World Cup winning center forward and didn’t score a goal. Wonder how he feels about that.

Not sure he'll give a toss. He's won the World Cup and played a big part in the team.

Played a huge part. No criticism from me but his contribution was not capped off with a goal or two

Not scored admittedly but his contribution in the last three games has been significantly better than that of the golden boot winner...

If I could play up front, not manage to score, but collect a World Cup winners’ medal, I think I’d take it

Perhaps that what we are lacking. After they won it last time with stephane guivarch.

And I am sure he would trade his three goals at euro 2016 for a winners medal. Much like kane would trade his 6 goals...

Clearly Giroud is fulfilling his role in the team,and Deschamps is happy with him,they scored 4 against the Argies,and 4 in the final so they must be doing something right.

Bad player

Yet arsenal fans were in meltdown as to why lacazette didn't get picked.

cutsy123 wrote:Bad player

Take it you weren't at Turf Moor in March then, when Giroud and Morata schooled our defence

bobinho wrote:Not scored admittedly but his contribution in the last three games has been significantly better than that of the golden boot winner...

If Kane had been more like Giroud and played for the team then England would have made the final. He had ample opportunity to square the ball to Sterling for two nil but selfishly tried to score because of his focus on winning the Golden Boot. Cost England big time.

Foulthrow wrote:If Kane had been more like Giroud and played for the team then England would have made the final. He had ample opportunity to square the ball to Sterling for two nil but selfishly tried to score because of his focus on winning the Golden Boot. Cost England big time.

You seen Sterlings miss at the turf last season? It wasn’t a given he’d have scored.

Dyched wrote:You seen Sterlings miss at the turf last season? It wasn’t a given he’d have scored.

Well, no, I suppose not.

ClaretJimmy wrote:Take it you weren't at Turf Moor in March then, when Giroud and Morata schooled our defence

Name another game he schooled a team?

Kane has been pure garbage. I was convinced he was carrying an injury until he was picked for the 3rd place play off game.

cutsy123 wrote:Bad player

Bad judge of a player more like.

Foulthrow wrote:If Kane had been more like Giroud and played for the team then England would have made the final. He had ample opportunity to square the ball to Sterling for two nil but selfishly tried to score because of his focus on winning the Golden Boot. Cost England big time.

Never in a million years would Kane have squared that and am glad he didnt. Because a striker should only have eyes for goal when in that situation.

He is one of the most lethal strikers in world football and was already on 6 for this world cup and only two players (Ronaldo and Klose in 2002) have scored more in the last 30 years! He was right to go for goal.

Giroud was pivotal for France's success; he could win the high ball, hold it up and bring others into play with exquisite link up play.

The area of expertise where Kane lacks a lot, imo.

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Never in a million years would Kane have squared that and am glad he didnt. Because a striker should only have eyes for goal when in that situation.

He is one of the most lethal strikers in world football and was already on 6 for this world cup and only two players (Ronaldo and Klose in 2002) have scored more in the last 30 years! He was right to go for goal.

Not just that miss.. The diving header from trippiers volleyed cross.. About 2 seconds too late.