Harry Kane

AliAdel said:
Think 50m, Jesus & Sterling would be satisfy all parties.

Sterling would be deployed as a RW (fits his abilities) & Jesus would get a run as the main man in attack.

Sterling is originally from london too, so doubt he’d be against that move.
Click to expand...
This is a forum mate, you’re supposed to share the crack pipe around.
 
BlueMedic said:
Out of interest, who instead? Or stick with what we've got?
Click to expand...

If nobody more fitting at a fitting price, then stick with what we've got. And ive been calling for a goal scorer and striker. But 100m+ just feels misplaced, to me. Of course, fully trust the club and welcome whoever we sign
 
Whatever the club decide I will ultimately support, not doubting Kane's ability

I am concerned about his injury record especially that suspect ankle
 
Horlocksleftpeg said:
There’s also an argument to say he wouldn’t get ran in to the ground playing for city either.

One thing he won’t get at City is as much game time as he does at Spurs.
Click to expand...

He would play more games at City because we don't go out of the FA Cup and League cup in the 3rd round every year.
 
Maybe after the results in the bundesliga this weekend Haaland’s people have contacted city to say the lads going to stay another year.

City then get on the phone to kane’s people to say they want him at city next season but are not going to spend all summer in pissing competition with levy, so if wants to come here he’s Going to have to do the leg work him self.
 
Hes bludy good, didnt realise how good his passing is and vision. Honestly he seems the perfect fit watching this for a Pep team.

 
Lkzerinho said:
Don't get me wrong, I think Kane is a world-class striker, but if we're going to be paying north of 100 million for a guy who more likely than not has 2-3 years left at that level given his injury record, we should cough up the extra 50 for the 20-year-old who can lead our line for the next 10-12 years.
Click to expand...

I think the fee will be sub-£100m - apparently Spurs convinced him to delay plans to leave last summer, so you’d imagine they’d have had to compromise and agree to let him go for a fair price this summer if he gave them another year.

Haaland isn’t staying anywhere for 10-12 years - Raiola will want at least one more massive agents fee for him, as will Alfie. There’s also a question as to how good he really is; Dortmund have massively underperformed collectively since he arrived, and were practically playing with 10 men against us.

Us and Liverpool have gotten to 3 of the last 4 Champions League finals without a traditional poacher - the game has moved on, and 11 contributing players takes you further than 10 + a goalscoring ghost. Kane or Lautaro offer more in that regard and in our current system than Haaland would.
 
wolviedinho said:
Probably right mate but what is their rebuttal for Leicester winning the league and fa cup? Everton have also got an owner willing to fund the club. Spurs are a quagmire.
Click to expand...
Those factual intricacies have probably flown straight over their heads. To be fair, even after their title win, did anyone really see Leicester dominating for a generation? I think we all saw it as a Roy of The Rovers lottery win come true.

As for the FA Cup, it's a two team final which Chelsea were strong favourites for. It took a worldy, two world class saves & a correctly disallowed goal for Leicester to triumph. No one would have been surprised in the slightest if they'd lost.

Spurs are different. They've always flattered to deceive. They are a part of English football's power clubs, but strangely aren't there based on success. They've always been the bridesmaid & rarely the bride, but in their fans minds the Northern upstarts City have not only upset the Sky 4's apple cart, they've upset the ambitions of the chasing pack too. They're finding it hard to deal with.

Most of my family are in North London & are Spurs fans/season ticket holders. It kills them to see what City have achieved. My lot didn't care much for Moureen, but they were so desperate for a trophy, any trophy, that they were happy to hold their nose for three years in the hope Moureen could land even a Carabao Cup or two.

Strangely, they see it as City have killed their dreams & chances of success. ManUre, The Dippers, L'Arse & The Chavs have all struggled at some point over the last 10 years. Spurs replaced all of them as CL regulars at one point or another, but they honestly believe they could have been winners if not for City skewing football with our oil money.

It's weird. None of them mind being stiffed by the old Sky 4, but even now they find City's success hard to swallow & accept.... :-|
 
domalino said:
He would play more games at City because we don't go out of the FA Cup and League cup in the 3rd round every year.
Click to expand...
Harry Kane wouldn’t start vs Lincoln away in the LC but he would at Spurs.

We go stronger than most in the cup competitions but Pep isn’t daft.

One thing is for certain, moving to a false-9 formation for our biggest games would be a thing of the past.
 
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