Nordic Ghost Yeti (Scandi Carroll) | Haaland at City

[heraklion]

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

I have nothing against City and highly admire many current & past players at City such as KDB, Silva, Gundogan etc. You will very have hard time finding someone here saying things like "KDB is not a great player" just because "he plays for City".

Most people just don't see him as a great footballer, simple as that, in fact an inferior one just like Roy Keane said yesterday, he lacks so much compared to the striker greats, nth tap-in in a game does not cover these flaws. Lately, he is not even able to finish tap-ins which makes him even more of a ghost.

People respond more in this thread negatively because we have a minority trying to portray him as a genius which is laughable.

Many would take former PL players RVN, RVP. Henry, healthy Aguero, Suarez over this tap-in merchant any day let alone Van Basten, R9 etc. over him.

 

[Pickle85]

I have nothing against City and highly admire many current & past players at City such as KDB, Silva, Gundogan etc. You will very have hard time finding someone here saying things like "KDB is not a great player" just because "he plays for City".

Most people just don't see him as a great footballer, simple as that, in fact an inferior one just like Roy Keane said yesterday, he lacks so much compared to the striker greats.

People respond more in this thread negatively because we have a minority trying to portray him as like a genius.

Many would take former PL players RVN, RVP. Henry, healthy Aguero, Suarez over this tap-in merchant any day let alone Van Basten, R9 etc. over him.

And you wonder why people don't take your posts seriously...

 

[Fortitude]

I have nothing against City and highly admire many current & past players at City such as KDB, Silva, Gundogan etc. You will very have hard time finding someone here saying things like "KDB is not a great player" just because "he plays for City".

Most people just don't see him as a great footballer, simple as that, in fact an inferior one just like Roy Keane said yesterday, he lacks so much compared to the striker greats.

People respond more in this thread negatively because we have a minority trying to portray him as a genius which is ridiculous.

Many would take former PL players RVN, RVP. Henry, healthy Aguero, Suarez over this tap-in merchant any day let alone Van Basten, R9 etc. over him.

There’s a clear distinction between City players who get a pass and those who, even before they’ve kicked a ball for them, have half this site baying for them. For whatever reason, Haaland was always the latter. Grealish is another. These players are not given fair assessment because people don’t wish to hear of it, for them specifically.

I’m indifferent to the player and follow his game out of curiosity and a lot of the time what I observe does not match with the roasting he gets in here. He’s simply not very well liked.

Extended to a much grander scale, Neymar had the same, rarely receiving credit for good or great performances but piled in on for decent or poor games.

 

[Alpha 1]

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.

Even if he continues his goalscoring trajectory from last season, the glaring deficiencies in other areas of his game will always weigh him down in the all time ranking of players. As a pure goalscorer, he will be ranked very highly.

There’s a clear distinction between City players who get a pass and those who, even before they’ve kicked a ball for them, have half this site baying for them. For whatever reason, Haaland was always the latter. Grealish is another. These players are not given fair assessment because people don’t wish to hear of it, for them specifically.

I’m indifferent to the player and follow his game out of curiosity and a lot of the time what I observe does not match with the roasting he gets in here. He’s simply not very well liked.

Extended to a much grander scale, Neymar had the same, rarely receiving credit for good or great performances but piled in on for decent or poor games.

With Grealish, it has been due to him not being able to fulfill expectations of a £100M buy. With Haaland, it is because of his average to poor all round game. With Neymar, it is due to his antics on and off the field and the whole issue of diving in Russia 2018 (he was just back from a broken metatarsal and not fully fit).

Rival player's/manager's weaknesses would always be pounced on and ridiculed. Was true when Ruud played for us or during Cristiano's first 3 years for us. I remember rival fans criticising Beckham for he lack of pace and dribbling ability yet the same fans were happy he left because of his importance to us. There is a thread criticising Klopp's lack of trophies yet we are all happy he is leaving.

 

[heraklion]

And you wonder why people don't take your posts seriously...

no, I wonder why you're still here obsessed with me and my posts.
3 posts and just nothing about Haaland, all about me.. you should just go back to your usual thread to harass people for talking negatively about Ronaldo..

I'm not sure this makes you seem as balanced and rational as you seem to think it does.

