Really enjoyed that game. For such a good side, City have surprising weakness in depth in key positions. Spending £120m on Rodri and Cancelo last summer seems poor value
Really enjoyed that game. For such a good side, City have surprising weakness in depth in key positions. Spending £120m on Rodri and Cancelo last summer seems poor value
Cancelo yes but i think Rodri is a good player. Sure we'll see the best of him next season.
City's problem for me was not replacing Kompany, and having a lot of poor defensive options (Walker and Laporte aside). Mendy, Zinchenko, Cancelo, Stonesa and Otamendi are all not good enough. The fact Guardiola has been preferring the teenager Garcia ahead of Stones and Otamendi says a lot.
I seem to remember we played out a 0-0 with Middlesbrough back in the PL one year which seemed to be widely agreed at the time to have been the worst PL game ever shown on Sky.
Jesus Christ, that goes down as one of the worst games of PL football I've ever had fhe misfortune to watch.
It would appear that Spurs and specifically Daniel Levy have big problems to resolve. Both on an off the pitch.
When Spurs sacked Pochettino they had a points tally of 13 points from 10 games. After an initial "holiday" period since his sacking, they have now become a functional Mourinho football team. Trouble is that with a record of 2 wins from their last 10 games they aren't actually "functioning" that well. In fact, they have actually only scored 10 goals in those games.
If you were Harry Kane, coming up to 27 and in his prime, would you be hanging about with that total lack of service? Or would you be tempted to move to United playing with the likes of Pogba, Martial, Rashford, Fernandes and Greenwood? A United side unbeaten in 14 games but, more to the point, one that has scored 43 goals in that time.
The move to the new stadium and loss of revenue as a result of the pandemic from not just ticket sales but also the cancelled Johua fight and two NBA matches has also cost Spurs dearly. Would they be able to resist a £100m bid for their most valued player? And how much of that would be available to Mourinho to spend?
You can say a lot about Levy but he never undersells his players. Kane has a contract to 2024, no way Levy is selling England's centre forward for 100m.
Jesus Christ, that goes down as one of the worst games of PL football I've ever had fhe misfortune to watch.
It would appear that Spurs and specifically Daniel Levy have big problems to resolve. Both on an off the pitch.
When Spurs sacked Pochettino they had a points tally of 13 points from 10 games. After an initial "holiday" period since his sacking, they have now become a functional Mourinho football team. Trouble is that with a record of 2 wins from their last 10 games they aren't actually "functioning" that well. In fact, they have actually only scored 10 goals in those games.
If you were Harry Kane, coming up to 27 and in his prime, would you be hanging about with that total lack of service? Or would you be tempted to move to United playing with the likes of Pogba, Martial, Rashford, Fernandes and Greenwood? A United side unbeaten in 14 games but, more to the point, one that has scored 43 goals in that time.
The move to the new stadium and loss of revenue as a result of the pandemic from not just ticket sales but also the cancelled Johua fight and two NBA matches has also cost Spurs dearly. Would they be able to resist a £100m bid for their most valued player? And how much of that would be available to Mourinho to spend?
Bang on the money my friend.
Kane goes at the end of the season with my blessing. Will be gutted of course but the boy deserves to be winning things.
Spurs were at a major crossroads 2.5 seasons ago and Levy/Poch never dealt with it then.
We've gone from a back four of Peak Rose, Peak Walker and Peak Vertonghen/Alderweirald, to Davies, Dier, Sanchez and Aurier. There is just no comparison.
We sold Moussa Dembele, one of the finest defensive midfielders in the game and didnt replace him. Winks, Sissoko, not one of them is half as good. Then people wonder what has happened to Spurs? It really isnt a surprise.
You can say a lot about Levy but he never undersells his players. Kane has a contract to 2024, no way Levy is selling England's centre forward for 100m.
You have to take into account that we are in a pandemic and that we do not know if and when crowds will return. And Spurs borrowed £175m to get through this crisis.
We don't know the effect of this on the market but Chelsea signed Timo Wener for £48m who is three years younger and scored 35 goals for club and country this season. Equally, how many clubs can actually afford to pay more than £100m for one player especially taking into account FFP.
Add to that the fact that Kane has had meaningful periods out injured in three of the last four seasons would it be better to take £100m now in those circumstances or wait a year and have to accept half that?
You can say a lot about Levy but he never undersells his players. Kane has a contract to 2024, no way Levy is selling England's centre forward for 100m.
You have to take into account that we are in a pandemic and that we do not know if and when crowds will return. And Spurs borrowed £175m to get through this crisis.
We don't know the effect of this on the market but Chelsea signed Timo Wener for £48m who is three years younger and scored 35 goals for club and country this season. Equally, how many clubs can actually afford to pay more than £100m for one player especially taking into account FFP.
Add to that the fact that Kane has had meaningful periods out injured in three of the last four seasons would it be better to take £100m now in those circumstances or wait a year and have to accept half that?
And finally if Kane wants to leave he will leave.
Some valid points but i certainly don't see Levy selling him for less than 150m. He's 27 in a few weeks, and not a striker who relies who pace so may have not even reached his prime yet. Spurs losing money during the pandemic and taking out a loan are probably reasons why Levy would hold out for a high figure.
