• 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!

Ex-Spurs Player Harry Kane

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Go on son said:
Ah right and you would have been happy with him dropped at the time 👍
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I’m always happy with rotation.
There are games Kane needed to come off in.
It starts there

Competition for places is healthy and we could have even played them both.

But go ahead and convince yourself that short sightedness is good policy.

2021 and we still have one striker.
How’s it panned out for you
 
Last edited:
sammyspurs said:
I’m always happy with rotation.
There are games Kane needed to come off in.
It starts there

Competition for places is healthy and we could have even played them both.

Big go ahead and convince yourself that short sightedness is good policy.

2021 and we still have one striker.
How’s it panned out for you
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There you go. Youre usual way of arguing. Making up stuff people said. I never said short sightedness is good policy. Please point out where i did. I also never said having one striker was the way to go.
I clearly outlined why a top striker wouldnt come to us to play second fiddle at the time.
Couldnt be clearer really.
You also make out like its kanes fault we dont have another striker
 
Go on son said:
There you go. Youre usual way of arguing. Making up stuff people said. I never said short sightedness is good policy. Please point out where i did. I also never said having one striker was the way to go.
I clearly outlined why a top striker wouldnt come to us to play second fiddle at the time.
Couldnt be clearer really.
You also make out like its kanes fault we dont have another striker
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ok let’s play the nonsense game:

Point out where I said you said it was a good policy…….see we can all waste time can’t we, accusing each other of making up quotes…or, you can learn the nuances of a conversation and try and understand how language works
 
Go on son said:
I clearly outlined why a top striker wouldnt come to us to play second fiddle at the time.
Couldnt be clearer really.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And I clearly pointed out that the clubs policy of never dropping Kane was the reason and that it was an incompetent and small time approach which is costing us now

That’s why I said you are advocating short sightedness by justifying it.
Because……you are doing that

Go on son said:
You also make out like its kanes fault we dont have another striker
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Have I? Shall we go back to making up quotes thing eh?

I’ve clearly blamed the club. Kane’s responsible for his own shitness not transfers and team selection
 
sammyspurs said:
And I clearly pointed out that the clubs policy of never dropping Kane was the reason and that it was an incompetent and small time approach which is costing us now

That’s why I said you are advocating short sightedness by justifying it.
Because……you are doing that


Have I? Shall we go back to making up quotes thing eh?

I’ve clearly blamed the club. Kane’s responsible for his own shitness not transfers and team selection
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Again i didnt justify it. I was giving points why a top striker wouldnt join us
 
TylerB said:
That's literally all he has in this thread. Makes stuff up when he runs out of things to say. And also pats himself on the back for it for some strange reason.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No this thread is people basically saying

“Kane isn’t shit but the reason he is shit is because x, y and z……oh and everyone can see he’s shit, why do you keep saying it……he’s not shit, I didn’t say that”
 
sammyspurs said:
If Kane stays, he should be used like Llorente was, but his ego and some delirious fans feel he’s a 45 goal a season City player trapped in a Spurs kit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Mate, I don't think people in here understand the concept of playing style and maximizing the team's ability, not just maximizing the stats of just one player.

People do not realize that when Kane is on the pitch, playing as a non pressing/no pace #9, we as a team suffer. People see his goal numbers and think that it's because of Kane's greatness rather than being a function of the club's insistence on ensuring that he gets his individual stats.

Juventus and RM were willing to move on from Ronaldo and there are some no-so-subtle murmurs from Man Utd questioning whether he's the right fit for the team. And this is a man that's has been and is still infinitely better than Kane, still scoring worldies at the top level and still probably one of the best goal scorers in the world. Sometimes, players just don't fit with the rest of the other players and we need to move on from them or find another place for them.

Like you said, it's maybe playing Kane in a Llorente type of role, being a striker supporting/distributing to our other attackers, or maybe we just completely try to revinvent him into a player that just focuses on distribution. His passing his still very good and he doesn't need that much pace/physicality etc. to execute his long balls.
 
NDomBadBoy said:
Mate, I don't think people in here understand the concept of playing style and maximizing the team's ability, not just maximizing the stats of just one player.

People do not realize that when Kane is on the pitch, playing as a non pressing/no pace #9, we as a team suffer. People see his goal numbers and think that it's because of Kane's greatness rather than being a function of the club's insistence on ensuring that he gets his individual stats.

