Any chance you could elaborate on this? I've seen A LOT of Kane to City discussion out there.
Depends on what you mean by a lot, but there has been a lot on Ings too, and earlier than Kane. By the same people in the media. My point is more about reactions than listing comparisons though.
When the links with Ings started, we instantly dismissed them. No way are we replacing Sergio with a 28 year old. It is just his agent looking for a better deal. Scores a lot but not the profile. etc etc.
Kane is also 28. Ok in a few days for the technicality lot, but 28 when he signs and plays for us.
The links with Kane really started when his interview was released, and that was recieved as anywhere between 'this has been done for some time' and 'he must at least have some encouragement from us to say that publicly'.
Ings offically turns down a 4 year improved contract offer from Southampton. But that can't he must have had some encouragement from somehere to do that, with us being the club most strongly linked club.
The club hasn't denied the links to Kane (we most often don't anyway). So that must mean we Are in for him. The club hasn't denied the links to Ings either. means nothing. Means nothing in both cases for me fwiw.
We readily believe that we would pay over double our transfer record, just like that, for a very very good player that scores lots of goals in the league. But wouldn't pay some 25-30m for a very good player that scores lots of goals im the league, of the same age. Who happens to be easier to get with only a year left on his contract and at a club known for selling more readily.
Again, for clarity, not that i believe we wre in for ings, or in for ings over Kane, and i certainly would've want Ings over kane. I just think we are very selective with what is out there to suit the players we fancy. Myself included at times, although I do try at least notice the parity.