• 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!

Ex-Spurs Player Harry Kane

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Personally I see no Kane issue beyond the subjective discussion about how good he is.

Nobody can question he is quality but how good is that quality?

The only matter of concern for me is our complete over reliance on the bloke and what we do or who we can turn to when he has a poor game or spell?

The emphatic, shameful answer is nobody.

We are a club who effectively have thrown their eggs in a Kane basket.

And yes, we have coped in his absence before and in shortish spells but it is clear as day, somewhat to what Liverpool are finding with the loss of Van Dijk that sometimes one player's performance levels or sheer presence can drive up the overall level for the rest of their team. But within that the team must do its bit. Ours just doesn't for whatever set of reasons we can try and explore and understand..

Kane often elevates us from average to good. For Liverpool and Van Dijk, maybe it was good to very good. It is certainly appearing that way. Look at City and they are currently a team of players playing very well, not reliant on one individual and with huge confidence. It will change but right now they look unstoppable.

Kane really is not the problem but neither can he always be the solution.
 
Last edited:
Kane is a better footballer overall nowadays but give me 2016/17 Kane all day. Back then he scored goals like it was an addiction, now there are unfortunately quite a few matches he goes without bagging one.

Naturally, the team is worse than back then so it's harder with even worse tactics, but I just feel he doesn't have that attacking eye he used to and focus more on helping the team all over the pitch.
 
sammyspurs said:
Can’t paste the link for some reason but good write up here from a year ago, some get it.

Not for the sensitive



Harry Kane has 14 goals in 15 appearances for club and country across all competitions this season. A remarkable return for a player yet to catch the eye in the new campaign. Yet talk of the Tottenham HotspurNo.10’s demise continues to rage on.

The 26-year-old doesn’t look as fearsome as he once did and he’s by no means as prolific. Of those 14 goals he’s scored, six have come from the penalty spot. His return of eight open-play goals from 15 matches isn’t quite as impressive.



There’s a feeling that his reputation means he’s being shoehorned into the starting XI for both Spurs and for England. Having seen how both managed without him during his spell on the sidelines last season, there’s an argument to be made that his inclusion limits both.

The ability is there for all to see. He can be a game-changer and a match-winner on his day. He’s reliable from the penalty spot and that is an invaluable trait to have. But forwards need to be much more than goalscorers these days. Kane is far from a one-trick pony, he’s brilliant in the number 10 space and can act as a playmaker on occasion.



The problem is, however, both Spurs and England have built their attacks around him. While this, in theory at least, gets the best out of the forward, it also means they’re reliant on him and when he has an off day it can derail the entire team.

Kane relies on volume.






His best Premier League season was during the 2017/18 campaign when he netted 30 goals. During that year, the England international averaged 5.32 shots per 90. Due to the number of goals he scores, Kane is often described as clinical when he’s anything but that. He’s not a one shot one goal kind of striker, and he never has been.

Kane’s is getting into dangerous areas on a regular basis. But when the opposition find a way to prevent the ball from getting to him and limit the chances the 26-year-old has, his influence on proceedings can wane.

Last season, injuries meant Kane could only appear in just over 2,400 minutes in the Premier League. His goal return dropped from 30 to 17 and his expected goals average per 90 dropped by 0.20. This drop coincided with the Spurs man taking fewer shots. The 5.32 dropped to 3.77. Still a high average but over the course of a season, he’d be taking close to 60 fewer shots.

So far in the 2019/20 campaign, Kane is averaging just three shots. For context, that is the same number as Aston Villa midfielder John McGinn. In England’s recent defeat to the Czech Republic, Gareth Southgate’s No.9 had four shots but only three in open-play.

Neither Spurs nor the Three Lions are creating as many chances for Kane and his output is suffering because of it. Kane isn’t as dynamic as he once was but he’s still managed to add value to his efforts, as evidenced by his post-shot expected goals numbers.

This stat looks at where the shots lands on target and not just where it was taken from. His expected goals average this term is 0.30, his post-shot expected goals average is 0.47. The 26-year-old is picking out the corners with his efforts like elite strikers tend to do. He’s just not being afforded as many chances so he can’t impact proceedings as he once did.

