"Honka Espoo... We'll see you next year....."
What if Kane becomes ineffective, moody, a waste of a shirt?
That's far from being a forgone conclusion.
Do we hold onto him just to prove we don't have to sell our best players? Do we cut our noses off to spite our faces.
No. He was not for sale, so all the chat about ego and posturing is bollocks.
The problem is that we all know Kane wants to leave, so things will never be the same as before.
Modrich was superb after he didn't get his move to Chelsea.....
You can only be alluding to the "one of our own" schtick.... And that's just sentiment for the best part.
Something you're otherwise preaching shouldn't cloud our decision making.... You can't have it both ways.
The main reason we didn't sell Kane is nothing to do with City not meeting an imaginary valuation, it's all to do with the fact there is no confidence that we could improve the team with the money we'd have got for him.
To say that has nothing to do with any prospective price-tag is ludicrous.
And yet again we didn't buy a striker "to partner" Kane because when the chips were down, we didn't have the balls to go big money for someone.
You don't pay with your balls..... You pay with your wallet.
Hence proving why Kane wants to leave and why we are absolutely gutless going forward.
He wanted to leave as he's getting older and is now itchy for a trophy or two.... It doesn't take an entire round of golf with Gary Neville to comprehend this.