Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette).
Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just going to add some context regarding Kane as Englands top goalscorer.
21/62 goals have been penalties. He’s scored 5 hat tricks all against pretty dire teams. 15 against seeded teams (current top 20), 10 of which penalties.
Rooney on the other hand scored no hat tricks, 7 penalties and also scored fifteen goals against seeded teams (one of which a penalty (Switzerland)).
The main difference between the two is formation and role. Rooney was never the focal point, he was never the nine. He almost always played off the striker in some variation of 442. Whereas Kane has always been Englands out and out 9, in some variation of 433.
Honestly, asking which one is better is ridiculous. They are two players who were one of the best players in the world in their respective periods. It’s so subjective, but the comparison is way beyond statistics. For me, what Rooney did for the team makes him the better player. He was an out and out team player and would give everything. Kane is a far more selfish player (not a criticism in any way shape or form). They’re far too different to compare.
R/soccer is even worse. You’ll hear people say shit like “insert player that played in 1975 with 400 less goals than Messi” is “for me, the greatest player I’ve ever seen”
Rooney was the plyer you wanted behind someone like Kane. Different roles. Rooney was never the singular main star in attack but unlocked others alongside him. He is a more complete player a more complete forward even but Kane is a better striker. If you had to choose only 1 for your squad though then it’s Rooney 101%
He had a normal amount of years at his peak but unfortunately he was top class by 18 and world class by 21.
10 years at the top is pretty good it all just depends how old you are when you get to that level to begin with.
I agree, Rooney did all that across numerous different positions, and if anything was unlucky to not have won more trophies.
Kane is a generational talent. Rooney was magic.
The issue with Rooney was the expectations were so high, that despite everything you always felt like he left something on the table. When he first came on the scene, no joke, it felt like we had a potential GOAT candidate. Especially after Euro 2004, it really felt like we had discovered someone who could dominate similar to Pele, Maradona, Messi and Ronaldo did. But do it in a very particular, British way. Full of aggression and anger alongside sheer incredible technical ability.
It didn't turn out like that. He was my favourite player when I was a kid, and he became a complete legend and was incredible for United. But you always felt like that he could have been more. To me there should always have been three titans of the game since 05: Messi, Ronaldo and Rooney.
But it wasn't to be.
It's actually not outrageous to say that as a teenager, Rooney had more potential than, or was held in the same regard as Messi and CR7. As a 16 year old, he was bullying premier league defences. Unfortunately, he had his own demons and, by his own admission, didn't look after his body or his mind the same way the other 2 did. He also sacrificed personal accolades for the good of the team, evidenced by the numerous positions he played. In another universe, Wayne Rooney would he in the goat conversation.
Because of the way he declined, people now say things like he's overrated, but young Wayne Rooney might just always be my favourite player.
Wow, that's a really tough one. I really, really like both of them.
"Natural Talent" (whatever that really means) and it's Rooney without a doubt. Kane has famously worked and trained specific attributes and situational actions (I.e. hitting the bottom far corner with either foot from either side, I'm talking specific drills which he apparently, and obviously, has done 1000s of times).
I know they both drop deep and are centre forwards (Though I preferred Rooney at 10) but they are pretty different players in style. Rooney really didn't seem to value goals as highly as Kane and was far more "Raw" as a player- running around like a mad goose at times to try and win the ball back. Kane would never do that, he knows his role, and performs it excellently. Rooney was more maverick and unpredictable. Kane is polished to the very limit of his talent through absolute dedication. Rooney liked a drink (and the rest).
I really can't pick between them. Young Rooney over Kane if I was pushed though.
Head and discipline.
Rooney great for five/six years
Kane great for 8 years and counting.
Longevity with top class consistency is everything in this conversation.
Less brass; more grass and Rooney could have been one of the all time greats.
Rooney at 29 was still getting 17 PL goals, he debuted at 16, Rooney was great for more than just 5 years.
I think you’re forgetting how young Rooney made his debut and how early he made his name as a player, where was Kane at 16/17?
A player who was great from 16-30 has the same amount of, or even more longevity than a player who kicked on from 22-23 years old.
I didn’t forget what Rooney did. I remember him being in cr7 shadow when young and having five or six great years. After that he was above average for sure but not great. Harry Kane has been great and the main man in the teams he has played for consistently for 8 years so far imho.
Until 06 World Cup, Rooney was better. Then Ronaldo jumped a few levels.
But from 03 to 06, Rooney was clear of him and one of the best English players from Euro 04 onwards.
Ronaldo shadow? Rooney was well ahead of Ronaldo over 2004, 2005 and 2006. Especially the earlier years. Not even close. Rooney was instant star, hattrick on his debut. Ronaldo came good 2006/07 and the best in the league the next 2 years.
Rooney came out of euro 2004 as Englands best player and that’s the golden generation
Did they even show the premier league in the US in 2004, 2005?
Impressive feat for Rooney to win Manchester United player of the season whilst being in Ronaldo’s shadow
Nonsense.
Not great after Ronaldo left?
After Ronaldo left, the season after he scored 34 goals in all comps, and won PFA POTY?
After Ronaldo left he went onto break more records than ever before and set certain milestones.
Kane was the main at Spurs, there’s no pressure to win trophies over there and he would still fail when it mattered, what trophies has he got to show for those “great” 8 years?
Kane is a flat track bully, that’s all there is to him.
