• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Harry Kane MBE

The media are a bunch of slags. They argue on one hand about the inequality in the game and how the esl will destroy football. Then tell everyone the grealish, kanes etc... need to go to bigger clubs because they deserve trophies.
As are uefa, painting themselves as the good guys against esl while totally failing to implement financial fair play, despite paying lip service to the idea.
 
This smacks of the bale transfer. Where he went to spain for 2 weeks.

Wasn't to force a move. Deal was in place.

Just everyone getting their houses in order first.

I disagree, we were spending unforseen amounts of money on transfers before Bale was eventually sold - i don't think that's how we are working this summer so far.

This seems to be more Modric/Chelsea and Berbatov/United to me - which way it plays out from here depends on how close to our valuation City get.
 
Last edited:
Has he not been given the remit of Harry Kane will not be sold no matter what?

I think we can clearly see that there has always been a figure. It appears that figure is 160 million. Charlie Kane certainly thinks so, and you'd have to wonder why he arrived at that figure.

As for Levy going back on his word, I'm not so sure. I think the position has always been very clear. Harry Kane won't be sold unless someone comes in with a fair market value bid for him. Given that Grealish (a very good player of course) is valued at 100 million, there is some sliver of an argument to say that selling Kane for 160 million would be giving City a discount they don't deserve, as Kane is easily worth at least 80 million more than Grealish.
 
I think we can clearly see that there has always been a figure. It appears that figure is 160 million. Charlie Kane certainly thinks so, and you'd have to wonder why he arrived at that figure.

As for Levy going back on his word, I'm not so sure. I think the position has always been very clear. Harry Kane won't be sold unless someone comes in with a fair market value bid for him. Given that Grealish (a very good player of course) is valued at 100 million, there is some sliver of an argument to say that selling Kane for 160 million would be giving City a discount they don't deserve, as Kane is easily worth at least 80 million more than Grealish.

A funny old world when an (imagined) mans word is worth more than a multi million pound contract
 
Kane obviously doesnt think he's worth that much and is desperate to join a team who agree he's not worth it.

He himself mentioned “£100m” in the Neville video, honestly the more I think about it the more it was clearly planned out from the start to get that number out there. Even Neville laughs at him for thinking that does the job.

We’ve been in these situations before but I don’t recall Levy ever letting the player go below the price we want, they were sold but never for less than we wanted. (Correct me if I’m wrong…)
 
I think we can clearly see that there has always been a figure. It appears that figure is 160 million. Charlie Kane certainly thinks so, and you'd have to wonder why he arrived at that figure.

As for Levy going back on his word, I'm not so sure. I think the position has always been very clear. Harry Kane won't be sold unless someone comes in with a fair market value bid for him. Given that Grealish (a very good player of course) is valued at 100 million, there is some sliver of an argument to say that selling Kane for 160 million would be giving City a discount they don't deserve, as Kane is easily worth at least 80 million more than Grealish.

Agree with all of that, but we don't know if there was ever a figure both levy and kane agreed upon. Its naive to assume that there was not a figure discussed just going by Harry Kanes interview with neville.

But I guess this is all too familiar when players want to leave.
 
He himself mentioned “£100m” in the Neville video, honestly the more I think about it the more it was clearly planned out from the start to get that number out there. Even Neville laughs at him for thinking that does the job.

We’ve been in these situations before but I don’t recall Levy ever letting the player go below the price we want, they were sold but never for less than we wanted. (Correct me if I’m wrong…)
This is what bugs me the most, Kane clearly rates himself as one of the top strikers in the world, therefore he must be sold for the amount of a top world class striker, ie close to the world record transfer fee. The fact that the pandemic has hit clubs hard is irrelevant. You won't see Ferrari dropping the price of their cars because of Covid, then again I haven't been looking at Ferrari prices of late so don't go doing any research to debunk my examples...
 
A funny old world when an (imagined) mans word is worth more than a multi million pound contract
I wouldn't want Levy to give his word and go back on it to our players.

I struggle to even imagine Levy entering some gentleman's agreement that Kane would be allowed to leave for less than the club values him at.

I don't like this from Kane at all. Most fans have (seemingly) been very understanding of his wish to move despite having 3 years left on his contract. I've been, though I've never wanted him to be sold.

Can feel that understanding eroding in my bones with every step of this transfer saga.
 
