Yeah, a 5 months run on the back of a steady 3 year decline.
No. A 5 month run on the back of being the most prolific player in the league. Funny how you keep ignoring that little detail because it debunks your narrative...
A lot of this is due to his immobility and decline in strength and general fitness
Which somehow didn't stop him scoring more goals than anyone else, providing more assists than anyone else, leading his team to an international final and filling his boots in qualifiers to have the most prolific calendar year in the entire history of the England national team.
Funny how you can't respond to these details which not only debunk your narrative but make it look like the stupidest thing you could possibly say, isn't it?
He didn’t have a great showing at the Euros
Yes he did. He scored 4 goals in the knockout stages. You're wrong.
What’s with the fascination about lying about Kane’s levels?
You tell me. You're the one who keeps doing so.
If you don’t care about results with Kane then you don’t care
...about your argument, because it's absurd.
Simple as that, how can I have made up what you posted
Because you're lying about what I said and the context in which i said it. Sorry, were these meant to be hard questions?
We haven’t played a final without him.
Why do you think that is? Could it possibly be that every single coach we've had has recognized that having one of the best strikers in world football on the pitch is a good idea, even though Sammy's School of Football says that strikers are useless if you're not going to make them your only avenue of attack?
Probably have a CL under our belt if we had dropped him though.
Ah yes, the Utter Speculation method of predicting football results. For the record I don't think Kane should have started that game and would have been better used as an impact sub, but the idea that we would simply have beaten Liverpool after their early penalty without him is just horseshit.
Irrelevant who’s fault it was
No, and now I'm genuinely disgusted with your dishonesty. You have spent 700 pages whining about how it's all Kane's fault we have not won a trophy, and yet now that you're confronted with a clear answer about why he was used the way he was you want to pretend it's 'irrelevant'.
Grow some balls and just admit that yet another of your claims is nothing more than biased, obsessed nonsense.
. If a race driver isn’t very good, and his car isn’t very good, he’s still not very good at driving
So blame the driver, i.e the coach, not the Ferrrari who scored more goals than anyone else and assisted more goals than anyone else.
And a striker who can outscore Hojber
Kane can. In fact he can outscore anyone else in the league with regularity.
Hmmmm no, the coach not relying on Kane makes Kane redundant, hence the fact he’s the only player who isn’t improving under Conte bar Ndombele who doesn’t play
Who says he isn't improving? He just scored against one of the best teams in Europe, laid a golden chance in two consecutive games for Son, and if Dele's passing has been a smidge better he could well have scored a hattrick.
As I explained in the other thread, the problem here is that you vastly overrate your own powers of analysis, and while you think you're dropping pearls of footballing insight you're actually just farting out bad take after bad take.
