Harry Kane

It says a £160m ‘Deal’ key word there being DEAL. It’ll include wages, bonuses, and anything else they can throw in to make it as higher fee as possible to report.
 
Phil Mitchell Foden said:
Never turned up when it mattered in his life, we have no problem putting several past dross every week as is his forte. Can't get excited about this one at all.

He's better than what we have, but for me I'm not sold on it. His age, his recent fitness/injury record, the giant fee. But the worst thing about this move is that it'll rule us out from moving for Halaand, and he may end up at a domestic rival within the next 12 months. And that's something we could really live to regret.

If Halaand wasn't a possibility that's the only way this move would make sense in my opinion.

Otherwise I feel we would've been alright even for a season with just Jesus and Torres up front if we needed to, with our usual false 9 options to cover too. Until making a move for Halaand next summer if he isn't available this.

If Halaand had rejected us and moved elsewhere already then you can justify the Kane move, can't see it otherwise.
Click to expand...
Taps ignore button.
 
How many years do we think we're going to get out of Kane at hes best hopefully by the time he's declining we'll also have a young striker ready to replace him
 
Brewster's millions said:
Well, I’m neither shitting myself nor staring into a car’s headlight right now, but this article is an interesting read

www.90min.com

Every ankle injury Harry Kane has had since 2016 & how long he missed

Name a more iconic duo than Harry Kane and ankle injuries. I'll wait. The Tottenham striker is no stranger to damaging his ankles, so much so that Spurs and Eng
www.90min.com www.90min.com
Click to expand...
I stated PL games played played and some of those injuries were also caused by some poor challenges.Look no further than our very own Sergio who lost far more games with constant muscle injuries.
If we take either the past 6 seasons but not including 2020/21 as figures appear not to have been updated but its been 34, 38,30,37,28 and 11 = 178 and average of 30 PL per season for a centre forward is a very good return.
 
Last edited:
not my fault! said:
It says a £160m ‘Deal’ key word there being DEAL. It’ll include wages, bonuses, and anything else they can throw in to make it as higher fee as possible to report.
Click to expand...
Kidding yourself if you think that's going to include his wages mate. They want to claim he's getting 400k a week that's over 20m a year, he's likely going to get a 5 year deal minimum, there's 100m in wages. Even if you say the figures are bullshit, there's no way he's getting less than half that so the wages alone would make up far too much of that deal to be combined. The figure may or may not be bullshit but they aren't including wages and reporting it as a package at that figure.
 
A well football is now officially ruined.

Second-fourth place beckons the candle dwellers and the rag scum. Another season of ridicule awaits.

Well played City, well played.
 
ninjamonkey said:
Kidding yourself if you think that's going to include his wages mate. They want to claim he's getting 400k a week that's over 20m a year, he's likely going to get a 5 year deal minimum, there's 100m in wages. Even if you say the figures are bullshit, there's no way he's getting less than half that so the wages alone would make up far too much of that deal to be combined. The figure may or may not be bullshit but they aren't including wages and reporting it as a package at that figure.
Click to expand...
No way he’s getting £400k either lol. City don’t pay those types of wages, we pay lower but add incentives and bonuses as they are exempt from FFP calculations. We are not daft… But my point was more there’s no chance we’ll be paying a £160m fee which is why it’s been referred to as a £160m deal, as in a package not fee.
 
Phil Mitchell Foden said:
Oh right so you fully understand precisely how the club operate on transfers because you once had a word with an old City player, and the rest of us are clueless for thinking Txiki has a role in the fees parted with for his targets?

Funny stuff.

I hope Kane is a roaring success if we sign him too btw, how could any blue not? I just have reservations about the move, that's all.

I hope I am wrong if he does sign. I had reservations about the Dias move initially, and I was delighted to be proven wrong on that. Hopefully I am wrong in this instance if Kane does sign.
Click to expand...
YAWN.You could send a fucking glass eye to sleep.
Nothing funny about my knowledge on transfers. just like many who know far more than me on other subjects. But when someone I had known for many many decades informs me about the way in how transfers are handled (and I`m not talking about the intracasies of dotting the i`s and crossing the t`s, as even he didn`t know that side) but the fundamentals and basics of who did what and their roles.
Personally I couldn`t give a flying fuck if you believe me or not but I fully believe this well respected ex player who had very good contacts within the corridors of the Etihad.
People who know me on here will probably be aware as to who told me, but I will never divulge who it was and its not to cover my own arse but for the respect of this person.
 
I have no idea if this real, if this is a good idea, if the money makes sense, if Kane would stay healthy, if Spuds fans would riot and toss cameras to the ground and climb on crossbars, or anything else . . . but one of you better get yer ass down to bushes by the hospital pretty soon to watch for the medical or I'm going to be sorely disappointed in bluemoon.

5,500 miles away I can only be helpful tracking private airplanes, which is why I was hoping for Haaland . . .
 
Last edited:
From todays Gossip Columns :

Manchester City are prepared to offer one of Brazilian forward Gabriel Jesus, 24, Algeria captain Riyad Mahrez, 30, Portugal midfielder Bernardo Silva, 26, or England attacker Raheem Sterling, 26, as part of a deal to tempt Tottenham to sell England captain Harry Kane. (FourFourTwo)

Kane could be set to earn a £400,000-a-week deal at Manchester City with Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy having sanctioned his departure last week. (Sun)
 
ninjamonkey said:
Kidding yourself if you think that's going to include his wages mate. They want to claim he's getting 400k a week that's over 20m a year, he's likely going to get a 5 year deal minimum, there's 100m in wages. Even if you say the figures are bullshit, there's no way he's getting less than half that so the wages alone would make up far too much of that deal to be combined. The figure may or may not be bullshit but they aren't including wages and reporting it as a package at that figure.
Click to expand...
Why are we are offering so much in fee and wages when no one else is in for him ?
I just don't get it.
 
not my fault! said:
No way he’s getting £400k either lol. City don’t pay those types of wages, we pay lower but add incentives and bonuses as they are exempt from FFP calculations. We are not daft… But my point was more there’s no chance we’ll be paying a £160m fee which is why it’s been referred to as a £160m deal, as in a package not fee.
Click to expand...
You don't smash the PL transfer record and then put the guy on 100k. DeBruyne is on 380k and he'll probably be on parity with that.
 
oakiecokie said:
From todays Gossip Columns :

Manchester City are prepared to offer one of Brazilian forward Gabriel Jesus, 24, Algeria captain Riyad Mahrez, 30, Portugal midfielder Bernardo Silva, 26, or England attacker Raheem Sterling, 26, as part of a deal to tempt Tottenham to sell England captain Harry Kane. (FourFourTwo)

Kane could be set to earn a £400,000-a-week deal at Manchester City with Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy having sanctioned his departure last week. (Sun)
Click to expand...
If they get any of those players and upwards of 80m in cash for Kane then we'll have certainly had our pants pulled right round our ankles and our arses slapped.
 
Paulmcfc2703 said:
Why would it?

I don't get the obsession with figure. If he scores a shed load for us are you going to just sit there shaking your head at his cost?
Click to expand...
Why the hell are people like broken records with this questioning...The answer is so painfully obvious.

Why on earth would any city fan not be arsed about how we spend our finite resources, unless you swallow what you read and believe because we have billionaire owners we can spend anywthing we want. IF its 160mil thats just stupid money and we could have spent it much more wisely for me. Honestly i believe that if that figure holds up we will deserve the ridicule we will most certainly get.

Anyhow it obviously isn't...hopefully...surely...no way.
 
Last edited:
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