Kane and Ndombele
Kane and Ndombele
Enough of that though, onto Spurs.
OK, I guess we had better do a separate post about Harry Kane and Tanguy Ndombele, given someone has asked me on Wednesday about the Frenchman's continued absence.
While their situations are different, they are the same in the fact they both want out of a poor team.
You could say the ship is sinking, we are trying to plug the holes, or rebuild a new ship and they are jumping ship.
Tanguy Ndombele
I'll deal with Ndombele first who was given extra time off after the birth of his child, but I told you all, after I had seen him, when we first signed him, that his mentality was all wrong, that he does not have a winning mentality, at least not at Tottenham.
He ambled around in his first season and he is still a defensive liability today. He does not get behind the ball, quite deliberately, to take himself out of play.
Ryan Mason could see it and simply didn't pick him.
A central midfielder who refuses to defend and only wants to play when he has the ball is a liability.
I have said before we need to sell him and I'll say it again.
I don't think we will ever see the player that's in their because he goes through the motions at Spurs.
Ndombele simply wants to be in a team winning things and/or playing in the UEFA Champions League.
Tottenham have neither at the moment and so his losing mentality kicks in and he gives up.
Giovanni Lo Celso is a guy who tries and doesn't complain, Ndombele does his complaining on the field by not playing the defensive side of the game.
Sell and replace.
Harry Kane
Well, he has got himself in a right old pickle hasn't he.
First let me point you to yesterday's post where I go into the legal situation in some detail if he were to take the Webster route and terminate his own contract.
Tottenham Talk on Friday 6th Aug (opens in a new window).
He believed he had a gentleman's agreement to leave for £100m if we were not in Europe, or more probably the Champions League.
Daniel Levy sees the situation differently and, quite rightly, wants what we perceive to be his market value or certainly a lot nearer to it.
Manchester City, coincidentally, offered a package that came to £100m!
I wonder where they got that valuation from, the same as they were prepared to pay for Jack Grealish.
What a lot of people don't take into consideration is the off field things, commercial income, club profile, sponsorship deals, commercial deals etc.
We fans don't know what he generates commercially.
Gareth Bale's sponsorship deal had clauses that meant he had to be playing for Real Madrid, do we have commercial deals that stipulate Harry Kane must be playing for Spurs?
I don't know, but it's possible that there is far more to this from Spurs point of view than at first appears to us.
There has been consistent pressure from the Kane camp to give in and let him go on the cheap.
We have had stories he will strike from the England team, stories he has already agreed a deal with City, stories City have already agreed a deal with us and now we have the Webster ruling thrown at us.
What next?
When do you get to the point where bridges are burnt?
When do you get to the point where his position becomes untenable at Spurs in relation to playing with his fellow players and his commitment to the club?
Eriksen played within himself, would Kane do the same?
After going on strike effectively, who knows.
This Covid stuff is purely a backtrack to save face because the Kane camp had totally miscalculated the reaction the Spurs fans and the media would give.
They were all on his side, they were trying to get him to move, now they are split.
One would suggest this will go to the wire but which way it will go and the fall out from it over next season we can only guess at.
Enjoy your day.
Post a Comment