Does Anyone Still Supporting Keeping 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

Should We Have Sold?


  • Total voters
    77
The saddest of all sad realities for H. Loads of manoeuvring for Haaland. Literally nothing credible from any major club for him.

tumblr_pszcq0SokW1v0f036o2_r1_400.gifv
To be honest, Levy has probably told all the agents that negotiations start at £150m and a lot of clubs have just not even bothered to enquire.

I'm sure there are clubs out there who would love him, but just not at anywhere near the price Levy wants.
 
We do not know what goes on in boardrooms.
We read the various reports in the media and also are able to look back on the track records of clubs and individuals.

City are a buying club. City tend to buy high but sell low.
Pep strengthens his team by buying players and to bring in better than he has.
They need a proven striker.

Spurs have sold a player for big bucks.
Spurs would prefer to keep Kane, or sell overseas, but cannot compete if a City or a Liverpool come calling, however distasteful it feels.

Levy has a reputation as a difficult person to negotiate a purchase from.
Levy has a track record of bringing in average players.
Levy would not accept, rightly so, that he has to jump if the so called leading clubs come calling.

All clubs set a high figure on a sale, offer a low figure to buy.

City offering an initial 75m seems possible.
Levy insisting on 150 or 200m is believable.

City want to negotiate, knowing they have paid 100m for Grealish.
Levy is not moving but digging in, sounds feasible.

Kane wants to leave, his head has turned, he is mad at Levy, still is and wants out.

City have moved on. Will buy elsewhere. Kane is stuck, so are Spurs because their leading striker is carrying an offence against Levy.

Levy is responsible for this farce, though Kane signed his poorly worded contract.

However, I do not know what goes on in boardrooms.
 
Last edited:
Most of us were really happy when we kept him. Imagine the threads on here now if he was playing for City and scoring plenty.
Lose lose situation

Sell and he becomes re-energised to impress his new club and scores plenty.

Keep and we get the what looks to be a shell shocked Kane, contemplating his entire football future not just with us, but he's probably worried that it's over if he's forced to stay another 3 years here.

There was no 'winning play' for us


The only winning play would have been to sell and buy someone who turned out to be incredible for us - but our history with purchasing strikers indicates that that is fantasy land.
 
So you're on Pep's side he who openly named Kane as a player he wanted and they wanted to bid for. A player under a contract with another team.

Pep broke the golden rule - tapping up players and mentioning players he wants from another club.

Complete Dick move regardless of what the best outcome was for all parties.
How does realising that levy fucked up by not selling/negotiating means I am on pep's side. Makes no sense how its related. Peps a cunt, who cares. Nothing to do with us. But our owner is a useless fool who's been making crap decisions after crap decisions. That affects us.
 
Last edited:

todd1882

Airfixx's cup final; anti-English since 15/06/22
If we had sold Dele and Eriksen at their peak, people would have gone ballistic at Levy and labelled us a selling club forever more with no ambition till that bald C*** GOES etc etc etc
Ok, so this is like public school then...teaching to the level of the dumbest kid in class. Is this really a way to advance? That's why folks are in leadership positions, to lead. Or is your suggestion that institutions should take heed of the least mentally capable amongst us? Critical thinking is hard for many on this board. I can't imagine why anyone in power would care what they think. They may be the squeakiest wheels but they are always wrong and should be ignored. In fact, it's probably good policy to do exactly the opposite of what those folks want...for anything and everything.
 

Gym&Chill

LEVY OUT
If Spurs were at the top of our game and competitive then i would have said keep him at all costs.

However spurs are on a decline, the squad has major issues and the club has no direction. As a player like Kane who has been playing his best football for over half a decade, and has been through multiple “projects” which have come and gone, and can see the inevitable collapse, and the lack of investment, you have to ask yourself, why the fuck am i still here? Hes not getting any younger. Hes done the graft. Hes put in the shifts. Hes now at that stage of his career where he needs 10 quality men behind him for him to perform at the very best and be PLs top goalscorer. His game hs changed

Even if spurs get our shit together, it would be another THREE YEARS atleast before we peaked again. By that time Kanes entering the twilight years of his career.

Spurs didnt invest when poch had us running like a well oiled machine. Levy sacked poch and thought another manager could get more out of an already squeezed and tired squad. Now we have a squad which could end up in a relegation dogfight soon. Only 3 teams have a worse goal difference than us.

