Never denied that did I.
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
Never denied that did I.
No beef with anything.We obviously look at things quite differently so will never agree on this matter.
Personally, if the club deem the purchase price and wages acceptable, what's your beef?
We were discussing the transfer values of players, you said it's irrelevant if a player cost 70m or 100m, I disagree.
It's relevant to the club I'm unsure why it should be relevant to me or any supporter.
To the club, yes
I see these all the time, but they are the most absurd and pointless retorts of any kind. Totally not worthwhile.
And the irony of stating that opinion, on an opinions forum, that opinions are irrelevant, it is all just a bit inane.
with the wages I would imagine he wants/gets it makes it very expensive deal for me.If 60 mill is good value how can 80 mill be crazy? We want him so we’re not going to get him at good value, 80 feels about right to me.
I disagree.I see these all the time, but they are the most absurd and pointless retorts of any kind. Totally not worthwhile.
And the irony of stating that opinion, on an opinions forum, that opinions are irrelevant, it is all just a bit inane.
samuelyeboah
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 May 2021
- Messages
- 6,880
- Team supported
- Manchester City
i see we're back to the all important metaphysical debate of whether someone is 27.99 or 28
blueparrot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 33,406
No it's an opinion, and in my opinion the correct one.I see these all the time, but they are the most absurd and pointless retorts of any kind. Totally not worthwhile.
And the irony of stating that opinion, on an opinions forum, that opinions are irrelevant, it is all just a bit inane.
BillyShears
Well-Known Member
i see we're back to the all important metaphysical debate of whether someone is 27.99 or 28
Or whether they’re worth 50 or 51 million. Absolutely hilarious when lads draw imaginary lines in the sand and say daft shit like “he’s not worth a penny more than the amount I’ve decided in my head he’s worth”. The club will decide what he’s worth.
i see we're back to the all important metaphysical debate of whether someone is 27.99 or 28
It will be over tomorrow.
(He'll be nearly 29 then)
mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
In terms of whether performance changes with cost, cost becomes totally irrelevant.No beef with anything.
We were discussing the transfer values of players, you said it's irrelevant if a player cost 70m or 100m, I disagree.
In terms of whether performance changes with cost, cost becomes totally irrelevant.
Which is true but irrelevant to the discussion.
Exactly. They will decide what the value of the Premier leagues best striker is worth to us. I will be buzzing if we get him. Worth whatever we pay in my eyes.Or whether they’re worth 50 or 51 million. Absolutely hilarious when lads draw imaginary lines in the sand and say daft shit like “he’s not worth a penny more than the amount I’ve decided in my head he’s worth”. The club will decide what he’s worth.
sir baconface
Well-Known Member
Double standard modding on here. Got banned from the Grealish thread for a minor altercation with one of the forum’s favoured sons (no swearing). Posts deleted, ban for me, he carries on with impunity. No reason given, no PM, nothing.
Others abuse each on that thread as I write but that’s allowed (which doesn’t bother me apart from the inconsistency).
It stinks when a forum has blue-eyed boys with protected status - presumably because they are proclaimed ITKs.
Others abuse each on that thread as I write but that’s allowed (which doesn’t bother me apart from the inconsistency).
It stinks when a forum has blue-eyed boys with protected status - presumably because they are proclaimed ITKs.
feedmpenzaandhewillscore
Well-Known Member
Or whether they’re worth 50 or 51 million. Absolutely hilarious when lads draw imaginary lines in the sand and say daft shit like “he’s not worth a penny more than the amount I’ve decided in my head he’s worth”. The club will decide what he’s worth.
Dam right let’s get on the Google Mail account and get some funds funnelled through Etihad to really boil some piss.
mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
Not the discussion I was inWhich is true but irrelevant to the discussion.
Sure the club will decide what a player is worth but it shouldn't stop everyday fans from having their own views as to what they think is a fee worth paying.
I mean, it'll have no bearing whatsoever on the business we do but I don't think it's worth shouting anybody down for being uncomfortable with the price tags we are hearing about.
I mean, it'll have no bearing whatsoever on the business we do but I don't think it's worth shouting anybody down for being uncomfortable with the price tags we are hearing about.
BillyShears
Well-Known Member
Exactly. They will decide what the value of the Premier leagues best striker is worth to us. I will be buzzing if we get him. Worth whatever we pay in my eyes.
I also think in the main they’ve got more hits than misses as a club so we should give them a bit of credit. Also it’s not like we’re talking about some random unproven player. Kane is literally the best 9 in England.
Churchlawtonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2009
- Messages
- 16,617
He's either worth it or he isn't. Cost is irrelevant.
Sure its the same player , but cost is only irrelevant if you have an unlimited budget. Are you saying City have an unlimited budget? The more you spend the greater the risk you are taking. Lets say City spent £120m on Kane but next season couldn't affords to buy a another player that Pep needed or a replacement for Kane if he did his knee in, that's where the risk comes in. Cost is vitally important as the club is run as a business and City have to balance the books.Im saying he is either good enough or he isn't as a counter argument to those saying they would be comfortable at £70m but not £100m.
No matter the cost, he is still the same player so, cost is irrelevant.
Thought you meant me when I saw mention of one of the forums favourite sons but I'm not ITk so presume it was ezzy you fell out with.. :-)Double standard modding on here. Got banned from the Grealish thread for a minor altercation with one of the forum’s favoured sons (no swearing). Posts deleted, ban for me, he carries on with impunity. No reason given, no PM, nothing.
Others abuse each on that thread as I write but that’s allowed (which doesn’t bother me apart from the inconsistency).
It stinks when a forum has blue-eyed boys with protected status - presumably because they are proclaimed ITKs.
mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
Great, we agree whatever we pay, we get the same player, that was my only argument.Sure its the same player , but cost is only irrelevant if you have an unlimited budget. Are you saying City have an unlimited budget? The more you spend the greater the risk you are taking. Lets say City spent £120m on Kane but next season couldn't affords to buy a another player that Pep needed or a replacement for Kane if he did his knee in, that's where the risk comes in. Cost is vitally important as the club is run as a business and City have to balance the books.
I have no interest in what he will actually cost as the affordability is for the club to decide whether it is viable or not.