If teams can’t supply him with the ammunition he needs, he may have to tweak his style and redesign what he brings to the table. This could see his goal involvement decrease but his overall play and the team performance take an upward turn. He may have to sacrifice his individual accolades for team honours.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That’s a well written piece that gets to the nub of the issue. Who wrote it?

My own view is that Harry is sadly a much diminished player now from his peak of 2015-18 as a consequence of an accumulation of injuries, getting rushed back too quickly from those injuries and getting overplayed over the years.

He’s always scored plenty of goal and still is to an extent even as a diminished player in a dog shit team with a dog shit manager. It’s where you get the goals that counts as well though. Harry was never that one chance one goal striker, which is very often the determinative factor in the high stakes matches where chances are invariably at a premium. Harry’s career is littered with missed chances in the high stake games. Think back to 2015/16 and 2016/17, he was terrific, but Leicester and Chelsea in their title winning seasons had Vardy and Costa who took just about every chance that came their way. That’s often the standard that’s needed to get over the line and why in my book he was never quite at that Grade A level.

That’s water under the bridge now. I still want us to hold onto Harry. He’s our talisman. I’m not convinced he operates at a level now or can operate at a level that would interest City. Man U under Solskjaer is not going to give him the opportunity of winning titles and European Cups and won’t be much of an improvement on where he is now. I wouldn’t discount the possibility of him
still been here next season.
 
Juno said:
That’s a well written piece that gets to the nub of the issue. Who wrote it?

My own view is that Harry is sadly a much diminished player now from his peak of 2015-18 as a consequence of an accumulation of injuries, getting rushed back too quickly from those injuries and getting overplayed over the years.

He’s always scored plenty of goal and still is to an extent even as a diminished player in a dog shit team with a dog shit manager. It’s where you get the goals that counts as well though. Harry was never that one chance one goal striker, which is very often the determinative factor in the high stakes matches where chances are invariably at a premium. Harry’s career is littered with missed chances in the high stake games. Think back to 2015/16 and 2016/17, he was terrific, but Leicester and Chelsea in their title winning seasons had Vardy and Costa who took just about every chance that came their way. That’s often the standard that’s needed to get over the line and why in my book he was never quite at that Grade A level.

That’s water under the bridge now. I still want us to hold onto Harry. He’s our talisman. I’m not convinced he operates at a level now or can operate at a level that would interest City. Man U under Solskjaer is not going to give him the opportunity of winning titles and European Cups and won’t be much of an improvement on where he is now. I wouldn’t discount the possibility of him
still been here next season.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
40 goals
12 goals

Apparently it’s all the same
 
The first time I hear Spurs fan underappreciate their best player in that way.
Not good enough for Man City?
Your personal opinion may be acceptable if it comes from Chelsea or Woolwich, but even with their subjectivity, they are not stupid enough to disregard Kane. Pep never disregard Kane.
Everyone miss crucial chance. Spurs being an average club makes some delusional fans demand that Kane has to score 105% of his chance.
Shame.
 
sammyspurs said:
I agree.
Shame you can’t come right out and say in plain English whether you believe Kane has been poor or not.

If you do, then he hasn’t really had an amazing season has he

If you don’t, then KD does, so why not confront him too?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Kane has 21G and 14A in 32 games played.
Couple of poor games won't change that.
If you, or whoever else, cannot see his impact and that he's much bettet player than 3 seasons ago, then fuck it. End of discussion.
 
Marst0n said:
Kane is a better footballer overall nowadays but give me 2016/17 Kane all day. Back then he scored goals like it was an addiction, now there are unfortunately quite a few matches he goes without bagging one.

Naturally, the team is worse than back then so it's harder with even worse tactics, but I just feel he doesn't have that attacking eye he used to and focus more on helping the team all over the pitch.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The only reason you're taking 16/17 Kane back though was because we were a much better team that played much better football.

When you're winning. There's not much to complain about.

He's a much better player now, as youd agree.

So it's more that youd want Spurs 16/17 back as opposed to Kane.
 
Totti said:
The only reason you're taking 16/17 Kane back though was because we were a much better team that played much better football.

When you're winning. There's not much to complain about.

He's a much better player now, as youd agree.

So it's more that youd want Spurs 16/17 back as opposed to Kane.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But he’s a better player in a deeper position which has made him a lesser player as a striker
I don’t want Kane to be Dele Alli thanks

He was fine as he was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top