What's new

Harry Kane

SecretLemonadeDrinker

Well-Known Member
Jun 30, 2020
2,027
11,165
Since when did this international break include three games for national teams?

Fuck international football, basically.

Other than the Euros and World Cup tournaments, obviously. Because they're fun. And there's nothing else going on.
 

Gareth88

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2017
4,596
6,730
?

Fucking southgate!

If it’s the hamstring he had his injury with then it’s not insignificant news.


So put Danny Ings on or Calvert-Lewin, they have both earned a start. He has the right to be but I feel Southgate is being stubborn here.
 

C0YS

Just another member
Jul 9, 2007
12,780
13,817
So put Danny Ings on or Calvert-Lewin, they have both earned a start. He has the right to be but I feel Southgate is being stubborn here.
I mean that's the thing. I'm sure harry is desperate to play but right now England have very good in form options up front. If he is a doubt put him on the bench and bring him on if needed. But it might just be nothing.
 

Wsussexspur

Well-Known Member
Oct 2, 2007
8,918
10,176
?

Fucking southgate!

If it’s the hamstring he had his injury with then it’s not insignificant news.



Fuck The nations league it’s nothing but a host of glorified friendlies. No way Kane should be playing in either of the games if he has the slightest sign of injury.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,690
104,977
Fuck The nations league it’s nothing but a host of glorified friendlies. No way Kane should be playing in either of the games if he has the slightest sign of injury.

Yep. If he’s not fit enough to play today then playing him midweek is a risk.

His hamstring injury was terrible and if it’s on the same leg it is a risk. Anyone who can recollect from the documentary when the physio said he ripped the muscle from the bone and there was bleeding. It was a severe injury. There shouldn’t be any messing about.
 

Tucker

Shitehawk
Jul 15, 2013
31,517
147,535
Fuck The nations league it’s nothing but a host of glorified friendlies. No way Kane should be playing in either of the games if he has the slightest sign of injury.

What’s really annoyed me is that the nations league was devised to replace international friendlies, but rather than treat them as such, the FA in their wisdom decided to squeeze in another friendly this week. The season is already crowded enough as it is.

As for Kane, England should respect our wishes and release him, the injury could be nothing, but it doesn’t take a genius to figure out its likely fatigue related. Southgate should be working with us to make sure he’s fit firing and on form come the euros next year, and running the guy into the ground isn’t going to achieve that.
 

DJS

A hoonter must hoont
Dec 9, 2006
31,279
21,788
Don’t understand how Kane is injured yet England won’t release him back to us, yet Sterling is injured and didn’t even have to go over there to be checked? ?‍♂️
 

mark87

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2004
36,269
115,398
Don’t understand how Kane is injured yet England won’t release him back to us, yet Sterling is injured and didn’t even have to go over there to be checked? ?‍♂️

Probably because it isn't that serious and has a chance to play in the remaining games.
 

mark87

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2004
36,269
115,398
I suspect Sterling may magically be over his injury concerns for Man City’s next game as well though..
??

This wouldn't surprise me, they do it all the time.
Same with Aubameyang pulling out of the Gabon squad with sprained ankle. If he's back for their next game then there was no sprained ankle.
 

C0YS

Just another member
Jul 9, 2007
12,780
13,817
The thing is do you really trust England and Southgate? Thats the question. I certainly dont
Trust them to do what?

The reality is that while we prioritise our club, the national team is there to serve their own interest. As they should. It is unlikely they would play Kane if there is a serious worry that it would result in injury, because it is likely to hinder the national team. But, Southgate and England are absolutely in their right to play Kane if he is available, even if he does have a minor muscle problem. The national team doesn't exist to serve us. Players risking injuries in the national team is part of the parcel of having good players and people should deal with that.

