And here's Eriksen himself denying the Standard's report that he is unhappy at playing on the wing: http://www.tottenhamjournal.co.uk/s...but_i_m_happy_with_my_role_at_spurs_1_4382668
Conflicting reports also say Townsend is nearing a move to the Geordies while others are saying they're baulking at the asking price, supposedly £14m. If we could get anything of £10m upwards I'd take it, a shame to see him go as I like seeing our own in the team/ squad but he's clearly well out of the plans now and so cashing in on him would make sense.
Yourself and PS have a very interesting shared opinion on this matter that I am genuinely trying to get my head around. All the examples you've cited were signed to be headlining, 20+ goals a season strikers who would expect to start every game. I don't think anyone on here would be annoyed if we don't sign Berahino if Peace is digging his heels in for north of £20m, because as you have rightly pointed out - his attitude since August has frankly been shocking, especially considering the fact that Pulis has a reputation for being one of the best man-managers in the game. So there exists a genuine worry that he could disrupt the changing room if things don't go his way and upset our delicately balanced squad. I get that. But we're talking about a back-up striker here. Someone who by definition has to be happy to spend most of their time on the bench, which is why in previous seasons we've ended up with the likes of Gudjohnsen and Saha. I guess I'm struggling to grasp the apparent correlation between a player not 100% 'fitting the system' and consequent 'disruption' they'll have on it.
Saha contributed very little IMO I don't think we would have noticed if we had not signed him. Gudjohnsen was a high class player who contributed much more. He also provided me with one of my favourite moments when he scored the winner against Pullis's very nasty Stoke.
IMO we should not be buying 'back up' players at all. Yes it might be good to buy a Gudjohnsen or Davids as a mentor for the young team but not a young player unless he has the potential to become a first teamer.
I picked Bent to highlight my point precisely because IMO he did disrupt teams in that his overall contribution was minimal. I argued that his presence cost us goals despite his ability to knee them in. He was back up.
But still, surely there's a glaring difference in that every example you've used has been cited from seasons where we already had multiple strikers at the club? In Bent's case, we had 3 superb strikers already here, all of whom fit the style of play 100 times better than he did, so yes - his arrival was bizarre on so many levels. Gudjohnsen played when we had Pav, Crouch, Defoe and I think even Keane IIRC. Similar to Saha but to a lesser extent in that we played a 1 up top system and had Adebayor and Defoe. The situation now is totally different in that we find ourselves in the ridiculous position of having played half a season with one recognised striker. The PL is unique in that league positions can and do rest on a knife's edge. Look at Watford - trumpeted as potential candidates for the European spots and now a bad few weeks has seen them plummet down the table. Your point about Eidur's one and only goal for Spurs only proves my point (it was Krancjar who scored the winner that day). We finished 4th that year by 3 points. There's your knife's edge. Perhaps it was worth bringing in Eidur Gudjohnsen and paying him what were probably extortionate wages just for that one contribution of note that just may have sent us on our way to a rare victory at the Britannia, which in turn gave us 3 points that would ultimately prove so vital in the race for the top 4. It's counter-factual I know and I'm merely speculating. But my point is that if we finish this season 2 points off of 4th because in one stupid game Harry went off with a strain and we couldn't turn a draw into a win because Chadli replaced him up top instead of competent 'back up', I may spontaneously combust.
Presumably we're looking for at least one striker, but we don't want to look desperate.I hope this is just a negotiating stance and we are actively looking for at least a Striker to help Kane
You must log in or register to see images
I hope this is just a negotiating stance and we are actively looking for at least a Striker to help Kane
You must log in or register to see images
It's that last paragraph that is of grave concern to me. That must be the fourth or fifth time he's used that line of argument since last July so unless it's one massive bluff to throw teams off our scent, I'm starting to take it at serious face value.
The sting is at the end..."if we are to improve then we need to add the right player; if we can't find the right player we won't buy anyone."
This holds true as long as we assume that Kane remains fully fit and fatigue-free for the rest of the season. If he gets injured, 'improving' a Kane-less team suddenly becomes a whole lot easier as Son, Njie and Chadli are pretty ineffective up top unlike perhaps what many posters on here are saying. I just don't get the narrowness of his argument. It's like encountering a guy lost in the desert who has a supply of orange juice so he won't take any water from you because that doesn't 'improve' his beverage experience. Surely that traveller will take into account the likely possibility that he'll run out of orange juice before he reaches civilisation and that, at such a juncture, warm water will suddenly appear a whole lot better than dying of thirst?
Is it just me?!
Permission to make a terrible pun about how Dutch elm disease has set in at Old Trafford?What are you doing in a desert with orange juice, you know it gives you indigestion.
We are not in a desert btw we are in a verdant newly planted forest with very strong saplings all around. Oak, Birch, Willow, Poplar, transplanting an old Ash can be tricky, very expensive and no guarantee it will take even after some time of holding it up with stout stakes.
Well, what about Alli replacing Kane when/if needed? We’ve tried Son and Chadli. IMO they’ve been not quite good enough, even if we’ve been okay with them and three other midfielders. Alli seems to have better hold up skills. He certainly was brilliant with his back to the keeper on his last goal.

Agreed. I think Alli has shown far better movement and predatory instincts than the other players being mentioned on here as 'capable' back-up for Kane. It's staggering to think that posters on here would genuinely prefer seeing Chadli up front than an Austin/Long type option. I obviously respect their opinion; I just pray to the G-d that took down Sepp Blatter and Michel Platini that come the end of the season my only remaining comfort isn't that I can turn round to some faceless men who I'm actually quite fond of in a creepy, internet forum type way and say 'i told you so'.![]()
Permission to make a terrible pun about how Dutch elm disease has set in at Old Trafford?

Agreed. I think Alli has shown far better movement and predatory instincts than the other players being mentioned on here as 'capable' back-up for Kane. It's staggering to think that posters on here would genuinely prefer seeing Chadli up front than an Austin/Long type option. I obviously respect their opinion; I just pray to the G-d that took down Sepp Blatter and Michel Platini that come the end of the season my only remaining comfort isn't that I can turn round to some faceless men who I'm actually quite fond of in a creepy, internet forum type way and say 'i told you so'.![]()
