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

Said it before many times but will say it again even if the fanboys don't want to hear it. As the squad currently stands, we are better off without Kane and using the proceeds to invest in other areas of the squad. His value is only going to continually diminish. For those that have blinders on, I've broken down his game into simple and objective pros/cons for you to understand:

Pros
-One of the best in the world with the ball at his feet in and around the box - not many do it better
-Good passer of the ball for a striker that can operate as an above average #10/false 9 for short periods of time if needed
-Good in the air when he's unmarked - rarely misses open headers
-Decent at holding the ball up and link up play
-When he's fit and plays for the team, his defensive work is second to none for a striker

Cons
-Lacks pace and mobility which in many ways, prevents him from getting service. We often hear complaints from the fanboys saying he doesn't get service. A big part of getting good service requires the attacking player to quickly move into dangerous/open areas. Kane's lack of pace and mobility makes is relatively easy for PL defenders to mark him when he does not have the ball at his feet in and around the box
-Slow/lethargic in counter attacking situations - again, lack of pace is a big issue
-While he's a good passer of the ball, he's probably not mobile/physical enough nor has enough endurance to be converted into a full time #10 and/or #8
-His off the ball movement is often poor. If you watch truly world class strikers they are constantly moving around with quickness and cleverness
-He doesn't have the physicality/strength like he used to - just watch his performances from 4-5 years ago vs now. He regularly gets physically bulled by bigger/stronger Premier League defenders
-Below average dribbler of the ball - has a hard time beating defenders on the dribble even in 1v1 situations. Has virtually no tricks/moves to take on defenders and creating something from nothing.

With all this said, having 1 or 2 prime Eriksen type of of creative midfielders would mitigate any of the issues Kane has in his game as they'll be able to put the ball in Kane's feet, in and around the box. However, at this point in time, we do not have those type of players so Kane's issues as a player is becoming very apparent. To make matters worse, it doesn't ever look like Levy will do what is necessary to bring those caliber players into the team nor would those players want to join a squad playing in the ECL.
I totally agree that we should have sold him and reinvested the funds back into the team with proper signings to strengthen our squad. I see it the same way as you. Kaneā€™s value will only decrease and there are only a couple of big check writers. We didnā€™t take the check from one of them this past window. Weā€™ll likely not get another offer that high.

Too much ego from Levy and emotions from the fans to hang on to Kane so that they can say we did this and that to Kane and City. However, if you start to think about the club in a broader sense, selling Kane is the better business decision and if we reinvested the funds back into the team, we could be looking at players peaking over the next few years. Kane will start to and then continue to decline. Not saying that Kane isnā€™t amazing or isnā€™t able to carry the team, but we need to start looking beyond Kane as the main guy to carry this team season after season.
 
Well yeah. Kane wanted to go and we should have allowed him to go instead of pricing him out of the move. I've never said anything different to that. If we're keeping him then we need to add genuine quality to the team regardless, because him and Son can only take us so far.

Regardless of what "stats" NDomBadBoy likes to pluck from his arse hole all the time, as long as he's actually fit, opponents would much rather play us without Kane in our side than with. Do some idiots genuinely think they would worry more about Moura or Bergwijn?
Just where did we price him out of the move? We never quoted a price.

I'm not even sure a concrete offer was made for Kane. Lots of speculation about what they were "prepared" to pay, but no counter from Spurs.
 
Just where did we price him out of the move? We never quoted a price.

I'm not even sure a concrete offer was made for Kane. Lots of speculation about what they were "prepared" to pay, but no counter from Spurs.

75m (+ 25m add-ons) is about as unanimous as any reports got.

Mind you, The Sun's Charlies Wedding exclusive was proper bantz, eh!
 
As I clearly stated, he's one of the best strikers in the game when he has the ball AT HIS FEET when he's in and around the box and can also pass a bit. But he's not without flaws and those flaws unfortunately hinder us in many ways given the way our squad is constructed.

Now if Kane played for Man City, the world class players around him are going to help gloss over his flaws as a player. But unfortunately for us and Kane, City and all the 'bigger clubs' don't seem to really rate him highly versus other alternatives on the market.

What is this nonsense about other clubs not wanting him that you keep spouting, as if it strengthens your agenda?

Barcelona and Real Madrid couldn't afford him in the first place. Neither could any club in Italy. Bayern have Lewandowski still. PSG play in a farmer league and is more of a retirement home. That leaves the English clubs. Chelsea would never be an option, for obvious reasons, and Liverpool don't have that kind of money. So that leaves the two Manchester clubs, one who wanted to sign him.

