Yeah, I was being sarcastic. Agree, someone like Kane is clearly a more well-rounded forward.
Nordic Ghost Yeti (Scandi Carroll) | Haaland at City
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Yeah, I was being sarcastic. Agree, someone like Kane is clearly a more well-rounded forward.
Nothing, I was just the first person to have said he was a big time ghost, not a Ballon D'or worthy player, nothing more than an average player when he doesn't score in this thread... as you can see here, many feel the same way as I do.
To me, it's crazy to hype up such a limited player just because of the "number of goals" which became like the de-facto standard in evaluating a player's worth in this social media age which I dislike.... and some people in this thread just don't like to hear when one says he is not that special & seems to take it personal like yourself.
Last edited:
He's Inzaghi with better physicals. He will score a billion goals and not one will be remembered
That’s a bit much. He’s averaged 1 goal a game essentially since he started playing at senior level, that’s pretty freakish, but he’s still nowhere near the best player in the world, that’s for sure.
So much hyperbole in here. Which is not surprising.
Haaland is quite obviously a brilliant footballer. His record speaks for itself. But he’s not infallible. Like every footballer, he’s more suited to some games than others. Better at some things than others. Today City probably would’ve been better off playing Alvarez. For his movement and technical ability.
They were faced with an opponent who dug in and defended in numbers and incredibly well. City tried to choke the life out of them with relentless possession and probing. Often slow and methodical. That’s not an environment suited to Haaland. There was no space behind, as Arsenal sat so deep, and they clogged up the middle where he plays. City would’ve been better off with a false nine to give them an extra option in possession and make him harder to track for opposing CBs.
So yes, this wasn’t his day. It wasn’t his game. It showed how limited he is in the build up phase of the game. That doesn’t normally hurt him or City too much, but today it did. Why? Because like nearly every other player in the world, he’s not a complete footballer. He’s isn’t brilliant at everything. What he is brilliant at, can be devastatingly effective, but it’s not for every occasion.
He’s not as good as people have often made out, but the idea he’s now shit, is even more ridiculous. He’s just a brilliant striker, who has limitations. There’s still no team in the world that wouldn’t take him.
And this is coming from someone who cannot stand the guy.
Haaland is quite obviously a brilliant footballer. His record speaks for itself. But he’s not infallible. Like every footballer, he’s more suited to some games than others. Better at some things than others. Today City probably would’ve been better off playing Alvarez. For his movement and technical ability.
They were faced with an opponent who dug in and defended in numbers and incredibly well. City tried to choke the life out of them with relentless possession and probing. Often slow and methodical. That’s not an environment suited to Haaland. There was no space behind, as Arsenal sat so deep, and they clogged up the middle where he plays. City would’ve been better off with a false nine to give them an extra option in possession and make him harder to track for opposing CBs.
So yes, this wasn’t his day. It wasn’t his game. It showed how limited he is in the build up phase of the game. That doesn’t normally hurt him or City too much, but today it did. Why? Because like nearly every other player in the world, he’s not a complete footballer. He’s isn’t brilliant at everything. What he is brilliant at, can be devastatingly effective, but it’s not for every occasion.
He’s not as good as people have often made out, but the idea he’s now shit, is even more ridiculous. He’s just a brilliant striker, who has limitations. There’s still no team in the world that wouldn’t take him.
And this is coming from someone who cannot stand the guy.
That’s not good from him either but you don’t have to resort to personal insults especially still being a newbie as some mods are strict. Taking from experience
Not that fussed either way just curious as to why you so obviously hate him? Is it because you’re terrified he may challenge your ‘precious’ Messi?
Say what you like, but there’s no denying his goal tally both before and since he joined City.
Nah I highly rate his goalscoring which is a skill in itself. Just not a fan of his style of football.
Imagine how shite he would look with our lack of service though.
Weirdly enough I think he would still thrive even here, our matches are often very chaotic/end to end, that’s an environment he thrives in, and a player like Bruno despite whatever faults he has is capable of feeding someone with the extreme physical gifts and positional sense of Haaland’s calibre.
