Harry Kane

[Anonymous Claret]

I am too depressed to post about Burnley so I thought I may pose the question of whether England would be a better team without him in it? If anyone agrees with this, who would be best suited to replace him? I just watched a little bit of the Bayern game in which he scored again but ultimately they lost again. He went to Germany to win a title in a 1 horse race and has failed spectacularly regardless of his personal achievements.

He is a great goalscorer but so were Jimmy Greaves and Charlie Austin. I am pretty sure that when Greaves was injured in 1966 England fans hopes dropped immensely. I remember when we lost Austin in 2013 that I expected very little for the following season but we ended up being a much better team without Charlie.

I can't think of anyone who would be an effective forward replacement because I am not too convinced by Toney or Watkins. But then again does it have to be a traditional forward type player?

Possibly Gibbs White or Palmer?

[Burnley1989]

No, unbelievable footballer, first name on any international teams name sheet

[matttheclaret]

Absolutely not. Kane is first name on the team sheet. Brilliant player as well as an incredible goal scorer

[Swizzlestick]

He’s a world class striker and is obviously the first name on the team sheet. He’s not just a goal scorer - his link up play is fantastic. Bayern’s failings are very much not down to him.

[Cooclaret]

He is for this tournament the first name on the sheet. But I can see how he stifles a Foden…

Rooney did the same in later years, dropping deeper and deeper.

England need an out and out goal scorer, Kane fills that job role.


After the Euros, when Southgate has gone, I’d drop him.

[jrgbfc]

Have to be either drunk or on a late night fishing trip? Best striker in the world.

[distortiondave]

Best striker in the world is right, and that includes Haaland who is himself a machine, but is nothing like the complete player Kane is.
There's not been many strikers like Kane. Shearer draws obvious comparisons because of goals scored, but they're nothing alike. Kane is the best striker of his generation, IMO.

[Burnleyareback2]

He is the best at a time when England have a limited choice.

[hoskinsgoalatswansea]

Quality player, but I feel his England scoring record is skewed by the amount he’s scored against poor sides. Kane, imo has always come up short when we’ve played the better sides in the latter stages.

Even when he got the WC golden boot it was a bit rubbish. 2 decent goals in the first game against Tunisia, then after that a hat trick against the mighty Panama (2 pens and one off his heel he didn’t know about), and another pen against Columbia. Nothing in the QF and SF. Four years later we’ve got that late pen against France when the pressure was on.

Scoring 5 against San Marino to boost your numbers doesn’t impress, he needs to do it when it matters for England if he’s going to be regarded as one of the very best.

[ecc]

Quality player, but I feel his England scoring record is skewed by the amount he’s scored against poor sides. Kane, imo has always come up short when we’ve played the better sides in the latter stages.

Even when he got the WC golden boot it was a bit rubbish. 2 decent goals in the first game against Tunisia, then after that a hat trick against the mighty Panama (2 pens and one off his heel he didn’t know about), and another pen against Columbia. Nothing in the QF and SF. Four years later we’ve got that late pen against France when the pressure was on.

Scoring 5 against San Marino to boost your numbers doesn’t impress, he needs to do it when it matters for England if he’s going to be regarded as one of the very best.

I agree with you to a large extent but then all of today's strikers' stats are skewed by the admission of San Marino and Gibraltar into UEFA.

The Poles level the same criticism against Lewandowski. And yet it's impossible to deny his ability.

[Anonymous Claret]

Have to be either drunk or on a late night fishing trip? Best striker in the world.

I am genuinely not fishing and I was completely sober when posting last night.

I haven't watched an England game for quite a few years so my question was aimed at those fans who still do watch the national team.

I cannot disagree with what people have been saying that Kane is a great striker and an even better goalscorer. I cannot disagree that he is also 1 of the best strikers in the world atm.

I just feel that when I have watched him in the past whether that has been for Spurs, England or Bayern he has been the main focus of the team and a lot of the play has been geared towards feeding him opportunities to score. Although Kane has been outstanding personally I think the team hasn't always performed as well as it can.

As mentioned earlier Bayern's problems aren't solely down to Kane but they still should be doing a lot better than what they are this season. Spurs have had terrible luck with injuries this season but I think that they have been a much better 'team' without Kane in it. Obviously a lot of this is down to Big Ange.

