare ? There is no one single metric

1. Rooney will always be the born talent and Kane is more of training ground player
2. Rooney can score free kicks at will, Kane still has that 1 deflected free kick in 2015
3. Rooney got inducted to a tittle winning team, Kane didnt - so comparing careers is bit pointless. Put Rooney in Spurs side, pretty sure he wont win trophies either
4. Rooney lost his game towards end of his career - whether he is no9 or 10 or midfielder. Kane is 28- he isnt losing it -infact he is adding more things to his game. His assist/key passes record from 2015 to now will tell this story
5. Kane is better no9 better striker. PL & England Record speaks for itself . Arguably Better creator as well
6. Both players play well in big games. Kane attimes goes missing in big games but if you look into it ,in most of those occasions, he is injured or coming back from injury.

 

[Bluelion7]

Time is a funny thing. This question gets asked because people will tend to look at Kane in this period where he’s probably been as good as he will ever get, and then comparing it to the last 3 or 4 years they had Rooney.
We do this to a lot of players.
But if you take the best 5 year stretch of both players it’s Rooney, and I don’t actually think it’s that close.

 

[pacifictheme]

Kane is a better striker.

I would choose peak Rooney every time, he was unreal.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Being in the conversation with Ronaldo and Messi, when they were already the best in the world (ok, maybe not at their legendary best we know now, but still the best) is pretty damn impressive, no? Kane has never even been the best player in the league. I don't see how age or longevity really matters in the discussion either - Rooney was a force, Kane just isn't. You don't need stats or figures to come to this conclusion, you just had to have watched them both week in week out. The only current player who has that Rooney-like inevitability is Haaland. I don't watch Spurs, see Kane and think "yeah, they've got this". I expect him to take his chances, but I expect that from Vardy too.

Rooney wasn’t the third best player in the world from 06-09 when Ronaldo or Messi was at their best though, he wasn’t the best in the PL either, Ronaldo was then you had the likes of Torres Lampard Gerrard Drogba Fabregas who could argue to be on a similar level or better and that’s just in the PL.

What Rooney had was explosion and electrifying nature to his game that made him seem larger than life, at 18 he was probably the best 18 year old the world had seen at that point and he always had a mythos around him that he would explode into being a Bobby Charlton George Best Cruyff type great but that never actually happened in the end, I would have him above Kane personally but it’s close

 

[ArunCph]

Time is a funny thing. This question gets asked because people will tend to look at Kane in this period where he’s probably been as good as he will ever get, and then comparing it to the last 3 or 4 years they had Rooney.
We do this to a lot of players.
But if you take the best 5 year stretch of both players it’s Rooney, and I don’t actually think it’s that close.

Greater than 20 goals in PL seasons:

Rooney - 2 times in 13 full seasons for United
Kane - 5 times in 8 season (other 3 times - 17,18 scored. This season 12*)

Kane has scored most away goals in PL already (102)- by the time he finishes he might be 150 away goals - no one touching that for some time. He is also on track for Shearer record. If measurement is goals, then Kane in any time period is above & beyond Rooney.

Problem with Kane is not Kane himself, its the club (my club) he plays for

 

[footballistic orgasm]

"So you're saying Spurs team would have finished in the top 4 that season?"

I've noticed this tactic with you , you create strawman arguments by claiming people said things that they didn't.

My only claim is that man for man the Spurs side were better than that Liverpool side.



Ok im not arguing with you you have some nerve telling others their claims are fake or false.

You don't even know that Owen wasn't in that side what a joke.

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about and quite frankly I think you come across as belligerent from your other exchanges on this thread.

You claimed Liverpool being 5th was a sign that that side was weak, so my question (which i clearly stated was hypothetical) was if you thought Spurs would have done better given their talent. I personally don't think so because i don't think the Spurs side was better than that Liverpool team, but it's all hypothetical.

You're the one passing off your opinion as facts by saying that the Spurs team with Kane is better than that Liverpool team that won the CL and that he dragged them.

If you're going to go about assuming what people think, assuming that you're right and generally (from looking at your other posts in other threads) being this confrontational, you're going to get replies.

Mine was a polite (try it) comment suggesting you could engage in a different way. If you don't want to, your call... though again, when you repeatedly disagree with posters and claim the Caf is an echo chamber (more than once), I've got no idea why you stay anyway.

People debate about their different opinions that they are entitled to have, not once have i insulted anyone here so get out of your feelings. If you can't stand contradiction, that's your problem.

