It's not City's board that broke this deal, it was Levy's insistence on getting every pound of flesh. It blew up in his face as City got tired of waiting and a better proposition appeared on the horizon.I suspect Kane was told we won't stand in your way if we don't qualify for the CL, no figure would have been mentioned. Kanes understanding of "won't stand in your way" was a million miles off from Levy's.
In my opinion its City's job to verify if Kane is right through whatever sources they have. They didn't and that is where this mess developed from. I mean what's your first reaction when you hear gentleman's agreement and Daniel Levy? Kane may have been stupid enough to believe it but a club the size of City with the resources available should have known better.
Off course I don't know but we do know Kane gave an interview to get the ball rolling, he then missed his covid test, 2 actions designed to aggravate. He proved he was willing to play his part. There is no way after doing that he just goes silently if the only hold up his is replacement.
Pile of shite, absolute bollocks post.Where have all the "we won't leave him hanging" posts gone? All I see is Kane and Levy taking flak. All transfers involve the buyer discretely finding out if the player will move, once they have his indication they go and find out if the club will sell. This is established practice, Kane did his bit, twice, City let him down. A club the size of City should have known what spurs would take before getting the player to start letting off grenades. They acted either amateurish or naive, if Spurs price was too much the player should have been informed in May. We where told it was "close" less than 2 weeks ago when in reality it was never close. Kane nor his agent have ever been involved I a transfer, the onus was on City to to indicate how well or otherwise things where developing. They either completely misunderstood the situation or just plain had no clue.
I've seen numerous times that players won't sign for Spurs because Levy won't let them go, I'd argue City have come out of this worse. Would the agent of Declan Rice or Kalvin Phillips have their player behave the way Kane did in the knowledge City might just abandon them? You never hear of Liverpool, Chelsea or Utd behaving in such a way, they seem to know if a player is actually attainable before getting involved. City done this Koulibaly last year too. Its poor behaviour.
I don't feel as though we have lost. Certainly not at the figures involved.I don't think any of the 3 parties involved have come out of this particularly well.
City - Messed around for weeks/months with what seemed to be the expectation that as we got closer to deadline Spurs/Levy would fold. We could have got the same response a month ago and moved on.
Kane - Didn't do enough to push it through. He kicked all of this off by doing the Neville interview and then disappeared.
Spurs/Levy - You have had years of Kane in the side and won nothing. If it had been the other way around I might have expected my chairman to think that taking in £100m+ for a 28 year old might not be a bad idea. If my club had done nothing in the transfer market all summer and was scratching around trying to take players like Traore on loan, I would really consider that a £100m+ influx into the coffers might be a major plus. Especially since Nuno hasn't done too badly bringing in mid-priced players previously. However, Levy is clearly now obsessed with this master negotiator persona he has built for himself, to the extent it now takes precedent over what is best for Spurs. Levy is an idiot and you guys and the media celebrating his idiocy just encourages him to be even more idiotic. £100m+ for a 28 year old and apparently he doesn't even consider it...braindead.
All to blame in this and all losers in it.
Thought this from the start, no way have we gone into this without having a very good idea of what figures were being mentioned and what was supposed to be involved, and that would have come from people directly involved.The £75m + £25m offer is so ridiculous it has been bothering me since I heard it. Do you not think it is plausible that Kane told City that his gentleman's agreement with Levy was that if Spurs underachieved (whatever that is) he could leave for £100m? City saw an opportunity and thought we will have a piece of that and made the offer, only for Levy to renege on the agreement and say we want £150m. So yeah, they were miles apart on fee. However, I think its entirely possible that City made the offer and expected it to be accepted based on info provided to them from Kanes camp and therefore never had any intention of going to £150m.
- They were prepared to pay a fixed £100 million plus £20-or-so million in add-ons, but Levy refused to negotiate
- With the two clubs not talking since late July, the move had been dead for weeks despite Kane’s hopes
No point crying over spilt shit.Direct from The Athletic:
Where were all these confident rumours coming from?
Bizarre.
I agree that gentlemans agreements are stupid and naïve but I suppose it depends on how the relationship has gone before. If Kane considered Levy to be a friend and a man of his word, then I don't think its too crazy to expect a friend to do as they have said.I suspect Kane was told we won't stand in your way if we don't qualify for the CL, no figure would have been mentioned. Kanes understanding of "won't stand in your way" was a million miles off from Levy's.
In my opinion its City's job to verify if Kane is right through whatever sources they have. They didn't and that is where this mess developed from. I mean what's your first reaction when you hear gentleman's agreement and Daniel Levy? Kane may have been stupid enough to believe it but a club the size of City with the resources available should have known better.