Pretty much saw that today, had 1 good chance.
Fair enough. The way city play though they need an Haaland type rather than a Kane type. 90% of there goals come from cut backs where they need the ST in the middle of the penalty area.
It is just unfortunate that the games he is suited to are the ones his team would have easily won without him anyway, albeit with a lower scoreline.
Those are pretty broad strokes you are painting with there. He scored 52 goals in 53 games in a treble winning season. His first at the club. I’m fairly sure he did more than score goals in games they would’ve won anyway.
You are making me feel dirty, in forcing me to defend Haaland. But I have to, in the face of some fairly ridiculous takes in here. As always; the truth is much more nuanced. People so often confuse patterns for absolutes; or worse, use patterns to make absolute statements that fit whatever agenda they are pushing.
I’m just more interested in reality, than I am creating or “proving” a narrative.
Anonymous today and again proving why we won't have any poacher winning the highest accolades anytime soon. Too little impact, you get one chance a game and if you miss even 20% of those you're just disappointing. Haaland is a great player but nowhere near discussion about the top3 worldwide
Understandable, since he's being compared against strikers who were not only strikers, but world class midfielders, who when faced with deep blocks and excellent defenders, threw multiple step overs, passed through balls to theirselves before scoring thunderbolts from outside the box in every "big game" they played
*definition of big game varies depending on who the conversation is about
Not sure why the discord has shifted to him not deserving the Balon d'Or based on his current season.
Last season he broke the Premier League scoring record, was the top scorer in Europe and won the treble*. He deserved it for that.
Last season he broke the Premier League scoring record, was the top scorer in Europe and won the treble*. He deserved it for that.
Last edited by a moderator:
he wasn't even City's the best player last season (when you were definitely the best team around), so I don't think it makes any sense to go "he deserved to win". As if "deserved" meant anything in football, anyway
I'm pretty sure this is why he was bought, against teams who park the bus and are difficult to break down, a huge physical player to be the target. He was useless.
there’s this thing called golden boot. I believe it’s awarded to the player with most goals.
No he didn't. Even if Messi wasn't around he wouldn't deserve it. Ballon D'or isn't golden boot.
That is not a big chance, which is why he tried to give it to Diaz. Very bad angle, and the goalkeeper is less than 1 meter away. The ball is bouncing as well.
If he shoots it hits the keeper 98/100 times.
This. Last season everyone was falling all over themselves to praise him, now he's a bum? Clearly it's not that black and white. I'm not his biggest fan because I like footballers, not just poachers. But his scoring record is phenomenal, and that's the case for every team he plays for, not just City.
He's still a young player as well, he can improve in the areas where he is weak. I will say though that the 'ghost' thing, whilst harsh, is not completely unwarranted. I feel that even last season, when he was really humming, he kind of vanished towards the business end of the campaign. But as I said, he is young and can still change a lot of these narratives.
This a good post. I think part of today's anonymous performance is that Arteta actually had a good plan to neutralize him and the players executed it very well (not something I've said much about Arsenal in the last 20 years). Part of it is that he seems like a player that should excel in a match like today but the plan of choking out his service and constantly challenging him physically paid off well. Like @Fortitude alluded to with his comparison with van Basten, you'd need someone with that skill set to overcome a defensive set up performed and Haaland lacks that type of game that van Basten had.
Like you said, he is a brilliant striker, overrated by some and underrated by others and today just showed how a well executed plan can neutralize him, although the flip side to that good defensive plan is that Arsenal didn't look great offensively either.
There was a moment yesterday where he had the ball on the edge of our box with some space at hand (because we were refusing to clear our lines for the 100th time), and I remember thinking "if that's Drogba/Costa/Aguero they bury this", and Haaland just sort of turned away and passed sideways. Not representative of him as a player overall but I think over the course of 90 minutes against Arsenal, there should be some activity that justifies your presence on the pitch.
He's a brilliant number 9 but an average footballer.
And that's fine, not everyone has to be able to play 7 different positions, or score a goal only peak Maradona could score every weekend.