I only "asked" if redcafe was an echo chamber in a thread (not this one) where posters were actually mad at people not sharing the same opinion as them and were the answer to that specific question I asked was "Yes" by 2 posters.
So move on and get out of your feelings.

I'm not sure many of the 2005 Liverpool team get into, for instance, the 2019 Spurs side.

Spoiler: Line Ups

If I'm combining the sides, it's probably

Lloris
Trippier - Aldeweireld - Hyppia - Vertonghen
Hamann - Alonso
Gerrard - Eriksen - Son
Kane​

Mostly Spurs. That Liverpool side was pretty underwhelming, averaging 60 points over three seasons from 2002/03 to 2004/05. Meanwhile, for the equivalent 3-year period (2016 to 2019), Spurs averaged 79 points. They would improve later in the decade, but that was a poor vintage that relied on being stuffy and Roy-of-the-Rovers interventions from Gerrard.

Gerrard should be in Erickson's position, with Garcia in too. Riise was better than Vertonghen IMO and it's a toss up between Kewell and Son.

So for me, that Spurs team isn't better than the Liverpool team. And Gerrard definitely didn't "drag" that team.

 

[Robertd0803]

Harry Kane is great. No doubting that.
Rooney was better. Simple.

Ask Rooney to play anywhere on the pitch and he would have quite easily and very well. Kane couldnt play as an extra rb against Barca in the Nou Camp for example.

Also Rooneys drive and aggression were something else. Very few if any players since have matched that.

 

[432JuanMata]

Harry Kane is great. No doubting that.
Rooney was better. Simple.

Ask Rooney to play anywhere on the pitch and he would have quite easily and very well. Kane couldnt play as an extra rb against Barca in the Nou Camp for example.

Also Rooneys drive and aggression were something else. Very few if any players since have matched that.

That’s the thing with this comparison both are opposite players so it’s hard to compare.
Kane is obviously the better ST and Rooney is obviously the better player

 

[Abraxas]

Kane is probably the better player, he is a relentless goalscorer, can create. I think it's only the raw aggression and spirit of a younger Rooney before he was blunted by having to be more "disciplined" that is the real edge Rooney has. That and pace when he was younger. Can you imagine what numbers Kane would be producing playing alongside Tevez and Ronaldo?

The problem for Kane is he's going to finish his career achieving the square root of feck all. Not entirely his fault (although he had chances to rectify that which he didn't personally help either when you think back to good Spurs sides). I mean what you win and the stage you perform on does kind of matter. So history probably will remember Rooney better as the more accomplished footballer.

 

[RC89]

Rooney was half a level above Kane

 

[Plassryss]

omg, Kane better than Roo? What are people smoking?

 

[Scroto Baggins]

Not only Rooney tends to pass the ball than score directly in two on one situation with goalkeeper and also being sacrificed to get the best out of Ronaldo. Rooney didn’t spend his career as the main striker like Kane. The only time when he actually played as the main striker were in 09/10 and during his late career. So of course in term of goals quantity Kane is better as he spent his careers as the main striker. Would Rooney continue to score more goals than he has done if he never told Sir Alex that he doesn’t like the main striker role after 09/10 season? I would say yes. Rooney was capable to be world class main striker and he was superior technically which enables him to play in lot of roles and position. Overall, Rooney is just far better than Kane.

You cannot bring 'what ifs' into it, that is a never ending debate. And no amount of talking will convince me Rooney is a better out and out striker than Kane.

What if Kane played for City? What if Spurs were actually a good team? Look at the clowns Kane plays alongside of compared to Rooney, with a team of world class players beside him Rio and Vidic at the back, Scholes in midfield, Giggs out wide, CR7. Kane is pretty much Spurs' De Bruyne and a world class striker rolled into one, playing in a team with a bunch of bang average plodders like Sanchez and Winks. This is the problems with 'what ifs'. They swing both ways and people can speculate but you will never really know. The only thing you can look at is what is in front of you, and Rooney scored 20+ goals twice in his career after CR7 left.

I would say Rooney is the better player, even then as Kane gets older we will see, as Rooney's last 4 years were pretty much non existent, but as an out and out striker, no way.

 

[Bwuk]

Rooney and I don’t think it’s particularly close.

Swap peak Rooney for Kane in the Leicester season, Spurs win the league.

Kanes just not got the same presence on the pitch as Rooney did.

 

[AndersB]

A slight side point here, but man are these two different when it comes to scoring exciting goals. I don't follow the English NT admittedly, but off the top of my head I can't remember any truly exciting Kane goals. Just zillions upon zillions of really solid ones. Compare that to Rooney's City goal, Portsmouth goal, Newcastle goal etc.

