Got into an argument about this earlier. As far as I'm concerned, Kane's younger than the other two and has scored more goals this season. I don't see how it can be argued that he's not superior to them.
Costa scored 27 goals in a title winning season for Atletico Madrid last season and has 19 in 23 PL games in what will be a title winning season for Chelsea. If Kane scores and performs consistently well for longer than six months then comparisons can be made. There are countless tales of players who suddenly had purple patches scoring a goal a game for half a season and were hailed as this and that, only to fade without trace - Mark Stein, Paul Warhurst, Jan Aage Fjortoft, for example. On the other hand, Cristiano Ronaldo suddenly started scoring at a goal a game or better and hasn't stopped since. More time is needed to judge Kane.
You already broke character earlier and admitted you were here to troll. You can't start up again now, the illusion is already shattered!
I love Harry Kane but Costa is a different beast. We'll see again once Kane carries us to a CL final and the title??
I sould say Costa > Kane = Giroud I see a lot of good in Giroud, and he's got a decent goal record over multiple seasons
This is classic Matth posting. Constant threads, all completely biased etc. Can't believe there's 2 of them out there. However in the interest of debate. All 3 have had very good seasons. Kane has been a revelation and no one could have predicted how well he has done. Giroud has been much improved and suits Arsenal well. I'm of the school though that standing out in a top team is more impressive then players who look good in just good sides. Chelsea should win the title, Spurs will probably finish around 6th. Countless players have purple patches as stated above. That's why Andy Carroll once cost 35 million and Kevin Phillips was the best goal scorer in Europe. Costa's has been amazing considering he has come into a foreign league where he doesn't speak the language and into the pressure cooker environment and expectancy of a title challenging side like us. To score that many goals, provide assists and dominate defences the way he has has been pretty special. He's obviously not liked but he's been brilliant. This is also coming off the back of an outstanding season for AM last year where his goals took them to the title ahead of Barca and Real and to seconds away from the C.L. Until Kane has performed that consistently, at that level, they just can not be compared. Costa is also Spain's number one striker, played (poorly admittedly) for them at the World Cup where as Kane has one cap. All in all it's too early to put them in the same bracket and we all know how many young English players get bigged up to then spend years letting us down. You have a potentially top draw player there though.
Costa didn't do that for Atletico. He wasn't even their best player. Courtois, Godin, and Koke were all more important to their team. Costa did **** all in the CL Semi Final vs Chelsea, and didn't even play most of the final.
What we need is neutrals to pick who'd they'd have. At the moment this is an utterly pointless debate. Sturridge got 21 prem goals last year as a one-off. Is he now worse than Kane? None of them are as good as Aguero.
Kane's at least as good as Aguero now. What's Aguero's best goal tally for a season? Bet Kane will beat it this season.
What makes Aguero better than Kane if they both score the same amount of goals? What can Aguero do that Kane can't?
Be the main man for year after year after year and win big trophies maybe? At the moment Kane is no better than Adebayor, Phillips, Caroll, Andy Johnson, Michael Ricketts and Benjani. All smashed in loads of goals over one or two seasons then did nothing. I'd like nothing more to have Harry Kane spearheading England's attack for the next 10 years but at the moment he's not an Alan Shearer, he's just a Kevin Phillips. Go back to your maths
