Pretty ignorant
Nordic Ghost Yeti (Scandi Carroll) | Haaland at City
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Pretty ignorant
The amount of posters who talk crap like "he gives me nothing" and "will score goals, but won't elevate City to become a better team" is ridiculous. He's a striker. It's his job to score goals and that's exactly what he's doing. Maybe they're not scoring as much as the seasons before, but that's down to other factors than signing Haaland. Sterling leaving, players aging, Cancelo, Grealish still adapting (seems to have come good now), Foden played out of position and Guardiola just experimenting as he tends to.
City are not a worse team because they signed Haaland, and you would all love him if he played for us and wouldn't write shit like "he doesn't give me a boner, so bored watching him play".
City are not a worse team because they signed Haaland, and you would all love him if he played for us and wouldn't write shit like "he doesn't give me a boner, so bored watching him play".
Gap between the haves and the have nots is getting bigger and bigger as the post Bosman superclub era becomes more and more entrenched.
Probably worth changing the thread title by this point, no?
It's funny. Thread titles don't have to be accurate.
Big teams concentrating the better players has a lot to do with how imbalanced and one sided football look nowadays
In the 90s, Thuram and Crespo were at Parma, Sinisa Mihjalovic and Nesta at Lazio, Batistuta at Fiorentina, Djalminha and Bebeto at Deportivo La Coruña, etc.
Talent was more widespread 30 years ago, which made it more difficult to create an actual superteam.
Last edited:
Yep. Give me the striker who offers "nothing except goals" over the striker that offers no goals, but runs around a lot and gets praised for it.The amount of posters who talk crap like "he gives me nothing" and "will score goals, but won't elevate City to become a better team" is ridiculous. He's a striker. It's his job to score goals and that's exactly what he's doing. Maybe they're not scoring as much as the seasons before, but that's down to other factors than signing Haaland. Sterling leaving, players aging, Cancelo, Grealish still adapting (seems to have come good now), Foden played out of position and Guardiola just experimenting as he tends to.
City are not a worse team because they signed Haaland, and you would all love him if he played for us and wouldn't write shit like "he doesn't give me a boner, so bored watching him play".
Silence domination?He is definitely one of the most effective players I’ve ever seen. Can basically not touch the ball all game and still have a hat trick. Doesn’t need the ball to stick to his feet when dribbling as his pace and power allows him to bulldoze through everyone. I don’t think there has been a more effective player at his level who can basically not play football but be an amazing footballer.
Your answer is 'pretty ignorant' if you do not even attempt to substantiate it. Many of these technical players don't do much imo, and I am talking attackers (not midfielders) here, and correlating this with Halaand's efforts. Look at our forwards. Rashford, v direct, now scores goals and looks a handful. Compare to Antony, Sancho, Martial. All so called 'technical' players... look at Grealish, Chelsea have I don't know how many of these types of players... Crystal Palace too... goes back to players like Lallana, Wiltshire. Klopp has little time for these types of forwards. The more effective ones score goals, win games, and are consistent (Mahrez is a wonderful example...). But too many, simply not doing what they should.
Halaand will end up scoring more goals than all of those players put together.
It isn’t luck. More to do with reading the game, ability and brute strength.
What a player Djalminha was! Artists like him are dying out in the modern game.
Also agree with your post generally.
Annoyingly City were amazing last night. Best performance I have seen for some time.
He reminds me of an old school striker like batistuta/adriano.
Probably because he’s left foot too but he reminds me of a prime Christian Vieri
Weird view.
His PSV time was against LVG's Ajax, having a golden generation, who won CL, and made another CL final. It's like asking why Haaland didn't win Bundesliga with Dortmund, nor why not outscoring Lewandowski. Ronaldo missed a huge chunk of his second season due to his first serious knee injury, too.
That Barcelona went through a transition and in identity crisis with Sir Bobby Robson before LVG first stint. Real Madrid happened to have Capello who at the time regarded one of elite managers in his peak. That Real Madrid may not be Galaticos, but they were on par with Barcelona; and they didn't have European duty because they stank the previous season. Barcelona issue was not outscoring. It was that their defense was significantly weaker. Barcelona lost the title to Real Madrid for only 2 points. It speaks volume of Ronaldo individual brilliance as a player, by dragging his team as far as they could, challenging Capello's Real Madrid, regarded as a much superior manager than Sir Bobby Robson.