He's not on Mbappe's level but he'll score as many goals as him throughout his career. And probably win as many trophies. So fair play to him.
And that's fine, not everyone has to be able to play 7 different positions, or score a goal only peak Maradona could score every weekend.
He's not on Mbappe's level but he'll score as many goals as him throughout his career. And probably win as many trophies. So fair play to him.
He's one major injury (hope he doesn't) away from becoming Andy Carroll at his finest.
Seems like solid advice to me.
Ridiculed when I said I thought he would make City worse by their reliance on him. He's a top goalscorer but is a horrible footballer.
Think he'll be sold in a year or two.
Think he'll be sold in a year or two.
Wouldn’t mind this ghost at Utd and doubt too many would be arguing otherwise if in some parallel universe we managed to sign him from citeh
If they give you ten goals less but offer 8 assists more then it's not much of an issue. Likewise goals can attributed more value depending on when they're scored.
So like, if a player scores 30 goals in a season like say Luis Suarez who scored 35% of those 30 goals across three games, or Berbatov who scored 20 odd goals but 40% came in two games, that doesn't really benefit the team as much. It masks a lot of games without goals.
So I always look at how many of those goals are winners, taking the lead or open the scoring when appraising a striker.
If your striker bangs in a brace when you're 3-0 up, I'd assign those goals "less value" than if he'd scored the first 2. Especially when understanding the value and how much those goals are worth.
Nah, we'd be moaning like when we had the literal greatest goalscorer of all time playing for us 18 months ago.
He wouldn't work or press and we'd spam aimless crosses at him.
We do that a lot, just we suck at it.
Looking at his goals scored this season, Haaland hasn't actually been doing a lot of stat padding. The only real example is him getting five goals vs. Luton in the cup, but even there they needed three to win it, so almost all the goals were meaningful.
It was worse last year where he got 5 goals in a 7-0 win, twice got 3 in a 6-0 win, etc.
When it comes to his transfer, it seemed like there was more going on that doing the very best for the tactical set-up of the team. I'm sure it was also partially about Man City wanting to show, that they could get the hottest prospect on the market and really be one of the big boys.
Wasn't pointed at Halaand per se but just that "oh he scored 36 last year" if he'd banged in half of those across three games, it's less impressive.
It's why Dimi's season isn't rated as highly because he got nearly half of his goals in 2 games.
Yeah, I agree with the general principle of course. The Berbatov season is a great example of that. 8 out of 20 league goals were largely meaningless, and he didn't manage to score in Europe or the FA Cup either.
Gerd Muller played for us?
...okay?
Yeh, Gabriel and Saliba did very well and physically more than matched Haaland. A big difference from having Holding there last season.
Two things working against Haaland:
- He plays for City, thus, objectivity is thrown out with the bathwater for a lot of people
- He's a victim of his own success and initial career trajectory
The former is why this thread is full of people who pounce on his every poor game. Rightly or wrongly, they are not here to objectively discuss the player, only revel in any pitfalls or demise.
The latter is a bigger issue in many ways. Haaland burst onto the big stage looking like a player who could only be compared to not only all-time greats, but players with longstanding records that are so out there, most have never even heard of the players. There was a period last season where he was following the trajectory of Dixie Dean's all-time English top division goalscoring record, set in the 1930's(!) FFS. This is indisputable. It was fact for a period of time. It wasn't a case of whether he would be the top-scorer; there was a point where he had people wondering if Dean's record itself was feasible. Everything he touched was Midas, and that kind of finishing could not be compared to anything but the most elite finishers football has witnessed.
