• 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!

Transfers Summer Transfer Thread 2023! - Closed (Maybe)

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Rate this window out of 10

  • 1

  • 2

  • 3

  • 4

  • 5

  • 6

  • 7

  • 8

  • 9

  • 10


Results are only viewable after voting.
So he wants to play for the club whilst it suits him.

No; whilst he's under contract.

We make him the main man and then he wants to play for someone else.

He's already the main man...... You make it sound like we'd be 'promoting' him..... So long as he gives 100% then there'd be nothing untoward going on.

What message does that send to the rest of the squad?

There's untold angles at play here.....

- We could have refused the money and we'd still be in this final year/leave for free predicament.
- BM could have bailed out and we'd still be in this final year/leave for free predicament.

.........They'd still be sat back watching the same outcome, regardless.

- How do you think they'd feel seeing us chuck him in with the kids due to boardroom politics?
- How'd you think Ange would feel being told he can't play a world class striker even though we'd already missed out on a fee to replace him?

Nothing's really changed here...... Same three outcomes in the offing... Senseless getting spiteful as they draw closer.
 
Last edited:
Winning definitely doesn't happen when you bench a world class player in place of Richarlison. If Kane stays, it's in the best interest of the club to utilise his talent, not try to prove a point with a silly moral crusade.

Not a silly moral crusade, it's building a team.

Good teams make players look better all the time.

Committed Kane makes the team better no question.

Playing him when he's not committed makes other players in the team worse, even if he's still able to play well.
 
No; whilst he's under contract.



He's already the main man...... You make it sound like we'd be 'promoting' him..... So long as he gives 100% then there'd be nothing untoward going on.



There's a untold angles at play here.....

- We could have refused the money and we'd still be in this final year/leave for free predicament.
- BM could have bailed out and we'd still be in this final year/leave for free predicament.


.........They'd still be sat back watching the same outcome, regardless.

- How do you think they'd feel seeing us chuck him in the with the kids do to boardroom politics?
- How'd you think Ange would feel being told he can't play a world class striker even though we'd already missed out on a fee to replace him?

Nothing's really changed here...... Same three outcomes in the offing... Senseless getting spiteful as they draw closer.

Those things aren't at play because Levy accepted the offer.

If they were at play then it would be a different situation. But they aren't and it isn't.

But anyway, bollox to it all. Don't give enough of a shit to keep arguing it out.
 


Ok, wake us up when this is decided.

Whatever happens, fuck it we are smashing teams to pieces this year. Kane or no Kane.

original
 
Not a silly moral crusade, it's building a team.

Good teams make players look better all the time.

Committed Kane makes the team better no question.

Playing him when he's not committed makes other players in the team worse, even if he's still able to play well.

Kane will play to the highest standards if he stays though, as he did last season. I mean, if he leaves on a free, he would have known last season that he didn't want to be here as well, but he was outstanding.

Modric didn't want to be here when we turned down the bid from Chelsea. He was outstanding again for one more season and then we sold him to Madrid.

The very best players will always deliver their best, it's part of what made them the level they are.

Benching these players would only tell the future Modric's and Kane's that Spurs is a club that will fuck with your career instead of further it. Not good for us.
 
Unless we get a decent fee, I’d honestly rather keep Sanchez than risk having to play dier in an emergency.
I want us to sign a CB better than both Dier and Sanchez.

We have:
Romero
VDV
Davies
Phillips
Sanchez
Tanganga
Dier

We need to shift two more to accommodate 1 upgrade. There is no market for Dier and he seems set on staying. But we can flog Tanganga and Sanchez.

I think we are also banking on Phillips to step up as 4th choice

Romero ---- VDV
(Phillips) ----- (NEW CB)
(Dier)---- (Davies)
With this outcome, we only rely on Dier and Davies at CB in a real crisis.

The wildcard for me is what kind of role Phillips is ready to play.
 
if its just small financial things this will get sorted quick, levy wont want to keep him if he is not committed
I keep reading this nonsense - Levy kepy him 2 years ago when he pretty much went on strike for a few weeks, if that isn't 'not committed' then I don't know what is. Yet once it was 'temporarily over' he knuckled down like a pro, and has continued to be superb for us in many games since. The idea that either Levy would deliberately ruin next season by insisting his best player is benched, or Kane would ruin next season by not giving everything, is just ludicrous and has already been proven as such 2 years ago.
 
Back
Top