Kane should have been too nice a guy to try to win things this way
IN the lower leagues, where basic pay is relatively humble, many clubs have a bonus system that rewards assists.
It means managers, operating on a shoestring, have to devote working time to studying videos, deciding what is an assist and what is not.
What commands an extra few quid and what does not, when an assist is not really an assist. In a 60-yard run 32 years ago, Diego Maradona eluded Peter Beardsley, Peter Reid, Terry Butcher and Terry Fenwick before dumping Peter Shilton on his backside and scoring the Goal of the Century.
Did Hector Enrique, who tapped a five-yard pass to Maradona inside Argentina’s half, pick up a fat assist bonus?
There are assist wrangles at small clubs after every game.
A keeper launches it long, it skids off the head of a defender into the path of an attacker, who scores. Who gets the assist? Who cares? The keeper, for one. He might be on £500 a week and an assist bonus is worth £200.
A couple of those could be the difference between a holiday in Blackpool or one in Benidorm. Bonuses matter. Harry Kane is probably on a goal bonus and probably on far bigger bonus, from sponsors and club, for winning the Premier League’s Golden Boot.
But giving him the benefit of the doubt, we can assume Kane’s claiming of that goal at Stoke City was not about the money.
He craves the honour that comes with finishing as the top flight’s top scorer and has a greed for goals that has long been popular.
Kane takes his inspiration from the likes of Alan Shearer, who would still have you believe he scored 261 rather than 260 Premier League goals, having had one particular effort against Manchester United controversially chalked off by the sort of panel that gave Kane his 25th of this season.
When leaving Blackburn, Shearer was always likely to join Newcastle United rather than Manchester United but if he needed a clinching moment, it came when Sir Alex Ferguson – who had Eric Cantona in his ranks – could not guarantee him penaltya taking duties. Kevin Keegan did not need asking. The assumption is that selling your granny for a goal is the mentality required.
Swearing on your daughter’s life for one is fine, as well, it seems.
That Kane did so is indisputable proof he believed he got a touch and was enough for the three-man panel.
(Incidentally, if he did get a touch, it was a) the faintest imaginable and b) not decisive.)
We assume the panel was three men. The Premier League won’t tell us anything about their identities, other than they are usually explayers, exmanagers, ex-referees or the like. It is like they are on a witness protection programme rather then being characters who somehow decided Christian Eriksen’s cross took a fibre of Kane’s jersey on its way past Jack Butland. Nationalities? Can’t say. Are they all English, possibly fans of our most upstanding striker? Can’t say.
Does all this matter? Well, it will to Mo Salah if he is pipped to the outright Golden Boot by Kane by one, or if Kane equals his total.
He will be denied not just his full bonus, if he has one, but the full kudos and honour of being the first Egyptian to achieve the feat. That would mean something to him and his nation but three nameless, faceless blokes – still assuming they are blokes – could diddle him out of it.
Kane was correct when he initially said all that mattered was Spurs won.
That was before he and the club appealed. If it turns out to be the difference, Kane’s third Golden Boot will have an asterisk on it. The anonymous panel have essentially given him an extra goal because he is a nice guy.
But he should have been too nice a guy to try and win things this way.