"and can also pass a bit". Lmao. What an absolute helmet you really are.
 
What is this nonsense about other clubs not wanting him that you keep spouting, as if it strengthens your agenda?

Barcelona and Real Madrid couldn't afford him in the first place. Neither could any club in Italy. Bayern have Lewandowski still. PSG play in a farmer league and is more of a retirement home. That leaves the English clubs. Chelsea would never be an option, for obvious reasons, and Liverpool don't have that kind of money. So that leaves the two Manchester clubs, one who wanted to sign him.

"and can also pass a bit". Lmao. What an absolute helmet you really are.
LOL team's spent more money on Jill Grealish and Lukaku than they were willing to spend on Kane. You can kick and scream all you want alongside the other fanboys telling the world he's world class and the best striker in the world, but unfortunately, 75 million + add ons is just what Kane is worth to teams.

We all know Mbappe and Haaland, are the main prizes/targets for the big clubs and owners would be willing to sell their wives and children to sign them. In professional team sports, if there's a highly desirable player for sale, there will be offers at or above market value as we saw with Grealish and Lukaku.
 
Last edited:
What is this nonsense about other clubs not wanting him that you keep spouting, as if it strengthens your agenda?

Barcelona and Real Madrid couldn't afford him in the first place. Neither could any club in Italy. Bayern have Lewandowski still. PSG play in a farmer league and is more of a retirement home. That leaves the English clubs. Chelsea would never be an option, for obvious reasons, and Liverpool don't have that kind of money. So that leaves the two Manchester clubs, one who wanted to sign him.

"and can also pass a bit". Lmao. What an absolute helmet you really are.

Didn't you know; similarly when Messi was at his peak; the fact that no-one could afford him meant that no-one wanted him either.... :pocheyes:
 
Itā€™s tough to say because without Kane, our style of play and tactics would have been much different. We would have found a way to play without him and could have finished higher than 7th in my honest opinion. Just look at what we did during the first couple PL games without Kane - two victories.

Iā€™ve posted stats before showing that over the past three years, we have performed better when Kane is not playing, as long as Son is playing. I donā€™t think itā€™s a coincidence at all.
Sure, segments of the season without Kane we seem to cope OK.
I think if you start trying to cope for a whole season without him you are going to see the numbers sway in the other direction.

You just can't argue with that many goals/assists.
 
I usually dismiss clickbate debates at talkSport, but Adrian Durham and Darren Gough made interesting points today on Kane after his poor performance against Palace. In sum:

- His lack of efforts clearly showed that Kane doesnā€™t want to be at Spurs.
- Kane will still score every now and then because Kane is Kane but it wonā€™t change the fact that he doesnā€™t want to play for Spurs.
- Spurs can perform well without Kane because Son is ā€œridiculously importantā€ for Spurs since he can play center, run behind defenders, has pace for counters and is clinical.
- But Spurs canā€™t perform well without Son because as good as Kane is, he has no pace like Son, Vardy or Ronaldo to run through defenders or is not suited for counters in the Mourinho/Nuno style of football.
- Kane and Son are deadly duos and have been brilliant together, but without Son, Kane will need better midfielders to create. He probably doesnā€™t enjoy playing with Spursā€™ players without Son.
- Darren Gough said he golfs with some of the spurs players and they all expected Kane to leave this summer and the proceed was going to be reinvested in buying new players to rebuild because in order for the team to evolve, the team has to stop relying on Harry Kane.

Edit: regarding Darren Goughā€™s statement, it wasnā€™t clear if the last part (about stop relying on Kane and all) was his opinion or some of the playersā€™ he golfs with.
 
Last edited:
In the end we were stuck in a situation where no serious bid seemed to have been offered 75m plus add on was too low and especially with our recruitment efforts we would have been mugged . Of course now we have a demotivated player on our hands in a average team with an average manager it appears .Going to be huge task top 4 hopefully a cup any one at this stage looks the best we could achieve.
 
You have to take the opportunity of a lifetime, in the lifetime of the opportunity.
Kane does not want to be at Spurs.
City one of only 4 teams - United, Chelsea, PSG - that could afford him, wanted him.
Levy missed the opportunity.
 
šŸ‘€ yeah still a lot of crazy in here
Only at Spurs...
No others clubs supporters would demand their club sell one of the best strikers in the world to "progress" then to top it off try and act like they are big brains in the room. LMAO

Confused John Dyer Baizley GIF by Baroness
 
Back
Top Bottom