Feel free to correct me though

 

[galwayfa]

Brilliant out an out strikers, Rooney role at utd wasn't always out and out striker

 

[Bluelion7]

Greater than 20 goals in PL seasons:

Rooney - 2 times in 13 full seasons for United
Kane - 5 times in 8 season (other 3 times - 17,18 scored. This season 12*)

Kane has scored most away goals in PL already (102)- by the time he finishes he might be 150 away goals - no one touching that for some time. He is also on track for Shearer record. If measurement is goals, then Kane in any time period is above & beyond Rooney.

Problem with Kane is not Kane himself, its the club (my club) he plays for

Well, Kane would also start off zero for an entire month, the club would drop points, get in a a hole, never truly get out, and then he would amaze in October with hat tricks against Norwich or something. Stats are a tricky thing when it comes to telling a story.

 

[footballistic orgasm]

Well, Kane would also start off zero for an entire month, the club would drop points, get in a a hole, never truly get out, and then he would amaze in October with hat tricks against Norwich or something. Stats are a tricky thing when it comes to telling a story.

This would make sense if he only did it against lesser teams, but he actually also performs against the big 6 teams (obviously not always hat tricks, but still).

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

You cannot bring 'what ifs' into it, that is a never ending debate. And no amount of talking will convince me Rooney is a better out and out striker than Kane.

What if Kane played for City? What if Spurs were actually a good team? Look at the clowns Kane plays alongside of compared to Rooney, with a team of world class players beside him Rio and Vidic at the back, Scholes in midfield, Giggs out wide, CR7. Kane is pretty much Spurs' De Bruyne and a world class striker rolled into one, playing in a team with a bunch of bang average plodders like Sanchez and Winks. This is the problems with 'what ifs'. They swing both ways and people can speculate but you will never really know. The only thing you can look at is what is in front of you, and Rooney scored 20+ goals twice in his career after CR7 left.

I would say Rooney is the better player, even then as Kane gets older we will see, as Rooney's last 4 years were pretty much non existent, but as an out and out striker, no way.

The thread and argument is not about who’s better out and out striker though. I’m making a valid point that Rooney was world class when he played as out and out striker (this is not even ‘’if’’ because it’s proven he scored lot of goals in 09/10 season) and also world class when playing other roles. Rooney is just better than Kane.

 

[Red the Bear]

Better striker obviously but not a better footballer for that matter, nowhere near as versatile and complete though he shown to have a very decent passion passing range and footballing brain so maybe he could actually pull of a transition to midfield.

That said i feel he didn't really reach his potential by staying at spurs but that's another story.

On a unrelated note Fergie would have loved him we definitely would have gone for him had they overlapped.

 

[Wing Attack Plan R]

Yes, Harry Kane is totally better-looking than Rooney.

 

[RedDevilQuebecois]

When Rooney played for England at the Euros at age 18, he basically bossed the French team (that had Zidane, Vieira, Thuram, Pires and Henry on board) until he was substituted. That is impressive.

Kane may be a better striker, but he will never boss a game like Rooney did. A player who is always determined to boss the game is always more dangerous than someone whose job is mainly about scoring goals.

 

[The Brown Bull]

Ah Jayzus lads. How is this even a question.
Rooney all day every day.

 

[RedBanker]

Haha. Heck no. Close this embarrassing thread please. For all those who are saying Kane is more prolific go watch the season review of Rooney's first season unburdened from Ronaldo. He tore it up domestically and in Europe till he got that nasty injury against Bayern iirc. I mean ffs man. Watch his debut against Fener, watch his goals, watch his flair, watch his selflessness and always putting the team and the managers instructions ahead of his stats.

 

[RedBanker]

Better striker obviously but not a better footballer for that matter, nowhere near as versatile and complete though he shown to have a very decent passion passing range and footballing brain so maybe he could actually pull of a transition to midfield.

That said i feel he didn't really reach his potential by staying at spurs but that's another story.

On a unrelated note Fergie would have loved him we definitely would have gone for him had they overlapped.

My arse.

 

[Bebestation]

I always felt Rooney was like a CAM for us.

 

[Scroto Baggins]

My arse.

It's not even close, Kane wins that hands down. As a better player, Rooney, but he spent a lot of years doing not much towards the end of his career, absolutely phenomenal player when he was young.

But I mean this is the CAF, where people were actually saying Rooney is better than Benzema. Go post that thread over on the Real Madrid forums and see how many people are in agreement.

