Did you watch France vs Spain the other day. France were absolute shite. Benzema scores a blinder and creates 2-3 amazing chances. We never see Kane do that when we are playing shit against a good team. At least it hasnt happened in a looong time.
-
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...
Ex-Spurs Player Harry Kane
- Thread starter Moulman14
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Ultimately, my point is that England as a team would likely get similar results regardless of whether Kane plays or not. For instance, the 5-0 win over Andorra was going to be a blowout regardless of whether Kane was in the line up. That's likely going to be the case with almost all of England's games. I also took a look at England's results in games where Kane wasn't starting and for the most part, England won games they were supposed to win.
Again, I think Kane is a world class flat track bully. He'll score in bunches against inferior teams like Pacos and Mura, Hungary and Andorra particularly if he gets a lot of penalties. That has always been my position. But when he's faced with stiff competition alongside the world's best, he falls short almost every time. On the other hand, take a look at Benzema's goal the other day. Truly world class players are supposed to be the difference maker in big games against tough opposition, not just score in bunches against inferior opposition.
Vardy has played in about 1/3 of the games, and has a worse ratio, even if you remove pens. That tells me Kane is a comfortably better striker at that level. Especially when you consider Kane was getting games as he broke through in England, whereas Vardy pretty much was only put in the team as a striker in his prime years.
And whenever he played, the eye test told me he didn't function well at international level. He went missing a lot in games. Whenever we let him lead the line he didn't claim his opportunities, again he's a great player at league level, but international football is a different beast.
I don't think you read the numbers:
Open Play Goals Per Minute For England
Kane = 1 goal every 173 minute played
Vardy = 1 goal every 189 minute played
Again, it's not much different. Vardy doesn't start many of his games so apps is not a good way to base his goal record off of. He also doesn't take penalties. Adjusting the two variables is the best way to do an apples to apples comparison between the two.
I mostly agree, Kane hasn't done enough in big games. It's a big weakness of his game and I can't see why people try and argue against it. His ratio in these matches is worse than other elite strikers, or even a guy like Vardy if you look at PL only. It's a blot on his copy book. He's been especially disappointing in finals, and it's why I wouldn't have him in that upper echelon of players.
But I do see more of a use for a player who scores against 'inferior' teams than some of you do. A player who can consistently guarantee goals against these sides can be very useful and get you through the season. Kane's goals against mid-table/relegation level sides in the PL get you points throughout the season, and it's far from guaranteed other players would've got those same goals.
At the end of the day, he's a player you need to service. If you can't do that he might as well not be on the pitch and you're better off favouring players who create their own opportunities. That doesn't make him useless, because in a team with highly creative players and wingbacks/wide players who get service in to the box, he can be a very useful asset.
Vardy has only played 20 odd games .. and you're going by minutes per goal despite the fact in many of those minutes he would have been an impact sub. With such a small sample size you'd expect him to have a better ratio of minutes to goals too, but he doesn't. Even with penalties that's a poor ratio when you're a pacey, pressing striker and being used off the bench late against tired legs.
Kane has played far more games, and his minutes per goal will be skewed by the fact he starts nearly all of them. It's actually a really flawed way to look at strikers, and in the past has favoured impact subs like Hernandez, Dzeko etc. Those players wouldn't suddenly score as many per minute if they started every game, their ratio would be adjusted.
Especially when many strikers score their goals late when energy/pace is brought in around them vs tired fullbacks, and central defenders may have lost concentration. There's a reason Kane was overwhelmingly preferred to Vardy by multiple England managers, one offered more than the other at that level.
Wow, Kane fanboys are really the most zealous- That's because he is world-class. His record doesn't lie.
- No, I didn't. I've simply said he's had plenty of poor games against the better sides, regardless of whether it's less than Kane. That's not mocking at all, you simpleton.
- No, I've not. I've simply said that in a better side than ourselves, Kane would have a better record in the bigger games. That's simple logic, if you're not a simpleton.
- That's fine. Doesn't mean that Son doesn't also score the vast majority of his goals against lesser/weaker sides though, which is a point you continue to completely ignore after you have basically said that Harry's goals don't count like a proper weirdo.
- World-class strikers are the type that score 20-30 goals season after season, even in average teams like us, and compete and win Golden Boots in one of the toughest competitions in Europe. So that's Harry Kane.
World-class player. World class Harry Kane.
