Harry Kane

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
VoiceOfThePoshSeats said:
So where is Murray in the rankings and how many grand slams has he won since his hip replacement?
Click to expand...
The same number he would've won if 2017 had never happened.

Ignoring the unnecessary pedantry, if Andy was a football player, he wouldn't have been deemed fit to play PL football yet, but instead he's gone out and won two more titles. Very Kane-esque.
 
Kane hasn’t said a word. About anything. Interviews or otherwise. Yet the media are rolling with he wants to go to fucking United? Lol.

It could quite easily be avoided with a mention though. We all think Aubameyang is a cunt, but the fucker has said that he basically doesn’t need trophies to ratify his ability or legacy.
 
SpursUltra said:
Suprised you managed to find your way here if you are trying to “Play the Instagram” and find “The world of facetube”
Click to expand...
How old are you? Forums were a huge part of the golden age of the internet (about '97-'08 depending on who you ask). Social media was not. The golden age ended when social media arrived -- no coincidence. Some people would regard everyone here as a luddite simply for being here.
 
Murphy said:
Kane hasn’t said a word. About anything. Interviews or otherwise. Yet the media are rolling with he wants to go to fucking United? Lol.

It could quite easily be avoided with a mention though. We all think Aubameyang is a cunt, but the fucker has said that he basically doesn’t need trophies to ratify his ability or legacy.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the United thing is laughable. I sympathise with the second part but that's never really been Kane's style. I don't recall him ever responding to media rumours or saying anything absolute about his future that could come back and make him look like a tit down the line. It works for him and I wouldn't want him to change that.
 
1966 said:
How old are you? Forums were a huge part of the golden age of the internet (about '97-'08 depending on who you ask). Social media was not. The golden age ended when social media arrived -- no coincidence. Some people would regard everyone here as a luddite simply for being here.
Click to expand...

Well Harry Kane was 4 years old then. I was in my mid twenties.

Not sure why you are treating him like some throw back to a bygone edge which is your only link to football?
 
1966 said:
Every part of your analysis is cherry-picked to maximise the effect of Son and/or minimise the effect of Kane. It doesn't make sense (except in the way you wanted it to). If Kane is the player under scrutiny, how does it make sense to only look at games where Son was involved? I might be stating the obvious here but Son isn't Kane. There's a sort of inherent assumption that "Son will be playing all the time so it doesn't matter what happens when he isn't". If you want to get rid of Kane because Son is apparently a viable replacement at CF, how are you accounting for Son's absences and the dire effect that would have on the team without Kane (see also: right now)? You're also introducing a false dichotomy between Kane and Son despite the fact that the team is easily at its best in attack when both are acting as a synergistic unit.

In tandem, it all looks like a ploy to keep losses off the record, like how the added constraints erase the losses to Colchester in which Son played as a sub and Bournemouth where Son played half the match before getting sent off (is his recent tendency to get red cards not his own fault now?). You're looking only at the last outcome of cup ties to exclude the fact that both of those FA Cup ties required replays (add an extra two draws to the results total) and that two of the CL matches resulted in losses (add two losses). There's at least two more dubious cases I can think of off the top of my head.

I can't be bothered to go through all of this in depth again but the way you've presented what is a mediocre record without Kane (not "without Kane and then only when Son is present but not when Son's done anything wrong") during that time period is similar to the way a corporation tells its shareholders about a bad year. It's disingenuous. And I'm completely ignoring my own analyses from the recent past that explain how Kane has been shafted by fate over the years because I've said enough already and I'm bored by the basic premises that a lot of people seem to bring to the debate. They can be found in this thread anyway.
Click to expand...

I hear your arguments but doesn't mean I agree. I think there are some fans that are in denial about the possibility that we can win without Kane. We've shown that as long as we have another potent attacker in the line-up, we can still compete and win. This should be a positive for Spurs fans - I'm not sure why you're taking this as a negative/attack on Kane. So long as we have this mentality that Spurs are the "Harry Kane" team, we will continue to struggle and will likely never win any trophies. The time for change and adjustments is obvious and apparent.
 
eugekhan said:
I hear your arguments but doesn't mean I agree. I think there are some fans that are in denial about the possibility that we can win without Kane. We've shown that as long as we have another potent attacker in the line-up, we can still compete and win. This should be a positive for Spurs fans - I'm not sure why you're taking this as a negative/attack on Kane. So long as we have this mentality that Spurs are the "Harry Kane" team, we will continue to struggle and will likely never win any trophies. The time for change and adjustments is obvious and apparent.
Click to expand...