Im eagerly awaiting the Rooney was far better than Lewandowski thread.

 

[RedBanker]

It's not even close, Kane wins that hands down. As a better player, Rooney, but he spent a lot of years doing not much towards the end of his career, absolutely phenomenal player when he was young.

But I mean this is the CAF, where people were actually saying Rooney is better than Benzema. Go post that thread over on the Real Madrid forums and see how many people are in agreement.

Im eagerly awaiting the Rooney was far better than Lewandowski thread.

My arse.

 

[Freak]

Not even close.

 

[ArunCph]

Haha. Heck no. Close this embarrassing thread please. For all those who are saying Kane is more prolific go watch the season review of Rooney's first season unburdened from Ronaldo. He tore it up domestically and in Europe till he got that nasty injury against Bayern iirc. I mean ffs man. Watch his debut against Fener, watch his goals, watch his flair, watch his selflessness and always putting the team and the managers instructions ahead of his stats.

So basically you are saying, Rooney was a better player in his early days and then lost it...if so agreed. Rooney & Ronaldo were at similar levels at one point. One player lost his way with booze & women and other looked after his body and made sure he maximised the talent.
As for as Kane, he is only going from strength to strength interms of his game and there is nothing in his record one can find fault from his first full season to now. Only fault of Kane is to get stuck at Spurs - if we go down that argument path, we are comparing United vs Spurs and not Rooney vs Kane. Kane is a model pro who embodies hard work & commitment. Rooney is the opposite of this - yes he did work hard but lets be honest - he wasted his talent - he could have been talked along with Messi & Ronaldo instead of losing his way and retiring at 34.

 

[Camilo]

Rooney wasn’t the third best player in the world from 06-09 when Ronaldo or Messi was at their best though, he wasn’t the best in the PL either, Ronaldo was then you had the likes of Torres Lampard Gerrard Drogba Fabregas who could argue to be on a similar level or better and that’s just in the PL.

What Rooney had was explosion and electrifying nature to his game that made him seem larger than life, at 18 he was probably the best 18 year old the world had seen at that point and he always had a mythos around him that he would explode into being a Bobby Charlton George Best Cruyff type great but that never actually happened in the end, I would have him above Kane personally but it’s close

Good players. They weren't as good as Rooney. And I really don't get the Kane thing - he's just not that good.. He may well be seen in the same light as Shearer when he retires, which is a great level, but Shearer isn't Fat Ronaldo.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Good players. They weren't as good as Rooney. And I really don't get the Kane thing - he's just not that good.. He may well be seen in the same light as Shearer when he retires, which is a great level, but Shearer isn't Fat Ronaldo.

Well they all were to be honest, by any metric you want to go on whether that be UEFA PFA team of the years, b’allon d’or placings and etc, Rooney was never at any point in his actual prime seen as on a different level to those players I named.

And if he ends up being seen close to Shearer then he’ll be close to Rooney also, they’re all a level away from Fat Ronaldo including Rooney, in fact it’s almost incomparable.

 

[RedBanker]

So basically you are saying, Rooney was a better player in his early days and then lost it...if so agreed. Rooney & Ronaldo were at similar levels at one point. One player lost his way with booze & women and other looked after his body and made sure he maximised the talent.
As for as Kane, he is only going from strength to strength interms of his game and there is nothing in his record one can find fault from his first full season to now. Only fault of Kane is to get stuck at Spurs - if we go down that argument path, we are comparing United vs Spurs and not Rooney vs Kane. Kane is a model pro who embodies hard work & commitment. Rooney is the opposite of this - yes he did work hard but lets be honest - he wasted his talent - he could have been talked along with Messi & Ronaldo instead of losing his way and retiring at 34.

Basically I said "my arse". Rest of the tedious argument belongs to you. " Lost his way with booze and women". I nominate this for shitpost of the year.

 

[Gio]

Gerrard should be in Erickson's position, with Garcia in too. Riise was better than Vertonghen IMO and it's a toss up between Kewell and Son.

So for me, that Spurs team isn't better than the Liverpool team. And Gerrard definitely didn't "drag" that team.

To look at it another way, 6 of that Spurs team - Kane (5), Eriksen (2), Vertonghen (2), Ali (2), Rose (2) and Aldeweireld (1) - made the PFA team of the year during their Spurs careers. Meanwhile, only Liverpool 3 players were recognised by their peers that way - Gerrard (8), Hyypia (2) and Carragher (1). Would agree on peak Kewell from his Leeds days, but the Liverpool version had slowed up a lot.

