Nordic Ghost Yeti (Scandi Carroll) | Haaland at City

giorno said:
No, it's not viewed the same way because the guy has 9 goals in 5 games for the best attack in the league....there is simply no amouny of "problems" a player can create that he can't solve by averaging 2 goals per game....
Click to expand...
So he carries on scoring two a game and all is good? What if reasonable people think thats unsustainable? Ronaldo was getting shit on even when he had a goal per game in the CL and dragged us through the group stages on his own so it’s not as simple as if he scores enough then the criticism become invalid. Ronaldo was equalising v Chelsea, hat tricks to beat Norwich, Spurs, scored v Arsenal and gave a pen to Bruno which he probably would have scored himself. People forget Ronaldo himself got two hat tricks two consecutive starts last season.
This is what interests me, a lot of posts similar to yours view my point as a negative. I’m basically asking was last years criticisms bullshit simply because City have a player in that same ilk. I’m more or less saying people went overboard last season more than Haaland is causing all these problems. Imo the Norwegian is proof positive that pundits and fans fall for narratives and accept them as fact then they drop that line of thought for the next narrative.
 
Anderson_7_ said:
This thread is nauseating to read. So many of our fans gleefully counting goals of a player who openly hates our club.

All this hype and hysteria around Haaland is what happens when you let stats rule your way of thinking. Haaland is an average, one-dimensional player and most of his goals are either simple tap-ins or 1-1 with the keeper. I think everyone who has actually watched him play should come to this same conclusion. He's not a game changer or anything special. He's not even the best youngster in that City team (Alvarez is) and yet you have people comparing him to prime Ronaldo and Messi. He shouldn't even be compared to Mbappe, let alone legends. Please get serious!
Click to expand...

If he is average/not a game changer/anything special, why doesn't every striker have a goal record like his?
 
cyberman said:
He’s a weird one. He offers the same kind of problems Ronaldo did for us but because he isn’t 37 it’s not viewed the same way
Click to expand...

I’d say the one key difference is that Haaland occupies defences in a way that Ronaldo doesn’t. So even when he’s not participating in the build up he is actually making things easier for his team mates. Against Ronaldo teams can squeeze up against us and they know he won’t threaten in behind, he won’t be a focal point in attack to launch counter attacks. He makes us very vulnerable not just because he does no defensive work off the ball, he because he does so little offensive work off it too.

It is obviously the case that #9s who don’t participate at all in the build up or defensive game create problems that other players have to compensate for. But if you’re that prolific, that consistently, then it’s worth compensating for that. Ronaldo was not consistently creating or finishing chances in the way that Haaland is. There were many games with no goals, no other meaningful contributions, and little reason for him to be out there. Haaland can create many more chances for himself.

A better comparison is with someone like Mario Gomez at his peak, not Ronaldo long past his best. When Gomez was scoring at a ridiculous rate that made it impossible for Bayern to drop him. But when he was less clinical and getting fewer chances for himself, the balance shifted to him being more of a problem than a solution. He always scored a lot of goals but it was only when he was firing on all cylinders that he could play at that elite level. Ronaldo is more like that Gomez. He doesn’t compare to Haaland right now at all.
 
horsechoker said:
He's top quality but the reaction has been ott. Let's not forget this city team have won titles without a recognised striker.
Click to expand...

Yeah well, you keep missing the point which is that he didn't start playing football in August this year. And what we're seeing so far in the PL just folds neatly into everything he's already been doing for several seasons. So, when you have a player who's been putting them away at a rate of roughly one per game at every level he's played, was the CL top scorer at age 20 and comes in scoring 9 goals in 5 PL games, what exactly would you consider a more reasonable reaction?
 
AbusementPark said:
He seems to be the missing piece for City, they could run away with everything this season, if he stays as injury free as possible. The chances they create are unreal and this guy is always in the right place to finish them off.
Click to expand...
balaks said:
Gotta say I badly misjudged his impact and had expected him to struggle this season. Clearly he is the real deal and an incredible striker.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately both of the above posts are right on the money.

The main thing I've noticed about Haaland is that he's just stronger than all the central defenders he's coming up against.

Centre halves are used to bullying centre forwards with their bulk and power, which has levelled up the playing field in the recent past as the forwards just tend to be that much better at playing football.....

Thing is, no one can knock Haaland off the ball. In fact, that fecker will more than likely knock the galoot defenders off the ball!

The age of the small tricky forward might be going out of vogue.

Mitrovic at Fulham appears to have found his mojo this season although he has nowhere near Haalands pace.

It will also be interesting to see how Núñez develops at Liverpool.

He looks like Bambi on ice a lot of the time, and definitely lacks Haaland's composure in front of goal and he's not as bulky, but he definitely gets himself into the right areas and has real pace.

Overall though Haaland is different gravy.....with a shedload of beef to go alongside!
 
Brwned said:
Do you think it suggests that your impression of how easy the Bundesliga is was a little off-base? People talked about the PL as if it was in a different category altogether, and yet Haaland doesn’t notice the difference at all…
Click to expand...

No my opinion of the Bundesliga is the same, my opinion of the player however has changed.
 
balaks said:
No my opinion of the Bundesliga is the same, my opinion of the player however has changed.
Click to expand...

Shouldn’t he have been scoring at a much higher rate in the Bundesliga for it to be so much worse than the PL?
 
Brwned said:
I’d say the one key difference is that Haaland occupies defences in a way that Ronaldo doesn’t. So even when he’s not participating in the build up he is actually making things easier for his team mates. Against Ronaldo teams can squeeze up against us and they know he won’t threaten in behind, he won’t be a focal point in attack to launch counter attacks. He makes us very vulnerable not just because he does no defensive work off the ball, he because he does so little offensive work off it too.

