Harry Kane | Vital Football

Harry Kane

Baghdad_Rob

Baghdad_Rob

Vital 1st Team Regular
"Harry Kane is so prolific that he is able to score without touching the ball.'

Amusing joke or bullying worthy of a public apology and a loss of job?
 
Clearly a joke. Quite a good little one as well. Certainly wouldn’t expect anyone to lose their job over the matter.
 
Quite clear what Ben Purkiss was referring to and I might agree with AK had not Shearer, Lineker and Fowler all used the same type of sarcasm straight after the match. It does seem like plain bandwagon jumping and rather pathetic. I would normally say Kane should just brush it off but he probably wants people to draw a line after having their fun.

You can watch the incident time and time again from every angle and not be sure whether he got a touch with his shoulder. The still image in this article is the best I have seen but is a split second too early:
https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/harry-kane-purkiss-port-vale-1502460

It boils down to whether you think Kane is the type of man to swear something on his daughter's life (which I agree was not really appropriate) and still choose to disbelieve or question him.

I certainly think that Butland would have claimed the ball but for Kane's intervention.

Kane is clearly now playing with an injury so he has no chance of catching Salah anyway.
 
GillsBluenose said:
Quite clear what Ben Purkiss was referring to and I might agree with AK had not Shearer, Lineker and Fowler all used the same type of sarcasm straight after the match. It does seem like plain bandwagon jumping and rather pathetic. I would normally say Kane should just brush it off but he probably wants people to draw a line after having their fun.

You can watch the incident time and time again from every angle and not be sure whether he got a touch with his shoulder. The still image in this article is the best I have seen but is a split second too early:
https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/harry-kane-purkiss-port-vale-1502460

It boils down to whether you think Kane is the type of man to swear something on his daughter's life (which I agree was not really appropriate) and still choose to disbelieve or question him.

I certainly think that Butland would have claimed the ball but for Kane's intervention.

Kane is clearly now playing with an injury so he has no chance of catching Salah anyway.
Click to expand...

The accusation of bandwagon-jumping and the comment being pathetic are strangely OTT in line with the initial media reports.

Purkiss was talking about players overcoming adversity to become successful and had praised Kane and his prolific scoring record before making the lighthearted quip.

http://www.skysports.com/football/n...d-appreciated-chairmans-joke-about-stoke-goal

The above article is more believable than its predecessors and suggests that Kane was not offended and that Purkiss has not been pressured into a public apology or been threatened with losing his role.

Just your usual made up story designed to cause controversy and invite comments criticising Purkiss and / or Kane.

Job done it would seem.
 
My usual make up, Your usual wind up, eh, Nibbs.

As you say, mate, job done

Presumably Baghdad must be clairvoyant to know I was going to make up a story an hour and a half later about the possibility of "public apology and a loss of job" so he could say that in his OP and actually ask people for their opinions.

If you bothered to read the link that I posted you will see that Purkiss was claiming then that his comments were meant to amuse and followed compliments so I had factored that in. Or did I make that article up? Or perhaps I was the reporter?

Yeah, mate, spot on. Keep taking the tablets.
 
nibbles said:
The above article is more believable than its predecessors and suggests that Kane was not offended and that Purkiss has not been pressured into a public apology or been threatened with losing his role.

Just your usual made up story designed to cause controversy and invite comments criticising Purkiss and / or Kane.

Job done it would seem.
Click to expand...

Kane may or may not be offended and until he issues a statement to confirm I guess we won't know for sure. One interesting comment in the statement is:

"Out of courtesy our chairman Ben Purkiss contacted Harry personally to explain that the comment had been taken out of context."

To me that suggests that someone spoke to Purkiss and make the comment that Harry might have found the joke insulting. Otherwise why would he need to call Kane to explain it had been taken out of context? Someone apparently has taken the joke out of context.

In terms of the losing his job, that is something that some "offended" people in the general Twittersphere have argued because what the always offended to do.
 
GillsBluenose said:
My usual make up, Your usual wind up, eh, Nibbs.

As you say, mate, job done

Presumably Baghdad must be clairvoyant to know I was going to make up a story an hour and a half later about the possibility of "public apology and a loss of job" so he could say that in his OP and actually ask people for their opinions.

