andyhinch
Well-Known Member
That’s nonsensical in a business sense but it’s a nonsensical business at times.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Harry Kane
- Thread starter Super Joey Hart
- Start date
To be fair it's up to the players where they go, Raiola arranges the financials but the players must have the final say.I really think we aren’t going for Haaland because of Raiola, it’s too much baggage
he’d want 20 million fee now, same again in a few years so it’s either a big signing fee on a new contract or a transfer out
plus he seems to seriously hold talented players back Pogba, De Ligt, Verrati all had not achieved anywhere near what they should have at club level because they got moved to the wrong club for a big pay day
none of that nonsense with Kane just guaranteed goals from day 1
De Ligt is playing for Juve, hardly a move to a backwater club and as a CB a great place to learn your trade in Italian football. He has lots of time to move on IF he wants.
If Haaland is 150mil..Kane is 100mil... 7 years older but still at it. The Torres comparison is bollocks.. he'd lost it before he left Liverpool.
We get 4 good years im ecstatic.
Kane isn't happening for 100m, no chance.
Even if he was, Haaland would still be worth it, and Kane wouldn't, in my own opinion. I can see both being revisited (or actually formally looked at) before the window shuts.
Do I detect a cooling off towards Kane on here?
By who, posters or club?
Posters, generally seems to have stayed around a 50-50 split, but opinions more entrenched and exaggerated.
Club, impossible to tell one way or the other, as has been from the start.
I think it would be more like Kane would be 150mill and Haaland 200mill+++ with all of the extras for Alf and Raiola, plus his wages would be probably twice what Kane would accept.
Only if you choose to argue that. Nothing meaningful ho suggest that though. And of course Kane would play for free and there would be zero additional cost to getting the deal done.
Only because Haaland exists.
I call bullshit on that.
The only reason there is any interest in Kane at all is because Haaland is (wrongly) perceived as unavailable.
Ok, that's clearly bullahit too, but proves my point on sweeping statements.
FantasyIreland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2008
- Messages
- 64,697
Not bullshit for me,hence why i stated it as my reasoning.I call bullshit on that.
The only reason there is any interest in Kane at all is because Haaland is (wrongly) perceived as unavailable.
Ok, that's clearly bullahit too, but proves my point on sweeping statements.
He would be my first choice,but because i know Haaland is out there and is the better buy from several angles.....my excitement about Kane isn't at the level it otherwise would be.
EL APACHE TEVEZ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Sep 2008
- Messages
- 21,985
Welcome to Manchester Danny ; )
Not bullshit for me,hence why i stated it as my reasoning.
He would be my first choice,but because i know Haaland is out there and is the better buy from several angles.....my excitement about Kane isn't at the level it otherwise would be.
Fair enough, entirely my bad.
Seen a fair few claim that most of those not up for Kane only think that way because Haaland exists (which itself there is nothing wrong with) so I mistakenly took the above as that.
Its not Sturridge, is it?Welcome to Manchester Danny ; )