People who say that a team will be worse off when a top player is absent. No Kane and we've scored 11 goals in all competitions. No Ronaldo and Portugal record their highest ever score. I'll say it again. Often when a top player is absent it frees up the others. Too much responsibility resting on one player. No Kane and we scored 3 against Ajax. Keep Ronaldo out and Kane? Please, NEVER come back, we will never need you again.
I remember back in the day, the Edmonton Oilers traded Wayne Gretzky, the best player in the NHL, to the LA Kings and everybody said the Oilers were finished. I remember friends of mine who were Oiler fans crying their eyes out. Two years later they won their 5th Stanley Cup in 7 years and the Kings won nothing during the time Gretzky was there.
I don't think it was ideal losing Kane. Really you would love to see Spurs build a proper team around his talents. He now has something close to that at Bayern.
No, I don't agree. It was time for Kane to go. I noticed a few times how the rest of the players were freed up during Kane's absences, he somehow(Don't know how) hindered the others. We're doing alright without him and, if we can come through the next two matches with something, we'll do better.
I never saw us as that.* But I'm fine with him gone. I said as much when he wanted away to City. Too much fun stuff going on at N17 to spend time much time worrying about players who aren't at Spurs. Still, one or two goalless games, and the lamentations will begin (or resume, as the case may be). Not much you can do about it. Good job it doesn't matter. I still love him, mind. *the Harry Kane team
That time had come and gone. If we had a chairman who knew something about football, it could have been special, but we have Levy.
The other example that comes to mind is the Rays in MLB. They seem to lose their best player every season and come back even stronger the next.
Do Brighton miss the player who's flopping at Chelsea and do Utd miss Ronaldo? What's making me angry is there's a buyback clause for Kane. Please, NOOOOOOOOO. NEVER buy back is a good motto because things aren't the same a few years later. We don't need him back and his form wouldn't be the same anyway. Don't come back Harry.
Like Spurs are too good for Harry Kane. I'll agree that once he's won his medal or two in Germany, and we're doing whatever it is we're doing, it's quite plausible that bringing him back won't be a good fit. And if not, we shouldn't. But having that option is hardly a bad thing. So long as any decision is made looking forward, and not back. He is rather good, you know. Crikey.
Wasn't he 36yrs old and still scored 24goals? Multiple people at the club said he couldn't handle the low standards/efforts of some of the other players. The issue wasn't Ronaldo, it was the rest of the circus around the club. Crap CEO, recruitment, coaching and mediocre and poor attitude from some colleagues. Man U have been a shitshow since Sir Alex left.
I'm not sure I get the relevance. There are ample examples of 'returns' that didn't work out, and plenty (though admittedly fewer) of those that did. None of them are material to this situation. The point is that you're arguing a scenario that doesn't exist. If the time should come that we have an opportunity to bring back Harry Kane, it will either be an enticing scenario or it won't. If it's not, we shouldn't pursue him. If it is, it could be advantageous having that option. Nobody's arguing that we should bring him back, because said scenario doesn't currently exist. I'm not sure I understand why anyone would argue the other way, unless they just can't envision any scenario in which having Harry Kane could be good for Spurs (which is, frankly, preposterous). Giving ourselves the option is a good bit of business, even if a desirable return opportunity never manifests itself.
Just looked at The Bayern v Man Utd highlights and what baffles me is how the Utd player can claim the goal was his when it took 2 deflections. How can any player claim a deflection? Just a pet hate.
Should the opportunity arise he'll be 33 or 34, no, we should build for the future with younger players. Keane came back and flopped. However good a player is it's rarely a good idea to buy back.
"The reporter writes that Levy and Kane's relationship is now "strained" following his complicated move to Bayern, as it is claimed the Tottenham boardroom member pushed back on certain parts of the deal in last minute fashion. This resulted in the striker's flight being delayed and plunged into brief doubt. Kane wasn't even allowed to return to Enfield HQ, as Levy and Spurs thought it would be inappropriate given a fee was agreed. The transfer was given a green-light eventually, but all of this means Levy and the forward's relationship is on the rocks. As a result, it is very doubtful whether Kane would even consider re-joining Tottenham." Here's a reason which is as good as any. How good is Harry Kane?
I hate when highlight videos include everyone standing around waiting for a VAR decision - that is a low light, and definitely not what I want to be watching.
Commentators who 6 months into the season say Spurs are naive or need to be more pragmatic. Have they not watched any of our games lol?