Harry Kane

neilmcnab said:
With the saga now at the point where levy wants £150+ and city rightfully don't want to spend that amount on a 28 year old kane. Why not just scrap kane and go and buy Dusan Vlahovic and Nuno Mendes.
Target man with lots more pace than kane and a left back we have needed for 5 years plus.
Click to expand...
City have known from the very start what it would take to sign him. The fact this is still on going and City haven't publically pulled away means its still happening. It is a bit worrying that people still think we are negotiating.

Pep hasn't got time to see if Vlahovic is any good or develop. Mendes isn't a target, it has been made very clear on more than one occasion.
 
simon23 said:
Depends on whether you think Grealish is overpriced or not. He also had s release clause so we had no choice.
The value of anything is determined by what someone us willing to pay. If a loaf of bread is priced at 10 quid then its overpriced to me...maybe not fir others ( exaggerated to make a point)
Click to expand...
Did the 100 mill include add-ons?
 
DrBlueBob said:
That's certainly one side of the argument but equally having a longer contract helps the selling club maximise their revenue should they sell before the term is up. If, and it would seem that it may be the case, that Levy and Kane had an agreement then it puts a different slant on things.
Click to expand...
Just forget about agreements, even if there were agreements it has already been broken so there is nothing like that.
 
Bored of this now. Just want a striker in that can put the ball in the back of the net. Don't understand why it's Kane and only Kane. Surely the club have alternatives any striker that can put the ball in the back of the net would score so many goals in our team why does it have to be Kane
 
TINY said:
Fair play from spurs though surely? They value a player at £X, if City want to pay then great if not then the player doesn’t move. They don’t owe Kane or City anything.
Click to expand...
I agree, Spurs have their own valuation of Kane. And they have every right to do so. The problem I have with it, is if we were to pay £160M, it would be our fault for inflating the market. Spurs would be one of the first clubs to squeal about increasing prices, blaming City, when they, being greedy bastards, would be a big part of the problem. Everybody blames the buying clubs in these situations, whereby, the selling club has equal responsibility for rocketing transfer fees, yet get a free ride.
 
Gumzy97 said:
Bored of this now. Just want a striker in that can put the ball in the back of the net. Don't understand why it's Kane and only Kane. Surely the club have alternatives any striker that can put the ball in the back of the net would score so many goals in our team why does it have to be Kane
Click to expand...

Who then?
 
Gumzy97 said:
Bored of this now. Just want a striker in that can put the ball in the back of the net. Don't understand why it's Kane and only Kane. Surely the club have alternatives any striker that can put the ball in the back of the net would score so many goals in our team why does it have to be Kane
Click to expand...
We have tried alternatives. It doesn't work. If it was as easy as buying someone for 30m then we would do it, its clearly not.
 
I would be extremely disappointed if the deal were to collapse over 20-25M. Signing him will guarantee us the league title and that will guarantee us around 220M in prize money.
 
decmancity said:
City have known from the very start what it would take to sign him. The fact this is still on going and City haven't publically pulled away means its still happening. It is a bit worrying that people still think we are negotiating.

Pep hasn't got time to see if Vlahovic is any good or develop. Mendes isn't a target, it has been made very clear on more than one occasion.
Click to expand...
You cannot say that mate. In flapper land, every name mentioned is oven ready, cheaper, wants to come and can all be signed up this week.
 
No need for city to do anything we are the current premier league champions that has already acquired 1 of the best players in the league we will have a successful season with or without kane. On the spurs side they have a player that does not want to be at the club they also are heavily in debt and need funds to strengthen an already weak squad. People may say kane will be professional and give his all but come on how many people give there all in a job they don't want? We r firmly in the box seat if levy is indeed thinking of playing games.
 
I still think paying 100m for a player in a position we don't currently have a huge problem in (striker, left back, defensive mid) FIRST this summer was a huge mistake and we should have first and foremost focused on solving the glaring issues rather than strengthening an already strong position. we keep doing this ever summer, that's why the LB problem stays unsolved.
 
Gumzy97 said:
Bored of this now. Just want a striker in that can put the ball in the back of the net. Don't understand why it's Kane and only Kane. Surely the club have alternatives any striker that can put the ball in the back of the net would score so many goals in our team why does it have to be Kane
Click to expand...
Might be a request from Pep, just a thought
 
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