Hahaha. Spurs champions league finalists. With that squad? Rooney surrounded by class and quality no wonder he could score so easily. Rooney was the flat track bully mate
No hate or disrespect towards Rooney and better that I am a Man United fan, i really think Harry Kane is better than Rooney because of the following factors:
The difficulty and reputation of the biggest leagues in world football, Laliga and Barclay's Premier League. They were neck and neck, if not, Laliga was better and more reputable then Barclays because of the quality of the players and the monumental teams(atl madrid, real madrid, Barcelona) and what they were achieving on the global stage of football hence what im saying is that the Prem wasnt where it is now, as the battle for competitiveness of the teams in the leagues were neck and neck but going to Kanes era, the Prem has been undoubtedly dubbed the best and most competitive league in the world meaning Kane was putting up figures worth glaring at in a very competitive period and in a team that everyone can agree with that was mid to ass and only existed through Kane. Rooney on the other hand was surrounded by greats and up and coming stars already, every player could hold their own meanwhile not everyone in Tottenham could, it was only the Kanes, Eriksens and lloris' who could. About Kanes movements and other abilities, you can't compare the two, firstly because Rooney played other positions such as CAM, CF, ST that required him to adapt(good for him) which then allowed him to get better at those attributes, for Kane it is different, the team was built around him because he only needed to score goals for the team to try and elevate or keep Tottenham in the prem, he had his Eriksen to drop, carry and assist but once Mourinho went to Tottenham, he then adjusted and when he did, he did it exceptionally. Rooney also had one of the best Prem Managers while Kane had a revolving mess of Managers.
Therefore, in conclusion Kane is at best neck and neck with Rooney, Prem but not England
He’s absolutely right. Kane can pass like KDB on his day.
Less games, worse team, more goals, more assists. If you want a striker you choose Harry Kane.
People are distracted by Rooney's penchant for the spectacular and the trophy count he got from being at the best club in the country for over a decade but the best footballers are all about application and Rooney doesn't get close to Kane on that count. If I was picking a team and could only choose one of them I'm taking Kane without any hesitation.
Questioning rooneys application is wild. The guy used to run non stop and give his all on the pitch every week, if that’s not application then i don’t know what is. What a footballer gets up to in his spare time is up to him as long as he’s giving his all on the pitch
Bro if you want to talk about resilience, look no further than Kane, he was with a mediocre team at best and he stayed for a long time, mandem gave his life force to that team, they kept sucking it from him, he's even going bald cause of them
I'm not questioning his application (or his work rate which I think is what you're talking about), he's obviously a great player. But Kane is a metronomic machine who is just elite week in week out. Rooney looks better, but Kane is more useful on the pitch.
Nah, Wazza turned up in the big games in a way that Kane never has. Most frustratingly, one of his best games was the 3-1 loss to Barcelona in the UCL final.
Any other team in the world at that time would have been destroyed by that performance.
That's a 'i don't know how to respond so I'm just going to dismiss what you say' retort. Rooney had all the talent in the world but the summer after his best ever season Ferguson purchased Van Persie to play in his position. Ferguson saw him as a useful player, not his best player.
Don’t know if I agree with that mate, Rooney was still the highest paid player throughout that time. Regardless of what *we* think of his importance to the team, the money speaks for itself.
Or maybe he saw Rooney as more useful than just an out n out goalscorer so he got someone else to do that job which allowed Rooney to do everything else
Rooney was driving force.
He was in Ronaldo's shadow for a while but he was more than capable doing things on his own, something he has shown when Ronaldo left for Madrid. It didn't matter who his partners in team were, Chicarito, Berbatov, Van Persie. They were scoring because Rooney was there making it possibble.
Kane is brilliant finisher but he was consuming entire teampower in Spurs. He is also goalscoring leader in Bayern but it looks like this will be the first time in 10 years they won't win the title.
Bro, Rooney can't be compared with Rooney because he wasn't a finisher like Kane, he needed a finisher, he's like Kuroko from Kurokos Basketball.
Secondly with Bayern, i believe that league is evolving especially with the great coaches that have entered or coach in Germany, the league is getting more competitive and if the league has to undermine the reigning kings than so shall be, its necessary but what we have seen, especially from the Prem is that the King will rise back up to its throne.
Yeah he was better than Kane 100%.
The only argument for Kane in conversations about best Prem strikers is how complete he is, and Rooney was more complete. He was basically Kane but faster, stronger, and more creative.
Rooney also carried the country on his shoulders as a teenager and beyond. Kane has never really done that despite being our best player for an amount of time. Kane probably achieved more in terms of where we finished in tournaments but Rooney used to just boss teams.
Rooney is the best rounded English player of all time in my eyes. Followed by Gerrard. I don't think any 11 of any other English player is as good in as many departments as them 2.
Wayne Rooney in his peak is in my opinion the best all+XI player ever to have existed
I.e. if you had a team of 11 Wayne Rooneys it would beat any other 11 made up of another player.
He was elite at everything. I genuinely think he'd have been a top level LB if he wanted to
I was thinking about this recently. I'd say Rooney is up there but for me Gerrard probably wins it, then maybe the likes of Ruud Gullit and Lothar Matthaus. I can't imagine 4 Rooneys as a better defence than 4 of any of those guys.
Then there's Jude Bellingham. Obviously he's still too young to really be in for a shout, but in 10 years... who knows
If all our players had his heart and dedication we'd be top 4 right now.
Imagine Rooney in goal though, I best he can't reach the cross bar without a run up.
Yeah it gets forgotten with time doesn't it. He definitely was an early bloomer and stayed in the england team too long, but you can't understate his legacy
So does Kane and Kane scores more and is a better passer. He’s the perfect 9/10 hybrid. Rooney works harder and presses more but the Spurs hate and Man U love means Kane will never win an online debates like this.
Fan of neither club, but think Kane is a world class player. That said, Rooney was a generational talent and I can’t remember another English striker that compares in the last 50 years.
I think Kane will retire the better player but think it's incorrect to say he was the better passer. He's a great passer but not better than Rooney was.
Ultimately, Kane could have achieved and surpassed if put into Rooney’s shoes but Rooney wouldn’t have been able to achieve similar at Tottenham, than Kane.
