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

RedRonaldo said:
Its Kane who wants to leave Spur. Regardless of City or not, they shouldn't price him out after all the years of services he has given to the club.
Click to expand...
He signed a ridiculously long contract, he made his bed, now he can lie in it.
 
Sparky_Hughes said:
He signed a ridiculously long contract, he made his bed, now he can lie in it.
Click to expand...
Would you rather the player trying to run out his contract and leave for free, or extend his contract and hope his club would let him go for reasonable price after giving his all for his club throughout the years?
 
I’m with spurs on this one
 
RedRonaldo said:
Its Kane who wants to leave Spur. Regardless of City or not, they shouldn't price him out after all the years of services he has given to the club.
Click to expand...

Lets be honest here, Kane wants a big fat payday, else he’d hand in a transfer request. Spurs are entitled to their payday as well, considering they would rather keep him.
 
Zen86 said:
Lets be honest here, Kane wants a big fat payday, else he’d hand in a transfer request. Spurs are entitled to their payday as well, considering they would rather keep him.
Click to expand...
If I am being honest, I just think Kane wants to win trophy. There's no hope for him to win one at Spur.
 
RedRonaldo said:
That's why I rated Kane around 20% more expensive. I just don't think he should be cost 50% more. The difference isn't that huge.
Click to expand...

Lukaku had one good season in Italy (which is not anywhere near as good as it was before; see Italian clubs performance in both the CL and Europa) and Kane has pretty much outshone him every year while they both were in the Premier League. Apart from better goalscoring, Kane is much better on the ball, has an eye for a pass and had so many assists to Son last year. He's the real deal. As for Lukaku, the less we talk about his first touch the better. He's a striker than needs the whole team setup a certain way for him to be effective.

As for the record with the national team, Belgium is slightly better than England (at least over the last decade) and Lukaku has been pretty much the spear of an attack with Kevin De Bruyne, Hazard and Mertens feeding him balls, he should be scoring a ton.
 
Zen86 said:
Then he should hand in his transfer request. Oddly enough though, he won’t.
Click to expand...

Or simply City to pay the asking price. No one feel pity to United, when needed to fork out 80m to get Maguire, or 55m to a one season PL fullback.
 
Suedesi said:
Lukaku had one good season in Italy (which is not anywhere near as good as it was before; see Italian clubs performance in both the CL and Europa) and Kane has pretty much outshone him every year while they both were in the Premier League. Apart from better goalscoring, Kane is much better on the ball, has an eye for a pass and had so many assists to Son last year. He's the real deal. As for Lukaku, the less we talk about his first touch the better. He's a striker than needs the whole team setup a certain way for him to be effective.

As for the record with the national team, Belgium is slightly better than England (at least over the last decade) and Lukaku has been pretty much the spear of an attack with Kevin De Bruyne, Hazard and Mertens feeding him balls, he should be scoring a ton.
Click to expand...
I thought they are always among top 3 striker in the league back in PL time, remember at one point they are on race on who get their first 100 goals in PL. Of course I always rate Kane higher. But in recent years, I feel they have been getting at closer level

Club
12-13: Lukaku 17 goals vs Kane 0 goals
13-14: Lukaku 16 goals vs Kane 4 goals
14-15: Lukaku 20 goals vs Kane 31 goals
15-16: Lukaku 25 goals vs Kane 28 goals
16-17: Lukaku 26 goals vs Kane 35 goals
17-18: Lukaku 27 goals vs Kane 41 goals
18-19: Lukaku 15 goals vs Kane 24 goals
19-20: Lukaku 34 goals vs Kane 24 goals
20-21: Lukaku 30 goals vs Kane 31 goals

International
Lukaku 64 goals vs Kane 38 goals
 
Last edited:
RedRonaldo said:
Would you rather the player trying to run out his contract and leave for free, or extend his contract and hope his club would let him go for reasonable price after giving his all for his club throughout the years?
Click to expand...
Id personally hire a competent agent, not my gavin and stacey looking brother, and have some kind of a release clause in, I wouldn't Sign a contract that tied me into a club that hasn't shown any likelihood in being able to match my ambitions the second the pound signs started flashing. He made his bed, he signed the contract when he wanted the extra money, feck him.
 
RedRonaldo said:
Sure Spur could price him out of the market, but I think Kane deserves a move after giving his all for Spur over the years. Reasonable price would be around 120m.
Click to expand...
Why does Kane deserve a move?