Seems like solid advice to me.

why people don't take your posts seriously...

yeah, that's why the name of the thread became Nordic "ghost" Haaland as I've been saying for a long time with now tons of posters agreeing with me.

more like nobody knows why you are in this thread. Why exactly are you in this thread if you have nothing to say about Haaland?

 

[heraklion]

There’s a clear distinction between City players who get a pass and those who, even before they’ve kicked a ball for them, have half this site baying for them. For whatever reason, Haaland was always the latter. Grealish is another. These players are not given fair assessment because people don’t wish to hear of it, for them specifically.

I think it's more like, people have seen some of the greatest strikers before and Haaland just does not fit their vision of a great striker including me. He is causing confusion because he looks so average or inferior when he doesn't score, (sometimes even in games he scores like the last United game) but also has very impressive numbers making it complicated for some to properly assess him.

Extended to a much grander scale, Neymar had the same, rarely receiving credit for good or great performances but piled in on for decent or poor games.

Neymar was universally revered as one of the most talented players ever.. received a lot of criticisms for not reaching his full potential due to laziness/low discipline etc.

 

[Fortitude]

I think it's more like, people have seen some of the greatest strikers before and Haaland just does not fit their vision of a great striker including me. He is causing confusion because he looks so average or inferior when he doesn't score, (sometimes even in games he scores like the last United game) but also has very impressive numbers making it complicated for some to properly assess him.

That would be feasible if all the comments were only about football instead of how he looks or what he’s perceived as. He can never just be for some and they don’t care for him to ever simply be.

Neymar was universally revered as one of the most talented players ever.. received a lot of criticisms for not reaching his full potential due to laziness/low discipline etc.

Yeah, you might want to check any Neymar threads on here to see how much he was denigrated.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

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.

Might be to do with the manager involved too though, in terms of passing it sideways. Guardiola looks for that a lot. Also those players had lots of ghost games too. Most of Drogba’s era the big Super Sunday games were versions of yesterday, cagey games where strikers mostly did nothing. Drogba used to destroy Senderos and a few Arsenal players to be fair. But the majority of games against top class defenders were like this, no matter what the striker.

 

[adexkola]

Might be to do with the manager involved too though, in terms of passing it sideways. Guardiola looks for that a lot. Also those players had lots of ghost games too. Most of Drogba’s era the big Super Sunday games were versions of yesterday, cagey games where strikers mostly did nothing. Drogba used to destroy Senderos and a few Arsenal players to be fair. But the majority of games against top class defenders were like this, no matter what the striker.

Must be 2 Drogbas. The mythical one, and the one with the actual goal stats

 

[Gentleman Jim]

From cheat code to donkey in a few short months.
The truth is and always was somewhere in between.

 

[B20]

Fortunately, I've been saying he was overrated even when he was banging them in last season, so I can rest on the laurels of consistency.

Any game he doesn't score in, he's basically dogshit. Weird player whose worth to a team is very hard to gauge, in terms of how much he takes away from the rest of the team in order for him to be the one getting on the end of things.

 

[adexkola]

From cheat code to donkey in a few short months.
The truth is and always was somewhere in between.

Him being chased by top teams shows that the truth, while between, was/is much closer to cheat code than donkey.

 

[TsuWave]

Can’t believe people were mentioning this guy in the same conversations as Mbappe.

Mbappe is so clear. Like, not even in the same solar system

 

[Gehrman]

Can’t believe people were mentioning this guy in the same conversations as Mbappe.

Mbappe is so clear. Like, not even in the same solar system

It's mainly due to Mpabbe staying in ligue 1. I agree though Mpabbe has more to his game.

 

[Fobal]

The criticism is going over the top and BTW as great as Pep is, for me perhaps the best ever, for periods he can also help to create this sort of situations in the way he manages his teams. BTW not a single forward or off mid in this last game played great.

At some point with the heavy rotation, with the team and mostly system above the individual, sooner or later players began to loose confidence, in other situations the system applied does not suit the best traits of some players and so on.
Discussing Pep's methods is lunacy, because the results are there to be seen, but in general he ain't precisly a fella that thrives to put players above his ideas and there are moments, games, periods that this can create a new great role for some, or in the other spectrum dimminish the level of others.

Erling right now, it's not a great player to be surrounded by many, to feel pushed agaisnt the rival's final wall and his mates behind him operating in tight spaces at the pace of a snail.

He still will have that killer instict for second balls, for being in the right spot, but as soon as he gets game after game more uncomfortable, he'll loose his sharpness.
Also by this time regarding Erling, teams know better how he operates.

Of course the Viking should do better in more than one ocasion (it's silly to defend some of his plain and simply mistakes like not hitting the fecking the ball), but also should in prior games Alvarez, Foden, Kevin and such. Their system is so good to mantein their form, that even with many players not precisly in their best form, they still can compete, be compact, win or to teh very least not loose, yet at the same time they are loosing the spark. City sometimes plays so safe that players as diff as Alvarez and Erling, but that both thrive on running to channels and open space does this just receiving a single or couple of balls throw entire matches, so at some point, with all the changes of roles, positions, of the for moments excessive holding of the ball, it begans to play against the best tratis of some of his players and these felals start to loose their sharpness.

This by no means, means that the players should do a lot more, but it's quite more of a mixed bag the whole situation than pointing merely to individuals.

PD: All in all, the excessive praise on Erlin's unique traits from older posts and such, was extremely pushing over the overal talent of the man, yet going to the opposite extreme, it's sillier.

 

[simonhch]

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.

And that’s an excellent point in your last paragraph. So much focus has gone on Arsenal’s ability to neutralise him, but without any real context. The result of their game plan, sitting deep, clogging up the middle, not allowing any space behind; wasn’t just the nullification of Haaland, it came at the expense of nullifying their own attack. That’s a pretty high price to pay in general.

The circumstances in this case, away at City - having lost the previous seven away games to that opposition, and in the midst of a title race - certainly merited it. But if that’s the blue print for every side to follow, one is basically saying, yes, you can neutralise Haaland effectively, but in return you almost forfeit any chance you have of winning the game.

 

[giorno]

Allright yeah, he's having a poor season now. Hopefully it turns disastrous soon

 

[SCP]

He's Inzaghi with better physicals. He will score a billion goals and not one will be remembered

 

[heraklion]

you can neutralise Haaland effectively, but in return you almost forfeit any chance you have of winning the game.

Arsenal's goal was not just to neutralize Haaland but the whole City team, so reducing Arsenal's plan to mostly neutralizing "Haaland" is over-simplification and an excuse for his poor performances. Obviously, your attack will suffer in any game when you're playing against a very strong side, you'll need to compromise more on the attacking side when you're facing KDB, Silva, Foden, Rodri etc., Haaland is just a part of the City machine not the main component.

Top players show up regardless of how much the other team is focused on neutralizing them. I'm pretty sure players like Messi, R9, Maradona, Zidane, Ronaldinho etc. received way more attention from rival teams than Haaland in terms of "neutralization".

 

[MiceOnMeth]

Fortunately, I've been saying he was overrated even when he was banging them in last season, so I can rest on the laurels of consistency.

Any game he doesn't score in, he's basically dogshit. Weird player whose worth to a team is very hard to gauge, in terms of how much he takes away from the rest of the team in order for him to be the one getting on the end of things.

City will win leagues and champions leagues with or without Haaland. He's a great striker who does the hardest thing in football better than anyone currently playing but for a team like City he's not a difference maker

 

[adexkola]

City will win leagues and champions leagues with or without Haaland. He's a great striker who does the hardest thing in football better than anyone currently playing but for a team like City he's not a difference maker

That applies for every player in their squad except maybe Rodri (they've won a league without KdB in case you're wondering)

This doesn't mean much in the way you're implying.

 

[zertz]

Is Haaland being worse the main reason why City are worse this season compared to last season?

 

[Donaldo]

And that’s an excellent point in your last paragraph. So much focus has gone on Arsenal’s ability to neutralise him, but without any real context. The result of their game plan, sitting deep, clogging up the middle, not allowing any space behind; wasn’t just the nullification of Haaland, it came at the expense of nullifying their own attack. That’s a pretty high price to pay in general.

The circumstances in this case, away at City - having lost the previous seven away games to that opposition, and in the midst of a title race - certainly merited it. But if that’s the blue print for every side to follow, one is basically saying, yes, you can neutralise Haaland effectively, but in return you almost forfeit any chance you have of winning the game.

Did you watch the reverse fixture?

 

[giorno]

City will win leagues and champions leagues with or without Haaland.

They have not, in fact, won the CL without Haaland, yet

 

[adexkola]

They have not, in fact, won the CL without Haaland, yet

They did play the semi-final and final with 10 men so technically they did win it without Haaland

 

[chomsky89]

Is Haaland being worse the main reason why City are worse this season compared to last season?

All their defenders except for Ake are "statistically worse" than last season. Diaz is winning almost 20% less of his duels and Walker made more "Big errors" by match week 21 than he did last season. But Haaland has also been out of form, especially post-injury. This is the first season ever that he is underperforming his xG.

 

[heraklion]

Is Haaland being worse the main reason why City are worse this season compared to last season?

No, KDB being injured for 18 games where they lost 17 points, and KDB while still good not being back to his old self.
It also doesn't help when the ghost is breaking "most big chances missed" record in the PL.

 

[adexkola]

Is Haaland being worse the main reason why City are worse this season compared to last season?

No.

Multiple reasons for City's dip in form

1. They really miss Gundogan and Mahrez. Not for the goals; for what they brought to City's general play. Foden/Alvarez/Doku simply don't bring that pausa and precision that City have at their best, and as a result City give away the ball more which leads to more transition opportunities for the opposition
2. KDB and Grealish being injured and out of form, further impacting the above.
3. Walker making more mistakes.
4. Rodri having to facilitate more; he can't do everything in midfield. This impacts them negatively on both ends.
5. No other defender brings what Stones brings. He's injury prone and there is a difference in City's progression when he plays vs when he doesn't.

But this is what you would expect in a transition season. Despite City still being in 3 competitions, this is a transition season for them. They're seeing KDB and Walker decline, they have lost Gundogan and Mahrez, and they have a bunch of players trying to find their place and optimal role.

 

[giorno]

They're coming off a treble. Which they'd been chasing for years. Mentally they're not as sharp

 

[Hammondo]

No.

Multiple reasons for City's dip in form

1. They really miss Gundogan and Mahrez. Not for the goals; for what they brought to City's general play. Foden/Alvarez/Doku simply don't bring that pausa and precision that City have at their best, and as a result City give away the ball more which leads to more transition opportunities for the opposition
2. KDB and Grealish being injured and out of form, further impacting the above.
3. Walker making more mistakes.
4. Rodri having to facilitate more; he can't do everything in midfield. This impacts them negatively on both ends.
5. No other defender brings what Stones brings. He's injury prone and there is a difference in City's progression when he plays vs when he doesn't.

But this is what you would expect in a transition season. Despite City still being in 3 competitions, this is a transition season for them. They're seeing KDB and Walker decline, they have lost Gundogan and Mahrez, and they have a bunch of players trying to find their place and optimal role.

Yea their recent attacking buys are just not that impressive for their general football. Less technical and more physical and 1 dimensional.

 

[Maluco]

Lots of ideas and speculation about mentality and his role in the team, but the fact is, he comes off second best against top defenders in big games, a lot.

Someone like Drogba, who certainly wasn’t prolific, was a much better footballer than Haaland, which meant he could provide that bit of magic in a big game or a split second and decided trophies.

Haaland just doesn’t have the skill or technique to be able to do that. He will make great runs and use his fantastic athleticism to get there first on many occasions, but he isn’t a good enough footballer to regularly be decisive at the very top level.

It seems crazy to say that given his record, but as many others have said, great goalscorer doesn’t always equate to great footballer.

I think Real will be better off with Vini, Mbappe, Bellingham who are all much superior footballers that can make even the very best defender look average at times.

 

[Kwabs]

Is Haaland being worse the main reason why City are worse this season compared to last season?

Well last season he scored a goal every 70 minutes and this season he's down to a goal every 112 minutes (only 18 goals in 24 games, a truly pathetic return ) so maybe that has had an impact on City. But then again, I clearly recall people saying for much of last season that Haaland was the reason City were worse than the season before that because he didn't fit their system. So who the heck knows?

 

[Fortitude]

Lots of ideas and speculation about mentality and his role in the team, but the fact is, he comes off second best against top defenders in big games, a lot.

Someone like Drogba, who certainly wasn’t prolific, was a much better footballer than Haaland, which meant he could provide that bit of magic in a big game or a split second and decided trophies.

Haaland just doesn’t have the skill or technique to be able to do that. He will make great runs and use his fantastic athleticism to get there first on many occasions, but he isn’t a good enough footballer to regularly be decisive at the very top level.

It seems crazy to say that given his record, but as many others have said, great goalscorer doesn’t always equate to great footballer.

I think Real will be better off with Vini, Mbappe, Bellingham who are all much superior footballers that can make even the very best defender look average at times.

Problem with this, and most definitive statements to the negative about Haaland is, at 23, Drogba was a non-entity playing for Le Mans before moving on to Guingamp. Hell, even during his first portion of being in the PL, he was labelled an ineffective donkey and waste of money - Drogba's football that you're speaking of, in relative terms, Haaland has a good 5-years minimum, to reach.

People are using entire careers as detriment against Haaland, that is to say, the peak of players of an entire catalogue, of course results will be tilted, how can they not be? Contextually, comparing Haaland to the vast majority of strikers, great or even all-time, he is currently top percentile and it doesn't really matter what they went on to do at much older ages as he has that to come yet.

The question of whether his body will hold up and if his progress will be linear is valid, but we can't possibly know that and can only deal with what is presented and that is a very young striker who is well ahead of the curve of most who went on to be true greats of the game.

 

[Maluco]

Problem with this, and most definitive statements to the negative about Haaland is, at 23, Drogba was a non-entity playing for Le Mans before moving on to Guingamp. Hell, even during his first portion of being in the PL, he was labelled an ineffective donkey and waste of money - Drogba's football that you're speaking of, in relative terms, Haaland has a good 5-years minimum, to reach.

People are using entire careers as detriment against Haaland, that is to say, the peak of players of an entire catalogue, of course results will be tilted, how can they not be? Contextually, comparing Haaland to the vast majority of strikers, great or even all-time, he is currently top percentile and it doesn't really matter what they went on to do at much older ages as he has that to come yet.

The question of whether his body will hold up and if his progress will be linear is valid, but we can't possibly know that and can only deal with what is presented and that is a very young striker who is well ahead of the curve of most who went on to be true greats of the game.

You can still have a good idea based on his touch and contribution to games. It would take a massive leap in his overall game.

Possible, as you say, but he has been playing at the top level for a long time now and there is no sign of improvements to his overall game.

 

[Fortitude]

You can still have a good idea based on his touch and contribution to games. It would take a massive leap in his overall game.

Possible, as you say, but he has been playing at the top level for a long time now and there is no sign of improvements to his overall game.

Drogba was a mess when he got to the PL. I don't think many backed him to become the player he did; it's one of the most meteoric rises of performance level I know of. I'm not saying Haaland is capable of the same, but that whatever he might max out as could prove to be a very useful component in his game. Funnily enough, Henry would be another meteoric rise for me; the Monaco and Juve player never hinted at becoming such a sublime goalscorer with all that finesse and composure and Wenger was hailed as a true genius in converting him from something quite good into something astonishing domestically.

 

[hasanejaz88]

To be fair this is a bit of a consistent issue for Haaland in bigger games.

That's not true. He was scoring consistently against Bayern for Dortmund, 5 goals in 7 games. Similarly he had an incredible record in the UCL for them, goals against Napoli, Sevilla and PSG while against Bayern for City.

He's come up with goals against the bigger teams in England as well (20 in 32 matches v Bayern, Chelsea, Liverpool, United, Arsenal and Spurs). Is his record against them as good as it is against other teams? Ofcourse not, but then name me one striker who has a better record against the top teams versus everyone else. From Aguero I see he had 54 goals in 98 matches v the same clubs minus Bayern.

Drogba was a mess when he got to the PL. I don't think many backed him to become the player he did; it's one of the most meteoric rises of performance level I know of. I'm not saying Haaland is capable of the same, but that whatever he might max out as could prove to be a very useful component in his game. Funnily enough, Henry would be another meteoric rise for me; the Monaco and Juve player never hinted at becoming such a sublime goalscorer with all that finesse and composure and Wenger was hailed as a true genius in converting him from something quite good into something astonishing domestically.

Completely agree. People are revising history if they're saying Drogba was great when he came into the league. I specifically remember he was bring slagged off in his first two seasons despite Chelsea walking the league. The 06-07 season was his breakout in terms of having a first great season for Chelsea, for the first two he struggled a lot. He ofcourse became a great striker after that.

 

[Maluco]

Drogba was a mess when he got to the PL. I don't think many backed him to become the player he did; it's one of the most meteoric rises of performance level I know of. I'm not saying Haaland is capable of the same, but that whatever he might max out as could prove to be a very useful component in his game. Funnily enough, Henry would be another meteoric rise for me; the Monaco and Juve player never hinted at becoming such a sublime goalscorer with all that finesse and composure and Wenger was hailed as a true genius in converting him from something quite good into something astonishing domestically.

I agree, football can change very quickly! But in both those cases, the players improved very quickly with game time at the top level. Haaland has had several seasons of top level football now and there is no sign that he could develop those aspects of his game.

It could happen, of course, but his career, in terms of minutes at the top table, is far more advanced than Drogba or Henry at the same age.

 

[KiD MoYeS]

That's not true. He was scoring consistently against Bayern for Dortmund, 5 goals in 7 games. Similarly he had an incredible record in the UCL for them, goals against Napoli, Sevilla and PSG while against Bayern for City.

He's come up with goals against the bigger teams in England as well (20 in 32 matches v Bayern, Chelsea, Liverpool, United, Arsenal and Spurs). Is his record against them as good as it is against other teams? Ofcourse not, but then name me one striker who has a better record against the top teams versus everyone else. From Aguero I see he had 54 goals in 98 matches v the same clubs minus Bayern.

His record in Germany isn't overly relevant in my opinion. Plenty of players have performed in Germany and struggled in England, which is generally a stronger league.

Also, he filled his boots against a poor Man Utd and Chelsea side so his goal record against bigger sides can be considered somewhat skewed. I'm pretty sure he is yet to score in a semi-final or final for a team that has won the treble .

I don't think it is unfair to point out he has definitely been less effective in the bigger moments and games for Man City. He is a phenomenal goalscorer but it is an aspect of his game, at least right now, that is worth discussing.

 

[Fortitude]

I agree, football can change very quickly! But in both those cases, the players improved very quickly with game time at the top level. Haaland has had several seasons of top level football now and there is no sign that he could develop those aspects of his game.

It could happen, of course, but his career, in terms of minutes at the top table, is far more advanced than Drogba or Henry at the same age.

As far as I'm aware, this is the first 'real' adversity of his entire career? The first time where he looks 'normal', that is to say, not like some kind of prototype from the future. How much of that is down to injuries and growing pains compared to being "found out", I cannot say, but this is the first season he has been looked upon as truly fallible as opposed to someone who hasn't done so well solely in the biggest games.

If this turns out to be his bottom level, when then, he's assured of being something very special as a goalscorer, if not, and he levels out where he is, then the criticisms and assessments of him will change, but for now, there's really not enough sample size to write him off or mark him down, outside of saying he's not the [goalscoring] messiah, anyway.

I'd just err on the side of caution in terms of absolutes for a 23-year old. Definitive notions of this is all he is and all he ever will be are short-sighted, especially so when his trajectory and standing is above so many who went on to be special with the exact starting point of his age now.

He doesn't look like he'll ever have silken touches and ability, but he can be a couple of rungs down from that and still be devastatingly effective against all and sundry. A big part of greatness is waiting to see how adversity is handled and what the player works on and comes back with. This is a chapter in Haaland's story, but at 23, the book's not even out of the first quarter!

 

[adexkola]

Yea their recent attacking buys are just not that impressive for their general football. Less technical and more physical and 1 dimensional.

Yeah. Doku, Alvarez, Nunes, Kovacic. More physical than technical.

Remains to be seen whether they are more cohesive as an attacking unit next season, or Pep just goes full Pulis. But as of now they are in-between, and their general play is suffering for it. And Haaland is being impacted by that.

Now, it's lazier and easier to say, "Haaland introduced. City worse. Haaland bad striker. Drogba do better".