He'll be perfect as a second striker. This i believe.
Agree. Perfect backup striker and also backup RW/LW.He'll be perfect as a second striker. This i believe.
He’s great at link up play & hold up play. His finishing is horrific though.
I really, really don’t understand the «he was fantastic»-posts and plaudits after this game. He barely touched the ball, he missed a sitter with an awful finish.... he won the penalty naturally after 30 seconds, but that says very little about his performance. Anonymous, not much involved, like most of our attacking players as it was a defensive display where we didn’t see much of the ball.
Yes, if AM shows consistency and quality all the way to the end of the season. Sounds basic but it’s that simple, because he hasn’t throughout the season all the way until this City game, where he was absolutely brilliant last night. He’s much younger and less injury prone than Cavani.I would rather sell Cavani than Martial if we get Haaland. Martial is a different type of player to Haaland and Cavani.
I'd rather have a type a and b forward than two type a forwards.
How did Kane perform at the Etihad? Not really fair to compare the performances in games of completely different quality and intensity.Though Gary Neville went a little overboard describing his performance as "outstanding"
I thought he did some basic centre forward play, the type of stuff that should be the minimum requirement. Still good to see but it's just a first step in getting back to some sort of form.
If Martial was outstanding how do we describe Kane's performance against Palace?
How did Kane perform at the Etihad? Not really fair to compare the performances in games of completely different quality and intensity.
Martial has been terrible all season, but credit where it's due, him being involved and being a focal point for our attack was a huge difference in the game.
If he finished that chance, it's pretty much the perfect CF performance against the best defence in the league. The real question is where did that performance come from, and why can't he do it regularly?
1. No one doubts Kane as being a top class CFThough Gary Neville went a little overboard describing his performance as "outstanding"
I thought he did some basic centre forward play, the type of stuff that should be the minimum requirement. Still good to see but it's just a first step in getting back to some sort of form.
If Martial was outstanding how do we describe Kane's performance against Palace?
Absolutely.Now imagine if we actually have a fit and functioning striker all year instead of Martial.
Would swap him for a proper functioning striker that functions 38 games a season instead of few games a season
How did Kane perform at the Etihad? Not really fair to compare the performances in games of completely different quality and intensity.
Martial has been terrible all season, but credit where it's due, him being involved and being a focal point for our attack was a huge difference in the game.
If he finished that chance, it's pretty much the perfect CF performance against the best defence in the league. The real question is where did that performance come from, and why can't he do it regularly?
I think the bar has been set pretty low for Anthony. I though he had a good game yesterday, but that is the minimum requirement for a starting striker.
Spot on. He likes to come deep and get on the ball. He is not a strict 9 and you play with a Kane or Haaland and he is going to destroy defences.
He can take on defences. He is not quick like Rashford or James but has a burst of pace.
Kane is one of the best forwards in the world. I don't understand what is to gain from comparing his performance against Palace to that of Martial against City?There's still a huge gap between the two performances even taking that into consideration. That was the same Palace our entire team struggled to fashion a chance against.
I've always been a Martial fan but yesterday it was just a few moments of decent hold up play. The kind of thing I'd expect from a mid table centre forward. Chuck in him missing a sitter and no way can it be described as "outstanding."
Agree with those wondering what was so great about him yesterday. He just wasn’t shit like usual, apart from the bit where he was really shit in front of goal.
Those saying he’d be perfect for this role or that role, based on what? The one decent performance he’s put in all season?
Yeah, he was decent. I don’t really see what he did as much more that that. While a penalty was fantastic for us, I don’t think it makes his performance that much better.It was better than 'decent'. City suffocate teams by playing very high and pressing intensely. They make it incredibly difficult for teams to play the ball into the forwards and get out.
Martial was very good with his back to goal yesterday. He held-off Stones and Dias numerous times and found good passes which relieved pressure and enabled us to get out.
Don't forget, he also won us the first-minute penalty with his direct running, which swung the game in our favour
I really, really don’t understand the «he was fantastic»-posts and plaudits after this game. He barely touched the ball, he missed a sitter with an awful finish.... he won the penalty naturally after 30 seconds, but that says very little about his performance. Anonymous, not much involved, like most of our attacking players as it was a defensive display where we didn’t see much of the ball.
This goes both ways. He has played at this level most of the season. When we win he's good when we loose he's sht. But the truth is somewhere in between. I agree decent is the overall assessment. Good with build up, holding on to the ball, back to goal, dribbling etc. Bad with shooting and making runs in the box. If he gets his last years shooting boots on then he is a top player.Yeah, he was decent. I don’t really see what he did as much more that that. While a penalty was fantastic for us, I don’t think it makes his performance that much better.
Wonder how much the consensus would change if he’d fluffed the shot at 1-1 but still played the same the rest of the game?
When he plays like he did last season and again today he’s absolutely good enough to be our number 9. The question is though, why has he had such a poor season? Ultimately that is the conundrum and it’s cost us massively this season. Ole clearly loves him as a player but Martial has let him down big time and I’m not sure Ole will risk entering the next campaign putting in the same faith again. What a massive shame though as I really thought he would kick on from last year and we would have an absolute world class player. It’s clear that at his best he facilitates some fantastic football and most of our play goes through him.
I don't get the plaudits from the City game. Yes he played much better and was mostly a nuisance for their defenders but he still has failed to one thing you'd expect number 9 to do - score, something he's failed to do pretty much all season. And that's after gifting him two chances on a plate.
Unless he goes on a freak goalscoring romp between now and the end of the season I'm still learning towards selling him and making way for a number 9 who reliably bags us 20+ goals a season. I'm a big converted Cavani fan and would be happy for him to have another season here, but he's not the solution going forward, nor is Martial.
Yeah, he was decent. I don’t really see what he did as much more that that. While a penalty was fantastic for us, I don’t think it makes his performance that much better.
Wonder how much the consensus would change if he’d fluffed the shot at 1-1 but still played the same the rest of the game?