Shouldn't have signed such a long contract if he wanted to move.

If he wants it that much, put in a transfer request and lose a bonus or, shut up and concentrate on playing for Spurs under the contract he signed.
 
RedRonaldo said:
Its Kane who wants to leave Spur. Regardless of City or not, they shouldn't price him out after all the years of services he has given to the club.
Click to expand...
Years of service that he's been well paid for.

Spurs can ask for whatever they want, they have to do what's best for the club, not some uppity player who's decided half way through a contrtact he wants to move.
 
RedRonaldo said:
I thought they are always among top 3 striker in the league back in PL time, remember at one point they are on race on who get their first 100 goals in PL. Of course I always rate Kane higher. But in recent years, I feel they have been getting at closer level

Club
12-13: Lukaku 17 goals vs Kane 0 goals
13-14: Lukaku 16 goals vs Kane 4 goals
14-15: Lukaku 20 goals vs Kane 31 goals
15-16: Lukaku 25 goals vs Kane 28 goals
16-17: Lukaku 26 goals vs Kane 35 goals
17-18: Lukaku 27 goals vs Kane 41 goals
18-19: Lukaku 15 goals vs Kane 24 goals
19-20: Lukaku 34 goals vs Kane 24 goals
20-21: Lukaku 30 goals vs Kane 31 goals

International
Lukaku 64 goals vs Kane 38 goals
Click to expand...
So Kane has 8 more goals for a club (25 more if we don’t account for 12/13), but Lukaku has 26 more goals internationally.

Comparable, it needs to be said.
 
romufc said:
I get your points, ofcourse spending £100m on a Striker at both their age is ridiculous for us. However; if you are looking at City or Chelsea where they have winners in their team and is like a missing piece, you probably would spend that money.

Kane to me is a much better player than Lukaku. You also have to take into consideration he plays for Spurs, they hardly have a chance to win things, Kane has always been their go to guy.
Click to expand...

I think Kane is better and there is more he can do. To be frank I haven't seen enough of Lukaku since he left us to believe that he has improved significantly since then.

ThierryHenry14 said:
For Kane vs Lukaku, it really depends on the tactic and the coach. For pep it is Kane for slow build up play and Kane's false 9 style, and Lukaku for Conte/Tuchel's 343. The right horse for the course.
Click to expand...

I get that logic 100%, but part of me wonders if Kane won't slow down City's build-up play even more. He likes to start his runs from deep and arrive in the box relatively late for Spurs, and to get on the ball around the half way line. That's the same as basically all of City's forward players. Everyone talks about Kane like he's a model box striker, but I haven't seen him do that for a while, even for England when that was what he was meant to do.

Do Man City really need a false 9? I always got the sense that for Spurs Kane guaranteed goals at the expense of team fluidity, and whenever he didn't start the team actually seemed more cohesive. I think every Spurs player deferred to Kane in every situation, and there's still a bit of a question about what happens when he isn't indisputably the main man.
 
Alemar said:
So Kane has 8 more goals for a club (25 more if we don’t account for 12/13), but Lukaku has 26 more goals internationally.

Comparable, it needs to be said.
Click to expand...
Question for those who feel Kane and Lukaku are comparable strikers: would United have sold Kane to Inter had he been a United player?
 
GreenFieldsGoldenBarley said:
I think Kane is better and there is more he can do. To be frank I haven't seen enough of Lukaku since he left us to believe that he has improved significantly since then.



I get that logic 100%, but part of me wonders if Kane won't slow down City's build-up play even more. He likes to start his runs from deep and arrive in the box relatively late for Spurs, and to get on the ball around the half way line. That's the same as basically all of City's forward players. Everyone talks about Kane like he's a model box striker, but I haven't seen him do that for a while, even for England when that was what he was meant to do.

Do Man City really need a false 9? I always got the sense that for Spurs Kane guaranteed goals at the expense of team fluidity, and whenever he didn't start the team actually seemed more cohesive. I think every Spurs player deferred to Kane in every situation, and there's still a bit of a question about what happens when he isn't indisputably the main man.
Click to expand...
Kane of the last 2 season is nothing but a box striker. He played like a false 9/playmaker for spurs and england. I am not sure if it is because Erikson left so he needed to do that for the team.
 
