Sam Allardyce has credited Tottenham Hotspur as the only club who have succeeded over recent years in hanging on to a big-name player against his wishes when they prevented Harry Kane from joining Manchester City in the summer of 2021.

Kane was subject to interest from City all through the summer transfer window after he publicly hinted at his desire to seek a new challenge in an interview with Gary Neville on the overlap.

Harry Kane

(Photo by Tottenham Hotspur FC/Tottenham Hotspur FC via Getty Images)

The striker seemingly did his best to force a move to the Etihad, even reportedly not showing up for training when he was supposed to during pre-season (The Athletic).

However, the Tottenham hierarchy managed to stand firm and keep Kane at the club, and the striker seems a lot more committed to the cause now, having bought into Antonio Conte’s methods since the Italian arrived in North London 12 months ago.

In fact, reports over recent months have even indicated that the England captain would be open to discussing a new deal with the Spurs hierarchy when the time is right (Ben Jacobs).

When discussing Cristiano Ronaldo’s controversial interview on Piers Morgan Uncensored, Allardyce remarked that they have little choice but to let the player go, adding that Spurs are the only club who bucked that trend during the Kane saga.

The 68-year-old said on the No Tippy Tappy Football Podcast: “The only one that succeeded that way is at Tottenham when they wouldn’t sell Harry Kane. That’s the only one where they have managed to keep him at the club. The rest have been sold off.

“For the manager’s sake, at this moment in time, they have to let Ronaldo go. I would say let him go back to Italy. I think he will be great there and score lots and lots of goals.”

Spurs Web Opinion

While one can make the case that City’s offer for Kane never really came close to his real value, I suspect that the Premier League Champions would have actually upped their bid if Tottenham were actually willing to negotiate.

Levy deserves credit for flat our refusing to be blackmailed into selling the striker as many other clubs would have likely decided to cash in on their main asset if he was unwilling to play for the club.

Many pundits at the time suggested that Spurs had made a mistake by handing on to Kane against his wishes, especially after his struggles at the start of last season. However, with hindsight, the decision has proved right as I doubt Conte would have accepted the job had the striker been sold.

Have something to tell us about this article?