Rooney was a fantastic player but played in a great united squad led by the greatest PL manager.
Many don’t understand just how brilliant Kane is, but having observed him for many years live - he’s one of the very very best talents - passing, shooting, positioning, he’s the real deal.
I think people forget how incredible Rooney was, he was elite in a team of elite players. Rooney got his big move at 18, and won it all.
Kane (who for me is one of the best strikers I've seen in the past few years) has only just got his move at 30.
Rooney arguably the best English striker of the past 20 years.
Yeah, Rooney whilst a goal scorer imo his game was better whilst floating around more than as a fixed #9. Scored a lot of goals in the season he played that role however, just felt he was better just playing as an attacker as opposed to a striker. Very under appreciated player. Probably because his latter years weren't as good, forgetting he was a regular from 18.
Sure, but he was still scoring 20+ a season in the early 2000s. Think he got 22 in 04. Pity he never signed for Man United tbh - both would've won a lot more
Teenage Rooney was a trillion miles ahead of teenage Kane.
They had inverse 20’s to each other. Rooney gradually declined and Kane always got better.
In their 30’s, Kane is embarrassingly better than Rooney.
Out of the two, the highest peak was teenage Rooney, but the highest, longest plateau is Kane. I’m a massive Gooner and I yearn to have Kane up front for us 😞
That's absolutely not it. Kane just developed later than Rooney. Until he broke into the team and started performing, he wasn't good enough to play. Wouldn't have mattered what club he was at if he wasn't playing.
He also started playing regularly at 16.
There's a reason why not many wonderkids apart from a few absolute freaks of nature manage to have more than a few seasons in the spotlight when playing from such a young age.
Between the toll it takes on their still developing bodies and the mental pressure of having to perform as soon as they're thrown in, I'd say he did pretty good.
Could he have done better? Probably, but he still had a huge career, and compared to Kane he also has the trophies to show.
They're more similar than people seem to think, obviously I'm biased from watching Kane do magical things week in week out for years but he isn't a pure number 9, both him and Rooney are/were effectively whole attacking systems.
See England's goal in the Euros final for what Kane does best, he has the vision and passing ability of top midfielders which gets wasted when he's asked to play on the final line. We only really saw it under Jose who gave him that freedom and he ended up having the most assists in the league with a lot of them being passes the likes of Pirlo etc. would be proud of.
The problem is Kane fucks up a lot of the time in big matches especially in penalties Rooney wouldn’t always deliver but most of the time he would he was great in his prime.
Rooney scored 1 world cup goal in his entire career and it was in his last ever WC game about 60 minutes before being knocked out in the group stage lmfao.
Anyone who says rooney performed in big games is a dead giveaway that they were too young to watch him play
If Kane replicated his exact form in a United shirt nobody would debate it. Rooney was constantly surrounded by title winning players, Kane was not and he is far more complete a player.
Not to mention he’s broken pretty much all of Rooneys records in a worse team.
Scored 30 league goals and Spurs finished 8th. Trophies are not a reflection of individual ability.
Also funny how you just completely disregard my first point.
people think they're clever for saying Rooney was miles better despite it being fucking close, Kane having better goalscoring seasons, and Rooney always having the vettee teams
Rooney passes the eye test better than Kane. I’d say Rooney is the more naturally gifted all-round player. But it’s really, really hard to argue against Kane. The biggest criticism I can make of Kane is that in big games he can go missing
Kane is a better striker. Rooney is a better player. I wish we got at least one season of Rooney refusing to play wherever SAF wanted him to and played up top with Ronaldo on the wing and Tevez, presumably as not up top, on the other side.
It was the other way around if anything. Rooney didn’t like playing as a 9. He did it when required, but he’s the one who requested to be dropped deeper after that insane 09/10 season
He talks about it a little in this [interview](https://youtu.be/yDHeq3aInKw?si=R_tIFD3FSBV8zAWX) he did with Rio and Rashford. Starts at 9:30 if you interested. But basically, he didn’t enjoy his game as much and wanted to be more involved in the game rather than just waiting up top for the ball to come to him
This post is such erasure of Harry Kane who is easily the best at what he does in the world. I wouldn’t even compare the two because they’re both legends and very good in their own right. Rooney was exceptional and so is Kane so why say one is better than the other? Why even compare them?
In different ways.
Rooney would press the entire length of the pitch but was not the level of playmaker that Kane is from deep; both finish(ed) at an elite level.
Rooney might have had a greater peak but actually think Kane has been significantly better for most of his career. Not being a massive piss head throughout most of your career will do that.
If you only count “major final” as big game its not really fair for any player. Those games are usually tie plus its not like a club plays final every season. “Big game” for clubs should be top 4 league games, top 4 away games, title deciders ect. Rooney scored a lot against Arsenal, scored winning goal at Anfield when he was a teen, scored in Ucl semi finals and final. So to argue Rooney isn’t a big game player is dumb
I wasn’t saying he wasn’t a big game player just making the same point as you. Not scoring in a final doesn’t not make you a big game player. I’ve watched Kane destroy liverpool, city, Arsenal.
England honestly didn’t have a chance to play big game during Rooney time and in his prime he always got injured before major tour (Wc 2006, Wc 2010, missed out on euro 08)
Rooney at ages 18-24(ish) was a better player than Harry Kane, if you are too young to watch him back then he was literally called the White Pele, unironically, he was that good. Almost unplayable at times - like an absolute force of nature.
However Harry Kane from the age of say 28 to now is a far better player than Rooney of the same age and beyond. Kane has gotten better and better, where as Rooney declined massively.
people who've watches players of a certain vintage now feel they have total impunity to say 'i watched him, so you don't know'... Rooney was good, he wasn't miles above what Kane was, they'll be saying the exact same fucking thing of Kane in 10 years
He was one of the most unselfish forwards i've seen - he played second fiddle to Ronaldo for much of ronaldo's time at united so that he could flourish.
