Well, the last bit is the point I made. Dean had upwards of 20 more goals that season than was typically scored by the top guy at that time. Haaland still has games to go, but he is currently, what? 10 ahead of Kane in the league? So what Dean did is as impressive relative to his time as what Haaland is doing now relative to his time. The circumstances were totally different but 60 goals in a league season in any context is nuts.
Nordic Ghost Yeti (Scandi Carroll) | Haaland at City
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
It is surprising how so many in this forum don't rate him as a well rounded striker. If he's going to the break the all-time English first division goal-scoring record in his debut season, then he is probably one of the most complete strikers.
Some other strikers may have 20 other traits, including a good hairstyle, but what matters the most for strikers is the number of goals scored. Haaland has great pace, acceleration, shooting accuracy, aerial presence, positional awareness, and above all, an insance scoring record. He is more well-rounded than most others.
Some other strikers may have 20 other traits, including a good hairstyle, but what matters the most for strikers is the number of goals scored. Haaland has great pace, acceleration, shooting accuracy, aerial presence, positional awareness, and above all, an insance scoring record. He is more well-rounded than most others.
Complete doesn't equate to being better, there are more complete forwards in the last 20 years of the English game, but Haaland excels more in the most important part, goalscoring, than the other players to an extraordinary level, so in turn is a better player. We don't need to act as if there aren't better strikers all round even playing the game today to give him his due.
You don't need to be complete to break records or well rounded to score tons of goals, Ian Rush wasn't as well rounded as some of his contemporaries and look at his record at Liverpool, not Haaland level of course but he scored lots and lots of goals.
You, my friend, are high on something. Or are a wum.
Haaland is a goalscorer. Period. Let's not start pretending he is anything else.
If criteria for goat candidacy is goalscoring only than Muller MUST be in the conversation. But he isn't and that is how Haaland will be viewed as once everything is said and done.
How many has he scored from outside the box.
Henry was far better interms of allround play. It's not even close.
I am not sure he has "fantastic" finishing. Seen him mishit a lot. He has, however, fantastic movement and anticipation, combined with amazing physicality of course, so he finds himself in perfect positions a shitload of times per game.
Ah, forgot this was basketball, where a goal from outside the box counts for 2
I wish Premier League reporters made more background checks and not interview his teammates as fans but there you go.
Some player, gutted City have him! Not much else to say really.
Yes, let's stop here because once again you have no idea what you are talking about.
He said part of the reason why Haaland is a complete striker is because he is good at shooting hence the question. Anyway your reply makes it obvious that he isn't.
He is a goalscorer/poacher. A roided version of RVN.
I would go with that. Ibra had great ability
Yeah this is it for me. He is a generational player at 22 who while doesn’t look pretty playing wise he is so unique as you shouldn’t be that quick big and strong at the same time.
Its not the fact he is breaking records for city it’s the fact I like to watch him and have a hard time disliking him so him at City makes me sick
Absolutely pig sick every time he scores,find myself utterly green with envy and wishing he was ours and can't hide that feeling whatsoever
Yeah how did we feck this up so easily
Go back to the rumours thread. There was much talk about him being from Germany and therefore being another Sancho, or another Mkhitaryan.
Ignoring the fact that De Bruyne has probably been the best player in the league ever since moving from Germany.
Then there was Mini Raiola, many didn’t want to deal with him again either. But then he passed away
Yeah and we thought ourselves too good to accept that release clause as well,really been left with egg on our faces now
Those “hollow and meaningless” posts always make me smile. If it is that meaningless and one couldnt care less, then why specifically comment in the first place and several times. Copium and all imo
More all-round play = less goals.
All-round play basically means being able to do many "other" things during play. That's important.
Semantics.
But.
My argument is that the best definition of a "well-rounded striker" should be one who consistently scores the most goals, because that's what a striker is there in the playing squad for.
So, Gerd Muller was a more well rounded striker than R9?
Is that why, despite scoring many more goals, R9 is regarded as better?
And by your logic also, Romelu Lukaku will go down in history as a more "well rounded striker" than Drogba, Owen, Fernando Torres and Andriy Shevchenko because he will end up with more goals.
Not true my friend.
Haaland is an extremely gifted goalscorer, his all round game is very basic.
Comparisons to R9, Pele, Messi, even talent wise to Roberto Baggio are extremely Ott.
Chill.
It’s not the only thing a striker is in the squad for, it depends on your system and team.
Also scoring goals is not the only way to contribute to a goal being scored, Henry was a playmaker too, and his passing allowed others to score goals.
How many goals?
Well in one season Henry had 24 goals and 20 assists so contributed to 44 goals directly, Haaland is still 2 off that total overall but will probably beat it in the end.
I would also make a guess Arsenal probably scored a few less goals than season than City will this season(haven’t checked) but my guess is that Henry was directly responsible for a greater percentage of goals for his team
Some of the posts at the begining of this thread…..
Sounds like you place far too much value on dribbling and passing and far too little on the other very important aspects of the sport.
I could champion Ronaldo all day, but there's nowhere that he is seen as better than Muller definitively and they are easily interchangeable in terms of achieving objectives. Some might even favour Muller and there's little objective reason to disregard people doing so.
There's an absolute top bracket of striker, and the fairest is to say they are both always in it.
Don't forget Henry were same age as Haaland is now when he joined the leauge and Haaland already outscored Henry's two first seasons this season.
Indeed Henry was a more fancy player to watch, but not when he were the same age as Haaland, his best seasons were from after he turned 26 so lets give Haaland some more years before we compair his finesse to Henry/Suarez etc best ever season, in football terms he is still a talent, Suarez were playing in Holland intill 24/25 but many of you compair 31 year old Suarez with 22 year old Haaland. but I agree he will never be a technical player that will dribble 3 guys but I don't think he tries because he is smart and play to his strenghts (but I think his touch and shooting is very technical).