Tbh, I don't think any Spurs fan seriously thinks we are the Harry Kane team. And even if they say so, they don't really mean it. They can look at our run to the CL final last year as evidence.
 
eugekhan said:
I hear your arguments but doesn't mean I agree. I think there are some fans that are in denial about the possibility that we can win without Kane. We've shown that as long as we have another potent attacker in the line-up, we can still compete and win. This should be a positive for Spurs fans - I'm not sure why you're taking this as a negative/attack on Kane. So long as we have this mentality that Spurs are the "Harry Kane" team, we will continue to struggle and will likely never win any trophies. The time for change and adjustments is obvious and apparent.
Click to expand...

Fuck off you boring little shithouse.
 
SpursAllTheWay said:
Tbh, I don't think any Spurs fan seriously thinks we are the Harry Kane team. And even if they say so, they don't really mean it. They can look at our run to the CL final last year as evidence.
Click to expand...
Even as a neutral, I don't believe the Kane team stuff. In this thread, I big up Kane and defend him from anything I feel is undue criticism, but my intention is never to say that Spurs can't win without him. They can and have and will.

I think I share the general sentiment of more than 90% of intelligent fans and observers alike: it's always better for Spurs if Kane is fit and playing, and losing him is always going to hurt to some extent, but Spurs can still win games if the tactics and personnel can cover the absence. Literally the only way to change that situation would be to bring in a direct replacement of equal ability, which would seem nearly impossible for Spurs at the moment (very few clubs have the clout to get a striker of Kane's quality in the transfer market).
 
Brian Fantana said:
Cheer up. Him being back is good news. Not sure how you can spin his return as being negative.
Click to expand...
I watched us getting played off the park against Utd, Wolves, Chelsea, scrape past Brighton and get and scrape a draw against Norwich and lose to Southampton all with Kane playing and half of those with BOTH Son & Kane playing together!

Ordinarily, it would be great to see him play, but nothing that had preceded under Jose indicates that his football would be any better if Kane and/or Son are playing.

What are you drawing on that having him back changes our performances?
 
Guido said:
I watched us getting played off the park against Utd, Wolves, Chelsea, scrape past Brighton and get and scrape a draw against Norwich and lose to Southampton all with Kane playing and half of those with BOTH Son & Kane playing together!

Ordinarily, it would be great to see him play, but nothing that had preceded under Jose indicates that his football would be any better if Kane and/or Son are playing.

What are you drawing on that having him back changes our performances?
Click to expand...

Hope
 
Brian Fantana said:
Hope
Click to expand...
Your hope should be targeted towards our defence, not our attack.

An area of the pitch in which we don’t have any injuries and yet it's our biggest problem.

Mourinho has now managed 25 matches and things aren’t improving defensively. The number of clean sheets in his first 25 matches at each club:
Chelsea – 17
Inter – 10
Real Madrid – 15
Chelsea – 10
Manchester United – 9
Tottenham – 3
When it's the defence that he built his entire career off, the biggest worry has to surely be that one of the most defensive, pragmatic football coaches in World football can't even get his teams to defend anymore.
 
Guido said:
Your hope should be targeted towards our defence, not our attack.

An area of the pitch in which we don’t have any injuries and yet it's our biggest problem.

Mourinho has now managed 25 matches and things aren’t improving defensively. The number of clean sheets in his first 25 matches at each club:
Chelsea – 17
Inter – 10
Real Madrid – 15
Chelsea – 10
Manchester United – 9
Tottenham – 3
When it's the defence that he built his entire career off, the biggest worry has to surely be that one of the most defensive, pragmatic football coaches in World football can't even get his teams to defend anymore.
Click to expand...
How many of those clubs did he join mid season, when they were already playing like dogshit? If the players aren't up to it, and they clearly weren't before Poch was sacked, then you can't pin all of that on Mourinho
 
ArmadilloSackRace said:
How many of those clubs did he join mid season, when they were already playing like dogshit? If the players aren't up to it, and they clearly weren't before Poch was sacked, then you can't pin all of that on Mourinho
Click to expand...
Because he's the manager. It's his job.

If we were defending well right now he will be taking all the plaudits and rightfully so.

Because he's playing a deliberately defensive style of football, something that he's a supposed master at doing and we are still getting shafted it's a massive cause for concern made all the worse by the fact there is no injury crisis being suffered amongst out defenders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom