Harry Kane

AliBobbyJ said:
You don't pay all that money to get a sure-thing penalty taker. Kane is a short term answer and his injury record is troubling. Haaland being younger, and fitter (and better!) makes him much better value for money.
Click to expand...
Who said were paying for just that? The guy scores 20+ goals a season. Kane is a top3 striker in the world right now.
 
It seems from reading this thread, one of the main objections to buying Kane is his age.

Well, I can remember many 'wtf' comments about 8 years ago on this forum when City bought another 28 year old. The
28 year old is called Fernandinho. That didn't turn out too bad, did it?

Kane is Premier league proven, Mbappe and Haaland aren't.

No brainer for me.
 
bluebreeze said:
It seems from reading this thread, one of the main objections to buying Kane is his age.
Click to expand...

And price.

And injury record (ankles).

Lack of any resale or longevity value.

Some say lack of pace too not that that is what he relies on.

Other than that, all good.
 
FantasyIreland said:
5 years isn't my idea of short term? His injury record is hugely exaggerated.
Haaland would be a better option,but that doesn't make Kane a bad one.
Click to expand...
Some have been spoiled with our best players staying with us over the years. It has skewed their view and given them the belief that a player spending 10+ years with a single club is the norm. It isn't. I don't believe for a second that Haaland spends the rest of his career with us if we sign him, and if we got 5 years out of him we would have done well. Of course, after 5 years of Haaland we can get a fee back on his sale, which we wont get with Kane. Its whether or not the club determine this is a deciding factor in who we drop £100m+ on.
 
Coatigan said:
And price.

And injury record (ankles).

Lack of any resale or longevity value.

Some say lack of pace too not that that is what he relies on.

Other than that, all good.
Click to expand...
Both Haaland and Kane have positives/negatives, but both would be great signings and improve us considerably.

Haaland, young exciting talent, could be our striker for the next 10 years, against, dealing with a known 'bad" agent, unproven in the Premier league, a big lad already at 20, will he have issues later in his career?

Kane, proven top quality Premier league player, England Captain, great penalty taker, against, questionable ankles, dealing with Daniel Levy and one that's not mentioned often, 'Arry is a London boy through and through, will heading norf be good for him?
 
Last edited:
I don't think the club are too bothered about resale prices for our first teamers tbf. Could even have got more for Sane, if that's all we are bothered about. Its the reason why we don't get big fees like Chelsea- to us, they have run their course. I think the clubs first consideration is whether they 'fit and then if they can justify the cost spead over the time of their contract.

It will be fascinating to see this unfold. IF both want to come, seeing Haarland and Cains agents trying to reduce the fee Dortmund and Spurs want, will be interesting.
 
G-Star Medium Rare said:
Kane would be at best a short term stop gap. I'd say pay no more than £50m with a 2 year contract on a maximum of 80% KDBs salary.
Click to expand...
LOL, 50m and a two year contract, good luck with that.

Kane will want and get 5 years, no one makes an investment of 10's millions of pounds on a 2 year deal.

Kane won't leave Spurs for anything under 100m, Sterling straight swop?

Sterling goes to Spurs we get Arry and sign Grealish for 60m and wave the Luiz clause.
 
TonyColemansbagofapples said:
But why would Jesus want to go to Spurs? Don't say game time because he gets plenty of that here and gets plenty of lovely medals too.
Click to expand...
To be the main man, he is getting to the age where he wants regular game time, with us nothing more than a squad player and if we go and buy a world class striker, next season he may well get less minutes on the pitch.

Great lad, always gives his all , but is he good enough?
 
Keeper! said:
LOL, 50m and a two year contract, good luck with that.

Kane will want and get 5 years, no one makes an investment of 10's millions of pounds on a 2 year deal.

Kane won't leave Spurs for anything under 100m, Sterling straight swop?

Sterling goes to Spurs we get Arry and sign Grealish for 60m and wave the Luiz clause.
Click to expand...
Same as post above, why would Sterling want to go to Spurs, big step down and no medals
 
1
Keeper! said:
LOL, 50m and a two year contract, good luck with that.

Kane will want and get 5 years, no one makes an investment of 10's millions of pounds on a 2 year deal.

Kane won't leave Spurs for anything under 100m, Sterling straight swop?

Sterling goes to Spurs we get Arry and sign Grealish for 60m and wave the Luiz clause.
Click to expand...
Lanes just not worth anything more IMHO
 
Keeper! said:
If he is desperate ask for a transfer, officially, your move Arry.
Click to expand...

i think he will behind the scenes mate if he has an agreement with levy. Haaland is only starting out in his career but Kane knows this is his last chance of a big move to win trophies and he will also know that it would be his only chance to come to us as if we sign another striker this summer then he`s stuck at spuds.
 
An injury prone Kane no thanks
Haaland is so much better
Would rather sign someone like Andre silva this year in part ex for less money
Then get Haaland next year
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top