Harry Kane

Havard Business School tactic of anchoring.

Very successful technique if done right.

All depends on NBA (Next Best Alternative) and whose is the best.

Is it City’s - after all we did ok last season.

Spurs - They don’t want to lose him.

Kane TBF is playing whatever cards he can to weaken Spurs NBA.

At the moment we are in a stalemate, however in the next couple of weeks something will change as the one thing that will really test ours and Spurs NBA is a time limit on a decision being made expiring.

I think a transfer request from Kane is needed to get this done.

Interesting. I think our NBA is to wait a year and go for Haaland. The drop off from Kane to other strikers is stark.

Their NBA is what? Vlahovic and Martinez pairing, which will probably set them back £120m or so.

You could argue it's 'hold onto Kane' but I'm not sure that's true any more, as you've pointed out.
 
Another little bit of information from me, this time purely my opinion on the player I have watched since he was playing in our youth team. Should you sign Harry Kane, please don’t worry about him being ‘injury prone’.



In his senior career he has only had 4 ‘bad injuries’ (keeping him out for more than a month).



Biscuit ankles or similar, is what many people tag him with. It doesn’t really tell a proper story. He has had 3 bad ankle ligament injuries.. all coming from being tackled awkwardly. I’d assume you lot can remember one of them from Fabian Delph in the CL QF 1st leg. I’m sorry but if anyone’s ankle gets caught in that position, the result is an ankle ligament injury. The other 2 ankle injuries were from similar incidents. These 3 impact injuries are bad fortune, not the result of having weak ligaments.



His 4th big injury was a complete freak. As he was knocking on an offside goal he pulled up with what looked like a tweaked hammy. It turned out it he ruptured his hamstring and required surgery. As you can imagine Spurs fans freaked at the time because it was so innocuous. There were reports from medical experts at the time saying it was a 1 in a thousand injury.



I suppose it depends on your definition of ‘injury prone’. But for me Harry certainly doesn’t fit into that category. It’s not like he picks up loads of training ground niggles etc. For me an injury prone player continues to get multiple different injuries season after season. Harry played around 60 games last season for club and country!



Furthermore when he does get injured, he always seems to return before the expected date, which is a testament to how hard he works behind the scenes.



It’s the one remaining negative tag that rival fans throw at him, because he has proven every other myth wrong with his performances season after season. If you do end up signing him, quite simply THERE ARE NO NEGATIVES. I really can’t emphasise this enough. But then again you will all realise that very quickly if you get the pleasure of watching him for 90 mins week in week out.
Thanks for info

I’m pretty certain however that Kane got injured against us putting in a bad tackle on Delph rather than the other way round.

 
in the meantime spurs are apparently interested in JWP, to complete a full slate of mediocre former southampton midfielders with hojberg

If only they still had wanyama
 
Thanks for info

I’m pretty certain however that Kane got injured against us putting in a bad tackle on Delph rather than the other way round.

That’s absolutely right
 
Thanks for info

I’m pretty certain however that Kane got injured against us putting in a bad tackle on Delph rather than the other way round.


that cost us that game himself and Spurs we’re playing shite until he went off
 
Depends what we pay, don’t think anyone ever thought we’d pay less than £120 mill though . £120 plus add ons has been fairly accepted by most of us. Which is fine.

I agree.

A few definitely did though, got hounded for suggesting 120m, which I thought was conservative.
 
Thanks for info

I’m pretty certain however that Kane got injured against us putting in a bad tackle on Delph rather than the other way round.

I remember that, Delph had a go at him for going in recklessly and the Spurs fans were fuming at him for disrespecting his NT captain lol
 
Super negotiation tactics, how much for Kane. We want £200m, ok no problem.
Don't be ridiculous. City will already know to the penny how much Spurs want, and will be looking to negotiate it down.
If Spurs want an unreasonable amount, we'd have walked away ages ago.
The figure is clearly within our valuation range. We should be doing little more than coming to an arrangement on how the amount is paid.
 
Thanks for info

I’m pretty certain however that Kane got injured against us putting in a bad tackle on Delph rather than the other way round.

Haha you know what I meant! Either way, my point still stands. I’m not sure anyone in Kane’s position comes out of that incident without an ankle ligament injury.
 
At the start of the summer we were debating whether he was worth 100m. 120m, you were mad to even suggest that, that it would be asked let alone that we would pay it. We were going to land our man, it was going to be for nowhere near 120m, that was just a high figure kane haters used to claim high price.

Now we are debating whether he can be got for 150 or 160m. And generally think if we get him for that including addons we'd have done well.

And really, Levy has done nothing but sit and wait. Yeah, some myth that he is a good negotiator.

Well he's not negotiating with the Bluemoon forum, is he? What "we" were debating in terms of Kane's value is utterly immaterial to the conversations between Manchester City and Tottenham Hotspur
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top