I've also fallen into the trap of using this term but seriously when did we start using such a daft term.
many teams have had 2 strikers in their squad some even 3. All this rubbish about who would sign to be Kane's back up is probably half the reason our scouts have been ineffective.
ANY team that's in Europe and aiming to get to QFs of cup games will find that their so called 'back up'will play as many minutes as most teams strikers.
We also ignore the fact that in football there are some formations that actually require 2 strikers. This can also happen in many games.
never heard anyone call Winks a back up CM or Lamela/Lucas or Bergwijn a back up winger.
Look at PSG, they play a worse standard league and less domestic cup games and have Icardi Cavani Mbappe, Neymar all capable of playing CF.
Jesus at Man City got plenty game time despite Aguero being their most successful striker.
Quite simply you sign players. What they become is down to the manager not the press pretending that Spurs in their history have only played 1 striker formations in every game of every season.
We definitely need to change our perspective on players. To add to this I also blame tactical knowledge of Poch and any other manager that fails to incorporate 2 strikers into a formation or match situation.
No such thing as back up Striker for Spurs
posted on 11/8/20
I sometimes wonder if Kane has it in his contract that he has to play a certain amount of times and must be the clubs only striker.
I remember him coming in as a sub when we were 6-0 up in a cup game.
That and the fact we haven’t signed a striker for years.
Madness
posted on 11/8/20
comment by Smeg and the club levy destroyed (U6574)
posted 14 seconds ago
I sometimes wonder if Kane has it in his contract that he has to play a certain amount of times and must be the clubs only striker.
I remember him coming in as a sub when we were 6-0 up in a cup game.
That and the fact we haven’t signed a striker for years.
Madness
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah and we came out with that stuff about it being so tranmere could see one of the worlds best players in action
posted on 11/8/20
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 16 minutes ago
I’ve never got this with Spurs and people saying no one wants to be Kanes back up.
Kane wouldn’t get injured so much of he had a decent striker to play with him or rotate with him. They could both play as much as the other.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s no people saying it it’s the agents and players
Morata -“ Why do you want me if you have Harry Kane? You know, if you go to try to sign a striker, they will say: 'eh gaffer, you want me for what? To be on the bench?”
Milik agent - Vincenzo Morabito said: “Milik to Tottenham seems complicated. They have the best English striker in the league and he’d go to sit behind Kane. It’s easier for him to end up at Atlético Madrid or Juventus.”
Osimhen's agent - The Lille star's agent told The Cable: “We told Mourinho that if he wants Victor, will Harry Kane be leaving?.
“If Harry Kane is still playing for Tottenham will Victor play? Because he will always be benched for him.
“Kane is their number one striker and he is the captain of England, all these will always work for him in the club but at Victor’s detriment.
That’s why we have to take a punt on a young striker like Jansen or a older one like Llorente.
posted on 11/8/20
I wouldn’t mind Wilson from Bournemouth tbh.
posted on 11/8/20
MK
Hadn't seen these quotes before, really interesting
posted on 11/8/20
I expect it's easier for the likes of City and PSG to do it when they pay their players a fortune. I'm sure that would ease the idea of them maybe not being first choice at those clubs. Obviously we don't have that so our options are more reduced in who we go for, but I think Wilson would be decent enough, and for someone like him he should not have a problem coming to us knowing he'd primarily be a second option, although he and Kane could play together.
posted on 11/8/20
Dybala...anyone?
Is Levy listening
Deeny? ......
posted on 12/8/20
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 17 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
I wish people would stop saying “ but Son can play there”. I love Son and think he’s a fantastic player, but he’s not a natural striker. You play him there if you have no options as he can score goals, but his strength is playing as a wing forward. He’s not a striker!!!! Our problem is we have ran Harry Kane into the ground far too much, hence why he’s picked up so many injuries. Getting in a striker is as much a priority as any in my opinion. I mean a proper striker, not a winger pretending to be a striker. Bergwijn isn’t a striker. Lucas isn’t a strike. Son isn’t a striker.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Totally agree, I'll also add that Son will probably start as many games as Kane so I dont get the logic as Son being an alternative for Kane when he needs rest or is injured.
posted on 12/8/20
Poeple seem to forget that the last time Kane got injured,...... Son got injured too.
The squad needs a bona fide second striker.
Time for Levy to bring in someone really good....and young!
posted on 12/8/20
comment by Ioavirgo (U10470)
posted 3 hours, 37 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 17 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
I wish people would stop saying “ but Son can play there”. I love Son and think he’s a fantastic player, but he’s not a natural striker. You play him there if you have no options as he can score goals, but his strength is playing as a wing forward. He’s not a striker!!!! Our problem is we have ran Harry Kane into the ground far too much, hence why he’s picked up so many injuries. Getting in a striker is as much a priority as any in my opinion. I mean a proper striker, not a winger pretending to be a striker. Bergwijn isn’t a striker. Lucas isn’t a strike. Son isn’t a striker.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Totally agree, I'll also add that Son will probably start as many games as Kane so I dont get the logic as Son being an alternative for Kane when he needs rest or is injured.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly mate. Son plays every game, so I just don’t get the statements people make of “ well Son’s our 2nd striker “. He isn’t!!!! He’s in our 1st 11 and is our wing forward. He can play striker in scenarios when Kane is injured, but that means we lose Son out wide. A striker is a massive priority.