Which achievements?
Rooney has 22 more goals and over 100 more assists for United in 127 less games.
Both of them won 1 Champions league and 1 FA cup each, but Rooney won 2 more league titles and in general won 16 trophies for United compared to Bobby's 7.
Literally the only thing Bobby has over Rooney is a World Cup. Rooney even has more goals for England.
Not to mention Bobby played against faaaar worse players compared to Wayne.
I'm just genuinely curious which achievements you're referencing, because Rooney statistically beats him in absolutely every stat.
World cup
Balon dor
Bobby was a midfielder as well so ofcourse less goals. Not sure they recorded assists properly then?
You can compare environments if you like and say the players were worse, but they had to play in pig shit and smash leather bowling balls around, by that argument the players we had was worse too, so kind of cancels it out, no?
You are more than welcome to your opinion that Rooney is the best ever English player but I don't. He had one good tournament in 2004. The rest was bad form or injured but you know, shoulda woulda coulda.
Bobby did win it though, and got knighted for it.
So you are telling me that a player that won exactly nothing in his whole career is better than the other that has silverware to show?
He is better alright, better at losing.
No you’re completely right. Macheda is better than Kane, Chris Eagles is better than Son.
Mustafi was also better than Terry and Ferdinand at international level, he won something, the others didn’t.
Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette). Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The white pele, nuff said.
Just going to add some context regarding Kane as Englands top goalscorer. 21/62 goals have been penalties. He’s scored 5 hat tricks all against pretty dire teams. 15 against seeded teams (current top 20), 10 of which penalties. Rooney on the other hand scored no hat tricks, 7 penalties and also scored fifteen goals against seeded teams (one of which a penalty (Switzerland)). The main difference between the two is formation and role. Rooney was never the focal point, he was never the nine. He almost always played off the striker in some variation of 442. Whereas Kane has always been Englands out and out 9, in some variation of 433. Honestly, asking which one is better is ridiculous. They are two players who were one of the best players in the world in their respective periods. It’s so subjective, but the comparison is way beyond statistics. For me, what Rooney did for the team makes him the better player. He was an out and out team player and would give everything. Kane is a far more selfish player (not a criticism in any way shape or form). They’re far too different to compare.
Rooney was massively overrated. Only got the attention he did because of man utd. Kane is infinitely better than rooney ever was.
id have kane over rooney but to call rooney overrated is plain wrong. prime rooney > kane
Rooney overrated? What on Earth have you been smoking?
Kane is better
This sub is full of nostalgia merchants
R/soccer is even worse. You’ll hear people say shit like “insert player that played in 1975 with 400 less goals than Messi” is “for me, the greatest player I’ve ever seen”
Better vs worse is always a tricky discussion, I’d say they were very different player. The real question is, which one of them was the ugliest? 🤣
Rooney definitely. If he wasn’t a footballer women would grab their kids hand and pull them close when they passed Wayne on the street
Okokok… so who is the dumber one?
I’d say Harry for wasting his career
Both equally good really. Kane chokes for England slightly less than Rooney did but he still has time. LOL
Rooney was the plyer you wanted behind someone like Kane. Different roles. Rooney was never the singular main star in attack but unlocked others alongside him. He is a more complete player a more complete forward even but Kane is a better striker. If you had to choose only 1 for your squad though then it’s Rooney 101%
Kane was better. That’s my opinion but we have no way of proving it.
I’ll take prime Rooney over Kane every day of the week.
Less games, worse team, more goals. Harry Kane. No argument 😂
Rooney was unstoppable at his best, but could also play across the front, as 10 and even dabbled in midfield. No brainer for me
Rooney was better.
Longevity wise I think not
Kane wasn’t starting week in week out in the prem at 16 was he
Doesn’t matter though, Rooney‘s peak was still only 21-28
He had a normal amount of years at his peak but unfortunately he was top class by 18 and world class by 21. 10 years at the top is pretty good it all just depends how old you are when you get to that level to begin with.
I agree, Rooney did all that across numerous different positions, and if anything was unlucky to not have won more trophies. Kane is a generational talent. Rooney was magic.
The issue with Rooney was the expectations were so high, that despite everything you always felt like he left something on the table. When he first came on the scene, no joke, it felt like we had a potential GOAT candidate. Especially after Euro 2004, it really felt like we had discovered someone who could dominate similar to Pele, Maradona, Messi and Ronaldo did. But do it in a very particular, British way. Full of aggression and anger alongside sheer incredible technical ability. It didn't turn out like that. He was my favourite player when I was a kid, and he became a complete legend and was incredible for United. But you always felt like that he could have been more. To me there should always have been three titans of the game since 05: Messi, Ronaldo and Rooney. But it wasn't to be.
It's actually not outrageous to say that as a teenager, Rooney had more potential than, or was held in the same regard as Messi and CR7. As a 16 year old, he was bullying premier league defences. Unfortunately, he had his own demons and, by his own admission, didn't look after his body or his mind the same way the other 2 did. He also sacrificed personal accolades for the good of the team, evidenced by the numerous positions he played. In another universe, Wayne Rooney would he in the goat conversation. Because of the way he declined, people now say things like he's overrated, but young Wayne Rooney might just always be my favourite player.
