• 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!

Player Dominic Solanke

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Charlie F said:
Absolutely spot on. Ange for all his talk of entertaining football -actually favoured donkeys and runners.
He wanted Johnson and Solanke - he played Bissouma and Sarr. Even in the early days he used to sub Maddison and Son.

And he said over and over again - every signing was on.
Solanke was £65m - the highest value in world football that summer.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah I think one of Ange's failings is who he wanted/accepted as signings. He had some quote early on along the lines of "there's not that much difference between players at the top level" and I think the past 2 seasons have proven that's abundantly false.

He also had quotes hyping up Dragusin and saying how he felt he had all the attributes he needed and would be a great signing, was our first choice target that window blah blah.

Not to say it's all Ange's fault ofc - he got screwed in his second summer when he wanted experienced pros like Neto, Gallagher and got 3 teenagers - but I think for a manager who made his name playing technical possession football with dribbly wingers he seemed weirdly comfortable just signing runners once he got to Spurs (Gallagher and Neto are basically runners too...). Or maybe he simply didn't have enough political capital to push back given it was such a big gig for him.
 
TomHotspur said:
Can you explain your understanding of why we went for him?

Because apart from it being an easy deal to do, with zero competition and him being English and on low wages, from a purely footballing perspective spending 65 million on a striker who’s record prior to joining was a whopping 29 goals, (19 of which came in one season!!!) in 134 Premier League games, was right up there with some of the dumbest transfer decisions the inept berks running our recruitment have made.

I do agree he certainly hasn’t surprised me either though. He is a bang average bottom half level striker and he has looked every bit that level of player for us.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I didn't rate Solanke. It's on the thread when we were linked with him.

What I meant by understanding why it was easy is pretty much exactly what you have written. No competition, price was set and not increased, and I guess he suited what the manager wanted.

All I think is that when a club like us, who have (or had) certain aspirations starts to buy average players, who are arguably suppoaed to be one of your main men, it's a race to mediocrity.

In saying that I never ever expected us to be in this position, and as average as I think Solanke is, compared to top strikers, I'm still surprised how poor he has been. Offers too little for a striker in my opinion, and is just not a strong enough goal threat.
 
Notabadsquad said:
I didn't rate Solanke. It's on the thread when we were linked with him.

What I meant by understanding why it was easy is pretty much exactly what you have written. No competition, price was set and not increased, and I guess he suited what the manager wanted.

All I think is that when a club like us, who have (or had) certain aspirations starts to buy average players, who are arguably suppoaed to be one of your main men, it's a race to mediocrity.

In saying that I never ever expected us to be in this position, and as average as I think Solanke is, compared to top strikers, I'm still surprised how poor he has been. Offers too little for a striker in my opinion, and is just not a strong enough goal threat.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Have we signed a better striker in the last 15 years than Solanke? Agree with your point on no goal threat by the way
 
Hampshire Spur said:
Severely dropped. Growing up as a kid watching us we would go nowhere near signing this calibre of player.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

lol what??

I don't know what era you've grown up in but we've had plenty of shit strikers in the past

Janssen, Rasiak, Doherty, Postiga, Soldado, Andy Booth, Zamora, Frazier-Campbell, Carlos Vinicius

Honorable mentions to Gudjohnsen and Saha, they were well past their best when they signed for us, Armstrong and Iversen weren't great either.

Rebrov was good technically but he was a massive flop, you could probably say the same for Soldado actually

Unless you were exclusively bought up in the Son and Kane era this is what we have always tended to do.
 
I still fail to see why we signed solanke...couldn't hack it at chelsea or Liverpool..goes to Bournemouth has a field day in a lower division and we sign him on the back off one season in the prem in which he scored 21 goals 12 of which where pens for a scandalous fee ..
" We see you " they fucking did see us coming ?.
 
Kirk st moritz said:
I still fail to see why we signed solanke...couldn't hack it at chelsea or Liverpool..goes to Bournemouth has a field day in a lower division and we sign him on the back off one season in the prem in which he scored 21 goals 12 of which where pens for a scandalous fee ..
" We see you " they fucking did see us coming ?.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
See what Newcastle got for 50m…..Wissa??
It seems any half decent player starts at about 50m these days.
 
Shadydan said:
lol what??

I don't know what era you've grown up in but we've had plenty of shit strikers in the past

Janssen, Rasiak, Doherty, Postiga, Soldado, Andy Booth, Zamora, Frazier-Campbell, Carlos Vinicius

Honorable mentions to Gudjohnsen and Saha, they were well past their best when they signed for us, Armstrong and Iversen weren't great either.

Rebrov was good technically but he was a massive flop, you could probably say the same for Soldado actually

Unless you were exclusively bought up in the Son and Kane era this is what we have always tended to do.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Jaansen and Soldado were right up there with Solanke. Because they were big money and bought as the main man.
I actually think Soldado was a better player technically.

Solanke is particularly bad because
He had played in England and was a known quantity. And bought by Ange for completely the wrong reasons. ( chasing shadows ).
But yes neither Jaansem or Soldado passed the eye test.
They were not club record signings and were at least dropped pretty quickly.

You don't need to sign an out and out 9.
There are so few good ones you've asking for trouble .
If you do - someone like Llorente is perfect.
Can be plan b.
 
Charlie F said:
100 % - for various reason one of the club's worst ever signing.
Last season when people thought he was good: it was for his pressing . £65m for a forward who chases shadows .
Others buy forwards who can run with the ball - we buy one - who runs around like a headless chicken chasing thin air.

