No I didn't say that!
I doubt ANY story that uses the phrase 'has told friends'.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
I doubt ANY story that uses the phrase 'has told friends'.
If Kane has three years left, levy will most likely sell him the season after next.
I doubt he'd let him run down his contract and go for free. There's just too much money to lose.
Hopefully the new manager will be able to convince him to stay.
If he does go, and it would be fair enough, I just hope he goes abroad.
Rather have him here tho.
I doubt he'd let him run down his contract and go for free. There's just too much money to lose.
Hopefully the new manager will be able to convince him to stay.
If he does go, and it would be fair enough, I just hope he goes abroad.
Rather have him here tho.
Nope. Still not the talk of a true supporter.
I don't disbelieve that Kane wants to leave, but that article is laughable: the 'hell bent' quote is attributed first to 'friends'... and then to a 'Tottenham source'; 'hell bent', which is pretty emphatic, is later downgraded to '100% thinking of moving on'. Pathetic.If he left, it might honestly damage my support of the club and I never thought I'd say that about a player.
Tottenham star Kane 'hell bent' on quitting club this summer - Sources
Football Insider can reveal Harry Kane has told friends he is "hell bent" on quitting Tottenham and wants to join a Premier League sidewww.footballinsider247.com
Fucking dick. Spam cunt.
If he ever leaves he will be first on teamsheet where ever he is that good and managers love his attitude. Not 90 minutes necessarily but that may benefit.
Sterling is out because he's been shit for a few months.
I think you've been watching The Shining too long......
TLDR - what was the gist?
The gist was he's a cunt
Agree, but no more pathetic than half the shite that gets peddled here.
I think this idea that Kane will still be the same player after being refused a move is a bit misguided. Sure, he won't down tools because he's a consummate professional, but a huge part of motivation and desire is subconscious and essentially outside of your control. So without trying to do anything different, I don't think he'll be able to keep putting in 100% effort. There's a degree of almost faking it involved.
Just imagine if you weren't allowed to leave your job. If the pay is great, you feel valued, and you feel like you owe something to your employer, you're probably going to continue trying your best anyway. But are you really going to tell me that you'd still have the raw intrinsic hunger that came naturally and inevitably when you actually wanted to be there?
If Kane is kept, I can totally see next season ruining his legacy at Spurs and tanking his relationship with the fans, which would be tragic. If the team doesn't do well - and I don't think there's any reason to believe they will - every single mistake Kane makes will be replayed ad infinitum, overanalysed, and used as evidence that he doesn't care enough because he doesn't want to be at the club. Every lull will be perceived as laziness. Even the most typical, garden variety mistakes will be pounced upon. Kane's stamina management protocol already makes him look low-energy at times in games, but next season it'll be scrutinised anew and declared further evidence of a decline.
I'm sure Kane will continue to do the best he can, at least on a conscious level (as above, I think it's impossible to give 100% under the circumstances, no matter how much you tell yourself you want it). It'd be harsh to judge him for his effort if he's doing as much as his body and brain will allow. Anyway, the confluence of all of these factors - Kane's subconscious loss of edge, a few lean patches, another bad season for the team - could so easily lead to a rift between him and the fans. I can see it being a horrible break-up and that's sad.
Just imagine if you weren't allowed to leave your job. If the pay is great, you feel valued, and you feel like you owe something to your employer, you're probably going to continue trying your best anyway. But are you really going to tell me that you'd still have the raw intrinsic hunger that came naturally and inevitably when you actually wanted to be there?
If Kane is kept, I can totally see next season ruining his legacy at Spurs and tanking his relationship with the fans, which would be tragic. If the team doesn't do well - and I don't think there's any reason to believe they will - every single mistake Kane makes will be replayed ad infinitum, overanalysed, and used as evidence that he doesn't care enough because he doesn't want to be at the club. Every lull will be perceived as laziness. Even the most typical, garden variety mistakes will be pounced upon. Kane's stamina management protocol already makes him look low-energy at times in games, but next season it'll be scrutinised anew and declared further evidence of a decline.
I'm sure Kane will continue to do the best he can, at least on a conscious level (as above, I think it's impossible to give 100% under the circumstances, no matter how much you tell yourself you want it). It'd be harsh to judge him for his effort if he's doing as much as his body and brain will allow. Anyway, the confluence of all of these factors - Kane's subconscious loss of edge, a few lean patches, another bad season for the team - could so easily lead to a rift between him and the fans. I can see it being a horrible break-up and that's sad.
Last edited:
Years
...in hindsight, there were rather a lot of £££'s... it wasn't a necessary point to make... the fact I had to scroll down the post for half an hour to even edit it proves it was overkill!
I've edited into a 'spoiler' instead, it wasn't meant as a 'spam' post, honest!
