Kane may be a striker by definition but he hasn't yet played as one this season, bar when he has replaced Soldado off the bench. Your obsession with the term striker or forward is what i feel is clouding your judgment on the issue. Kane has been playing in the center of the 3 behind the lone forward - the same role other players have been given in the league - he just happens to be out scoring them in his cup appearences
The most important aspect about Kane is that he natuarrly gets into good goalscoring positions and is a threat......last nights goal was an example of his radar in the box. He has always been a striker throughout the ranks, scored a load, and now yes he is playing in the 3 in behind but in effect if he plays along with either Ade or Soldado we are more of a threat imo
Yeah that definitley plays a part - would probably have to sacrifice Chadli as what Kane has over Eriksen in terms of goals he loses out on creativity - so i think putting Eriksen left would make up for that. But then ultimately you'd be swapping Kanes goal threat for Chadli's - and we could possibly end up back at square one unless he keeps up his cup goal ratio
I cannot see how Kane is miles behind Eriksen in the creativity department, I did not see the Brighton game so cant really comment on Kane's performance in that one but against Asteris syphillis or whoever they were I thought Kane was uber creative.
For me at the moment I see our most creative players in our squad as Soldado, Kane & Eriksen.....feel free to disagree but thats how I see it, I would feel it would be more beneficial to us to get them all central and get a bit of pace to the side of them....most creative is Eriksen I would have him playing as CM and I would like to see Kane & Soldado getting a run of games and I feel they can both interchange the no9, no10 positions:
no8 Eiksen-----------Ball winner/Passer
Pace-----------------10,Kane------------------------Inverted
-------9,Soldado--------
In my opinion Poch is close to finding the right formula for us...I strongly believe that means dropping Ade....just my opinion. Interestingly enough when we were two-one down to Saudi Sportswashing Machine he finally moved Eriksen deeper to cm....Kane was on but Ade was still there. Eriksen needs to play cm and the sooner Poch and others realise thats the way we should go then the better we will be.
Yeah that definitley plays a part - would probably have to sacrifice Chadli as what Kane has over Eriksen in terms of goals he loses out on creativity - so i think putting Eriksen left would make up for that. But then ultimately you'd be swapping Kanes goal threat for Chadli's - and we could possibly end up back at square one unless he keeps up his cup goal ratio
They would be a good four to rotate for the tougher games, with the one missing out getting a run out in the cups. They all have their strengths and bring something different to the party but Kane's form is too good to ignore at the moment.
If you play can in left back is he still playing as a striker? A striker is a striker after all
Are you talking about Emre Can?
A striker is a striker and an AM is an AM. A truism, yes but apparently not recognised as such by some.
As others have said, Kane is NOT an AM. He is a striker. His goal instincts, abilities and the areas he takes up define him as such. For all those thinking he is a player that can play in the centre of three AMs are just ignoring the facts of how he plays. It is not where you line up at kick off that is important, the key is the role one plays.
In my view, the role of a central AM is quite different from that of a support, withdrawn or second striker (or whatever else one wishes to call it). Their movement is different, their priorities in creativity, defending and goal scoring are also quite distinct.
Make no mistake, Kane is the former, not the latter.
I'm more interested in what someone brings to the team rather than notions about what type of player they are. Kane frequently played as an inside forward for the development squad and Chadli has played as a striker. Plenty of people in the game are meant to think that Lamela will end up as a #10. Positions are a lot more fluid in the modern game and I do not really understand the desire to put players into boxes.
Right now it is very difficult to argue against Kane getting a chance in the PL squad but I think that he can most successfully be introduced without changing formation. He has different qualities to Eriksen at #10 for sure but switching them does not automatically make it 4-4-2.
If you use a horse as a camel, is it a camel?
No, but you are using him as one
... as ive been saying
I would ask him to play the same role he has played in his last two outings. I don't really care what you want to call it. Positionally, he would be central in the three behind the striker but we would see them swapping positions throughout the game.I agree with your last paragraph. We have all been impressed with the way Harry has played recently and I think there would be virtually universal support for him deserving his chance.
However, why would you ask/expect him to play in a different way and in a different role to the one where he has been so impressive as a support striker recently? Isn't that merely being a slave to 4231 for the sake of it?