Juventus and RM were willing to move on from Ronaldo and there are some no-so-subtle murmurs from Man Utd questioning whether he's the right fit for the team. And this is a man that's has been and is still infinitely better than Kane, still scoring worldies at the top level and still probably one of the best goal scorers in the world. Sometimes, players just don't fit with the rest of the other players and we need to move on from them or find another place for them.

Like you said, it's maybe playing Kane in a Llorente type of role, being a striker supporting/distributing to our other attackers, or maybe we just completely try to revinvent him into a player that just focuses on distribution. His passing his still very good and he doesn't need that much pace/physicality etc. to execute his long balls.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

People mate watching Kane and are satisfied with 3/4 passes over a game despite missing a sitter and not once heading the ball or winning possession or even slightly threatening newly promoted defenders.

They wore him out in 34 minutes by calmly tapping triangles around him.

Same people lauding the vast difference in intensity that Conte is bringing.

Same people who a mere few weeks ago were lauding Kane scoring against San Marino and thinking it would instantly translate into PL goals.

How can people not see he doesn’t fit this new era we want to build?
To play with Kane means we can’t play the high intensity they want, but it’s like a brick wall.

What the fuck is the point in having Navy Seal training sessions and building the team around the slowest and most ponderous striker in the league, who can’t get on the end of any cross ever, because he’s behind the play?

What’s the point? There is no point whatsoever in persisting with a striker who doesn’t score, and doesn’t assist.

4 big chances created in 12 games.
5 big chances missed.
27 shots
1 goal
1 assist

Fucking hell
 
sammyspurs said:
People mate watching Kane and are satisfied with 3/4 passes over a game despite missing a sitter and not once heading the ball or winning possession or even slightly threatening newly promoted defenders.

They wore him out in 34 minutes by calmly tapping triangles around him.

Same people lauding the vast difference in intensity that Conte is bringing.

Same people who a mere few weeks ago were lauding Kane scoring against San Marino and thinking it would instantly translate into PL goals.

How can people not see he doesn’t fit this new era we want to build?
To play with Kane means we can’t play the high intensity they want, but it’s like a brick wall.

What the fuck is the point in having Navy Seal training sessions and building the team around the slowest and most ponderous striker in the league, who can’t get on the end of any cross ever, because he’s behind the play?

What’s the point? There is no point whatsoever in persisting with a striker who doesn’t score, and doesn’t assist.

4 big chances created in 12 games.
5 big chances missed.
27 shots
1 goal
1 assist

Fucking hell
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Exactly - there's a difference between us and the England national team and Man City.

Maybe having Kane would be effective for those teams because they can get away with a striker that just needs to be at the right place at the right time and let others do the hard work. Kane can still do that and he does it well.

But we as a team are not City and England and we're never going to be those type of teams. Our golden years 3-5 years ago was the perfect storm and likely to never happen again.

As you say, we've got all these fast, high intensity type of players, only to be slowed down by our main point of attack and the man closest to the goal. We need a more aggressive, athletic and cerebral striker that can lead the attack.
 
It's a completely reasonable opinion to think that:
  1. Kane should probably play 25%-30% less minutes over the course of a season.
  2. That if he did, we'd perform better over the course of a season.
  3. That some of our best performances in our biggest matches over the past few seasons were without Kane available.
  4. That if Kane played less minutes he might prolong his career at the top-level.
 
Château NoHo said:
It's a completely reasonable opinion to think that:
  1. Kane should probably play 25%-30% less minutes over the course of a season.
  2. That if he did, we'd perform better over the course of a season.
  3. That some of our best performances in our biggest matches over the past few seasons were without Kane available.
  4. That if Kane played less minutes he might prolong his career at the top-level.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
JealousOrganicArcticfox-size_restricted.gif
 
Château NoHo said:
It's a completely reasonable opinion to think that:
  1. Kane should probably play 25%-30% less minutes over the course of a season.
  2. That if he did, we'd perform better over the course of a season.
  3. That some of our best performances in our biggest matches over the past few seasons were without Kane available.
  4. That if Kane played less minutes he might prolong his career at the top-level.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is fair hypothesis but that's all it is- 1 and 2 that is. We definitely need a quality striker to play alongside or backup to Kane.
 
sudoku said:
You are a master debater.
There is no debate. You are Adrian Durham and the punters keep biting.
No reasonable person could actually believe the guff you come out with but who cares?
You are winding people up on here and you and they are loving it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That’s nice, still struggling to find anything to type about Kane I see.

Don’t worry there’s a match tomorrow, you can rub one off if he passes the ball sometimes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top