RedRonaldo said:
I thought they are always among top 3 striker in the league back in PL time, remember at one point they are on race on who get their first 100 goals in PL. Of course I always rate Kane higher. But in recent years, I feel they have been getting at closer level

Club
12-13: Lukaku 17 goals vs Kane 0 goals
13-14: Lukaku 16 goals vs Kane 4 goals
14-15: Lukaku 20 goals vs Kane 31 goals
15-16: Lukaku 25 goals vs Kane 28 goals
16-17: Lukaku 26 goals vs Kane 35 goals
17-18: Lukaku 27 goals vs Kane 41 goals
18-19: Lukaku 15 goals vs Kane 24 goals
19-20: Lukaku 34 goals vs Kane 24 goals
20-21: Lukaku 30 goals vs Kane 31 goals

International
Lukaku 64 goals vs Kane 38 goals
Click to expand...

Kane is a much better player. Lukaku is a more intelligent person and has managed his career better.
 
Pep's Suit said:
Reports say Levy refusing to even talk to City so have no idea how this transfer could happen. I still think Kane will stay for another season or two and then eventually join United, maybe Chelsea if it's 2023.
Click to expand...

Why would we buy him realistically at 30yrs old and no doubt having more injuries?

I don't think Kane will be at Cavani level.

If Kane doesn't go this window, I feel he would have lost his big payday move. (Nice one Charlie)
 
Chief123 said:
I'm not a big fan of these comparisons. Bad or overpaid signings don't put value on other players. You could do it the other way too.

If the players as good as the ones below are this cheap, then Kane should be based around these prices:
Bruno - £47m
Varane - £40m
Sancho £70m
Click to expand...

Bruno - £47m Was unproven outside of Portugal
Varane - £40m Last season of contract
Sancho £70m Still young, contract was running down I believe was promised a move

Kane with 3 years left on his deal, proven now for seasons to deliver in the PL, England captain.
 
choccy77 said:
Why would we buy him realistically at 30yrs old and no doubt having more injuries?

I don't think Kane will be at Cavani level.

If Kane doesn't go this window, I feel he would have lost his big payday move. (Nice one Charlie)
Click to expand...
that would be on his agent and advisor. That's why Raiola is so popular among players, and has so many high profile clients. Even Ryan Gravenberch, a 19 year old, the so called next "Verratti", hired his service.
 
I am surprised by how many people have strong opinions on this matter, one way or another.

I mean this is just business and where money is involved this is how it goes. There are no good or bad people in this.

The other thing is I would love it if they got Kane, cuz that would likely mean they are out of the race for Haaland. That's all I care. Getting Haaland.
 
mav_9me said:
I am surprised by how many people have strong opinions on this matter, one way or another.

I mean this is just business and where money is involved this is how it goes. There are no good or bad people in this.

The other thing is I would love it if they got Kane, cuz that would likely mean they are out of the race for Haaland. That's all I care. Getting Haaland.
Click to expand...
these people are making millions of dollars. I don't feel bad for kane not getting his move.
 
Would you guys rather Kane went to City this season, or failing that, City landed Haaland next season? IMO not getting Kane this season would mean they give Haaland and Raiola everything they would demand next year.

Which is why I hope they somehow buy Kane now so that the pathway for us next year is less crowded.
 
RedSinha said:
Would you guys rather Kane went to City this season, or failing that, City landed Haaland next season? IMO not getting Kane this season would mean they give Haaland and Raiola everything they would demand next year.

Which is why I hope they somehow buy Kane now so that the pathway for us next year is less crowded.
Click to expand...
based on Modric's transfer history it won't happen this summer. Next summer may be. Levy has no time to find a replacement with only 10 days left.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
based on Modric's transfer history it won't happen this summer. Next summer may be. Levy has no time to find a replacement with only 10 days left.
Click to expand...

Ah that might be the case. Levy's doing what Dortmund did to United last season after we dilly dallied a bit too much. City didn't cough up the 150 mil in time for Spurs to find replacements. And now Levy won't take calls.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
based on Modric's transfer history it won't happen this summer. Next summer may be. Levy has no time to find a replacement with only 10 days left.
Click to expand...
I don't think he would be rushing to find a replacement either way tbh. I'm sure he's already resigned to it being a disappointing season for Spurs, so will probably wait to see how Nuno does before giving him more funds to buy more players in addition to the signings they've already made. They'd do well to avoid the mistakes of the past when they sold Bale and proceeded to waste the money on nothing players.
 
