If there was one thing most people agreed on after England’s World Cup semi-final defeat at the hands of Croatia, it was that Harry Kane had a stinker of a game.
Although Raheem Sterling is often the focus of negative attention, regardless of his performances, Kane drifts through life with people seemingly unable to see him when he’s playing poorly.
Against Croatia, Kane really struggled. I don’t say this to have a go at the Tottenham man, merely to highlight how completely ridiculous it is to give him a higher player rating than Sterling. Again.
Yet, somehow, that’s exactly what Jamie Redknapp has managed to do in today’s Daily Mail.
We all know that stats don’t tell half the story, let alone the full one, but we also know what we saw on Wednesday night. Harry Kane went missing in the biggest game of his career.
Imagine if Mesut Ozil played as badly as Harry Kane in a match that big….
— Daily Cannon (@DailyCannon) July 11, 2018
54.6% pass accuracy, two shots in total and not a single effort on target.
Throughout this tournament, the Daily Mail (and others) have consistently given underperforming players higher ratings than Sterling.
While the Manchester City man certainly hasn’t hit the heights we know his talent can scale, he has often been the scapegoat of this England side.
Redknapp gave Sterling a 6.5, no player got a lower rating.
Redknapp gave Sterling an 8 for his performance against Panama which seems impressive until you realise that 8 is the lowest rating he gave out for this game.
Sterling did not play in this match.
Sterling got 6.5 for his efforts against Colombia while Kane got an 8.5.
As these ratings appeared in the Mail on Sunday, Redknapp was replaced by Glenn Hoddle.
He gave Sterling a 6 while Kane got a 7.
As mentioned above, Sterling got another 6.5 for his game against Croatia.
In his latest piece, Redknapp says that Sterling’s tournament average is 7.9, however, when you average the rankings Redknapp has actually given him over the course of the competition, it’s really 6.7, if you include Hoddle’s rating, and 6.875 if you don’t.
So what about other papers?
Well, the Mirror managed to notice Harry Kane had a bad game and gave him a 6 while Sterling got a 7.
The Telegraph gave Sterling a 6 and Kane a 5.
The BBC gave Sterling a 6 and Kane a 5.
Sky Sports gave Sterling a 7 and Kane a 6.
The Guardian gave both players a 6.
The Express gave Sterling a 6 and Kane a 5.
The Daily Star gave Sterling a 7 and Kane a 5, the only mainstream media publication that I checked that had more than a single point difference between the two.