January 2019 transfer thread

  • There is only one thing weirder than posting on internet forums... lurking on internet forums!
    Registration only takes a minute and removes most of the adverts. You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Register to remove

Register to remove

Surely, yesterday proved a striker simply isn't needed (or at least not a priority).

What's our record without Kane?

Played 12
Won 9
Drawn 3
Lost 0
Scored 26
Conceded 6
Sorry but utterly ridiculous and massively incorrect.

It is now like Brexit and this striker issue.

Kane is superb but can lose form, get injured or need support.

Son or Moura are decent options but not strikers. Anyone who understands football should be able to see that.

In key games and for that difference between being a competitor or being a likely winner that difference is most evident. See yesterday with no Aguero for City.

My view is 100% that without a second/other striker who can effectively lead the line in Kane's absence for whatever reason that we will win nothing.

That until we add 2/3 players to the current group we will continue to challenge but not get past the winning line.

Why do we need another striker? 3rd, 2nd, 3rd and 3 semi-final losses that's why.
 

Totti

Chess extraordinaire
Sorry but utterly ridiculous and massively incorrect.

It is now like Brexit and this striker issue.

Kane is superb but can lose form, get injured or need support.

Son or Moura are decent options but not strikers. Anyone who understands football should be able to see that.

In key games and for that difference between being a competitor or being a likely winner that difference is most evident. See yesterday with no Aguero for City.

My view is 100% that without a second/other striker who can effectively lead the line in Kane's absence for whatever reason that we will win nothing.

That until we add 2/3 players to the current group we will continue to challenge but not get past the winning line.

Why do we need another striker? 3rd, 2nd, 3rd and 3 semi-final losses that's why.
What's massively incorrect?

That we've won 10 out of 13 games that we've rested Kane or games he's missed through injury? Which include smashing Chelsea at Stamford Bridge for the first time in 25 years and comfortably dismantling Guardiola's Man City at White Hart Lane?

We don't play with a striker when Kane is out. I'm not really sure what's confusing. Teams have no idea who to mark because Lucas/Son/Dele/Lamela/Eriksen float all over the place. Chelsea didn't even play with a striker yesterday and beat Man City.

If you think finishing 3rd, 2nd, 3rd and a semi final loss was because we didn't have a back up striker to a player who was Golden Boot winner in 2 of those 3 seasons then I feel sorry for you.
 
Last edited:
What's massively incorrect?

That we've won 10 out of 13 games that we've rested Kane or games he's missed through injury? Which include smashing Chelsea at Stamford Bridge for the first time in 25 years of comfortably dismantling Guardiola's Man City at White Hart Lane?

We don't play with a striker when Kane is out. I'm not really sure what's confusing. Teams have no idea who to mark because Lucas/Son/Dele/Lamela/Eriksen float all over the place. Chelsea didn't even play with a striker yesterday and beat Man City.

If you think finishing 3rd, 2nd, 3rd and a semi final loss was because we didn't have a back up striker to a player who was Golden Boot winner in 2 of those 3 seasons then I feel sorry for you.
Absolutely, find me a Kane back up striker better than Son or any of those other players we have in a false striker position, find me a club willing to sell them even though they are that good, has to be a player willing to be on bench, and they can’t be seen good enough to be bought by city or united for more than we offer

Not easy is it
 
Sorry but utterly ridiculous and massively incorrect.

It is now like Brexit and this striker issue.

Kane is superb but can lose form, get injured or need support.

Son or Moura are decent options but not strikers. Anyone who understands football should be able to see that.

In key games and for that difference between being a competitor or being a likely winner that difference is most evident. See yesterday with no Aguero for City.

My view is 100% that without a second/other striker who can effectively lead the line in Kane's absence for whatever reason that we will win nothing.

That until we add 2/3 players to the current group we will continue to challenge but not get past the winning line.

Why do we need another striker? 3rd, 2nd, 3rd and 3 semi-final losses that's why.
When you've just been presented with factual evidence that completely refutes your position you continue to dig the same hole. Utterly bizarre post. Just hold your hands up and say, "Oh I didn't know that perhaps you are right, thanks for posting".
 
What's massively incorrect?

That we've won 10 out of 13 games that we've rested Kane or games he's missed through injury? Which include smashing Chelsea at Stamford Bridge for the first time in 25 years and comfortably dismantling Guardiola's Man City at White Hart Lane?

We don't play with a striker when Kane is out. I'm not really sure what's confusing. Teams have no idea who to mark because Lucas/Son/Dele/Lamela/Eriksen float all over the place. Chelsea didn't even play with a striker yesterday and beat Man City.

If you think finishing 3rd, 2nd, 3rd and a semi final loss was because we didn't have a back up striker to a player who was Golden Boot winner in 2 of those 3 seasons then I feel sorry for you.
What have we won? Plaudits.

If we adopt your position we continue to win nothing.

The key moments in the biggest of matches and at the critical times require more than we have got.

What bit of that continues to get lost on you and others?
 

Totti

Chess extraordinaire
What have we won? Plaudits.

If we adopt your position we continue to win nothing.

The key moments in the biggest of matches and at the critical times require more than we have got.

What bit of that continues to get lost on you and others?
Right. Got it.

The only way Tottenham Hotspur win things is if we sign a player to sit on the bench behind Kane.

Got it.
 
Absolutely, find me a Kane back up striker better than Son or any of those other players we have in a false striker position, find me a club willing to sell them even though they are that good, has to be a player willing to be on bench, and they can’t be seen good enough to be bought by city or united for more than we offer

Not easy is it
Always the voice of reason. You must stop it.
 

Tomo

Supporter
I don’t think our system supports a typical out and out striker, Kane while a number 9 in ability has much more of an all round game than most strikers.

For me an alternative to Kane would be a multi role forward like Martial, Lacazette etc who can play as a forward but also as a wide forward and while Son nor Lucas are really quite they same they have done a good job for us.

I still feel we are mainly ok other than a prsssing need for a midfielder of top quality given the situation with Dembele and Wanyama. Obviously the Toby and Eriksen contracts are also key in terms of who we need over the next two windows.
 

Register to remove

If Sonny can find consistency (he is such a streaky player) then we genuinely don’t need any back up at this point. We are scoring plenty of goals and not heavily reliant on one player. It’s our defensive side (DM in particular) where we could use some investment. Dembele looks like he’s off, Wanyama looks like he’s broken & whilst I love Dier to bits, we can’t rely on him to be ever present- even if he stays fit, it’s a position that attracts yellow cards/suspensions. I’m happy with the squad, but DM is a position that does have me slightly concerned. We are an injury/suspension away from being very vulnerable there.
 
Top Bottom