I think we should have more British players anyway, but as far as quotas go, we are ok this year but when Eriksen and Lamela are no longer U21 (next season) then we would be maxed out.
No idea. Only one way to find out and I think he's had back problems this season, so he hasn't been fit enough to get involved.
I hope Kane is good enough, but I'm not filled with confidence from what I've seen so far. Good luck to him though.
He must have something about him if both past two managers have him good enough for the bench. That suggests they think he just need more experience.
I think Kane is good enough, he always seems to have so much time in the junior sides. When he steps up he tries to rush things. He needs to chill a little and play his own game. Also he looks better playing alongside young Tom Carroll, perhaps the two of them could break into the first team together.
would Kane make it into a match day squad if he played for Chelsea, City, Arsenal, Liverpool, United or Everton? Absolutely not for at least 4 of those, I'd say. So there's at least 4 clubs who have better strike options across the squad than us. We need to have the quality in depth in order to compete.
That lamppost took a beating. In fairness, surely Lescott on a 6 month loan is a no brainer? Kaboul seems to be nowhere near match fit, Vertonghen is still out, Dawson has had a few injuries over the years (plus he's been poor this season for the most part) and while Vlad has done well since signing, he still worries me positionally at times. I can understand the question marks over Fletcher but in my opinion, him as a 3rd choice striker (providing Defoe is shipped off to Toronto) is a very solid option to have. If his name was Steveninho Fletchervarios, there's a good chance most of our fans would love him here .
SOS... didn't you actually have a fight with a lamp post though? I seem to remember a photo you posted, pushing one over....
I'm not against unfashionable names as Peter Crouch was an important player for us but I can't see how Fletcher would work even as third choice. I would rather we stuck with Ade, Soldado and Defoe who I believe is staying and then Lamela has a chance to force his way into the team. . As for Lescott? He's an accident waiting to happen and I accept on paper it may look a good short term option yet he's on the decline. Hopefully one of our academy players can step up.
"if his name was Steveninho Fletchervarious, there"s a good chance most of our fans would love him here" He would be a dreadful signing. The fact the very suggestion of signing Fletcher gains some support just goes to show how much Villas-Boas damaged our club and has lowered the expectations of some people for the rest of this season.
What I've seen of Kane so far is that he's a useful player, able to play anywhere in the front line, but so far has scored one goal, I think, in very limited playing time. I think the answer with him or any very young, unproven striker is that you never know until you try. Most about Kane's level, I think, wouldn't be able to handle the pressure. But some would thrive. The advantage of giving Kane versus others a run of games is because he's a useful player even if he doesn't score. I was very impressed with the way he used his size and running to give us more of an outlet against Man U and help kill off the game. The idea of letting Defoe go, who after all is getting on, and giving Kane his playing time isn't a crazy one. Of course you worry that he won't be able to score, but that's a worry with every striker other than Messi and Ronaldo, really.
I thought when I mentioned the Fail starting this Fletcher nonsense it might stop. SOS, psst! when Fletcher was up for sale from Wolves.....he ended up at Sunderland! ...you've had a moment of madness young man, wash your mouth out with soap...Steven Fletcher in a Spurs shirt, whatever next!
Kane, Rose(bud), Paul Stewart - no more Citizen Kane references............. Do you want to buy Tom Cleverley? Very cheap...