Kaos said:
I don't think he would be rushing to find a replacement either way tbh. I'm sure he's already resigned to it being a disappointing season for Spurs, so will probably wait to see how Nuno does before giving him more funds to buy more players in addition to the signings they've already made. They'd do well to avoid the mistakes of the past when they sold Bale and proceeded to waste the money on nothing players.
Click to expand...
The goal for Spurs and Levy is top 4 to grow spurs as a brand. Selling Kane without replacement and 150m in bank won't help that.
 
I wonder if he's torched his reputation for good with Spurs fans. Us football fans are very fickle creatures and I suppose if he comes back and bangs in a few goals in his first couple of games, then maybe all will be forgotten. But he's really doing his best to destroy his legacy. At the moment he just seems to be in a lose-lose situation.

I think he'll stay because it's too late now. Spurs won't have time to find a replacement or two.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
The goal for Spurs and Levy is top 4 to grow spurs as a brand. Selling Kane without replacement and 150m in bank won't help that.
Click to expand...
That's their long term goal yes, but they're not getting top four this season, irrespective of whether Kane stays or goes. In the event he goes, they're not going to suddenly assemble a squad capable of pushing the current big four, even with £150million to spend. Nor do I think Levy will sanction it this late into the window for a still unproven manager.
 
BusbyMalone said:
I wonder if he's torched his reputation for good with Spurs fans. Us football fans are very fickle creatures and I suppose if he comes back and bangs in a few goals in his first couple of games, then maybe all will be forgotten. But he's really doing his best to destroy his legacy. At the moment he just seems to be in a lose-lose situation.
Click to expand...
Meh, you said it yourself - football fans are a fickle bunch. Liverpool fans have probably forgotten that Gerrard pushed for a Chelsea transfer (remember the infamous shirt burnings), and to an extent Rooney for us too. If he stays and carries on banging 20/30 odd goals a season, including a couple against the likes of Arsenal and Chelsea, they'll be worshipping him again.
 
Kaos said:
Meh, you said it yourself - football fans are a fickle bunch. Liverpool fans have probably forgotten that Gerrard pushed for a Chelsea transfer (remember the infamous shirt burnings), and to an extent Rooney for us too. If he stays and carries on banging 20/30 odd goals a season, including a couple against the likes of Arsenal and Chelsea, they'll be worshipping him again.
Click to expand...

The Gerrard one is an interesting comparison because he was equally revered by the fans, in a way that I don't think Rooney was (could be wrong there). I never really liked Rooney anyway. Appreciated him, and he was excellent for us, but I never took to him.

Gerrard kind of saw the error of his ways though didn't he. He saw what was happening and changed course in a way that Kane hasn't.
 
BusbyMalone said:
I wonder if he's torched his reputation for good with Spurs fans. Us football fans are very fickle creatures and I suppose if he comes back and bangs in a few goals in his first couple of games, then maybe all will be forgotten. But he's really doing his best to destroy his legacy. At the moment he just seems to be in a lose-lose situation.

I think he'll stay because it's too late now. Spurs won't have time to find a replacement or two.
Click to expand...

It could seriously affect his reputation across the country. Before this, as Gary Neville keeps reminding us, he was a model professional, with not one blemish on his record (excluding the whole swearing on his daughter's life thing, which isn't really worth caring about). But now his professionalism has been under relentless public scrutiny for a whole summer, and noone can pretend he's the quiet, serious, head down professional we all thought he was any more. I bet he gets booed at loads of away grounds this year, whether he stays or goes, and it'll be interesting how it affects him. He clearly cares a lot about his public image - hence that stupid statement.
 
BusbyMalone said:
The Gerrard one is an interesting comparison because he was equally revered by the fans, in a way that I don't think Rooney was (could be wrong there). I never really liked Rooney anyway. Appreciated him, and he was excellent for us, but I never took to him.

Gerrard kind of saw the error of his ways though didn't he. He saw what was happening and changed course in a way that Kane hasn't.
Click to expand...
I mean Gerrard went a step further than Kane and actually handed in a transfer request. Ultimately Liverpool rejected all bids, he stayed put and the rest was history. Though from how much Gerrard is revered there you'd never think those events transpired.
 
Kaos said:
I mean Gerrard went a step further than Kane and actually handed in a transfer request. Ultimately Liverpool rejected all bids, he stayed put and the rest was history. Though from how much Gerrard is revered there you'd never think those events transpired.
Click to expand...

Something to do with the CL. All Kane has to do is hope Spurs somehow find their way to another CL final, then actually turn up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.