Fabio Paratici

  • 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
FightingIllini said:
Well if the right bid never comes in for him, it's not like there are ever circumstances under which Spurs wouldn't happily offer him a bumper new contract. He has that as a fallback.

He is hell bent on Shearer's record, I'm sure of it. He won't go abroad.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with your assessment, but that's why I also have doubts he's sold this summer. If I'm Levy/Paratici, City is the only club I'd sell to. And at a record fee. They're going to spend enough to trump us to a top 4 place no matter what, so giving them Kane doesn't matter.

United and Chelsea are the two clubs we're targeting season in and season out to knock out of the CL places - I wouldn't ever pick the phone up for them.

So, unless City is offering a record fee for him he has no leverage to force a move domestically. So its a matter of how bad does he want to leave Tottenham, then.
 
StripiestPilot said:
I think that's being a bit naive. He clearly wants to move on immediately.

He's always said that if he feels Tottenham are challenging and being ambitious, he is happy to stay. Well we have given up on challenging and the chairman has today spelled out that we have no ambition either. Of course Kane would want to go. What sporting reason does he have to stay? Kane is a professional sportsman not a professional Tottenham fan.
Click to expand...
Hes got a 3 year contract to honor, this idea that he needs to want to grace us with his presence is a bit silly. Does he want to get paid?

We should move him if and when its a situation and fee that suits us, not him. He's got no leverage for at least 12 months, but more realistically 24.
 
Igula said:
I think we will be able to sell him anytime, I am not sure we will get the money we can now next summer or the summer after that.
Click to expand...
What would reduce the fee next summer? If you're City its still buy him in 2022 for a huge sum or wait to sign him for free in 2024. Thats 2 seasons of wear and tear on the magnificent but injury prone forward.

There's really no reason the fee would be less in 12 months.
 
MemphisWill said:
What would reduce the fee next summer? If you're City its still buy him in 2022 for a huge sum or wait to sign him for free in 2024. Thats 2 seasons of wear and tear on the magnificent but injury prone forward.

There's really no reason the fee would be less in 12 months.
Click to expand...

Need.

If Halaand is out there for his release clause, Mbappe leaving, someone else moving then there is not the same need to go for Kane.
 
Igula said:
Need.

If Halaand is out there for his release clause, Mbappe leaving, someone else moving then there is not the same need to go for Kane.
Click to expand...
The fact that anyone can buy Haaland for his release clause next summer only motivates the carbon clubs to buy him this summer for a fee no one else can challenge. I really don't understand this idea that City, PSG, et al are suddenly budget conscious.

I think his more likely that Haaland moves this summer and Kane next than the inverse which everyone seems to accept as fact.
 
Igula said:
Need.

If Halaand is out there for his release clause, Mbappe leaving, someone else moving then there is not the same need to go for Kane.
Click to expand...

I suspect Lukaku will be in the mix too; be that this summer or next.

Maybe that means a lower fee for Kane next summer... Maybe that means he misses the boat on a 'big' move altogether.....

How much is another season worth to us? How does that price-tag off-set against bagging top-4? How does that pricetag off-set against the latter eventuality of him staying beyond that?

All rage aside, if one has the stomach for it; it's a fascinating scenario.
 
MemphisWill said:
The fact that anyone can buy Haaland for his release clause next summer only motivates the carbon clubs to buy him this summer for a fee no one else can challenge. I really don't understand this idea that City, PSG, et al are suddenly budget conscious.

I think his more likely that Haaland moves this summer and Kane next than the inverse which everyone seems to accept as fact.
Click to expand...

I suspect this summer City or the chavs could still get Haaland (or Lukaku) for less than Kane.... If I'm City - unless HG is a concern - Haaland (rather than Harry) is a no brainer.
 
MemphisWill said:
The fact that anyone can buy Haaland for his release clause next summer only motivates the carbon clubs to buy him this summer for a fee no one else can challenge. I really don't understand this idea that City, PSG, et al are suddenly budget conscious.

I think his more likely that Haaland moves this summer and Kane next than the inverse which everyone seems to accept as fact.
Click to expand...

We'll see you could be right.

I would rather sell him now if someone has the 150m and he wants to go. Keeping him until next summer brings in more variables out of our control.