I guess what I'm saying is it's not a question of trust. The national team will do what is best for them. These things are not always opposed to the interests of the club. But, ignoring Mourinho intentionally using the media to put pressure on England, it really isn't the responsibility of England and Southgate to wrap our players in cotton wool. They have already made sure that players which played a lot sat out of the team the other day, there really isn't much more you could ask for. Regardless of what you think of the nations league, it's competitive football and you have some people who are very happy to judge Southgate on the basis of how well England do in this competition, so he is absolutly justified in picking the best players available to him.
 

JCRD

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2018
19,153
30,013
Trust them to do what?

The reality is that while we prioritise our club, the national team is there to serve their own interest. As they should. It is unlikely they would play Kane if there is a serious worry that it would result in injury, because it is likely to hinder the national team. But, Southgate and England are absolutely in their right to play Kane if he is available, even if he does have a minor muscle problem. The national team doesn't exist to serve us. Players risking injuries in the national team is part of the parcel of having good players and people should deal with that.

I guess what I'm saying is it's not a question of trust. The national team will do what is best for them. These things are not always opposed to the interests of the club. But, ignoring Mourinho intentionally using the media to put pressure on England, it really isn't the responsibility of England and Southgate to wrap our players in cotton wool. They have already made sure that players which played a lot sat out of the team the other day, there really isn't much more you could ask for. Regardless of what you think of the nations league, it's competitive football and you have some people who are very happy to judge Southgate on the basis of how well England do in this competition, so he is absolutly justified in picking the best players available to him.

You're right that Southgate should operate in the best interests of his team. I had no qualms for example that he did select Kane to be in his squad and to play.

What I don't really trust him with, and that is because the ramifications end up sitting with us, is knowing that Kane is say 60% fit yet playing him.

It is their responsibility to protect the players. Of course I'm not blaming anyone for any injury, but blame would sit with them if they play him on Wednesday knowing he is not 100% fit and they get injured. Returning him to us injured.
 

C0YS

Just another member
Jul 9, 2007
12,780
13,817
You're right that Southgate should operate in the best interests of his team. I had no qualms for example that he did select Kane to be in his squad and to play.

What I don't really trust him with, and that is because the ramifications end up sitting with us, is knowing that Kane is say 60% fit yet playing him.

It is their responsibility to protect the players. Of course I'm not blaming anyone for any injury, but blame would sit with them if they play him on Wednesday knowing he is not 100% fit and they get injured. Returning him to us injured.
We'd play him at 60% fit too, I don't see why it should be any different.
 

JCRD

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2018
19,153
30,013
We'd play him at 60% fit too, I don't see why it should be any different.

If I give you a car that I own and let you use it but not to drive it recklessly. Yet you go away and drive it recklessly and damage it knowing full well it cannot handle recklessness. Im the one that suffers, not you because you give it back to me and youre on your merry way.

I am sure Jose is sitting there and only cares about what happens with us and our players, and im seeing it from our view point and thats all i really care about. We own the asset, we pay the player and we need the player for a lot longer and the ramifications are far for damaging to us than it is for England.

Anyways it is what it is... as i said before, im sure its not that bad and im just jumping to conclusions.
 

yankspurs

Enic Out
Aug 22, 2013
41,989
71,414
Have a feeling Jose wont be taking too kindly to Gary. He’ll find a tv camera to speak to shortly and wont be mincing words.
 

tommo84

Proud to be loud
Aug 15, 2005
6,228
11,312
We'd play him at 60% fit too, I don't see why it should be any different.

The difference is that when Spurs play him while not fully fit, Spurs are the ones assuming the risk that it turns into an injury that keeps him out for 3 or 4 weeks. When England do that, it’s still Spurs assuming the risk of him missing 3 or 4 weeks. Southgate can decide to take a risk knowing that if it goes wrong he’s only going to be without Kane for one more international break - or knowing Kane he would probably return just in time for the next international break so England could take the same risk all over again.
 

wrd

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2014
13,603
58,005
Good to see something happened which let you all get up in arms about. He wasn't even on the bench vs Wales, it's a light muscle injury, sounds like he's not being risked today and you're still somehow getting upset and pointing fingers at the England camp. Muscle injuries happen in training, if it was because he overplayed then it's our fault.
 
Top