Harry Kane

blueparrot said:
No it isn’t it’s because half want Haaland, but he isn’t coming. If the question was if Haaland is out do you want Kane, it would be a very different answer.
Click to expand...
I disagree, If you asked fans do you want City to sign Kane for £50m I am thinking you would get 99% of people saying yes. Its only just over 50% because of the huge money it will cost and his age.
 
EL APACHE TEVEZ said:
Why is it tiresome
Click to expand...
Because its bollocks from any fan who gives a shit. We dont have endless money and paying exhorbitantly may well affect other business immediately or down the line...its such a cop out of a response.

I mean look dont take offense its just i keep hearing the same bollocks almost word for word.
 
BlueBanger said:
Because its bollocks from any fan who gives a shit. We dont have endless money and paying exhorbitantly may well affect other business immediately or down the line...its such a cop out of a response.

I mean look dont take offense its just i keep hearing the same bollocks almost word for word.
Click to expand...
I have an inclination they know what they’re doing though…
 
EL APACHE TEVEZ said:
Why is it tiresome
Click to expand...
It's a fair point, but the answer to it is that spending (of the amounts quoted) on Kane limits us elsewhere. Specifically LB and a Dinho replacement - ~I like Rodri as a footballer but he is not like for like and Zin is doing well as a makeshift LB with little prospect of Mendy coming good. Id also argue that even if we only plan to play 1 striker we may need 3 ( but accept Raz / Torres or even Foden could cover that. My understanding is that a 150m splurge on Kane may stop us dealing with those issues due to the ever evolving (to shaft us) FFP.
 
BlueBanger said:
Because its bollocks from any fan who gives a shit. We dont have endless money and paying exhorbitantly may well affect other business immediately or down the line...its such a cop out of a response.

I mean look dont take offense its just i keep hearing the same bollocks almost word for word.
Click to expand...
Some of us remember all the times we had fuck all mate,and the scum had it all.
 
EL APACHE TEVEZ said:
Is it your money!!!
Click to expand...
As i said...a cop out of a response.

No is the obvious answer, but as with all issues in life, its not black and white simplicity but rather shades of gray.

When big money is spent badly(and i'm not arguing Kane's value one way or another here) it can and does affect our ability to solve personnel problems down the line...see how we never solved the LB issue properly for example. When results are impacted because of this knock on effect it becomes everyone's problem associated with the club...especially the fans.
 
salford blue 62 said:
Some of us remember all the times we had fuck all mate,and the scum had it all.
Click to expand...
You are living in the past. Just because you live there dont expect us all to do the same.

I'm arguing for modesty in our spending if anything here...zero entitlement.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
It's a fair point, but the answer to it is that spending (of the amounts quoted) on Kane limits us elsewhere. Specifically LB and a Dinho replacement - ~I like Rodri as a footballer but he is not like for like and Zin is doing well as a makeshift LB with little prospect of Mendy coming good. Id also argue that even if we only plan to play 1 striker we may need 3 ( but accept Raz / Torres or even Foden could cover that. My understanding is that a 150m splurge on Kane may stop us dealing with those issues due to the ever evolving (to shaft us) FFP.
Click to expand...
We need a goal scorer. Fern & Rodders will be enough for now. Add into the mix JG and we are golden for the next 3-5 years. FFP is an issue or we would also be in the market for a DM and a LB. As I said we need Goals this season. We can fix the other issues next season. FFP has made sure we can’t do it all in 1 window unfortunately.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
It's a fair point, but the answer to it is that spending (of the amounts quoted) on Kane limits us elsewhere. Specifically LB and a Dinho replacement - ~I like Rodri as a footballer but he is not like for like and Zin is doing well as a makeshift LB with little prospect of Mendy coming good. Id also argue that even if we only plan to play 1 striker we may need 3 ( but accept Raz / Torres or even Foden could cover that. My understanding is that a 150m splurge on Kane may stop us dealing with those issues due to the ever evolving (to shaft us) FFP.
Click to expand...
A+++
 
BlueBanger said:
As i said...a cop out of a response.

No is the obvious answer, but as with all issues in life, its not black and white simplicity but rather shades of gray.

When big money is spent badly(and i'm not arguing Kane's value one way or another here) it can and does affect our ability to solve personnel problems down the line...see how we never solved the LB issue properly for example. When results are impacted because of this knock on effect it becomes everyone's problem associated with the club...especially the fans.
Click to expand...
We’ve not done too bad in the last 12/13 years well I don’t think we have.
 
I reckon it will happen but not until after the City v Spurs game is out of the way. The story's are already doing the rounds, Kane to miss the start of the season (very convenient that) wouldn't be surprised if he's a City player 3 or 4 days after the Spurs game.
 
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