Keeping Kane was nothing more than a theatre show. The club has so many problems and Kane is the least of our worries. Kane will always score goals. He just needs a competent team around him.

Selling Kane would have been the right thing at that time. Now we have a great dishevelled player playing in a shit squad with a shit manager thats only been here 5 minutes and is already about to be sacked
 

Tomo

Supporter
You can only blame the chairman.

He is the one that knows everything.


Guy is a dick.

I dislike Levy and want him out. The Kane situation however was City and Charlie lowballing, it’s what we probably do to other clubs for their players at points but you have to stand you ground. It was a lose lose situation. If City paid the money the 140-150m he was gone.
 
Just to reiterate the point of this thread - does anyone still think it was the right thing to do?

It's ok if you thought it was at the time. The point is - do you still think it was a good idea? And if you do still think that it was right, I believe Spaniel Spaniel may be a Dr who could get you help
 

Tomo

Supporter
Just to reiterate the point of this thread - does anyone still think it was the right thing to do?

It's ok if you thought it was at the time. The point is - do you still think it was a good idea? And if you do still think that it was right, I believe Spaniel Spaniel may be a Dr who could get you help

Yes. If we had sold Kane for 75m plus 25m add ons we would have probably bought Martinez as the replacement for about 70-80m. We would still be in exactly the same boat only Kane would be scoring loads for City and we would be waiting on our next manager.

Kane is a world class striker if he is motivated. Conte comes (he probably won’t) and we have a plan he will score plenty of goals. If City had gotten anywhere near the 150m I would have taken it as we could have bought 2-3 players rather than probably just 1 or 2 max. City and Charlie Kane fucked us leaving a lose lose situation.
 

cretinousgoat

Rebrand as FriendlyGoat?
Come on then 10 games in.

A lot of you were happy as Larry we forced a player to stay who clearly didn't want to. A 28 year old who is only likely to decline even if his heart was in it. A player entering the 2nd half of his contract with no incentive to sign and no desire to play.
His value is and will continue to decrease.
Our chairman is very unlikely to make up the difference in lost income to sign a replacement when Kane either leaves or becomes so useless we have to drop him

So, who still thinks we did the right thing refusing to negotiate?
If you could have worded your poll in a less antagonistic way, I would have bothered to use it. But as you decided to use it to show everyone what a muggy little waster you are, you can take your poll, shine it up real nice, turn it sideways, and stick it straight up your candy ass.

Over and out
 

cretinousgoat

Rebrand as FriendlyGoat?
By the way, the vote isn't really valid as the 2nd option is heavily loaded - if you actually want people's opinions, as opposed to just forcing them to support yours, you need to change that option to something at least more neutral. Some people may believe Harry is just having a bad patch or whatever - I'm not saying I believe that, I don't, but the way the option is worded in your vote makes the whole thing invalid as an objective survey of opinions as far as I'm concerned.
Exactly. Heavily loading a poll to wind people up. Only gooners do that.
 
That offer of 100 million was given by many sources. And on top if their manager is openly saying that our owner is not negotiating, then it was levy who kept a player here who didnt want to be . When he does go now, it will be an even worse offer. Just really poor from the levy.
Tbh i wouldnt believe a word out of that self serving prick guadiolas mouth
 
Just to reiterate the point of this thread - does anyone still think it was the right thing to do?

It's ok if you thought it was at the time. The point is - do you still think it was a good idea? And if you do still think that it was right, I believe Spaniel Spaniel may be a Dr who could get you help
It wasnt a good idea then, and its not a good idea now. The other option is being in a river in egypt.
 
Just to reiterate the point of this thread - does anyone still think it was the right thing to do?

It's ok if you thought it was at the time. The point is - do you still think it was a good idea? And if you do still think that it was right, I believe Spaniel Spaniel may be a Dr who could get you help
Your question doesn't really make sense.

Given the information available at the time, I think the same as I thought then, that it was the right thing to do. Obviously now we see how it has panned out, I wish we'd sold for, say, £100m (if anyone would pay it). But that doesn't mean my original thinking was wrong - just that it panned out differently. That happens all the time - for example, when Leicester won the league, I presumably wished on the last day of the season that I had bet my house on them doing so at the start of that season. But it would have been a very foolish bet based on the information available at the time and the probability of it happening. Similarly with Kane, if I knew his performances would fall off a cliff then I probably would have taken the money - but all the info we had in the summer - including what we had seen of Kane as a professional over several years, and our experiences of our previous top players' performances after being 'forced' to stay one last season - suggested that Kane would continue to perform well, maybe even better to prove to Pep how much he is worth ready for the next window.

So yes i do still think it was the right thing to do at the time, but equally I recognise that it panned out differently to how it could reasonably be expected to have done.

By the way, personally I'm not convinced yet that all is necessarily lost with Kane - sometimes players do recover their 'mojo' for whatever reason. The only way I can see out of this is for Levy to sit down with Kane, and give him a written agreement that if he achieves certain targets this season, then he can leave for (say) £100m next summer. That would save face to some extent for Levy, bring some money in, get Kane trying again, and give the player light at the end of the tunnel in respect of his transfer desire.
 
Kane fucked everyone as soon as he did that Neville interview. He basically said "I have the power" which we couldn't let radiate throughout the club. It would mean current players could do the same and potential signings could look at us as a stepping stone. Going forward we can't have that.

Has it cost us, city, and the player? Yes. Who is to blame? The player!

We were backed into a corner and had no choice. I'm sure if it had been handled on Levy's terms he would have gone for upwards of £100m
 
What were we supposed to negotiate when there was no offer on the table?
Pretty clear from whining baby Pep , Levy was not willing to entertain an offer . Now I don’t like the man but at the time I understood Levy being so intransigent. With hindsight Levy looks foolish , but I didn’t expect Kane to be so poor , but was not unhappy he stayed at the time.
 
He clearly isn't interested,so should be dropped.
Maybe,just maybe if his England place is threatened he might start performing. There is still a great player in there. Sadly,I don't think we will see it again wearing a Spurs shirt.
There's a lot wrong with our club at the moment,and his attitude is one of them.
 
Yes. If we had sold Kane for 75m plus 25m add ons we would have probably bought Martinez as the replacement for about 70-80m. We would still be in exactly the same boat only Kane would be scoring loads for City and we would be waiting on our next manager.

Kane is a world class striker if he is motivated. Conte comes (he probably won’t) and we have a plan he will score plenty of goals. If City had gotten anywhere near the 150m I would have taken it as we could have bought 2-3 players rather than probably just 1 or 2 max. City and Charlie Kane fucked us leaving a lose lose situation.
Kane still wants to go though. Martinez would at least be younger and fitter and a new coach may well sort out our forward issue. Now Kane is on a fast track to the bench and completely worthless
 
It wasnt a good idea then, and its not a good idea now. The other option is being in a river in egypt.
I don't understand the other option tbh?

Your question doesn't really make sense.

Given the information available at the time, I think the same as I thought then, that it was the right thing to do. Obviously now we see how it has panned out, I wish we'd sold for, say, £100m (if anyone would pay it). But that doesn't mean my original thinking was wrong - just that it panned out differently. That happens all the time - for example, when Leicester won the league, I presumably wished on the last day of the season that I had bet my house on them doing so at the start of that season. But it would have been a very foolish bet based on the information available at the time and the probability of it happening. Similarly with Kane, if I knew his performances would fall off a cliff then I probably would have taken the money - but all the info we had in the summer - including what we had seen of Kane as a professional over several years, and our experiences of our previous top players' performances after being 'forced' to stay one last season - suggested that Kane would continue to perform well, maybe even better to prove to Pep how much he is worth ready for the next window.

So yes i do still think it was the right thing to do at the time, but equally I recognise that it panned out differently to how it could reasonably be expected to have done.

By the way, personally I'm not convinced yet that all is necessarily lost with Kane - sometimes players do recover their 'mojo' for whatever reason. The only way I can see out of this is for Levy to sit down with Kane, and give him a written agreement that if he achieves certain targets this season, then he can leave for (say) £100m next summer. That would save face to some extent for Levy, bring some money in, get Kane trying again, and give the player light at the end of the tunnel in respect of his transfer desire.

What I'm getting at is that it rarely works out well for the current club or the player when you force these things. I know Modric played well for a year after being told he couldn't go to Chelsea but that move was never gonna happen. He must have known we wouldn't sell to them. He got a better move after a year and he would have gone anywhere. Kane has caused issues because he wants to stay in the PL. Maybe he'll have to look at himself in the mirror in the next window and ask himself whether he wants to stay at Spurs in the PL as City might move on from him.

I don't dispute your last paragraph. But it's going to take an inspiring appointment. Not a cunt in a zoro outfit or some other vacuous Portuguese bitch.
 
Top Bottom