Harry Kane

Wembley99 said:
Of course.
Although I would like to keep one of Sterling or Gabby as well :)
But I was referring to the argument that we shouldn't sign Kane, but we should sign Messi.
Click to expand...
Yeah I would keep Jesus all day as he can play out wide and central.
Personally I would prioritise Haaland over Kane but that's not to say I wouldn't be disappointed if we did sign Kane and Haaland ended up elsewhere because we know Kane would guarantee us 30+ goals a season.
Messi is an absolute no brainer and would be welcomed with open arms, so if we landed him and a another what a summer that would be!
 
I suspect a lot of people who voted No (myself included) would change their answer to a Yes if some concrete rumours gathered pace and it became clear that he was our target rather than Haaland.

He’s a top player and most of us would be buzzing if we signed him.
 
racecar said:
I suspect a lot of people who voted No (myself included) would change their answer to a Yes if some concrete rumours gathered pace and it became clear that he was our target rather than Haaland.

He’s a top player and most of us would be buzzing if we signed him.
Click to expand...
Not me ,overated, take out pens ..
 
jay laruja said:
It's just a dip in form. It happens. And he has been playing better lately. I'd wager he'd get back on track next season.
Click to expand...
I hope you are right. I’d love nothing more than to see Raz tearing up defences again.
Maybe he is not happy at City and wants a change. But his form has crashed through the floor lately. Maybe he needs a decent break!? Who knows.
 
racecar said:
I suspect a lot of people who voted No (myself included) would change their answer to a Yes if some concrete rumours gathered pace and it became clear that he was our target rather than Haaland.

He’s a top player and most of us would be buzzing if we signed him.
Click to expand...
And they would go back to No with two tweets from City Xtra quoting a couple of journalists saying that ‘Levy is adamant about not selling Kane’
 
racecar said:
I suspect a lot of people who voted No (myself included) would change their answer to a Yes if some concrete rumours gathered pace and it became clear that he was our target rather than Haaland.

He’s a top player and most of us would be buzzing if we signed him.
Click to expand...
Exactly you can't have your cake and eat it, and by that I mean you can't want the club to sign Haaland and also Kane. Maybe the questions need altering.
 
STOCKPORT'S INIESTA said:
I'd rather us but a striker that knows the league inside out and has bagged a hat full consistently every season than someone who if we're honest did nothing over 2 games against us..premier League v bundesliga is a different gravy
Click to expand...
If we’re going off of people not doing well against us may I ask when Kane’s last goal against us was?
 
dave_blue12 said:
It's a simple question. It doesn't mention alternatives and we don't know what other alternatives are anyway. Haaland has maybe set his heart on somewhere else, who knows ?

In the Haaland poll I have voted YES too. It's simple, just answer the question.
Click to expand...

The answer is still No.

You can't pose a hypothetical question and then exclude all other hypotheticals.

If he comes, will welcome him like every player, and trust the club. But as it stands, not excited about it nor particularly keen. Don't think he is the right signing at the right price or profile.
 
We are so good at creating chances I think any decent finisher scores a fuck load in our team.
 
Coatigan said:
The answer is still No.

You can't pose a hypothetical question and then exclude all other hypotheticals.

If he comes, will welcome him like every player, and trust the club. But as it stands, not excited about it nor particularly keen. Don't think he is the right signing at the right price or profile.
Click to expand...

The question is the question. The question wasn't Kane or Haaland.

Baffled that you aren't exited about, once again, having a prolific striker in our squad. As for profile and price, I don't care much about either. If we can't afford the price we won't buy him.

P.S. It would be a fucking relief having him on penalties that's for sure.
 
Re Haaland I think the poster who alluded to the fact that city would be put off by the fact that Riola , Alf inge haaland and erling were doing a European tour a couple of months ago meeting all the big clubs , seeing who could offer what may have put city off sounds plausible tbh .


That’s not the way city do business, we don’t enter bidding wars for players, rightly or wrongly we’ve walked away from a number of deals previously for this reason , Sanchez , van dijk , Fred , Jorginho, maguire .
And probably many more , we have a valuation of a player and it seems we want the player to be fully committed to us too .
I can totally see the club looking elsewhere if riola and haaland are shopping themselves about .


They may feel Kane is more attainable and less hassle and maybe talks behind the scenes have confirmed he’s committed to joining us , all hypothetical of course but this could explain the club going for Kane rather then Haaland.


That’s why reports for Kane are heating up and it seems to have gone quiet on Haaland front .
whatever the club choose to do I’d be happy .
Our recruitment for the most part has been amazing I fully trust pep tiki etc if they say Kane’s the man then he’s the man :) .
 
dave_blue12 said:
The poll on this thread is a fucking embarrassment.

Which weirdos don't want City to sign the most prolific striker in the PL ?

Give your heads a wobble ffs !
Click to expand...
Think it is skewered slightly by the fact that most people would prefer Haaland. I chose yes because Kane would be an extraordinary signing.






But I would prefer Haaland of course :)
 
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