(The 'cunt calling' was a bit harsh,mind!)
I still love you.
Cheers man. Apologies for use of the c word. Probably not needed and I apologise
Interesting take on Kane’s situation by Matt Dickinson in The Times today:
There is not much that links football from the 1960s with the business of today, but reading Harry Kane’s latest nudge of the exit door at Tottenham Hotspur this week brought a timely reminder of a story I once heard about Johnny Haynes.
The Fulham legend was attending a dinner in his honour, packed with adoring fans, when he was asked about his 18 years at Craven Cottage and why he remained a devoted one-club man, unlike modern football mercenaries.
Haynes gave the unexpected but admirably honest response that, in truth, he had been eager to leave for Tottenham, who were offering more money and a much greater prospect of silverware. As faces fell, Haynes explained that the only reason he stayed at one club was because of the restrictive transfer regulations of the time and Fulham’s refusal to let him pursue his dreams.
Kane’s comments this week, again expressing his frustration at a lack of medals and inviting Daniel Levy, the Spurs chairman, to read between the lines, could be shaping up as a modern echo: another hugely talented England captain thinking that he has outgrown his club, ready to move on but wondering if he will be released from his contract or remain trapped in a gilded cage.
Haynes, it should be said, was neither disenchanted nor particularly regretful. He had become the first £100-a-week footballer in Britain once the maximum wage was lifted in 1961, and could bask in lifelong acclaim at Fulham. Posthumously, a statue of this gifted inside forward was put up outside Craven Cottage in 2008, three years after his death.
He could not measure his career in silverware — tenth in the top division and a couple of FA Cup semi-finals was as near as Fulham came to glory in Haynes’s time — but he has been immortalised in bronze.
It made me ponder how we weigh up success. We talk about trophies as the obvious tally, almost as if they are the sole reason for the elite players and coaches to get out of bed. But do we count only who won what?
Medals might matter most for a player in his twenties but what about during those many decades post-playing? Can reputation and enduring affinity with a club, or a region, come to mean more?
Alan Shearer was the first inductee this week into the Premier League Hall of Fame and he lifted one club trophy: the league title, at Blackburn Rovers. His stellar career is not evaluated through silverware but all the goals he plundered — a record of 260 in the Premier League that Kane, on 164, chases — and remembered, most poignantly, in the brass statue that stands outside St James’ Park, right arm raised in that idiosyncratic celebration. Shearer won nothing in a decade at Newcastle United but is, by any estimation, a footballing legend.
There is not much that links football from the 1960s with the business of today, but reading Harry Kane’s latest nudge of the exit door at Tottenham Hotspur this week brought a timely reminder of a story I once heard about Johnny Haynes.
The Fulham legend was attending a dinner in his honour, packed with adoring fans, when he was asked about his 18 years at Craven Cottage and why he remained a devoted one-club man, unlike modern football mercenaries.
Haynes gave the unexpected but admirably honest response that, in truth, he had been eager to leave for Tottenham, who were offering more money and a much greater prospect of silverware. As faces fell, Haynes explained that the only reason he stayed at one club was because of the restrictive transfer regulations of the time and Fulham’s refusal to let him pursue his dreams.
Kane’s comments this week, again expressing his frustration at a lack of medals and inviting Daniel Levy, the Spurs chairman, to read between the lines, could be shaping up as a modern echo: another hugely talented England captain thinking that he has outgrown his club, ready to move on but wondering if he will be released from his contract or remain trapped in a gilded cage.
Haynes, it should be said, was neither disenchanted nor particularly regretful. He had become the first £100-a-week footballer in Britain once the maximum wage was lifted in 1961, and could bask in lifelong acclaim at Fulham. Posthumously, a statue of this gifted inside forward was put up outside Craven Cottage in 2008, three years after his death.
He could not measure his career in silverware — tenth in the top division and a couple of FA Cup semi-finals was as near as Fulham came to glory in Haynes’s time — but he has been immortalised in bronze.
It made me ponder how we weigh up success. We talk about trophies as the obvious tally, almost as if they are the sole reason for the elite players and coaches to get out of bed. But do we count only who won what?
Medals might matter most for a player in his twenties but what about during those many decades post-playing? Can reputation and enduring affinity with a club, or a region, come to mean more?
Alan Shearer was the first inductee this week into the Premier League Hall of Fame and he lifted one club trophy: the league title, at Blackburn Rovers. His stellar career is not evaluated through silverware but all the goals he plundered — a record of 260 in the Premier League that Kane, on 164, chases — and remembered, most poignantly, in the brass statue that stands outside St James’ Park, right arm raised in that idiosyncratic celebration. Shearer won nothing in a decade at Newcastle United but is, by any estimation, a footballing legend.
For FUCK sake