Ok so the less minutes you play, the more you should score. Ok got it.
Well these days he often drops far too deep too often to make a big impact on certain games, which is something I've said before. I've also always said that Benzema is criminally under-rated, not helped by living somewhat in Ronaldo's shadow for so many years.
Ok so the less minutes you play, the more you should score. Ok got it.
I thought I explained it pretty clearly .. how are you struggling with it?
A low amount of minutes = a small sample size. You're a striker coming on late vs tired legs during a time when goals are often scored. You don't expect your minute to goal ratio to be flawed, at all? Dumb gifs don't provide any kind of genuine rebuttal to the point.
Again, there are a long list of impact sub strikers who weren't very good who had exceptional minute to goal ratios. Ole had one of the best records in that respect around, because he was considered a super sub.
But there's a reason he was a super sub and not a starter.
Bit harsh, considering he was also our top assister and playmaker last season. It wasn't a fluke. His passing (for a striker) is elite level.
Do you expect him to keep up that level of assists this season? He's never managed it before, or even close. Nearly all of those assists came during a relatively small period of time, where Son was vastly exceeding his xG and Jose had a particular tactic which teams hadn't worked out. Teams have countered that now and don't give Kane the space he needs to get off that pass consistently.
He is a very good passer of a football, especially for a striker. But players have learned that if you simply close him down on the ball, he lacks any ability to turn them or escape in to space, so will either fall over or pass it back. It's why I'm not a fan of him playing so deep anymore, despite understanding why he does it.
We don't play to his strengths at all though. And it's too easy to simply focus on cutting him out of the game and knowing that we don't have other creative outlets. The team badly needs a third attacking player of use to play alongside Son/Kane, and a creative, dynamic midfielder to get the ball in to them.
Or failing that, selling Kane and signing a new striker, creative player, and wide attacker.
Ok I don't agree with that logic but anyway lets assume you're right. So... I took a look when Kane's come on as an impact sub for England and here are the numbers
Kane = 2 open play goals in 9 apps as an impact sub
Vardy = 4 open play goals in 13 apps as an impact sub
So Vardy is a better goal scorer for England by your logic right?
You don't agree with that logic? So Javier Hernandez and Ole are in the top 15 of the most deadly strikers to ever exist in Premier League football? They're there for minutes per goal. You don't think that's slightly flawed? Loic Remy and Giroud are up there too.
And Kane isn't a good impact sub. When you're bringing on a striker late in the game you want to stretch defences and tired legs, so a player like Vardy is a better option. He's quick and presses rabidly, so has a similar profile as many players utilized as impact players.
Kane sure looked good as an impact sub against Mura...
Whether he starts or comes off as an impact sub, I guess we can conclude that more often than not, he just generally doesn't look good against a decent side
He replaced a 17 year old against semi-pro's.
Against a competent side if you're going with an impact sub you're better off going with someone who is fast and can get in behind (Vardy) or someone like Giroud if you're going to go route one because trying to play football on the ground isn't working.
He's looked good against many decent sides, but he's failed to make the difference against the very top teams, in the very top occasions. It's a problem. He's too easy to shut down because he lacks any top level physical attributes which are impossible to defend against.
I've said that plenty. He's a player who relies on his teammates to get the ball to him in the right areas, or he is useless. A team either accepts that and builds it round him, or sells him and changes the team entirely. I was pro the latter last summer.
Kane scores most of his goals against semi pros for England anyway which goes to my point about Kane being a world class flat track bully
Most strikers at international level fill their boots against the nobody sides (he would have been gutted to miss out vs Andorra). I seem to remember Rooney getting what felt like 95% of his England goals against fodder.
But yeah, as stated earlier, in the big games for England he's often let us down at tournaments. I think his only tournament goal against a big team was vs Germany, but might be wrong.
Yeah, I think he's more than capable of it. He's had a poor and slow start to the season but it's still early, and it's not like we all know he won't get much better as the season goes on. How many times as he done the same thing before? Only a fool (or people with an agenda) would think he won't be scoring and making goals again in the Premier League before long.
He will score plenty, eventually. But he's only ever managed a single season with a lot of assists, so for me that stands as an outlier rather than the norm. I am of course happy to be proven wrong, and if he gets 10+ assists in the league this season he'll have made me look silly. (its not hard)
If I had to take a stab in the dark I'd guess at about 15 PL goals and 5 assists at the end of the season.