Harry Kane

domalino said:
I'd be worried about KDB's injuries if he was a player we were about to spend £160m on too.

I think his injuries are one of the main reasons we've bought Grealish. We now have another absolutely world class midfielder on the pitch when Kev is not fit and can be more relaxed about his recoveries as he gets into his 30s.
Click to expand...
Even with kdb injuries what he provides when he is fit 160m would be a bargain in this market
 
domalino said:
It's hilarious.

/r/soccer has convinced itself that we have unlimited money and zero FFP worries so to them, us haggling over £60m is like a billionaire not wanting to pay 10p for a shopping bag.
Click to expand...
that sub is full of uneducated teenagers. Awful awful platform for discussion, used to be okay for goals and highlights, even that's ruined.
 
vincent said:
Yes but if reports are correct we have already bid 100m. That would suggest we are ok with paying 100m (possibly more) on a player that is known to have problems with his knee (and possible ankles). All a bit odd imo.
Click to expand...
No the other poster was asked why City have potentially bid £100m (which actually nobody knows for sure), I was merely saying the other poster wouldn’t know why, he was just passing on info in good faith
 
domalino said:
That's not what I'd call looking into his injuries properly.

IMO clearly has a completely fucked ankle. They are only getting more and more frequent, and any kind of contact on his ankles seems to put him out for a minimum of 10 days which suggests to me something is permanently damaged and he's playing through it.

September 2016 Ankle injury.
March 2017 He reinjures the same ankle.
March 2018 Ankle injury again.
January 2019 Ankle injury.
April 2019 Ankle injury.
November 2020 Ankle injury (this is reported as unknown, but it happened after he limped off with after a challenge on his ankle vs. Iceland)
January 2021 Ankle injury.
April 2021 Ankle injury.

Spurs do rely on him, but he's gone through summers like 2019 with no international tournaments and not had a corrective surgery, so it seems unlikely to me that anything can be done to fix it. He's also got a habit of re-injuring it when they think it's fixed (ie being out for 40 days in Jan 2019 then coming back for 2 weeks and missing another 50 days)


I'm sure he'll keep playing through it, but it's not going to get better on its own, in fact these repetitive injuries usually just get worse and worse as a player approaches 30. I do not believe he's going to make it far past 30 at the top level, but....who cares? There will always be world class strikers around and if money is no object we'll get 2 or 3 years out of Kane and fuck him off when he can't produce any more.
Click to expand...

I did a comparison a few weeks back and from what I remember, Sergio missed something like five more games than Kane over the last five seasons through injury.

Keeping in mind that the perception of Aguero is that he's injury prone and he's
five years older than Kane, I find it hard to believe some people can't accept others finding Harry's fitness a concern.
 
Silence is golden golden, hmmmm not sure this applies to this deal. Spurs will announce Kane is staying, then we'll say there's no time to get a replacement in. As obvious as night following day
 
domalino said:
I'd be worried about KDB's injuries if he was a player we were about to spend £160m on too.

I think his injuries are one of the main reasons we've bought Grealish. We now have another absolutely world class midfielder on the pitch when Kev is not fit and can be more relaxed about his recoveries as he gets into his 30s.
Click to expand...
100% the reason we purchased Grealish - we will need to manage KDB’s playing time if he is going to play out his contract.
 
kanovic said:
Even with kdb injuries what he provides when he is fit 160m would be a bargain in this market
Click to expand...

I love Kev, but I'm not sure anyone in their right mind is spending £160m on a 30 year old who's missed big stretches of 2 out of his last 3 seasons and is currently injured.

I'm just glad we've got him and now Grealish is around and Gundogan is playing at POTY levels he doesn't have to carry the team creatively and play too much.

I assume he could have played Norwich if we needed him to, given he was fit to come off the bench vs. Spurs, but we've rested him and same again vs. Arsenal.
 
Fordyboy46 said:
Silence is golden golden, hmmmm not sure this applies to this deal. Spurs will announce Kane is staying, then we'll say there's no time to get a replacement in. As obvious as night following day
Click to expand...
Seriously fordy are you on the wind-up?
Your posts are getting absolutely stupid now, it's gone from being funny to being boring now, you are acting like a fan from another team.
You bring nothing to the table mate.
 
Fordyboy46 said:
Silence is golden golden, hmmmm not sure this applies to this deal. Spurs will announce Kane is staying, then we'll say there's no time to get a replacement in. As obvious as night following day
Click to expand...
They don't need to announce anything, he's got 3 years left on his deal.
 
What’s all this bollocks about Harry’s broken knee? Thought it was his glass ankles some of the non-wanters were getting in a tizz about at the start, it’s not like and deal wouldn’t be subject to a medical, or have I missed it and caveat emptor applies to all transfers now?
 
Anyone else not really bothered anymore? I am more than satisfied with the squad we have and if we can’t get a deal over the line for Kane then so be it.

We move on to another target. leave Spurs to their debt, winning fuck all and keeping unhappy players. It’s served them well up to now. Levy has achieved a great feat by distracting the London lemmings from gross mismanagement.

Spurs to win the league is my bet now Kane stays….oops wrong century ;)
 
Pam said:
So you're essentially saying that City are happy to splurge £100 mil on a player that the club believes is suffering from a permanently fucked knee. What level of derangement would that be?
Click to expand...

Pam said:
So you're essentially saying that City are happy to splurge £100 mil on a player that the club believes is suffering from a permanently fucked knee. What level of derangement would that be?
Click to expand...
I know. It does also lend some credence to what @twosips said about the board preferring other options to Pep who seemingly isn't as bothered about any risk as much?
 
Romeo_451 said:
Kane has always been Spurs star man. whenever he gets injured they rush him back, which made the injury worse many times. I'm not too concerned about his injury record I'm more concerned about the deal actually happening lol
Click to expand...
Me too mate, for the record!
 
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