Harry Kane

JPBB said:
Yes, exactly where we should finish given our resources.

And £160m less debt.



You don't think so?
Click to expand...
It's not just my opinion mate, they aren't in for him. Else they wouldn't be extending 35 year old Cavani another year
 
InLevyITrust said:
Again I am happy for him to be sold at a price that reflects his stature, his remaining contract and what he will do for City, its that simple.
Click to expand...
I think this is the route Harry Kane has to go down to try and force a move. City and Spurs clearly haven't come to an agreement on price. Levy doesn't have to sell because of Kane's long contract, and City has just won the league and reached a Champions League final without a striker.

This time next year, Harry will be another year older and Haaland's buy out clause is applicable. If Harry doesn't go in this window, he misses his chance to come to City and work with Pep IMO.

That's not to say what he's doing is right, but you can understand the politics at play. He has to cause a headache to lower Levy's demands. All this 'gentleman's agreement' stuff is rubbish. You either have an agreement in writing or you don't. He's an idiot for signing such a long contract without a buyout clause.
 
daztrueblue91 said:
You’d think City were offering a 2 year loan deal and a Mars Bar the way you’re going on.

If City placed a £100 million bid for Kane, it’s still a fee that would be a PL record. You might not think it’s what Kane is worth, but it’s hardly a disrespectful fee.

If a ‘serious offer’ only starts with Kane being the second most expensive player of all time, then it’s no wonder why Kane’s pissed off. That seems like pricing him out of a move as opposed to having a gentlemen’s agreement.
Click to expand...
Ben white went for £50M, a rumoured bid of £100m for Jack, £72M for Sancho. Kane is a player who has consistently scored goals in the PL and CL for a team who don't have the backing that others do. Kane will get you exactly what you need as a striker or a attacking midfielder. I'm not saying £180m or £160m.
 
InLevyITrust said:
Again I am happy for him to be sold at a price that reflects his stature, his remaining contract and what he will do for City, its that simple.
Click to expand...
He is 28 and has dodgy ankles. I think he should stay where he is cos those 2 factors mean, in my opinion, he isn’t worth what you and your chairman think he is. We have walked away from plenty of high profile transfers due to high fees quoted, I think that’s the likely scenario with this one. Our highest ever fee paid is around £65m, we are unlikely to add around £100m to that. I think the worst news for you is HK not coming in to training yesterday, for him that was a huge and frankly unexpected step and it probably lowered the maximum fee available to you.
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.