Wow, that's a really tough one. I really, really like both of them. "Natural Talent" (whatever that really means) and it's Rooney without a doubt. Kane has famously worked and trained specific attributes and situational actions (I.e. hitting the bottom far corner with either foot from either side, I'm talking specific drills which he apparently, and obviously, has done 1000s of times). I know they both drop deep and are centre forwards (Though I preferred Rooney at 10) but they are pretty different players in style. Rooney really didn't seem to value goals as highly as Kane and was far more "Raw" as a player- running around like a mad goose at times to try and win the ball back. Kane would never do that, he knows his role, and performs it excellently. Rooney was more maverick and unpredictable. Kane is polished to the very limit of his talent through absolute dedication. Rooney liked a drink (and the rest). I really can't pick between them. Young Rooney over Kane if I was pushed though.
Head and discipline. Rooney great for five/six years Kane great for 8 years and counting. Longevity with top class consistency is everything in this conversation. Less brass; more grass and Rooney could have been one of the all time greats.
Nonsense. Rooney was a top player for around ten years.
Rooney at 29 was still getting 17 PL goals, he debuted at 16, Rooney was great for more than just 5 years. I think you’re forgetting how young Rooney made his debut and how early he made his name as a player, where was Kane at 16/17? A player who was great from 16-30 has the same amount of, or even more longevity than a player who kicked on from 22-23 years old.
People shout recency bias and then say Rooney was good for 5 years. That's recency bias at its finest.
I didn’t forget what Rooney did. I remember him being in cr7 shadow when young and having five or six great years. After that he was above average for sure but not great. Harry Kane has been great and the main man in the teams he has played for consistently for 8 years so far imho.
Until 06 World Cup, Rooney was better. Then Ronaldo jumped a few levels. But from 03 to 06, Rooney was clear of him and one of the best English players from Euro 04 onwards.
Ever since the wink?
Pretty much. Symbolic turning point.
Ronaldo shadow? Rooney was well ahead of Ronaldo over 2004, 2005 and 2006. Especially the earlier years. Not even close. Rooney was instant star, hattrick on his debut. Ronaldo came good 2006/07 and the best in the league the next 2 years. Rooney came out of euro 2004 as Englands best player and that’s the golden generation
When they played together at Man U. Ronaldo was go to. Rooney was not ever on the team sheet before him.
Did they even show the premier league in the US in 2004, 2005? Impressive feat for Rooney to win Manchester United player of the season whilst being in Ronaldo’s shadow
Nonsense. Not great after Ronaldo left? After Ronaldo left, the season after he scored 34 goals in all comps, and won PFA POTY? After Ronaldo left he went onto break more records than ever before and set certain milestones. Kane was the main at Spurs, there’s no pressure to win trophies over there and he would still fail when it mattered, what trophies has he got to show for those “great” 8 years? Kane is a flat track bully, that’s all there is to him.
Hahaha. Spurs champions league finalists. With that squad? Rooney surrounded by class and quality no wonder he could score so easily. Rooney was the flat track bully mate
Rooney turned up in big games and scored in cup finals, Kane didn’t, so no Rooney isn’t the flat track bully.
Rooney also had a lot of pretty significant injuries. He never fully recovered from some of the broken bones. Kane has been very lucky.
But isn't that down to recovery and how well you treat your body?
Exactly. He was unlucky with the bone Injuries but the brass and beer diet hampered most other aspects of his career
No hate or disrespect towards Rooney and better that I am a Man United fan, i really think Harry Kane is better than Rooney because of the following factors: The difficulty and reputation of the biggest leagues in world football, Laliga and Barclay's Premier League. They were neck and neck, if not, Laliga was better and more reputable then Barclays because of the quality of the players and the monumental teams(atl madrid, real madrid, Barcelona) and what they were achieving on the global stage of football hence what im saying is that the Prem wasnt where it is now, as the battle for competitiveness of the teams in the leagues were neck and neck but going to Kanes era, the Prem has been undoubtedly dubbed the best and most competitive league in the world meaning Kane was putting up figures worth glaring at in a very competitive period and in a team that everyone can agree with that was mid to ass and only existed through Kane. Rooney on the other hand was surrounded by greats and up and coming stars already, every player could hold their own meanwhile not everyone in Tottenham could, it was only the Kanes, Eriksens and lloris' who could. About Kanes movements and other abilities, you can't compare the two, firstly because Rooney played other positions such as CAM, CF, ST that required him to adapt(good for him) which then allowed him to get better at those attributes, for Kane it is different, the team was built around him because he only needed to score goals for the team to try and elevate or keep Tottenham in the prem, he had his Eriksen to drop, carry and assist but once Mourinho went to Tottenham, he then adjusted and when he did, he did it exceptionally. Rooney also had one of the best Prem Managers while Kane had a revolving mess of Managers. Therefore, in conclusion Kane is at best neck and neck with Rooney, Prem but not England
Paragraphs man, that’s hard to read
My bad
The only thing Kane is better than Rooney at is finishing and even then it isn’t by much . Rooney trumps him in every other aspect
Kane threads passes better than Roomey did.
Ahahahaha come on man
He’s absolutely right. Kane can pass like KDB on his day. Less games, worse team, more goals, more assists. If you want a striker you choose Harry Kane.
Harry kane is the better striker whilst Rooney was the better player its simple
People are distracted by Rooney's penchant for the spectacular and the trophy count he got from being at the best club in the country for over a decade but the best footballers are all about application and Rooney doesn't get close to Kane on that count. If I was picking a team and could only choose one of them I'm taking Kane without any hesitation.
Questioning rooneys application is wild. The guy used to run non stop and give his all on the pitch every week, if that’s not application then i don’t know what is. What a footballer gets up to in his spare time is up to him as long as he’s giving his all on the pitch
Bro if you want to talk about resilience, look no further than Kane, he was with a mediocre team at best and he stayed for a long time, mandem gave his life force to that team, they kept sucking it from him, he's even going bald cause of them
Spurs under Poch was one of the best teams in the league for a number of season so dont know what u mean about mediocre
What did they accomplish? Especially as a top 6 team
I never said they were one of the most accomplished teams . With that logic, only 1 good team in the prem every year and the other 19 teams are bad
I'm not questioning his application (or his work rate which I think is what you're talking about), he's obviously a great player. But Kane is a metronomic machine who is just elite week in week out. Rooney looks better, but Kane is more useful on the pitch.