 

[footballistic orgasm]

To look at it another way, 6 of that Spurs team - Kane (5), Eriksen (2), Vertonghen (2), Ali (2), Rose (2) and Aldeweireld (1) - made the PFA team of the year during their Spurs careers. Meanwhile, only Liverpool 3 players were recognised by their peers that way - Gerrard (8), Hyypia (2) and Carragher (1). Would agree on peak Kewell from his Leeds days, but the Liverpool version had slowed up a lot.

Obviously we have to judge the players on their peak form but how they performed most of their careers (all of those Spurs players weren't world beaters before joining spurs and have since faded away also except for Kane), not just one season.
And we can't use the metric you just used IMO because both teams didn't play the same seasons, and also those were times where United and Chelsea were very dominant in the league.

 

[NicolaSacco]

Time is a funny thing. This question gets asked because people will tend to look at Kane in this period where he’s probably been as good as he will ever get, and then comparing it to the last 3 or 4 years they had Rooney.
We do this to a lot of players.
But if you take the best 5 year stretch of both players it’s Rooney, and I don’t actually think it’s that close.

Out of interest what would your 5 year spells for each player be then? I haven’t checked but I’d bet Harry Kane’s most productive 5 years purely in terms of goals would be comfortably better than Rooney’s. Just checked, its 159 for Kane from age 21-26, and 122 for Rooney from ages 22-27. Kane played 227 games in that period, averaging exactly 0.7 goals per game Rooney played only 179 games though, at a slightly lower average of 0.68 goals per game.
Career wise Rooneys average is 0.41, Kane’s so far is comfortably better at 0.59 but there are few caveats in favour of either player:
1) it’ll be difficult for Kane to maintain that average up until he’s 35, the age Rooney retired.
2) Rooney got a free hit of 25 goals for DC United which boosts his numbers

I’m not saying for a second that goals scored is the be all and end all, but it’s worth noting that Kane is ahead on best individual season, best 5 year spell, and best career so far. Arguably playing for a poorer club.

Anyway, that’s my deep dive into the goal scoring part of the equation, there are undoubtedly more parts to said equation which will be less easy to quantify. Is there a stats site anywhere that compares total career assists? Would be interesting to see how yet compare in that sense.

 

[WeePat]

How do we compare ? There is no one single metric

1. Rooney will always be the born talent and Kane is more of training ground player
2. Rooney can score free kicks at will, Kane still has that 1 deflected free kick in 2015
3. Rooney got inducted to a tittle winning team, Kane didnt - so comparing careers is bit pointless. Put Rooney in Spurs side, pretty sure he wont win trophies either
4. Rooney lost his game towards end of his career - whether he is no9 or 10 or midfielder. Kane is 28- he isnt losing it -infact he is adding more things to his game. His assist/key passes record from 2015 to now will tell this story
5. Kane is better no9 better striker. PL & England Record speaks for itself . Arguably Better creator as well
6. Both players play well in big games. Kane attimes goes missing in big games but if you look into it ,in most of those occasions, he is injured or coming back from injury.

I don't think this is arguable at all.

 

[Zen86]

Rooney obviously had the better career, and for me was the naturally superior player with a higher ceiling. At times he was unplayable in his prime when he still had that fire. The decline was steep though. He lost that hunger in the tail-end of his career and there were always question marks over where he should play, what position suited him best. He was somewhat enigmatic as a player which I think hurts his legacy, and his dedication to the game was questionable (although his desire to win certainly wasn't).

Kane is probably the more polished player of the two. He's a clear-cut no.9 with a great record, has that squeaky-clean talismanic reputation for both club and country, and he's adapting and evolving his game over time.

I would still say Rooney is hands-down the bigger talent though. He was just raw ability and a true rarity in English football (and that's ignoring the fact he also scored a ton of goals).

 

[Bennz McCarthey17]

No and hell to the No. Kane will never be better than Wayne Rooney. Its not even a matter of if's and buts. Y'all disrespect Wayne too much. To compare him with a player who lost the Premier League title to Leicester. Wayne Rooney was a juggernaut its a pity his career came to an end too soon. He was in the category just below CR7 and Messi in his peak, with your Robbens etc.

 

[Vernon Philander]

Put Harry Kane under Fergie for 10 years and see how full his trophy cabinet would be as well. Doubt his decline would be so great in his 30s as well

 

[Red the Bear]

My arse.

Sorry for being late i was away for a bit but I think it's fair to say kane is the better striker? He has the numbers backing him up as well. not to degrade Wayne either as I clearly believe him to be the better footballer overall.