I'd still not yet bring Kane back.
I still wouldn't as we win better without him than with him. I wouldn't change this winning team and Kane has to FIGHT to win his place back. If we are ahead with 20 minutes to go then he stays benched.Don't think there's a need to rush him back
We've been playing some gritty stuff without him...this is a team game. Hopefully Kane is hungry to earn his spot back.
A 10/20 minute run out tommorow and take it from there for the Chelsea game
I still wouldn't as we win better without him than with him. I wouldn't change this winning team and Kane has to FIGHT to win his place back. If we are ahead with 20 minutes to go then he stays benched.
That went well, completely disrupted the speed and fluidity of your attack.Do you really think he’s not fighting? Lad’s come back from injury early and just got described by his coach as an animal who he’s already had to hold back for 10 days.
He’s surely getting game time today, as he should, and I’d be shocked if he didn’t start midweek all being well.
That went well, completely disrupted the speed and fluidity of your attack.
A 20 goal/season guy is great, but not if he gets in the way/restricts the space of two or three other 10 goal/season men who also add a lot of assists.
Seriously I rate Kane highly, I have said on another thread that he is one of the top 5 most clinical strikers in the PL. That doesn't mean he is the best fit for the team/style as it stands.Yeah, note that I didn’t advocate what actually ended up happening. As I’ve mentioned on other threads, Poch set up against Burnley all wrong and the game against Chelsea was marginal at best. Kane has proven for the last few years that he can be very effective alongside Son and the others. To suggest that the main reason we lost the last two matches was playing them together is utterly wrong IMO.
Our attack didn’t have more speed and fluidity when Kane was out. We were scraping through games - not a bad sign for an under strength team for sure, but not the goal for how we should be playing either.
Seriously I rate Kane highly, I have said on another thread that he is one of the top 5 most clinical strikers in the PL. That doesn't mean he is the best fit for the team/style as it stands.
That doesn't mean he is the best fit for the team/style as it stands.
That will be easy for you to prove.
Every Spurs game where the starting XIs had the following combos :
C1 - No Kane or Son
C2 - No Kane, Son
C3 - Kane, no Son
C4 - Kane, Son
Total up for C1 - C4 : the W/D/L items.
At the very least the numbers for C2 should be greater than C1, yes ??
He's got a Daily Star article he couldn't copy/paste properly...DGC has the numbers to present to us now, yes ??
Seriously I rate Kane highly, I have said on another thread that he is one of the top 5 most clinical strikers in the PL.
Top 5? How generous!