I believe that with all the young talent England have such as Saka, Foden, Bellingham and Palmer etc. we would be a better team with a young Wayne Rooney type of player. Obviously we don't have anyone of that ability so I was asking if anyone believed we would be a better team without Kane and if that's the case is there anyone suitable to replace him?

Greaves, Lineker, Shearer and to a lesser extent Austin for ourselves were all great goalscoring strikers but it could be argued that sides sometimes performed better as a team when they weren't playing.

[Winstonswhite]

When we play France in the Quarters of the Euros coming up, it wont be a bit of magic from Kane that wins us the game, it’ll be a bit of magic from Mbappe. And that’s the difference. World class talent do it on the biggest stage and the biggest games. Kane doesn’t.

[MT03ALG]

Will Kane win a team trophy with club or country ? Looking doubtful....

[CoolClaret]

The Harry Kane conundrum...

My take - he lacks the physicality to be able to play himself into a game when things aren't quite falling for him/the team like a striker such as Benzema, Suarez, Drogba etc can so isn't the type that can take a game by the scruff of the neck and make something happen.

It seems to get the most out of him you either need runners going in behind him with him dropping deep and getting ball to feet or if the entire team is set up to feed him the ball.

Southgate needs to have the bottle to take him off when fatigued/not firing in a knockout game for someone like Toney that can cause a defense problems with his pace and power alone.

Obviously a supremely talented player - no doubting that.

[jrgbfc]

I am genuinely not fishing and I was completely sober when posting last night.

I haven't watched an England game for quite a few years so my question was aimed at those fans who still do watch the national team.

I cannot disagree with what people have been saying that Kane is a great striker and an even better goalscorer. I cannot disagree that he is also 1 of the best strikers in the world atm.

I just feel that when I have watched him in the past whether that has been for Spurs, England or Bayern he has been the main focus of the team and a lot of the play has been geared towards feeding him opportunities to score. Although Kane has been outstanding personally I think the team hasn't always performed as well as it can.

As mentioned earlier Bayern's problems aren't solely down to Kane but they still should be doing a lot better than what they are this season. Spurs have had terrible luck with injuries this season but I think that they have been a much better 'team' without Kane in it. Obviously a lot of this is down to Big Ange.

I believe that with all the young talent England have such as Saka, Foden, Bellingham and Palmer etc. we would be a better team with a young Wayne Rooney type of player. Obviously we don't have anyone of that ability so I was asking if anyone believed we would be a better team without Kane and if that's the case is there anyone suitable to replace him?

Greaves, Lineker, Shearer and to a lesser extent Austin for ourselves were all great goalscoring strikers but it could be argued that sides sometimes performed better as a team when they weren't playing.

Fair enough. I definitely wouldn't be leaving him out, even if we had a serious alternative. For me him and Bellingham are our 2 world class players who would get in any team in the world. As for Bayern they were very lucky to win the league last season, Dortmund bottled it on the last day.

[CoolClaret]

Fair enough. I definitely wouldn't be leaving him out, even if we had a serious alternative. For me him and Bellingham are our 2 world class players who would get in any team in the world. As for Bayern they were very lucky to win the league last season, Dortmund bottled it on the last day.

Yet they've added Kane and arguably regressed?

His performance in big games is really poor.. is it psychological or more that when the level is upped he just isn't as dominant?

[taio]

Top class striker and walks into the England side.

[jrgbfc]

Yet they've added Kane and arguably regressed?

His performance in big games is really poor.. is it psychological or more that when the level is upped he just isn't as dominant?

He's on track to get 40+ goals for Bayern this season, not sure he's the man to blame for their struggles.
We'll see, i think the Euros this summer is massive for Kane and England, not sure we've ever had a better chance to win something since 66.

[CoolClaret]

He's on track to get 40+ goals for Bayern this season, not sure he's the man to blame for their struggles.
We'll see, i think the Euros this summer is massive for Kane and England, not sure we've ever had a better chance to win something since 66.

He might well be - still aren't going to win the league.

Look at his goals in big games, talking final/semi finals, top 4 games. Just falls apart.

Very different from a Drogba type who was ice cold in big games.

Tremendously talented but it's a mark against him, sadly.

[taio]

He might well be - still aren't going to win the league.

Look at his goals in big games, talking final/semi finals, top 4 games. Just falls apart.

Very different from a Drogba type who was ice cold in big games.

Tremendously talented but it's a mark against him, sadly.

Superb record against Arsenal

[SonofPog]

I may pose the question of whether England would be a better team without him in it? If anyone agrees with this,

Yes, I agree. I've said as much to friends recently. There's a reason Kane scores a lot of goals and his teams don't win anything, he's a flat track bully.

This is my England team.

Grealish ---- Foden ----- Saka

------- Rice ------- Bellingham
--------------- TAA

Colwill----- Stones - Anyone buy Maguire - White / Walker


Get Grealish to stick to the left wing. Tell TAA to just sit and ping balls about. He's a physical monster, you need him in the team, but he's no where near being our best RB, Stones moves into midfield to create a box. Foden as a false 9 creating space for Rice, Bellingham and Saka to break in behind. Colwil stays and forms a back three. 3 - 2 - 4 - 1

Never going to happen though but I can dream

[yTib]

kane is not the problem for england.

i'd start by getting a manager who doesn't step out of the shower to have a pyss.

[Tricky Trevor]

Bayerns’ problems are not of Harrys’ doing. Too many are not playing for Tuchel and I’m amazed they are second=.
He is world class but may never win a trophy. I can’t see Southgate bringing home the cup.

[IanMcL]

He'll be used and subbed. Super striker but there are others now.

[bfcjg]

Truly world class, his range of passing as well as goal scoring is second to none.

[taio]

He'll be used and subbed. Super striker but there are others now.

The others aren't as good

[GetIntoEm]

would literally start for any country or club team in the world. absolutely start him.

[ChrisG]

Bayerns’ problems are not of Harrys’ doing. Too many are not playing for Tuchel and I’m amazed they are second=.
He is world class but may never win a trophy. I can’t see Southgate bringing home the cup.

Every chance they could finish 3rd, they are level with Stuttgart who they play in a few weeks. Stuttgart have got Leverkusen, but it should be all over by then anyway.

Both also have to play the mighty Eintracht, who are the most temperamental team in the world, hence the nickname die Launisch Diva, 'the moody diva'.

[gandhisflipflop]

I am too depressed to post about Burnley so I thought I may pose the question of whether England would be a better team without him in it? If anyone agrees with this, who would be best suited to replace him? I just watched a little bit of the Bayern game in which he scored again but ultimately they lost again. He went to Germany to win a title in a 1 horse race and has failed spectacularly regardless of his personal achievements.

He is a great goalscorer but so were Jimmy Greaves and Charlie Austin. I am pretty sure that when Greaves was injured in 1966 England fans hopes dropped immensely. I remember when we lost Austin in 2013 that I expected very little for the following season but we ended up being a much better team without Charlie.

I can't think of anyone who would be an effective forward replacement because I am not too convinced by Toney or Watkins. But then again does it have to be a traditional forward type player?

Possibly Gibbs White or Palmer?

I’ve said this for a while about Kane and you make good points about other strikers. I wouldn’t be playing him unless he could learn to play between the width of the penalty area and stop coming so deep to get the ball.

[Dyched]

He might well be - still aren't going to win the league.

Look at his goals in big games, talking final/semi finals, top 4 games. Just falls apart.

Very different from a Drogba type who was ice cold in big games.

Tremendously talented but it's a mark against him, sadly.

Difference being Drogba was the main man in a dominating Chelsea team with big money signings. Kane became the main man in a very young inexperienced Tottenham team that weren’t anyway near title contenders at the time.

[Colburn_Claret]

Quality player, but I don't like the way he plays for England. Has a habit of dropping too deep, or drifting wide looking for the ball when he should be playing off the shoulder of the last man.

[CoolClaret]

Difference being Drogba was the main man in a dominating Chelsea team with big money signings. Kane became the main man in a very young inexperienced Tottenham team that weren’t anyway near title contenders at the time.

What I was trying to get at, is basically saying that a Drogba type player in a huge crunch, nervy crunch game is the sort of player that rose to the occasion and put his team on his back.

Even when Chelsea weren't playing well you could never count Drogba out because he could out sprint, out muscle, out jump and out fight even the best defenders in the world and cause problems.

Kane is a wonderfully gifted footballer but doesn't have that dimension to his game.