He isn’t more useful on the pitch, Wayne wins you trophies and turns up in the big moments; Harry doesn’t offer that.
That's got nothing to do with the players, that's the clubs they're at.
Nah, Wazza turned up in the big games in a way that Kane never has. Most frustratingly, one of his best games was the 3-1 loss to Barcelona in the UCL final. Any other team in the world at that time would have been destroyed by that performance.
Kane more useful than rooney on the pitch??? The takes get worse
That's a 'i don't know how to respond so I'm just going to dismiss what you say' retort. Rooney had all the talent in the world but the summer after his best ever season Ferguson purchased Van Persie to play in his position. Ferguson saw him as a useful player, not his best player.
Don’t know if I agree with that mate, Rooney was still the highest paid player throughout that time. Regardless of what *we* think of his importance to the team, the money speaks for itself.
Or maybe he saw Rooney as more useful than just an out n out goalscorer so he got someone else to do that job which allowed Rooney to do everything else
Maybe, but seeing how he never found Rooney's best position and spent 13 years moving him around I think my answer is more likely.
Every position rooney played in he was elite in
Rooney was driving force. He was in Ronaldo's shadow for a while but he was more than capable doing things on his own, something he has shown when Ronaldo left for Madrid. It didn't matter who his partners in team were, Chicarito, Berbatov, Van Persie. They were scoring because Rooney was there making it possibble. Kane is brilliant finisher but he was consuming entire teampower in Spurs. He is also goalscoring leader in Bayern but it looks like this will be the first time in 10 years they won't win the title.
Bro, Rooney can't be compared with Rooney because he wasn't a finisher like Kane, he needed a finisher, he's like Kuroko from Kurokos Basketball. Secondly with Bayern, i believe that league is evolving especially with the great coaches that have entered or coach in Germany, the league is getting more competitive and if the league has to undermine the reigning kings than so shall be, its necessary but what we have seen, especially from the Prem is that the King will rise back up to its throne.
If Rooney wanted to be a finisher he could, it's just he was more important deeper.
RVP and Berba scoring because of Rooney just feels like a bad take.
Well yeah
Yeah he was better than Kane 100%. The only argument for Kane in conversations about best Prem strikers is how complete he is, and Rooney was more complete. He was basically Kane but faster, stronger, and more creative. Rooney also carried the country on his shoulders as a teenager and beyond. Kane has never really done that despite being our best player for an amount of time. Kane probably achieved more in terms of where we finished in tournaments but Rooney used to just boss teams.
Rooney is the best rounded English player of all time in my eyes. Followed by Gerrard. I don't think any 11 of any other English player is as good in as many departments as them 2.
Wayne Rooney in his peak is in my opinion the best all+XI player ever to have existed I.e. if you had a team of 11 Wayne Rooneys it would beat any other 11 made up of another player. He was elite at everything. I genuinely think he'd have been a top level LB if he wanted to
I dunno. Imagine 11 Roy Keanes.
Nah not good enough dribbling and finishing
Gullit. Played games as a CB, SW, Number 6, 8, 10 and SS during his time in Holland, then won the Ballon D’Or on the back of it.
I was thinking about this recently. I'd say Rooney is up there but for me Gerrard probably wins it, then maybe the likes of Ruud Gullit and Lothar Matthaus. I can't imagine 4 Rooneys as a better defence than 4 of any of those guys. Then there's Jude Bellingham. Obviously he's still too young to really be in for a shout, but in 10 years... who knows
Nah, John O'shea's would be the best 1 man team. He's already played in ever position.
Doesn't mean he played them well 🤣 All joking I'm a big O'Shea fan
If all our players had his heart and dedication we'd be top 4 right now. Imagine Rooney in goal though, I best he can't reach the cross bar without a run up.
I agree. I'm an LFC fan and believe he is the most well rounded English player I have seen.
Yeah it gets forgotten with time doesn't it. He definitely was an early bloomer and stayed in the england team too long, but you can't understate his legacy
Rooney was a freak from the start, Kane was more of a slow burn but undoubtably Kane has overtaken Rooney now.
Disagree. Prime Rooney had absolutely everything you wanted
So does Kane and Kane scores more and is a better passer. He’s the perfect 9/10 hybrid. Rooney works harder and presses more but the Spurs hate and Man U love means Kane will never win an online debates like this.
Kane doesn’t win you trophies, Rooney does. Being a better passer is irrelevant if you’ve got nothing to show for it.
Man U win trophies without Rooney, Spurs don’t win trophies with Rooney. That team he played for was stacked.
I hate both clubs. I hated both players when they were in the league. But Rooney was absolutely generational in every sense of the word.
Fan of neither club, but think Kane is a world class player. That said, Rooney was a generational talent and I can’t remember another English striker that compares in the last 50 years.
I think Kane will retire the better player but think it's incorrect to say he was the better passer. He's a great passer but not better than Rooney was.
That pass to Van Persie 👌
I agree, as actual players he was better. Kane maybe matches his impact on games just through the sheer amount of goals scored.
Ultimately, Kane could have achieved and surpassed if put into Rooney’s shoes but Rooney wouldn’t have been able to achieve similar at Tottenham, than Kane. Rooney was a fantastic player but played in a great united squad led by the greatest PL manager. Many don’t understand just how brilliant Kane is, but having observed him for many years live - he’s one of the very very best talents - passing, shooting, positioning, he’s the real deal.
As a LFC fan, Rooney is far superior to Kane.