If he is happy to stay then keep him here.
 
Airfixx said:
I suspect this summer City or the chavs could still get Haaland (or Lukaku) for less than Kane.... If I'm City - unless HG is a concern - Haaland (rather than Harry) is a no brainer.
Click to expand...

I don't think HG is ever really a concern for City because they can pay any English tax needed or throw away 20m to get someone to fill that and sit on the bench all year.

I think Kane is preferable because he plays more like Pep would want his striker, as much as he wants a striker at all. But Halaand obviously has the potential to be there for the next 10 years.
 
Igula said:
I don't think HG is ever really a concern for City because they can pay any English tax needed or throw away 20m to get someone to fill that and sit on the bench all year.

I think Kane is preferable because he plays more like Pep would want his striker, as much as he wants a striker at all. But Halaand obviously has the potential to be there for the next 10 years.
Click to expand...

Watch them buy both Halaand and Kane. As stupid as that sounds, they could. There is nothing like watching a state owned club piss away the wealth of their nation on football.
 
Igula said:
I don't think HG is ever really a concern for City because they can pay any English tax needed or throw away 20m to get someone to fill that and sit on the bench all year.

I think Kane is preferable because he plays more like Pep would want his striker, as much as he wants a striker at all. But Halaand obviously has the potential to be there for the next 10 years.
Click to expand...
I think a lesson football is teaching us is that if someone is making a nine-figure bid for any player, you should probably accept it.

You reach a point where the abstract notion of a player's "value" starts to recede next to how much more reliable and stable an asset a pile of cash at that scale is as opposed to a flesh-and-blood footballer.
 
Igula said:
I think we will be able to sell him anytime, I am not sure we will get the money we can now next summer or the summer after that.
Click to expand...
Agree but that shouldn’t be a factor. The difference between 90m vs 140m is immaterial when you can earn three times that (150m extra) in for finishing top 4 vs say 8th
 
The problem is that we needed Kane money to spend. If we keep Kane and not add to our current squad, we are still Europa level. But if we get say 120 mil and add another 30 mil to invest in 3-4 top kids, I am not worried about where we are in the next 2 seasons. We will compete in 3-5 years time. Just like Poch era.
MemphisWill said:
Hes got a 3 year contract to honor, this idea that he needs to want to grace us with his presence is a bit silly. Does he want to get paid?

We should move him if and when its a situation and fee that suits us, not him. He's got no leverage for at least 12 months, but more realistically 24
Click to expand...
 
Modder1440 said:
The problem is that we needed Kane money to spend. If we keep Kane and not add to our current squad, we are still Europa level. But if we get say 120 mil and add another 30 mil to invest in 3-4 top kids, I am not worried about where we are in the next 2 seasons. We will compete in 3-5 years time. Just like Poch era.
Click to expand...
Do we need to sell first? How comes we can find 1BN for a stadium and yet not funding for 150m for players? Do we have a cash flow issue? Can we not borrow for players? Can Lewis provide a cash injection? Why not spend the 150m this season, try and keep Kane for 12 months then sell and perhaps we have a chance of top 4 next season (which covers the cost of the 150m).
 
Zomb said:
Do we need to sell first? How comes we can find 1BN for a stadium and yet not funding for 150m for players? Do we have a cash flow issue? Can we not borrow for players? Can Lewis provide a cash injection? Why not spend the 150m this season, try and keep Kane for 12 months then sell and perhaps we have a chance of top 4 next season (which covers the cost of the 150m).
Click to expand...
Probably meaningless to ask why ENIC refuses to spend. We can discuss about how we shall spend our 200 mil with a new oil owner, or we can discuss how we work on our current situation. I think we both would love a new owner more willing to spend, but it is very unlikely to happen.
 
MemphisWill said:
Hes got a 3 year contract to honor, this idea that he needs to want to grace us with his presence is a bit silly. Does he want to get paid?

We should move him if and when its a situation and fee that suits us, not him. He's got no leverage for at least 12 months, but more realistically 24.
Click to expand...

It's crazy to think that the rumoured contract for Fonseca is 2 years, with 1 year option - and that's would be a fairly long managerial stint......and yet Kane's remaining 3 year contract is talked about like its already over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom