I said it's part of any assessment. It's also used in part as an excuse in my opinion.
-
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...
Player Dominic Solanke
- Thread starter Tomo
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
I said it's part of any assessment. It's also used in part as an excuse in my opinion.
I didn't want him, but if he's not getting any proper service I ain't judging him like that.
Not under this dogshit manager.
If he was getting served and missing sitters every week then I'd be onto him.
I'm putting all that on hold.
Go look at the goals he scored for B'mouth and ask yourself if if he's been catered for adequately here.
It's completely logical, that's if you want to follow it...
Then again I think people are just using the player threads to enforce their agenda on players they previously never like anyway.
It can't be a coincidence that none of the players are shining or playing well, it's obvious what the issue is.
Solanke getting quite a bit of stick recently.
The miser sold Kane; which wasn't Solanke's fault.
Solanke was about the best Spurs can do under ENiC and Levy in my opinion. And by that criteria Solanke has done OK; especially before the injuries.
Works hard, scores a few, assists a few.
Least of Spurs problems in my opinion.
The miser sold Kane; which wasn't Solanke's fault.
Solanke was about the best Spurs can do under ENiC and Levy in my opinion. And by that criteria Solanke has done OK; especially before the injuries.
Works hard, scores a few, assists a few.
Least of Spurs problems in my opinion.
What does this bollocks mean? Seriously, I have no idea... does it mean Ekitike is twice the player Solanke is? Or that Solanke is a small puddle in the Ekitike pond? Honestly, I've no idea... would it be accruate if Solanke scores two and Ekitike misses a pen?
Miser - rubbish. We spend quite a bit, but spend too poorly.
Solanke was the player we bought. Many, including a fair number of pundits said it was a good signing. Some reckoned very good. A few of us were less convinced.
Solanke has done okay, and has some good qualities.Whether he can find a solution to whatever doesn't quite connect between his ears, aged 27 I am unsure.
If a player like Solanke, for whom the doubts will start to creep in, wants to announce himself worthy of a club of our size and potential, then tonight and the rest of this tournament gives him that opportunity.
I think he could easily be an early casualty of a new manager and still think Richarlison may have a bigger role in these two games. If that happens, Solanke would be right to be looking over his shoulder.
It wasn’t long ago this season that people were saying how big of a miss Solanke was when he got injured.
Now he’s come back and taking a few games to find his scoring form and everyone says he’s shit.
It’s tiring .
He isn't sh!t by any means.
I am not convinced but have also been very consistent.
He, and other players we have are victims of our crushed spirit. The tiring bit is constantly hoping.
He could silence the doubters and it would be even nicer if a player was as good in the team, as people think they are, when they aren't.
Last edited:
If you want Richarlison ahead of Solanke then you must fancy Calvert Lewin on a free too?
The miser payed the money for Solanke because he could pay Solanke within the constraints of his miserly player wage bill.
We usurped West Ham for Solanke which stops them improving too.
Solanke with Kudos and Bowen would have been decent from their perspective tbh.
Where did I say I wanted Rucharlison ahead of Solanke? I said he might find Rucharlison makes more of an impact, and if that were the case (and because it would be off the sub's bench), he would need to worry.
Solanke with Kudud and Bowen. You mean the team below even us in the table.
As stated all our players seem to be better when not in the team or alongside players we don't have.
Nonsense.
It's time for Solanke to be the difference.
Solanke is on 90K a week … Mid-table level player on mid-table wages who’s playing for the 14th place team in the EPL …
For comparison, Solanke’s replacement at Bournemouth (Evanilson) is in 85K a week - The starting No. 9 at f’in Bournemouth is on ONLY 5K a week less than the 9th richest club the world.
Levy Out!
For comparison, Solanke’s replacement at Bournemouth (Evanilson) is in 85K a week - The starting No. 9 at f’in Bournemouth is on ONLY 5K a week less than the 9th richest club the world.
Levy Out!
Can you be shit and missed at the same time Richard?
I wasn't convinced about this argument but the last two words sold it to me!!!
Spam are just below Spurs.
Spam with Solanke and Spurs with Richarlison would see Spurs below Spam.
How is that nonsense?
Solanke started well and Brennan was the main beneficiary in terms of the opportunities created by Solanke's work on and off the ball.
Solanke had also been one of Spurs most consistent performers pre injury.
The injury was coming because Ange overused Solanke when resting him at times would have made more sense.
I have never seen Solanke as part of the problem this season.
The problems Spurs have this season are the same issues we had last season.
Solanke has done OK but needs more goals.
Can you be shit and missed at the same time Richard?
I did stop posting on here for a while so we can probably find the answer to that question without looking too far
Can we leave Winks out of this?Can you be shit and missed at the same time Richard?
I do see Solanke as the 21st century Chris Armstrong - the victim of being an overpriced transfer to replace a world class striker with a surname starting with the letter K.
Armstrong at first wasn't that bad. Really linked up well with Sheringham in 95/96 but it fell apart after that and his overall average ability reflected Spurs in the late 90s.
With Solanke I see a good striker but for a club our size I'm not sure that's enough. He has a place as backup but we do need an upgrade.
Sadly I already know that isn't coming any time soon...
That fork in the road moment. We finished 7th and got an FA Cup semi final. Sold Klinsmann and could have got Berkamp and really pushed on.
Instead we signed Armstrong and watched them up the road really pull away from us for decades.
I mean, it's that bad we even signed Klinsmann from Monaco - from Wenger. We must have had an inkling that he was the future of football. Surely even Sugar could see that.
Imagine we got Wenger instead of Francis in late 1994.
As you guys said though, Armstrong wsn't a bad player. I think he relied on speed though from my memory. Didn't he damage his ankle and never look right after?
I think it was a home game against Everton he went over on it at the Park Lane end and it looked a bad one!
Spurs were particularly shit after Armstrong signed; especially once Sheringham left.
Armstrong often scored in games Spurs lost too.
Scoring winning goals gets you noticed and loved.
Scoring an equaliser at Highbury, in a game you lose 1-2 gets forgotten.
Armstrong is up there with John Duncan as one of Spurs best strikers that played in poor teams.