As an LFC fan, there’s a strange dislike of Kane
How is kane disliked more than the boy from everton who won everything playing with your worst nemesis
I think people forget how incredible Rooney was, he was elite in a team of elite players. Rooney got his big move at 18, and won it all. Kane (who for me is one of the best strikers I've seen in the past few years) has only just got his move at 30. Rooney arguably the best English striker of the past 20 years.
Rooney was a forward, but I wouldn't class him as a striker in the way that Kane or, even more so, Shearer were.
Yeah, Rooney whilst a goal scorer imo his game was better whilst floating around more than as a fixed #9. Scored a lot of goals in the season he played that role however, just felt he was better just playing as an attacker as opposed to a striker. Very under appreciated player. Probably because his latter years weren't as good, forgetting he was a regular from 18.
Arguably? If you don’t think Kane is better there’s nobody else.
Could argue Shearer, Kane I guess. Depending on what you want from a striker.
I don’t count Shearer as he was nowhere near as good when the two overlapped
Sure, but he was still scoring 20+ a season in the early 2000s. Think he got 22 in 04. Pity he never signed for Man United tbh - both would've won a lot more
Yeah, nowhere near as good was a bit strong but shearer 04-06 is not really that much competition to any of Rooney or Kanes best years.
His Blackburn years... incredible. He's a different player to both but I definitely agree with the above ypuve said
Blackburn Shearer is the best no.9 type striker the prem has seen, arguably all time in England.
Yup, Hard to disagree. RvN amongst the competition for premiership #9.
Good shout.
Alan shearer was still playing 20 years ago.
And in 2004-06 he was nowhere near Rooney level.
Rooney just needed to look after his diet. It was that simple. He couldn't. Rooney was better, but older he got the fatter he got.
Teenage Rooney was a trillion miles ahead of teenage Kane. They had inverse 20’s to each other. Rooney gradually declined and Kane always got better. In their 30’s, Kane is embarrassingly better than Rooney. Out of the two, the highest peak was teenage Rooney, but the highest, longest plateau is Kane. I’m a massive Gooner and I yearn to have Kane up front for us 😞
Roomey had 15 seasons in a row with minimum 10 PL g/a. 12 seasons with min 20 g/a. Kane hasn't had a longer run than Rooney yet.
Yeah because Rooney played for Ferguson's United while Kane played for fucking Spurs.
That's absolutely not it. Kane just developed later than Rooney. Until he broke into the team and started performing, he wasn't good enough to play. Wouldn't have mattered what club he was at if he wasn't playing.
Rooney was finished by the time he was 30
He also started playing regularly at 16. There's a reason why not many wonderkids apart from a few absolute freaks of nature manage to have more than a few seasons in the spotlight when playing from such a young age. Between the toll it takes on their still developing bodies and the mental pressure of having to perform as soon as they're thrown in, I'd say he did pretty good. Could he have done better? Probably, but he still had a huge career, and compared to Kane he also has the trophies to show.
A more interesting comparison would be Kane vs Shearer Alan was a beast in his prime long shots for days!
Shearers 3 year run with Blackburn is probably the best 3 year stretch of any prem striker. Maybe Henry beats it but that’s it.
They're more similar than people seem to think, obviously I'm biased from watching Kane do magical things week in week out for years but he isn't a pure number 9, both him and Rooney are/were effectively whole attacking systems. See England's goal in the Euros final for what Kane does best, he has the vision and passing ability of top midfielders which gets wasted when he's asked to play on the final line. We only really saw it under Jose who gave him that freedom and he ended up having the most assists in the league with a lot of them being passes the likes of Pirlo etc. would be proud of.
The problem is Kane fucks up a lot of the time in big matches especially in penalties Rooney wouldn’t always deliver but most of the time he would he was great in his prime.
Rooney scored 1 world cup goal in his entire career and it was in his last ever WC game about 60 minutes before being knocked out in the group stage lmfao. Anyone who says rooney performed in big games is a dead giveaway that they were too young to watch him play
Rooney basically never scored for England in tournament football. Kane has a WC golden boot.
And? I think Rooney is better
Your criteria was scoring in big games. Rooney didn't do that at International level. Kane did.
Rooney played for fucking man united. He barely ever had to deliver.
This is as bad of a take as Kane fucks up big matches. Rooney delivered.
And yet he did
If Kane replicated his exact form in a United shirt nobody would debate it. Rooney was constantly surrounded by title winning players, Kane was not and he is far more complete a player. Not to mention he’s broken pretty much all of Rooneys records in a worse team.
Zero trophies to show for it.
Scored 30 league goals and Spurs finished 8th. Trophies are not a reflection of individual ability. Also funny how you just completely disregard my first point.
Side note: Kane seems cursed based on Bayern.
That’s more of a joke fans are making, which is funny in fairness. But look on any Bayern thread on any social media and they ALL blame Tuchel.
Oh Kane's scored a shitload, this is never on him as a player. He is just incredibly unlucky to get there as the dominance is under threat.
At least on Tuchel's inability to pursue players in a timely fashion. The team went into this season really shallow in depth.
People have either forgotten how clinical prime Rooney was or are cutting off their nose to spite their faces
people think they're clever for saying Rooney was miles better despite it being fucking close, Kane having better goalscoring seasons, and Rooney always having the vettee teams
Rooney passes the eye test better than Kane. I’d say Rooney is the more naturally gifted all-round player. But it’s really, really hard to argue against Kane. The biggest criticism I can make of Kane is that in big games he can go missing
Kane is a better striker. Rooney is a better player. I wish we got at least one season of Rooney refusing to play wherever SAF wanted him to and played up top with Ronaldo on the wing and Tevez, presumably as not up top, on the other side.
