I can’t see how they thought £20m + Sterling was a good offer. He’s the last player we need as we have a few that play on the left. When a player being included in a deal was mentioned I assumed it would be £120m plus a player.
Last edited:
Harry Kane
- Thread starter RichSpur58
- Start date
Gilzeanking
Well-Known Member
- May 7, 2005
- 6,144
- 5,088
Yes me too...but I notice there a lot more acceptance than there was.
dontcallme
SC Supporter
- Mar 18, 2005
- 34,481
- 84,196
I looked into this a few weeks back. There is no evidence of strikers moving to a top 6 club and scoring more goals.
Seems strange but statistically there's nothing to backup the idea that Kane going to City will result in him personally scoring more goals.
doctor stefan Freud
the tired tread of sad biology
- Sep 2, 2013
- 15,170
- 72,171
Completely. Fuck City. They want him, they pay what’s right for him. If not, they can fuck off for a year or two
dontcallme
SC Supporter
- Mar 18, 2005
- 34,481
- 84,196
Where did this £20m+Sterling offer for Kane come from? I don't believe it happened.
TheChosenOne
A dislike or neg rep = fat fingers
- Dec 13, 2005
- 48,222
- 50,307
I accepted the reality of it all last week.
.
HK felt like a third son to me until recently I ‘loved’ him that much.
I’ve come to terms with him gone but I also wonder what sort of reception he will get on a weekly basis from crowds up and down the land ?
He was never loved by a lot of opposition fans for whatever reason but going to City who are not liked by many because of their oil money won’t endear him to them either.
He’s made his bed and he can lie in it feathered by the millions.
And Jimmy Greaves keeps his all time goal scoring records for us.
.
HK felt like a third son to me until recently I ‘loved’ him that much.
I’ve come to terms with him gone but I also wonder what sort of reception he will get on a weekly basis from crowds up and down the land ?
He was never loved by a lot of opposition fans for whatever reason but going to City who are not liked by many because of their oil money won’t endear him to them either.
He’s made his bed and he can lie in it feathered by the millions.
And Jimmy Greaves keeps his all time goal scoring records for us.
I’m terribly conflicted on this now.
I really don’t want Kane in our colours after the way he’s disrespected the club, his teammates, the new management team and the fans.
Yet I REALLY don’t want those shitty oil barons to get their own way and procure a top striker.
I’d love it if we stood firm , gave them the finger and after yesterday’s performance they were concerned they didn’t have a proven striker.
I really don’t want Kane in our colours after the way he’s disrespected the club, his teammates, the new management team and the fans.
Yet I REALLY don’t want those shitty oil barons to get their own way and procure a top striker.
I’d love it if we stood firm , gave them the finger and after yesterday’s performance they were concerned they didn’t have a proven striker.
Last edited:
Iirc there was a ITK comment about the £100m offer being made up of 1 of 5 players plus balance cash, one of which was Sterling which they value at £80m.
Tucker
Shitehawk
- Jul 15, 2013
- 31,585
- 147,760
Gives the crowd the opportunity to vent their frustrations when his name is called out too.
WePlayWednesday
Essex Yid ??
- Jun 14, 2019
- 728
- 3,215
I agree, it’s a difficult situation.
I would start Kane in every game. He can then choose to keep going 100% for the club and his wages, or slack off. If he’s crap for the next games everyone will see the “statement” he issued after taking a week’s unauthorised holiday was fake. He can choose how he is remembered, but only if we give him the opportunity to do so.
I would keep him in the spotlight and let him make it break his reputation.
cliff jones
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2012
- 4,158
- 6,799
Seems I’m in the minority on Silva, when I think we need the money for two strikers
another CB and Tomi. Agree to differ.
I think the deal gets done one way or the other too.
He’s dead to me.
neogenisis
*Gensy*
- Jun 27, 2006
- 5,956
- 13,520
Absobloodylutely.
Romario
Well-Known Member
- Aug 3, 2019
- 1,427
- 10,416
Many, many thanks for your kind words. The name and my standard of English is all down to my Father. Your language is something I love to study and as I said before I try to learn a few more impressive words every day.
I find English very easy to use as a tool of expression because you have so many options to choose from regarding descriptive words/phrases.
I also love your sense of humour. Took some getting used to at first but now I'm becoming quite an expert.
Thanks again for your comments.
spids
Well-Known Member
- Jul 19, 2015
- 6,647
- 27,841
I just do not see how Levy can consider selling him now for multiple reasons:
1. If we cave in as soon as a player 'plays up' it will happen again in the future. Every time a rival wants one of our players they will just say - miss training and they'll cave in. Levy needs to take a tough stance on this, especially as ....
2. He has three more years under contract, and his market value will still be high next summer - especially if European clubs sort out their finances.
3. Levy's tough stance with Modric worked to Spurs advantage. Levy also saw that a world class player - once the window has closed - will still perform at a high level until the following summer.