Serie A of the 90s was a Super league, even when Juventus was supposed to be dominant.
I am not sure what you meant by a lot of success, when you listed Signori who only top flight success is Intertoto Cup. Yes he's a monstrous goal scorer, but your argument would be all over the place to use goal scorer individual tally to define success because in his first season in Netherland, Ronaldo way way outscored Kluivert, who played for a stronger (dominant) team. In the second season, despite the injury, Ronaldo was only about handful of goals behind Kluivert!!! Kluivert flopped when he moved to Serie A, and quickly shipped out to Barcelona after only a season to play for LVG!!! Kluivert boasted trophies but his goal scoring tally per season at Barcelona again was below fat version Ronaldo in La Liga...
Delvecchio is neither as consistent scorer, nor that really decorated. Won one Serie A and Italian Super Cup but it happened to be with when Batistuta arrived. That Roma squad was tasty (Totti, Cafu, Emerson, Samuel to name a few other notable great players), and Capello (elite manager at the time) was more the driving force for AS Roma success.
Outside success with Roma, Batistuta trophy count is very unimpressive hence why he needed to eventually move to Roma. He's no doubt an elite forward with consistent high scoring rate in toughest league at the time. However, Ronaldo first season at Inter when he's fit, he reached about same range of goal, Batistuta's best season could offer!
Bierhoff legend was based on him (at Udinese), outscoring Ronaldo first season at Inter. However, throughout his career, even when he's part of Milan team who won Serie A, he's not as consistent 20 goal Serie A scorer in same tier as Signori, Batistuta, Shevchenko. His only success is again moving to Milan and won Serie A. His overall club career success was even less decorated than Batistuta's.
Salas boast trophies being at the right clubs at the right time, but he and Zamorano were not that prolific in Serie A. Zamorano was as successful at Inter as Ronaldo!!! His overall success in Europe is about the same Ronaldo's too, but young fit Ronaldo way way outscored Zamorano's best seasons.
Vieri became a consistent scorer for few seasons during early 2000, but before that even when he was leading Italy NT line, he's not consistent posting great numbers at the clubs. His success with Juventus and Lazio were the clubs power (other great players, and managers) than Vieri contribution. Haaland maybe faster, but he's not on the same top tier speedster like Ronaldo. Vieri was not slow. He's not only a box attacker. He's quite confident with his speed and not shy to have a go in foot race against defender. Haaland maybe Vieri on steroid, but he's not from different world faster than the younger Vieri.
Inzaghi was not always a starter. He's more like Chicharito that some seasons when he did well, he started a lot but in other seasons, more well rounded forwards would be preferred to lead the line. Again, another case of being at the right clubs at the right time.
Only Shevchenko stood out with both trophies, and consistent scoring record. However, he's only more decorated than Batistuta due to Champions League triumph. Else, he's less successful than Inzaghi's trophy count for Milan, despite Shevchenko's more prominence role at Milan.
Weah's worth a special mention. Despite not a prolific scorer, he had huge influence especially to help Milan fighting against Juventus' emerging dominance. Only African who won Ballon D'Or for a reason. He boasted trophies to go with his influence, but great scoring record is not what he can boast about.
Last edited:
Just managed to see all of his goals from yesterday. In terms of having the anticipation and desire to go for the chances in the box, and the pure explosiveness to get there, I can't recall seeing many better. He is also a beast running in behind. I don't think he is all that good in the build-up play, or that he will get many goals from outside the box, but he probably won't need to.
What a very good post. Interesting and well balanced. But the names mentioned here, reflect the change in the characteristics of forward players. All the players mentioned here were associated with scoring goals. Like Halaand.
Everything involves luck, but not out of pure luck for players like Haaland to usually be at the right place at the right time.
It's scorer instinct to anticipate, position and react. He didn't need to chase the ball. He chose the position, time his run/react better than anyone else. It's scary to have someone with this level of scorer instinct marrying pace, strength, good physique and natural scorer technique to boost.
Outside of the goal, he had other chances too. And he's very lively this game outside of goal poaching. Even his second, was initiated by him pressing forcing a bad kick from the GK, which City gained possession and quickly had a go at Leipzig goal.