The era of Johnson, Richarlison and Solanke is a dire one.

You could just about get away with Richarlison - because he can be a handfull sometimes.
Solanke is a defenders dream. Completely predictable .
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ornstein said it was 55m. He is always right. Ridiculous how stuff gets exaggerated about transfer fees just cos someone sticks it on Twitter. It was never reported as 65m.
First season was ok but has had 5 months out this season and has never really looked fully fit.
 
Charlie F said:
Jaansen and Soldado were right up there with Solanke. Because they were big money and bought as the main man.
I actually think Soldado was a better player technically.

Solanke is particularly bad because
He had played in England and was a known quantity. And bought by Ange for completely the wrong reasons. ( chasing shadows ).
But yes neither Jaansem or Soldado passed the eye test.
They were not club record signings and were at least dropped pretty quickly.

You don't need to sign an out and out 9.
There are so few good ones you've asking for trouble .
If you do - someone like Llorente is perfect.
Can be plan b.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Jansen cost 17m . Big money?? He was bloody hopeless from the start.
 
Teach said:
Have we signed a better striker in the last 15 years than Solanke? Agree with your point on no goal threat by the way
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We had Kane for a few years.

I don't think it's about asking if we have signed a better striker than Solanke in however many years and more that we have failed to sign players who thrive and flourish.

I'm not saying it is easy. It isn't, but once you fail to sign or have in your squad/team, players who sit above the line, you are reliant on a tean that functions well on a regular basis.

We are seeing the result of not having a star player or 2 and of a unit that has been anything but strong for 2 years.

And I'm sick to death of it always being labelled as the players who are foisted on managers. These fcuking people are paid millions to make the sum of the parts the best they can be.

The 2 previous long-term managers abjectky failed in that regard, and I will wait to see if De Zerbi is any different. Way too early to offer judgement.
 
Last edited:
Perryman said:
See what Newcastle got for 50m…..Wissa??
It seems any half decent player starts at about 50m these days.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's market forces.

I think managers keep their counsel on players., maybe until they leave the game.

And Howe seems like a genuinely nice bloke, but he must rue signing Wissa and Elanga (2-goals against Barcelona apart,) Both players have failed to deliver, albeit Wissa picked up an injury straightaway. Even the young German has levelled off after a strong start.

Newcastle are exactly like us, except they have had a tiring and for the first time, injured Guimares. And by that I mean no star players, and Gordon has flitted in and out too much this season.

I know why we bought Solanke but I was openly against it, in the same way I was about Kudus. Decent players but if they are supposed to be our game-changers/spine, forget it.

When Newcastle and Howe part ways, as you would think likely in the summer, if they buy poorly. watch this space.
 
Last edited:
Kirk st moritz said:
I still fail to see why we signed solanke...couldn't hack it at chelsea or Liverpool..goes to Bournemouth has a field day in a lower division and we sign him on the back off one season in the prem in which he scored 21 goals 12 of which where pens for a scandalous fee ..
" We see you " they fucking did see us coming ?.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Because we were in need of a striker who presses to suit Ange - Solanke came on the back of a hot season with Bournemouth and it was the most logical step because the other options on the market who weren't called Alvarez or Osimhen (two strikers we were never touching) were a much of a muchness.
 
Notabadsquad said:
We had Kane for a few years.

I don't think it's about asking if we have signed a better striker than Solsnke in however many years and more that we have failed to sign players who thrive and flourish.

I'm not saying it is easy. It isn't, but once you fail to sign or have in your squad/team, players who sit above the line, you are reliant on a tean that functions well on a regular basis.

We are seeing the result of not having a star player or 2 and of a unit that has been anything but strong for 2 years.

And I'm sick to death of it always being labelled as the players who are foisted on managers. These fcuking people are paid millions to make the sum of the parts the best they can be.

The 2 previous long-term managers abjectky failed in that regard, and I will wait to see if De Zerbi is any different. Way too early to offer judgement.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yes but we didn’t sign Kane for a fee…. My point is Solanke is prob the best striker we’ve signed since Adebayor which is mental
 
Teach said:
Yes but we didn’t sign Kane for a fee…. My point is Solanke is prob the best striker we’ve signed since Adebayor which is mental
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Better probably to ask which strikers have been bought in the last 15 years that have been objectively good? It's not that many.

On Solanke, I just think his signing signifies our downturn. The fact he has also been injured so often, despite coming as this 'iron man' along with negligible options, in part explains our current predicament.
 
Teach said:
Funnily enough, Solanke would have been a great back up for those two…. As a rotation/sub.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes, and that's precisely what I have stated. Solanke can't carry the burden as lead striker (for us), physically and mentally, but as a stand-in would have been ideal.

It's not a criticism of Solanke but a short-sightedmess of those who just don't seem to understand the nuances. Weird to me but there you go.
 
Shadydan said:
Not really, we didn't need a striker all those years because we had Kane and Son :D
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We didn't need Solanke.
Shadydan said:
Because we were in need of a striker who presses to suit Ange - Solanke came on the back of a hot season with Bournemouth and it was the most logical step because the other options on the market who weren't called Alvarez or Osimhen (two strikers we were never touching) were a much of a muchness.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And therin lies the problem.
What sort of idiot ( Ange ) pays £65m for a striker- because of his pressing?
Literally any player for 65 quid can press.

It's fucking obvious Solanke is mediocre at best. He can't do anything .
Not good at running with the ball.
Not a good passer
Not good at heading
Can't shoot from anywhere outside the penalty spot.

A striker who also gets assists - is the way to go and a much safer option
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top