Really hoping he ends up at Real Madrid or Barca in a year or two
Nordic Ghost Yeti (Scandi Carroll) | Haaland at City
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
There's no links because it's a non-starter.
There's absolutely zero reason for him to leave Man City at the moment or his club to even consider letting him go.
he's more relevant in FPL than the PL basically
There's a big difference between willing someone to score and enjoying the talent of a goal retrospectively. Do I enjoy watching his highlights on match of the day? Absolutely because he's top of his game and how can you not enjoy seeing such a player.
If you enjoy football I think it's more odd to not enjoy such talent to be honest. The only ones I wouldn't enjoy watching are in games against us or the likes of that Aguero goal that cost us the title.
They just bought Mbappé and Endrick after winning the CL without a striker. Mbappé, Endrick, Bellingham, Vini, Rodrygo. They’re well and truly stocked there. I don’t think Haaland would go well with the other big characters there either. It is way too much.
Someone mentioned Barcelona, they can’t even register players in time and had to give Gundogan back to City for free because they’re so broke. As much chance of him coming here as going to Barca any time soon.
He's an incredible goalscorer, nobody can deny that. But for me, just like his father, there is nothing likeable about him as a player.
Completely agree
Probably the best goalscorer the Prem has seen.
But nobody is watching his highlight reel when his career is over. Same goal on repeat for hours.
But nobody is watching his highlight reel when his career is over. Same goal on repeat for hours.
No(stalgia).
Imagine peak R9 at city? If he stayed fit he could hit 50 pl goals in a season
If he gets a hat trick in the next game he will have scored as many as your top scorer in the league last season.
He needs one goal in the next game to have scored as many as our top scorer in the league last season.
In 4 games.
4. Games.
He needs one goal in the next game to have scored as many as our top scorer in the league last season.
In 4 games.
4. Games.
Shearer scored 260, Haaland's on 70 so he needs 190 more.
He's 24, so if he scores 27 goals a season for 7 seasons.
Shearer's record is so tough to beat. Kane should've stayed in the PL to beat it.
8 hat-tricks in 69. United have 8 in 479 games (dating back to Boxing Day 2011).
2011 was a prolific year for United hat-tricks so even if he gets 3 more this season we still won't be further back than 2011.
It's got nothing to do with nostalgia.
R9 is head and shoulders above Haaland in every single aspect of the game.
It's not a real record, just because they rebranded the top flight from Division 1 to the "Premier League" in 1992... There isn't suddenly a reset, it's still the same division just with a different name.
Jimmy Greaves is still the man to beat on 357.
They’re different types of strikers in different eras but R9 had more to his game.
And yet here you are.
The PL was a breakout league from the first division so technically they are different.
To be fair, all of us are discussing him. It's hardly a case of "nobody cares". You, yourself, are in a thread discussing him without him having scored 35 hatricks, because he's worth discussing.
He might go down as the greatest scorer in the english top flight (or close to it). And what we are watching is special.
I never get the obsession with hat-tricks in rating a player, one player could score 5 hat-tricks in a season and go missing in 10 other games while another player could score 1 goal in 15 games, I’d rather the player who is being decisive in every game. Cristiano Ronaldo barely scored a hat-trick for United in his first spell but he scored 2 goals very frequently. Overall impact was massive. It’s a nice aside but the number of hat-tricks shouldn’t be used to rate a player.
Denis Law had 6 in a season.In an era when the game was played on a cabbage patch , defenders could and did commit gbh and there were virtual no cameras.
Correct.
We will wait and see how he does in the big games again, to see if there is any improvement there. Scoring goals against the likes of Ipswich and West Ham is something he's already done to a prolific degree, and no one ever said that he can't do that.
IIRC though, he didn't score in the UCL semis, the UCL final, the FA Cup final or the Super Cup. The brilliant cartoonist on IG, Hamid Sahari, regularly depicts Haaland as a small child being carried around by Rudiger. Why has this happened?
But there is a distinction between 42-game campaigns and 38.
The PL is almost exclusively 38-game, sans the first 3 seasons.
The troubling thing is even without him, they’re the best team in the league.
Haaland never gets people off their feet, never elicits more than a simple "goal" from commentators? Is your memory that bad?
(Sorry, couldn’t find a short clip without shit music)
I get that most of his goals look unremarkable, but to say he never does anything impressive is off the mark.
Nobody makes that distinction when tallying league titles.
Which to be fair was exactly the case with Ronaldo.
I agree but Greaves record is unbeatable really.
If Haaland stays at city for 8 more years and no major injuries, he'll beat Shearers.
He might get close to 300.
They do, but it depends what conversation you’re having.
Very much the exception. I never read anybody talking about us having 13 PL’s and seven 1st division titles.
Last edited:
Seven first division titles.
I find it interesting how someone who is clearly not as technically sound as the likes of Henry or Suarez is so deadly at finishing. It just feels like some odd contradiction in which the player is obviously technically good enough to be an elite finisher yet seems limited overall.
Eep, my b.
If Sky had their way, they would.
Man United: 13
115: 8
Chelsea: 5
Arsenal: 3
Blackburn, Leicester, Liverpool: 1
I'm sure he's allowed to give an observation, no?
Would he bother to write up his observations if he gave absolutely no fecks? Would he even bother reading this thread?
Last edited:
When you don't give a feck, you just don't.