Because of the above, Haaland's bar was never set to that of contemporary football outside of They Who Shall Not Be Named freaks, who themselves broke what the accepted structure and framework for goalscoring was. When you are held to that kind of scrutiny, there is nowhere for you to go - you either maintain, and join the annuls of the true great ones, or, you decline, even slightly, which brings with it a heap of unwarranted scrutiny and criticism. The problem is the clamour to force Haaland into a box. He has to be this or that defined thing and anything either side of the preset parameters is simply unacceptable. It's not enough for him to be the league top scorer nor to remain a potent, world class striker over the course of a season - he must maintain the status quo or be deemed a failure... the guy is 23-years old(!) If I drew up a list of true all-time great strikers who had barely even got started at the age Haaland is now there might be better perspective on what he's doing and indeed, what he has done to this point in time. The player deemed the best the PL has ever seen hadn't even picked up his PL-defining form at that age, in fact, he'd not long got to the league.
Perspective is vital, and unless the remit is comparison to all-time greats, and all-time greats alone, the scrutiny Haaland receives, outside of playing for a traditional rival, is bizarre and completely out of wack with reality. My inkling is that people aren't as absent as to need this pointing out, more I'd say they simply don't care. Until he moves from City, they won't view him objectively.
Personally, what shall be interesting to determine is whether this is his bottom level or if it's his mean from now on. If it's the former, that's pretty incredible. If it's the latter, then the all-time comparisons will be a lot more muted despite him still being on course to cause some kind of ripples in the scoring charts. For myself, I'm surprised by a few things as his finishing isn't as consummate as I thought and he does still have things to work on purely in terms of that. To his whole game, I think people are way OTT in their statements about him contributing nothing. He tries to hard in some aspects and looks awkward and gangly, but his game isn't this calamity some make out.
- He plays for City, thus, objectivity is thrown out with the bathwater for a lot of people
- He's a victim of his own success and initial career trajectory
The former is why this thread is full of people who pounce on his every poor game. Rightly or wrongly, they are not here to objectively discuss the player, only revel in any pitfalls or demise.
The latter is a bigger issue in many ways. Haaland burst onto the big stage looking like a player who could only be compared to not only all-time greats, but players with longstanding records that are so out there, most have never even heard of the players. There was a period last season where he was following the trajectory of Dixie Dean's all-time English top division goalscoring record, set in the 1930's(!) FFS. This is indisputable. It was fact for a period of time. It wasn't a case of whether he would be the top-scorer; there was a point where he had people wondering if Dean's record itself was feasible. Everything he touched was Midas, and that kind of finishing could not be compared to anything but the most elite finishers football has witnessed.
Because of the above, Haaland's bar was never set to that of contemporary football outside of They Who Shall Not Be Named freaks, who themselves broke what the accepted structure and framework for goalscoring was. When you are held to that kind of scrutiny, there is nowhere for you to go - you either maintain, and join the annuls of the true great ones, or, you decline, even slightly, which brings with it a heap of unwarranted scrutiny and criticism. The problem is the clamour to force Haaland into a box. He has to be this or that defined thing and anything either side of the preset parameters is simply unacceptable. It's not enough for him to be the league top scorer nor to remain a potent, world class striker over the course of a season - he must maintain the status quo or be deemed a failure... the guy is 23-years old(!) If I drew up a list of true all-time great strikers who had barely even got started at the age Haaland is now there might be better perspective on what he's doing and indeed, what he has done to this point in time. The player deemed the best the PL has ever seen hadn't even picked up his PL-defining form at that age, in fact, he'd not long got to the league.
Perspective is vital, and unless the remit is comparison to all-time greats, and all-time greats alone, the scrutiny Haaland receives, outside of playing for a traditional rival, is bizarre and completely out of wack with reality. My inkling is that people aren't as absent as to need this pointing out, more I'd say they simply don't care. Until he moves from City, they won't view him objectively.
Personally, what shall be interesting to determine is whether this is his bottom level or if it's his mean from now on. If it's the former, that's pretty incredible. If it's the latter, then the all-time comparisons will be a lot more muted despite him still being on course to cause some kind of ripples in the scoring charts. For myself, I'm surprised by a few things as his finishing isn't as consummate as I thought and he does still have things to work on purely in terms of that. To his whole game, I think people are way OTT in their statements about him contributing nothing. He tries to hard in some aspects and looks awkward and gangly, but his game isn't this calamity some make out.