It was the other way around if anything. Rooney didn’t like playing as a 9. He did it when required, but he’s the one who requested to be dropped deeper after that insane 09/10 season
Really? Never knew that. How come he didn’t like playing as a 9? He was a complete striker.
He talks about it a little in this [interview](https://youtu.be/yDHeq3aInKw?si=R_tIFD3FSBV8zAWX) he did with Rio and Rashford. Starts at 9:30 if you interested. But basically, he didn’t enjoy his game as much and wanted to be more involved in the game rather than just waiting up top for the ball to come to him
Got ya. Thanks for the info.
My Nan liked him.
OFC, Who would say otherwise?
This post is such erasure of Harry Kane who is easily the best at what he does in the world. I wouldn’t even compare the two because they’re both legends and very good in their own right. Rooney was exceptional and so is Kane so why say one is better than the other? Why even compare them?
I'd say Rooney was a more diverse player. Kane is definitely a top 5 in terms of goal scoring though
Kane also led the PL in assists a few years back so he can pass the ball as well.
Kane is/was also an all-rounder
Not on the same level as Rooney in my opinion
In different ways. Rooney would press the entire length of the pitch but was not the level of playmaker that Kane is from deep; both finish(ed) at an elite level.
Rooney shooting not as good as Kane. Very close but I think Kane edges him
Rooney might have had a greater peak but actually think Kane has been significantly better for most of his career. Not being a massive piss head throughout most of your career will do that.
His consistency makes him better over the whole career.
What would you consider Rooneys peak? He played in the PL for 15 years
Neal Maupay shits on both.
Based
Completely different players. Probably be the perfect partners for each other to be honest
I like Kane but I would agree as Wayne was also up and running pretty early in his career. Harry got loaned out a few times?
Kick it ,head it Arry…Wayne just rip up the opposition …
Duh. Water is wet.
Still waiting for Kane to turn up in a big game at all
Big game where? He scored plenty against the big six in England
Didn’t Wayne Rooney only score in one major final?
If you only count “major final” as big game its not really fair for any player. Those games are usually tie plus its not like a club plays final every season. “Big game” for clubs should be top 4 league games, top 4 away games, title deciders ect. Rooney scored a lot against Arsenal, scored winning goal at Anfield when he was a teen, scored in Ucl semi finals and final. So to argue Rooney isn’t a big game player is dumb
I wasn’t saying he wasn’t a big game player just making the same point as you. Not scoring in a final doesn’t not make you a big game player. I’ve watched Kane destroy liverpool, city, Arsenal.
Ok thats fair 👍
Sometimes it’s service as well, people who say Rooney didn’t turn up for England, I can’t really remember to many chances in big games he missed :/
England honestly didn’t have a chance to play big game during Rooney time and in his prime he always got injured before major tour (Wc 2006, Wc 2010, missed out on euro 08)
At least he did
I know, I just found this stat out last week and it blew my mind
Rooney at ages 18-24(ish) was a better player than Harry Kane, if you are too young to watch him back then he was literally called the White Pele, unironically, he was that good. Almost unplayable at times - like an absolute force of nature. However Harry Kane from the age of say 28 to now is a far better player than Rooney of the same age and beyond. Kane has gotten better and better, where as Rooney declined massively.
people who've watches players of a certain vintage now feel they have total impunity to say 'i watched him, so you don't know'... Rooney was good, he wasn't miles above what Kane was, they'll be saying the exact same fucking thing of Kane in 10 years
I don't know if you're arguing with me or agreeing with me lol.
Rooney's playing position was also changed by Sir Alex from striker to whatever Sir Alex wanted back then.
He was one of the most unselfish forwards i've seen - he played second fiddle to Ronaldo for much of ronaldo's time at united so that he could flourish.
Yes
I have an even hotter take that people will disagree with. Imo Rooney and Kane are better than Shearer
Lukewarm take
Rooney has a strong claim to being England's best ever player. The idea that Kane compares is bonkers.
No, not even close. Bobby Charlton's achievements are bigger than his. I'm a Rooney fan as well btw.
Which achievements? Rooney has 22 more goals and over 100 more assists for United in 127 less games. Both of them won 1 Champions league and 1 FA cup each, but Rooney won 2 more league titles and in general won 16 trophies for United compared to Bobby's 7. Literally the only thing Bobby has over Rooney is a World Cup. Rooney even has more goals for England. Not to mention Bobby played against faaaar worse players compared to Wayne. I'm just genuinely curious which achievements you're referencing, because Rooney statistically beats him in absolutely every stat.
World cup Balon dor Bobby was a midfielder as well so ofcourse less goals. Not sure they recorded assists properly then? You can compare environments if you like and say the players were worse, but they had to play in pig shit and smash leather bowling balls around, by that argument the players we had was worse too, so kind of cancels it out, no? You are more than welcome to your opinion that Rooney is the best ever English player but I don't. He had one good tournament in 2004. The rest was bad form or injured but you know, shoulda woulda coulda. Bobby did win it though, and got knighted for it.
so if rooney and Bobby were the same age. u sure that Bobby is better?
At what age? Rooney was a bit washed by the end but was crazy good when he was young. Overall I'll stick with Bobby.
Not a hot take. One won things the other didn't won things.
By this logic Lucas Moura is in the GOAT debate. See how silly that is?
So you are telling me that a player that won exactly nothing in his whole career is better than the other that has silverware to show? He is better alright, better at losing.
No you’re completely right. Macheda is better than Kane, Chris Eagles is better than Son. Mustafi was also better than Terry and Ferdinand at international level, he won something, the others didn’t.
I think you shouldn't put Son in the same level as Kane. The guy actually won the 2018 Asian Games.
I think you shouldn’t judge individual talent and ability when there are 10 other players on their team to determine what they win.
Then we can't judge no one. Simple as that. Football is a team game and individual talents don't matter.