Would still prefer Haaland but Kane would be a brilliant back up option. However, both really don't suit our business model. As another poster astutely put it Grealish, although a completely different player would surely fit in with our transfer philosophy. Older than Haaland but over 2 years younger than Kane. Think he would cost around £65m, would give us a brilliant option and we'd have plenty of "legs" playing with the alternative of Gabby up top or the rotational false 9, makes loads of sense. Leave the dinosaur clubs to get into an auction for Kane and Haaland, both of who I think are great players.
Damn, how do I make my mind up now??I am on he fence with this. I am not excited about the signing but Kane isn't terrible player
No one is guaranteed trophies, he would have a fantastic chance to win things but no guarantee.Definitely wants out based on that interview with Neville.
Even trying to set his transfer fee at £100m.
I personally believe he will only consider City in this country, only place he's guaranteed trophies.
Oh right. No debate then. Everything is for the best in this, the best of all possible worlds.Try to belittle me all you like mush I’ve had a season ticket for 20 years I don’t need to have posts on a forum to tell me how much I care about this football club haha.
We are the best team in the world with the best manager in the world and the best chairman and owner in the world. Forgive me for trusting their judgement of our finances over ‘sir baconface’ and the like on an Internet forum.
Precisely. And why would they want two strikers in the first place, both of which they'd need to negotiate new contracts with.Two players in exchange wont pay their debts for the new stadium
Cheers. Wasn't aware of it being on video.