Although i do agree any transfer is limited by the fact there's probably only 5 clubs who could afford Kane. City, United, PSG, Real and Barca and i can't see any moving for him this summer. PSG don't need him as they just paid 50m for Icardi. Barca would only move for him if they got rid of Suarez and are already trying to sign Martinez from Inter. Real won't go for hm as they're reportedly 'saving up' to move for Mbappe next summer. So that leaves City who don't need him unless Aguero leaves, and United who might be better off spending that sort of money on other areas of the team given their new front 3 are all young and scoring goals.
Werner was only 48m because he had a release clause so not worth comparing.
You can say a lot about Levy but he never undersells his players. Kane has a contract to 2024, no way Levy is selling England's centre forward for 100m.
You have to take into account that we are in a pandemic and that we do not know if and when crowds will return. And Spurs borrowed £175m to get through this crisis.
We don't know the effect of this on the market but Chelsea signed Timo Wener for £48m who is three years younger and scored 35 goals for club and country this season. Equally, how many clubs can actually afford to pay more than £100m for one player especially taking into account FFP.
Add to that the fact that Kane has had meaningful periods out injured in three of the last four seasons would it be better to take £100m now in those circumstances or wait a year and have to accept half that?
And finally if Kane wants to leave he will leave.
Some valid points but i certainly don't see Levy selling him for less than 150m. He's 27 in a few weeks, and not a striker who relies who pace so may have not even reached his prime yet. Spurs losing money during the pandemic and taking out a loan are probably reasons why Levy would hold out for a high figure.
Although i do agree any transfer is limited by the fact there's probably only 5 clubs who could afford Kane. City, United, PSG, Real and Barca and i can't see any moving for him this summer. PSG don't need him as they just paid 50m for Icardi. Barca would only move for him if they got rid of Suarez and are already trying to sign Martinez from Inter. Real won't go for hm as they're reportedly 'saving up' to move for Mbappe next summer. So that leaves City who don't need him unless Aguero leaves, and United who might be better off spending that sort of money on other areas of the team given their new front 3 are all young and scoring goals.
Werner was only 48m because he had a release clause so not worth comparing.
I think that the fact that they are young especially in the case of Greenwood means that they do need someone else but more so for the fact that Kane is different to them as he is most comfortable coming short with back to goal as well as playing through the middle.
Comments
West Ham 37
Watford 32
Villa 29
Bournemouth 29
City's problem for me was not replacing Kompany, and having a lot of poor defensive options (Walker and Laporte aside). Mendy, Zinchenko, Cancelo, Stonesa and Otamendi are all not good enough. The fact Guardiola has been preferring the teenager Garcia ahead of Stones and Otamendi says a lot.
I don't need much prompting, but thanks for reminding me why I detest your shitbag club and it's followers so much.
Half hearted clapping and one side of the 'guard' jogged off before three or four of the Liverpool players had got passed them.
When Spurs sacked Pochettino they had a points tally of 13 points from 10 games. After an initial "holiday" period since his sacking, they have now become a functional Mourinho football team. Trouble is that with a record of 2 wins from their last 10 games they aren't actually "functioning" that well. In fact, they have actually only scored 10 goals in those games.
If you were Harry Kane, coming up to 27 and in his prime, would you be hanging about with that total lack of service? Or would you be tempted to move to United playing with the likes of Pogba, Martial, Rashford, Fernandes and Greenwood? A United side unbeaten in 14 games but, more to the point, one that has scored 43 goals in that time.
The move to the new stadium and loss of revenue as a result of the pandemic from not just ticket sales but also the cancelled Johua fight and two NBA matches has also cost Spurs dearly. Would they be able to resist a £100m bid for their most valued player? And how much of that would be available to Mourinho to spend?
Kane goes at the end of the season with my blessing. Will be gutted of course but the boy deserves to be winning things.
Spurs were at a major crossroads 2.5 seasons ago and Levy/Poch never dealt with it then.
We've gone from a back four of Peak Rose, Peak Walker and Peak Vertonghen/Alderweirald, to Davies, Dier, Sanchez and Aurier. There is just no comparison.
We sold Moussa Dembele, one of the finest defensive midfielders in the game and didnt replace him. Winks, Sissoko, not one of them is half as good. Then people wonder what has happened to Spurs? It really isnt a surprise.
We don't know the effect of this on the market but Chelsea signed Timo Wener for £48m who is three years younger and scored 35 goals for club and country this season. Equally, how many clubs can actually afford to pay more than £100m for one player especially taking into account FFP.
Add to that the fact that Kane has had meaningful periods out injured in three of the last four seasons would it be better to take £100m now in those circumstances or wait a year and have to accept half that?
And finally if Kane wants to leave he will leave.
Although i do agree any transfer is limited by the fact there's probably only 5 clubs who could afford Kane. City, United, PSG, Real and Barca and i can't see any moving for him this summer.
PSG don't need him as they just paid 50m for Icardi. Barca would only move for him if they got rid of Suarez and are already trying to sign Martinez from Inter. Real won't go for hm as they're reportedly 'saving up' to move for Mbappe next summer.
So that leaves City who don't need him unless Aguero leaves, and United who might be better off spending that sort of money on other areas of the team given their new front 3 are all young and scoring goals.
Werner was only 48m because he had a release clause so not worth comparing.