Harry Kane to consider Tottenham future?

I've had no doubt it was Grealish and Kane.

Big squad to keep happy
 
I think the absolute key person to this deal is Levy. He may have said to Kane that he can go but I suspect only if the valuation is met. And Levy isn’t the kind of guy to back down, if he wants £150m then he won’t accept a penny less. I highly doubt the deal will happen in truth.
 
Like I say, I'm with Levy on this one. If Kane had turned up to work I'd be on his side.
 
Rumours that Kane is still in the Caribbean.

That'd be full Diego Costa.
 
He’s put out a statement saying he’s back in training tomorrow which he says was his agreed return date and that hasn’t been refusing to train.
 
Got to be nonsense. Otherwise he'd have surely just tweeted it Tuesday when all the abuse was incoming.
 
Yeah sounds like him trying to patch things up as he might not get his move.
 
He's going to end up at City isn't he! And that's a complete joke. FFP is pointless.

It's not like FFP has tied our hands at any point though is it?

If Kane goes to City it's our own fault for allowing them to climb above us over the last decade with some pretty awful decision making over managers and players post Fergie.

What's funny with FFP is it was designed to stop City/PSG becoming the powerhouses in world football well a decade later look at the situation European football finds itself in. All the big names are flat broke and trying to create their own league while the two state backed clubs absolutely clean them out of their top talent.

Cash is king at the moment and those that have access to it can make some big moves.

Pep has been a bit moody over this whole spending thing but if City do land Kane along with Grealish they can probably recover a reasonable chunk of that money through sales which will put their net spend on par with that of say Utd.
 
It's not like FFP has tied our hands at any point though is it?
That isn't my point or issue though bud. My issue is that PSG and City basically do what they want despite not truly following the FFP rules. It's a joke.
 
That isn't my point or issue though bud. My issue is that PSG and City basically do what they want despite not truly following the FFP rules. It's a joke.

True but the rules were very much rigged in our favour by FFP and they were always flawed which is why City drove a truck through them in the courts but both City/PSG have faced punishment under the FFP system in the last 10 years be it fines or squad restrictions.

The point was we can cry about them breaking the rules but at no point have Utd been restricted in our own transfer business by FFP rules our revenues are so big we can basically do whatever we want.

We have been the masters of our own downfall in that respect.
 
He won't move in January but sounds like it's only a short term committment unless Nuno performs miracles and gets them competing at the top of the table he'll want out again next summer and maybe this time he's actually got a deal in writing from Levy.
 
Basically, Kane played this one poorly. He thought he'd get the move through to City but in the end I think they've decided he was too expensive given who they could probably get next year.
 
He had a tough hand to play his contract gave him no way of getting out his former agents probably need to take the flak over that one by signing a 6 year deal with no get out clauses.

The whole did he turn up on time or late saga should have been dealt with much clearer on both sides.

He obviously wanted to leave and he probably still does but he’s in a tough spot because he’s probably in the same spot in 12 months because Spurs are still unlikely to want to sell him at that point as he will still have 2 years on his deal.
 
Basically, Kane played this one poorly. He thought he'd get the move through to City but in the end I think they've decided he was too expensive given who they could probably get next year.

They bid €150m I think was about right and Spurs refused to let him go.
 
They bid €150m I think was about right and Spurs refused to let him go.
From Spurs' POV, who would they spend that money on that would be as good as Kane? Which strikers are available that would be worth losing your best* player over? They know they can still get the same €150m next year because that offer was seen as lowball this year. That's only 128.52m pounds. If Lukaku is 100m then Kane should be 200m (whatever the numbers are, Kane is twice the player).

Spurs don't need the money, selling Kane would be disastrous for them without a replacement, and there's no one on radar.


*I think that's actually Son.
 
£130m is a fair price for Kane in my opinion in this market but it's fair to say that money in the bank isn't much use to Spurs especially this late in the day.

He is an impossible player to replace just like Bale was you can't do it with one person as the players of Kane's quality won't sign for Spurs so all you can do is look to use that money to improve your squad as a whole so you aren't as reliant on the one superstar player. For that to work you need to find hidden gems which again is a tough thing to pull off.
 
If he wanted out he shouldn't have signed a new deal not that long ago with a Gentleman's agreement. Has he not met Levy?

He signed that deal 3 years ago just after Spurs got to a CL final.

His agents back then made 2 mistakes

1) allowing him to sign a 6 year deal
2) not having his get out clause in writing
 
If Kane was smart he'd do what Grealish did last season sign a new deal that includes release clauses problem for him is Spurs will want to set that release clause at a level that they don't expect anyone to pay.

He's left himself with absolutely no leverage in negotiation his only way out is to basically stop acting like a top professional and force his way out which I don't think he really wants to do.

Wouldn't rule out Utd entering the race next summer
 
If he wanted out he shouldn't have signed a new deal not that long ago with a Gentleman's agreement. Has he not met Levy?

You forget these deals are also done to protect the value of the club and help them. He could have not signed that new deal 3 years ago and walked off for £50m but like Ronaldo he wanted Spurs to get a good fee for him when it came to leaving. £130m isn't a bad fee for any player.

Ronaldo was signing new 6 year deals every 12 months. He gets the reward of the payrise and United know that they'll get top dollar when it's time to leave. These deals aren't just for the player and meaning you'll definitely stay the time they're two protect both parties but then there has to be an agreement that if one wants to leave then a fair price is agreed.
 
You forget these deals are also done to protect the value of the club and help them. He could have not signed that new deal 3 years ago and walked off for £50m but like Ronaldo he wanted Spurs to get a good fee for him when it came to leaving. £130m isn't a bad fee for any player.

I think these release clauses will become a bit more common now or we may even see players ask for shorter contracts to maintain that freedom to move on.

I agree clubs have a responsibility to act reasonably and I don't think Spurs have been reasonable with Kane if a player says they want to leave I think as a club you can ask them to stay one more year but you can't just keep saying no. The story from the Kane camp is that he wanted to go last summer but agreed to stay one more season to try and help them get back into the CL which they ultimately failed to do.
 
You forget these deals are also done to protect the value of the club and help them. He could have not signed that new deal 3 years ago and walked off for £50m but like Ronaldo he wanted Spurs to get a good fee for him when it came to leaving. £130m isn't a bad fee for any player.

Ronaldo was signing new 6 year deals every 12 months. He gets the reward of the payrise and United know that they'll get top dollar when it's time to leave. These deals aren't just for the player and meaning you'll definitely stay the time they're two protect both parties but then there has to be an agreement that if one wants to leave then a fair price is agreed.
Yup, the longer deals are in the interests of the club to protect sell on value plus amortizing transfer fees over the length of the contract, or asset value in Kane’s case helps their dodgy accounting balance the books. Top players would be better served with shorter contracts, allowing them the ability to get out of necessary.

I think his relationship with Fergie helped Ronaldo put faith in our willingness to sell when he wanted to leave. Clearly that doesn’t exist between Kane and Levy.
 
In this sort of form who buys him?

Spurs fans clearly let him have it today he was useless.

Has he hit that Rooney/Torres wall in his late 20s where he suddenly has a huge drop off.

Think he needs players around him helping him now he can’t carry that team on his own anymore.
 

Login or Register

Forgot your password?
or Log in using
Don't have an account? Register now
Back
Top