4. He is too hard to replace now - the season starts in a week's time.
5. We are rebuilding our defence - this is the priority, and if we keep Kane and Son up top - they are both world class and the best forward partnership in the league - then we have a good shot at qualifying for the CL.
The only reasons to sell him are:
If we need the money (ITK says we do not)
We get a crazy offer that lands in the 'everyone has their price' zone (ITK suggests City are reluctant to go above 50% of what that would be).
We think Kane will destabilise the team - if he stays - surely once the window closes Kane will realise it is a world cup year and he just has to get on with it.
I still think the best way forward is to offer Kane a new contract. 5 years. Pay increase (heavily incentivised) and importantly (or he would not consider it) a release clause that decreases over time (as he gets older) and is only valid in the month of July (to give us time to get a replacement:
1st July - 31st July 2022 = £120M (PL clubs, exc. Chelsea or Arsenal), £100M (foreign clubs).
1st July - 31st July 2023 = £100M (PL clubs, exc. Chelsea or Arsenal), £80M (foreign clubs).
1st July - 31st July 2024 = £80M (PL clubs, exc. Chelsea or Arsenal), £60M (foreign clubs)
Worst case is he leave for £120M on 1st July next summer to Man City, which would be great business for a 29 year old).
1. If we cave in as soon as a player 'plays up' it will happen again in the future. Every time a rival wants one of our players they will just say - miss training and they'll cave in. Levy needs to take a tough stance on this, especially as ....
2. He has three more years under contract, and his market value will still be high next summer - especially if European clubs sort out their finances.
3. Levy's tough stance with Modric worked to Spurs advantage. Levy also saw that a world class player - once the window has closed - will still perform at a high level until the following summer.
4. He is too hard to replace now - the season starts in a week's time.
5. We are rebuilding our defence - this is the priority, and if we keep Kane and Son up top - they are both world class and the best forward partnership in the league - then we have a good shot at qualifying for the CL.
The only reasons to sell him are:
If we need the money (ITK says we do not)
We get a crazy offer that lands in the 'everyone has their price' zone (ITK suggests City are reluctant to go above 50% of what that would be).
We think Kane will destabilise the team - if he stays - surely once the window closes Kane will realise it is a world cup year and he just has to get on with it.
I still think the best way forward is to offer Kane a new contract. 5 years. Pay increase (heavily incentivised) and importantly (or he would not consider it) a release clause that decreases over time (as he gets older) and is only valid in the month of July (to give us time to get a replacement:
1st July - 31st July 2022 = £120M (PL clubs, exc. Chelsea or Arsenal), £100M (foreign clubs).
1st July - 31st July 2023 = £100M (PL clubs, exc. Chelsea or Arsenal), £80M (foreign clubs).
1st July - 31st July 2024 = £80M (PL clubs, exc. Chelsea or Arsenal), £60M (foreign clubs)
Worst case is he leave for £120M on 1st July next summer to Man City, which would be great business for a 29 year old).
brasil_spur
SC Supporter
- Aug 25, 2006
- 12,762
- 16,942
I was at the Community Shield yesterday thanks to a company I work with and one thing that stood out was that City are in desperate need of a front man. They literally couldn’t do anything meaningful once they got into the box. Given all the rumblings coming out in the media today I reckon they’ll go for Kane this week properly.
yeah but nowhere close to the Suarez level or Coutinho... plus no one talks about reinvesting the Sterling money
Liverpool also sold Torres to Chelsea and used the £50 million to buy Andy Carroll and Luis Suarez.
aussiespursguy
Well-Known Member
- Mar 21, 2015
- 3,448
- 6,708
I can't "winner" this enough.
He has fucked himself in the ass without lube!
spurs mental
Well-Known Member
- Mar 10, 2007
- 25,639
- 50,657
Kane is the best goalscorer in the league, and possibly the world
City create infinite chances per game. Not only that but with the tricky and skilful players they have he'll get plenty of penalties too. Remember last season they missed about 5 or 6 at least. Put the ball on a plate for someone as clever as Kane with his movement and his ability and he will score, comfortably, a goal a game. I'd suggest he'll break Salahs record of 31 goals in a season quite comfortably.
Clive Wilson
Well-Known Member
- Jul 24, 2013
- 933
- 4,109
I'm sure the idea has been floated but is it possible the club (Levy and co) are behind the delayed return to training, the half arsed message to the fans etc. as they want to sell but know that their value would result in a fans revolt? I'm not talking about Levy calling Harry and saying "take an extra week off" and then acting like we had no idea but we could easily have people in his agent's ear planting seeds.
All this helps them appear to be the victims like us fans and puts them in a position where even if they sell for £100m they can justify it as necessary to keep harmony in the club and prevent a key asset losing further value.
All this helps them appear to be the victims like us fans and puts them in a position where even if they sell for £100m they can justify it as necessary to keep harmony in the club and prevent a key asset losing further value.