Said it before. Think he will leave in this window, and once he has won his money-bought trophies with CIty and passed, or got very close to Shearer's PL haul and Rooney's England goals tally, I see him returning to Spurs to finish his career and overhaul Greaves' Spurs goals record

I'm not so sure that he'll be coming back once he leaves, especially if it proves to be a fractious parting of ways. And I'm not really sure I'd want him to, tbh.
I'm disappointed with what appears to be happening (but let's see how today goes). I understand why he wants to leave and I can't hold that against him and I'd certainly applaud him whenever he came to the stadium, I'd never boo him or sing against him or anything like that - unless he said something derogatory about the club, then the gloves would be off. If he were going abroad, then him coming back might be easier to take. But to go to City, win things, then come back to us just to beat a(nother) record would leave a bad taste. Who knows, maybe that's easy to say now and I'd welcome him back with open arms in the future, but I don't see it happening.
 
Now I have a dilemma, and it is regarding Kane and my garage that I converted into a playroom, Office and sort of bar. My Mrs allowed me (I wear the trousers honest) to put a spurs wall up in there and I spent a few months collecting programmes old and present along with newspaper articles and then put these onto the wall.

Now my dilemma is that Kane clearly features on there a lot, but if he departs us will it be too soon to cover up his face with other spurs stuff, or would you just leave it on there as a permanent painful reminder of him?

I think the answer from most will be to leave him up there, but I just think looking at the wall will hurt so much when I see him lining up in in colours of blue for City. Obviously there are players up there that have left Spurs that I hold close to my heart but they weren't Spurs through and through like Kane is, so this one will hurt the most I think.
 

Attachments

  • 20210803_080112.jpg
    20210803_080112.jpg
    2.1 MB · Views: 27
  • 20210803_080116.jpg
    20210803_080116.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 26
  • 20210803_080147.jpg
    20210803_080147.jpg
    2.1 MB · Views: 26
He himself mentioned “£100m” in the Neville video, honestly the more I think about it the more it was clearly planned out from the start to get that number out there. Even Neville laughs at him for thinking that does the job.

We’ve been in these situations before but I don’t recall Levy ever letting the player go below the price we want, they were sold but never for less than we wanted. (Correct me if I’m wrong…)

Of course thats why he mentioned it - would have known that Levy would have wanted a big price and he would have been concerned that City wouldnt get to it

There's no way we'd let him go for £100m though
 

Hurry up and give us £150m and let’s all just move on.

I'd rather just watch Levy bend City over and f**k them without any lube for 150m than have this drag on and watch Kane's legacy go up in flames. This is where Dr Evil should come into his own.

That said, if he's openly going to tell City to f**k off because he's our player, I'll enjoy that too as long we don't cave at the last minute and bring in Christian Benteke as a replacement.

And if Kane and his representatives think they had a "gentleman's agreement" with Levy without anything in writing, they're beyond f**king stupid. Everything I hear about Levy is that he's tough but honourable. But I wouldn't trust anyone on stuff like this with a verbal agreement.
 
No I'm siding with the reality that a man is only as good as his word. Levy going back on his word and kane not training, going back on his word when he signed the contract just reads for a messy divorce.
There is no evidence to suggest that Levy has gone back on his word. Let's assume there is a 'gentleman's agreement', what does that really mean? It does not mean we will sell him for £100m, it means we will sell him when we get an acceptable offer. The £100m offered about a month ago is clearly unacceptable.

All Kane needed to do was to come to training every morning and keep his gob closed until Emirates Marketing Project made an acceptable bid.

Fact, Levy is not the bad guy here.

Sent from my SM-G975F using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
Last edited:
There is no evidence to suggest that Levy has gone back on his word. Let's assume there is a 'gentleman's agreement', what does that really mean? It does not mean we will sell him for £100m, it means we will sell him when we get an acceptable offer. The £100m offered about a month ago is clearly unacceptable.

Or Kane needed to do was to come to training every morning and keep his gob closed until Emirates Marketing Project make an acceptable bid.

Fact, Levy is not the bad guy here.

Sent from my SM-G975F using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
This. Whilst some will find Levy has made errors in the past by not paying over the odds (Grealish for example) for a player, in my eyes he has done nothing wrong here. He is just holding onto his most prized asset and hasn't had a bid anywhere near his valuation of said prized asset. Kane really is acting strangely here yet a lot of the journalists and football world are seeing that Spurs are in the wrong. I don't understand how anyone can think that his actions are the right way to go.
 
Back