Harry Kane

Dr Dweeb said:
He is exactly the type of player City don't need. A bit like Grealish, all me me me. Best left alone.
Click to expand...

Yes clearly both of them are very selfish, staying at clubs despite having the chance to go to ones that are more likely to challenge for titles and pay them more money.

Kane is 29. It is now or never for him. For City it isn't business that makes sense in my opinion when Haaland is about and is so much younger. But there aren't many transfers the club has got wrong in recent seasons so I'll trust them to make the right choices.

Grealish I hope we sign.
 
TCIB said:
Pretty much how i feel, undecided. Top English striker, yes please, top English striker at 28 who has a history of ankle issues at a fee north of 100m and i suddenly find myself wanting to be more considered. If Haaland did not exist i would be more assured saying yes but he does exist.

For me both those players would need to be worked into the squad at a cost of our current play style, to an extent. One however has significant resale value and the other will depreciate quickly no matter how successful he is due to age.
We would not have to become a bunch of long ball bruisers but the top end synergy or pressing, lots of movement and sharp passing would likely not be as it is now. How much would that affect us as a whole? not got a clue tbh. Pep may even be able to coach both of them to do a bit more of that, Kane already has shown he can drop back and pick a decent pass through but does that interfere with Kev then?

Kane is a huge goal threat and Pep would see that is realised to the fullest. If we are going to have to adapt a bit though, the sensible option is do it for the younger man who will still be growing as a player, but still a deadly striker. Then again Kane is absolutely proven in the prem, i am pretty certain Haaland would carry his ability to the prem but we have seen Kane do it over a prolonged period of time.

We may even not be interested in either and work with what we have and i'd be fine with that to if Pep thinks the squad will be ok over a season. Txiki and Pep have no time for Haalands agent at all so that has to be considered. The harmony at the club is imo sacred to them as much as anything we do on the pitch as one affects the other.

Marketing wise Kane would be great but equally making inroads to the nordic market would appeal greatly to. They are traditionally Liverpool and Utd but Haaland would certainly bring a lot of young Norwegian fans to follow us. We think long term so it will be a consideration but how much is anybody's guess really.



tl;dr Not got a clue what we should do but would not be dissapointed with any outcome really, Kane, Haaland or neither. If we go for Kane i just hope we do not spend to much due to the English tax or whatever else inflates his price.
Click to expand...
I'm in the no stack in the poll. Mainly due to thinking long-term with Haaland but, I suppose 3/4 years of Kane is also long-term in football. His game has developed and he is more involved in play rather than standing on the 6 yard box as some posts insinuate. Fitness shouldn't be too much of an issue as we rotate players unlike Spurs.

The positive of buying Kane is that no matter how much we pay Spurs it'll just go against the debt, not that they are any real threat to us but, I fucking still hate them for that walk out of Wembley in '81. The LC final was nice however, I may never get the chance to see us live beating them in a final. Time does not heal a good grudge.
 
The Stockport Iniesta said:
There's a few things, Pep's confidence we are getting someone , the way Its being played out looks scripted to me, both Kane and Levy can come out of it with credit in the eyes of Spurs fans, if it's played right. The interview Kane gave a couple of weeks ago, talking about how his game has evolved just screamed Kane to City to me.The clubs may have had no contact but I wouldn't be surprised if the deal was already in place. Just a gut feeling I have.
Click to expand...

Makes you think. if Part of (and I stress part of) the reason to announce Sergio's departure so early, was ro send a 'signal'. Was that signal really to Kane rather than Haaland as people thought
 
TCIB said:
Pretty much how i feel, undecided. Top English striker, yes please, top English striker at 28 who has a history of ankle issues at a fee north of 100m and i suddenly find myself wanting to be more considered. If Haaland did not exist i would be more assured saying yes but he does exist.

For me both those players would need to be worked into the squad at a cost of our current play style, to an extent. One however has significant resale value and the other will depreciate quickly no matter how successful he is due to age.
We would not have to become a bunch of long ball bruisers but the top end synergy or pressing, lots of movement and sharp passing would likely not be as it is now. How much would that affect us as a whole? not got a clue tbh. Pep may even be able to coach both of them to do a bit more of that, Kane already has shown he can drop back and pick a decent pass through but does that interfere with Kev then?

Kane is a huge goal threat and Pep would see that is realised to the fullest. If we are going to have to adapt a bit though, the sensible option is do it for the younger man who will still be growing as a player, but still a deadly striker. Then again Kane is absolutely proven in the prem, i am pretty certain Haaland would carry his ability to the prem but we have seen Kane do it over a prolonged period of time.

We may even not be interested in either and work with what we have and i'd be fine with that to if Pep thinks the squad will be ok over a season. Txiki and Pep have no time for Haalands agent at all so that has to be considered. The harmony at the club is imo sacred to them as much as anything we do on the pitch as one affects the other.

Marketing wise Kane would be great but equally making inroads to the nordic market would appeal greatly to. They are traditionally Liverpool and Utd but Haaland would certainly bring a lot of young Norwegian fans to follow us. We think long term so it will be a consideration but how much is anybody's guess really.



tl;dr Not got a clue what we should do but would not be dissapointed with any outcome really, Kane, Haaland or neither. If we go for Kane i just hope we do not spend to much due to the English tax or whatever else inflates his price.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, yes. The huge Nordic market. All 28 million of them.

Key to our ongoing success abroad.
 
supercity88 said:
Yes clearly both of them are very selfish, staying at clubs despite having the chance to go to ones that are more likely to challenge for titles and pay them more money.

Kane is 29. It is now or never for him. For City it isn't business that makes sense in my opinion when Haaland is about and is so much younger. But there aren't many transfers the club has got wrong in recent seasons so I'll trust them to make the right choices.

Grealish I hope we sign.
Click to expand...
Kane isn't 28 yet.

The last thing those two players are,captains of their clubs...is selfish.We all have moments,but its fuking mental some of the shite that gets written.
 
SanPellegrini said:
Wow, what a shift in the poll since this morning. There had been a consistent “no” majority for the last few weeks.

Not complaining though, as more and more I’m thinking this will happen, so good to see us getting behind the transfer. I was somewhat keen before, but I’ll admit, events of the last day or so have got me so much more excited and I think he’d bag lots of goals in our team.

Sense some piss boiling too, and wonder how conflicted the media will feel - their media darling ‘Arry playing for us
Click to expand...

Yeah I mean now that the question has been re-explained over and over and all reasoning removed, no surprise really.

It is a simple question, you see:

Do you want City to sign Harry Kane, assuming no other alternatives exist, that he will never be injured, that the price doesn't matter, that he will guarantee 30+ goals, that we can still sign others anyway, that no is the wrong answer and you'll be told to give your head a wobble, that his character is irrelevant, and that he would drag his baws over hot coals in desperation to join us?

Who wouldn't say yes to that.
 
Last edited:
ws01 said:
Ahhh, yes. The huge Nordic market. All 28 million of them.

Key to our ongoing success abroad.
Click to expand...
Doesn't bother me but some marketing chap has probably given it brief thought whilst taking a morning dump. As i insinuate, it is likely a very small factor to not being one at all.
 
supercity88 said:
Yes clearly both of them are very selfish, staying at clubs despite having the chance to go to ones that are more likely to challenge for titles and pay them more money.

Kane is 29. It is now or never for him. For City it isn't business that makes sense in my opinion when Haaland is about and is so much younger. But there aren't many transfers the club has got wrong in recent seasons so I'll trust them to make the right choices.

Grealish I hope we sign.
Click to expand...
Kane is 27
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.