If you bothered to read the link that I posted you will see that Purkiss was claiming then that his comments were meant to amuse and followed compliments so I had factored that in. Or did I make that article up? Or perhaps I was the reporter?

Yeah, mate, spot on. Keep taking the tablets.
Click to expand...

I think Nibbles was talking in a general sense of the media making up stories and is doing the usual thing of spinning a story to make it as controversial and newsworthy as possible. He happened to click on reply to your comment as you posted the media article with it.
 
Last edited:
GillsBluenose said:
My usual make up, Your usual wind up, eh, Nibbs.

As you say, mate, job done

Presumably Baghdad must be clairvoyant to know I was going to make up a story an hour and a half later about the possibility of "public apology and a loss of job" so he could say that in his OP and actually ask people for their opinions.

If you bothered to read the link that I posted you will see that Purkiss was claiming then that his comments were meant to amuse and followed compliments so I had factored that in. Or did I make that article up? Or perhaps I was the reporter?

Yeah, mate, spot on. Keep taking the tablets.
Click to expand...

? What the fuck have you just written?
 
Baghdad_Rob said:
I think Nibbles was talking in a general sense of the media making up stories and is doing the usual thing of spinning a story to make it as controversial and newsworthy as possible. He happened to click on reply to your comment as you posted the media article with it.
Click to expand...

You might be right, Baghdad, but I think that as he replied to my post and used exact words contained in the post of my OPINION "bandwagon-jumping and the comment being pathetic", I took it be a reference to that post.

He has history in questioning everything even if you include IMO and IMHO but if he can honesty say that was not his intention, he has my apologies.

Going back to the subject in hand, I would use an analogy. When I was at school we were all given nicknames, many of which we obviously hated. Even though mine was embarrassing, I actually thought it was quite funny as well. However, it became tedious when just one individual kept dragging it up time and again and I felt similarly for any school mate that had theirs dragged up after it stopped being funny. As I say, just my humble opinion.
 
GillsBluenose said:
You might be right, Baghdad, but I think that as he replied to my post and used exact words contained in the post of my OPINION "bandwagon-jumping and the comment being pathetic", I took it be a reference to that post.

He has history in questioning everything even if you include IMO and IMHO but if he can honesty say that was not his intention, he has my apologies.
Click to expand...

I tend to try to apply a general rule that the first paragraph is a direct response to whatever it is that is quoted and probably ditto for the second paragraph. Beyond that, the more paragraphs that has been written then the more likely the person is talking in a wider sense having used my comment as a springboard. I find on these sort of forums in general that if someone intended to have a go at you personally then they tend to make it bloody obvious.
 
Baghdad_Rob said:
I tend to try to apply a general rule that the first paragraph is a direct response to whatever it is that is quoted and probably ditto for the second paragraph. Beyond that, the more paragraphs that has been written then the more likely the person is talking in a wider sense having used my comment as a springboard. I find on these sort of forums in general that if someone intended to have a go at you personally then they tend to make it bloody obvious.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed. The first two paragraphs are specifically in response to GBN’s post. I think calling purkiss’ little joke pathetic and bandwagon-jumping is OTT.

As you say the rest is more a general comment about the media though also in context of GBN’s post.

I must admit after reading GBN’s second post several times most of it still baffles me. My intention certainly wasn’t to cause offence but I reserve the right to have an opinion of my own.
 
The spurs manager asking for "protection" for Kane is unbelievable. Why can't a) Kane just speak up for himself and b) some of these pampered PL players just man the f*** up and get on with it?
It sounds like the local primary school playground.
At the end of the day, Kane had two choices.
1. Claim the goal thinking he could still win the golden boot (but surely know he'd get stick for it) or
2. Keep quiet and accept that he may not win it.

Your choice Harry, bloody live with it mate.
 
Have I missed Harry Kane having a breakdown about the jokes? Haven’t seen anything from him - grateful for a pointer in the right direction.
 
No Nibbles, but then he hasn't come forward and said it's fine either, hence my comment about him speaking up for himself. His manager however, seems to think he's upset by it. Poor little lamb.
 
Last edited:
So if Kane doesn’t publicly condone any jokes about him then he

a) can’t speak up for himself
b) needs to man the fuck up?

Really?
 
Nibbles, are you being deliberately obtuse or do you really not understand what I'm saying?
I haven't actually said that, read it again.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.