The EPL has been dominated by a team which plays almost exclusively technical players. And their biggest competitor played a <15 goals a season striker with great link up play and playmaking ability up front during its strongest years. The current EPL leader has no real striker. United has no real striker. The moment City installed a true striker, it became much more inconsistent. The recent UCL wingers all had very technical strikers in Benzema, Lewandowski, Havertz and Firmino.
On the other hand, despite his goal return, Haaland has not improved any team he joined so far significantly. Contrary to Sancho by the way.
R9 didn't actually have all that much success at club level, one league title, one uefa Cup, no champions leagues, I don't think saying haaland could have replicated that is too strong a statement. And the brazil 2002 side was very strong, I think they'd have a decent chance of winning it with haaland instead of ronaldo
Which was my point. Forwards only focus on just getting goals were very successful in that era and Haaland is the best at it that I have seen
Especially since R9's contribution on the pitch can't be measured in goals, Haaland's can (at least much more so)
It wasn't an outrageous statement imo. I like Ronaldo more of course but my feeling is Haaland would have replicated
I mean r9 didn't exactly do much off ball. He was lazy, had his hands on his hips and did not press. He wasn't a playmaker or creator so what was his contribution measured by?
Depends what you are defining as success, I don't believe he would have replicated what Ronaldo did at Barca, PSV or Brazil. Because his success was not just measured in trophies, the guy did't have a team set up to create him chances either (Brazil being the exception), he created them by himself.
Christ, he created goals for himself.
All very true. Their achievements of club success will still be forgotten because they were obtained through corruption.
Ronaldo was literally one of the best dribblers ever.
To suggest Halaand doesn't improve a team is madness, but it's all opinions.
You also do not respond to my points where I identify players, as my original post stated 'some' players. I even quoted Mahrez as an example of where it works well. Liverpool don't have ineffective technical players. City now do with Grealish. Sterling was struggling, and he was ousted and look at him at Chelsea?
Benzema and Lewandoski are simply class No 9's... they are v direct, and very much in the mould of all the names mentioned. Havertz and Firmino are not like those two. No way.
He absolutely was a playmaker pre injury. No coincidence he wore the 10 for Inter
He's either a fecking machine or a genetically modified "human". No love from this side. If given a chance, the freak could break footies.
He is a mix of Adriano and Inzaghi
If he picked the right club at the right time, Haaland may even beat Ronaldo trophies count. However, if talking purely on same career path/scenario, it's can be different for the worse for Haaland in comparison.
Ajax was a serious CL contender (won one even), when Ronaldo arrived in Netherland. He could only get one cup. It's similar to how Haaland couldn't beat Bayern with Dortmund, and only had one cup to show. So a lot of context, needed to be considered. Especially when serious injuries like Ronaldo suffered being involved.
Last edited:
I mean Haaland averaged a goal per game in the Norwegian and German so why could he not do it in the Dutch league? He also averaged this in the CL as a child. Barcelona had Luis Henrique, Prosinecki, De La Pena, Pep, Stoichkov, Giovanni, Figo etc that's a better team than City. I am sure Ronaldo had plenty opportunities created for him.
Yes so his contribution is scoring goals like Haaland.
Yes but it was all for the purpose of scoring goals, hence his impact is goal attributed like Haaland.
It's not madness. Dortmund didn't become better and City didnt become better. It might have other reasons and maybe the teams would have been 'even worse' without his arrival due to other developments but so far it is a fact that he didn't improve their performance levels.
And Benzema and Lewandowski are technically extremely good and contribute much more than Haaland. Benzema especially won three UCL's as basically a playmaker with in comparison mediocre goal outputs.
It is important to actually play football and not only score goals in every position. This goal obsession is really annoying. There are dozens of important plays in a football game that can't be measured in goals and when you don't consider them important, you're being ignorant, simple as that.
nope he wasn't. His only playmaking was to set up a one two give and go so he can get into the box and score himself
You're wrong and obviously haven't seen him play.
The post of someone who never saw Ronaldo play.
Ronaldo could create something out of nothing through his dribbling and skill - either for himself or for his teammates. Haaland cannot. Haaland's skillset may be better for some teams, while Ronaldo's is better for others, but you cannot convince me that they are equally creative, because they might end up scoring the same amount of goals.