Also Henry were a winger up intill 23 ish so he developed totaly different skills when growing up compair to Haaland that always been a true 9.
Indeed Henry was a more fancy player to watch, but not when he were the same age as Haaland, his best seasons were from after he turned 26 so lets give Haaland some more years before we compair his finesse to Henry/Suarez etc best ever season, in football terms he is still a talent, Suarez were playing in Holland intill 24/25 but many of you compair 31 year old Suarez with 22 year old Haaland. but I agree he will never be a technical player that will dribble 3 guys but I don't think he tries because he is smart and play to his strenghts (but I think his touch and shooting is very technical).
Also Henry were a winger up intill 23 ish so he developed totaly different skills when growing up compair to Haaland that always been a true 9.
I think Haaland will beat it too. To be fair, I don't think you can sum an attacker's contribution in terms of G+A, and I'm sure Henry's impact was more than just his 44 direct goal contribution. Same for Haaland. We don't have a great way of measuring the total impact of an attacker on their team. And i think what happens is many, in lieu of that objective information, go for aesthetics as a proxy. Because Haaland could have 50% more G+A than Henry hypothetically and some would still go for the latter
7 assists this season says otherwise. And these aren't 2-yard passes before a screamer - his linkup play in both Arsenal games was particularly vital to what might end up being title-winning wins.
Nobody is saying he's Messi but his passing and dribbling is perfectly competent and is getting better very quickly. You're being harsh.
Some of the posts at the begining of this thread…..
Not just in the beginning. I looked at some of the posts from January and there were still several posters arguing that Haaland has made City worse. Crazy.
Some of the posts at the begining of this thread…..
Worst ones are the ones claiming he'd have an ego and cause problems in the dressing room, because people were basing those assumptions on absolutely nothing. People thinking he might not suit our style is quite forgivable.
I think there were some issues with the previous style until Guardiola changed to the half-back style and more defensive full-backs/centre-backs. Ever since then they’ve looked as good as ever and he’s been thriving along with the rest of the team. Pep did what a good manager does, adapted the team to his best player and showed more flexibility than he’s often given credit for.
Henry actually assisted even more (winning penalties = transfermarkt assists), making it 24G/25A that season in the PL alone for Arsenal. It was his peak season in numbers and he had a pretty decent crew around him (Pires, Bergkamp, Wiltord, Kanu, Vieira, Gilberto, Ljungberg and Edu among others). He was involved in 55% of Arsenals goals in the games he featured in all comps that season (a feat he never repeated or were close to again).
Compared to Haaland's production it is still a way to go though.
Here's all Henry's season for Arsenal in all comps:
99/00 - 26G/9A in 47 games (3311 minutes) - 127 min/G and 95 min/G+A
00/01 - 22G/11A in 53 games (4069 minutes) - 185 min/G and 123 min/G+A
01/02 - 32G/9A in 49 games (4128 minutes) - 129 min/G and 101 min/G+A
02/03 - 32G/28A in 55 games (4638 minutes) - 145 min/G and 77 min/G+A
03/04 - 39G/15A in 51 games (4459 minutes) - 114 min/G and 83 min/G+A
04/05 - 30G/15A in 42 games (3680 minutes) - 123 min/G and 82 min/G+A
05/06 - 33G/10A in 45 games (3773 minutes) - 114 min/G and 88 min/G+A
06/07 - 12G/6A in 27 games (2220 minutes) - 185 min/G and 123 min/G+A
Compared to Haaland this season:
22/23 - 51G/8A in 45 games (3497 minutes) - 69 min/G and 58 min/G+A
Haaland has since the start of the 18/19 season contributed to 52% of his teams goals in games he has featured (1,26 non penalty G+A/90 avg.).
Henry contributed 48% of his teams goals in games he featured in his 5 peak years (0,931 non penalty G+A/90 avg.)
A lot of people saying on the first page that he was injury prone. Which actually used to be true. I've said time and time again that Pep is managing him the way he is managing him for a reason and yet people still don't get it. You still get the clueless comments about 'Pep holding him back' and how 'he'd have 700 goals by now if he played 90 minutes every game'. Um, no he wouldn't, because if he played 90 minutes every game he would likely have gotten injured and it's tough to score goals from the treatment room. I mean, he's already made more than half of the total appearances that he managed in his entire time at Dortmund (and scored more than half of his total Dortmund haul as well).Some of the posts at the begining of this thread…..
Last edited:
That's quite insane.
Damn Henry was a monster in his prime. Pity his lack of CL/International success in those years kinda drops him down in any all timer lists. Skill-wise(i mean it in how good he was, not in terms of technical skills) he was as good as Dinho. But Dinho did it in CL too(and was way more spectaculat and entertaining) so...
I think if you asked french people now they'd pick Benzema ahead of Henry too
I think if you asked french people now they'd pick Benzema ahead of Henry too
Henry was successful at international level, he was great in Euro 2000 and World Cup 2006.
The only caveat I’d say is that Henry played his peak in a more defensive era, goals per game hit lows of 2.4 per game in the mid-2000s, whereas this season it’s an average of 2.8 per game which is more common in recent seasons.
The league was heavily influenced by the likes of Mourinho, Benitez and Big Sam, even from memory I remember a lot of really cagey Super Sunday big matches where forwards would just get one good chance or barely get a sniff. Bigger games in particular are way more open these days and thus slightly easier to score. I still think Haaland would score more than Henry in that era, but it might be closer in the final stats.