It is obviously the case that #9s who don’t participate at all in the build up or defensive game create problems that other players have to compensate for. But if you’re that prolific, that consistently, then it’s worth compensating for that. Ronaldo was not consistently creating or finishing chances in the way that Haaland is. There were many games with no goals, no other meaningful contributions, and little reason for him to be out there. Haaland can create many more chances for himself.

A better comparison is with someone like Mario Gomez at his peak, not Ronaldo long past his best. When Gomez was scoring at a ridiculous rate that made it impossible for Bayern to drop him. But when he was less clinical and getting fewer chances for himself, the balance shifted to him being more of a problem than a solution. He always scored a lot of goals but it was only when he was firing on all cylinders that he could play at that elite level. Ronaldo is more like that Gomez. He doesn’t compare to Haaland right now at all.
Click to expand...

You see, I’m not really talking about Haaland v Ronaldo, it’s more Haaland v last seasons narrative. Is he pressing high from the front? Is he a trigger for the press? Is he linking play and playing in his teammates to the final third? Is he involved enough outside of the box?
He may do other things well but I was repeatedly told these were the basic fundamentals of modern football, that scoring goals just wasn’t enough anymore. Anything else and a top side can’t operate at a top level.
I’m looking at Haaland and I don’t see his teammates or his side suffering. I don’t even think it’s 9 in 5 that makes up the difference since he just stat padded v Forest. Say he got 0 last night, would people be saying he was a problem with 6 in 5? I suppose the better way of asking that is pre Forest match he had 6 in 4 which isn’t obscene. He still wasn’t seen as a problem so it’s not a scary goal rate that’s the difference here.
 
Anderson_7_ said:
This thread is nauseating to read. So many of our fans gleefully counting goals of a player who openly hates our club.

All this hype and hysteria around Haaland is what happens when you let stats rule your way of thinking. Haaland is an average, one-dimensional player and most of his goals are either simple tap-ins or 1-1 with the keeper. I think everyone who has actually watched him play should come to this same conclusion. He's not a game changer or anything special. He's not even the best youngster in that City team (Alvarez is) and yet you have people comparing him to prime Ronaldo and Messi. He shouldn't even be compared to Mbappe, let alone legends. Please get serious!
Click to expand...
He’s also a year younger than Alvarez.
But let’s be honest. You’re a troll. A man city fan in disguise trying to have a laugh by getting a few reactions.

You literally predicted he would score under 10 goals. He’s on 9 after 5 games. You don’t have a leg to stand on.
 
cyberman said:
You see, I’m not really talking about Haaland v Ronaldo, it’s more Haaland v last seasons narrative. Is he pressing high from the front? Is he a trigger for the press? Is he linking play and playing in his teammates to the final third? Is he involved enough outside of the box?
He may do other things well but I was repeatedly told these were the basic fundamentals of modern football, that scoring goals just wasn’t enough anymore. Anything else and a top side can’t operate at a top level.
I’m looking at Haaland and I don’t see his teammates or his side suffering. I don’t even think it’s 9 in 5 that makes up the difference since he just stat padded v Forest. Say he got 0 last night, would people be saying he was a problem with 6 in 5? I suppose the better way of asking that is pre Forest match he had 6 in 4 which isn’t obscene. He still wasn’t seen as a problem so it’s not a scary goal rate that’s the difference here.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it’s the scary goal rate but it’s the consistency of the goals. Most people wouldn’t have been saying it was a problem if he was scoring over a goal a game. It got brought up with Ronaldo because he was scoring closer to a goal every two games. Like Mario Gomez when he was worth putting up with for Bayern, vs. when he wasn’t. I don’t know why you’re suggesting that’s a small distinction.

People will definitely ask those questions of Haaland in the big games. People were asking those questions of Haaland after his first few games. It’s just the volume of goals drowned out those criticisms. That would have happened with Ronaldo too. He never got close to that level of productivity. It’s got nothing to do with his age or some agenda against him.
 
Brwned said:
Shouldn’t he have been scoring at a much higher rate in the Bundesliga for it to be so much worse than the PL?
Click to expand...

I don't think looking at 1 player is a good way to judge an entire league. There are so many factors, he is now playing in the best team in the league when he wasn't at Germany for example. Just looking at one player you could conversely say it has been proven by Sancho, Keita ect. All have different circumstances though including Haaland.
 
cyberman said:
You see, I’m not really talking about Haaland v Ronaldo, it’s more Haaland v last seasons narrative. Is he pressing high from the front? Is he a trigger for the press? Is he linking play and playing in his teammates to the final third? Is he involved enough outside of the box?
He may do other things well but I was repeatedly told these were the basic fundamentals of modern football, that scoring goals just wasn’t enough anymore. Anything else and a top side can’t operate at a top level.
I’m looking at Haaland and I don’t see his teammates or his side suffering. I don’t even think it’s 9 in 5 that makes up the difference since he just stat padded v Forest. Say he got 0 last night, would people be saying he was a problem with 6 in 5? I suppose the better way of asking that is pre Forest match he had 6 in 4 which isn’t obscene. He still wasn’t seen as a problem so it’s not a scary goal rate that’s the difference here.
Click to expand...

Honestly a lot of it is just Manchester United fans have somehow convinced themselves every other club in the world has these perfect footballers, while we're the only ones who have players with flaws. It's fecking bullshit.

The reason you have a coach in the first place is to hide the flaws of your players, and let them express their strengths. We've had shockingly poor coaches for most of the last 10 years which has meant even good players at the club have looked poor. While players of a similar quality have not only gone onto thrive, but also improve under coaches who can teach them how to improve their weaknesses. But at Manchester United a manager's job is apparently just to buy players, and select the team on matchdays.

The fact that Sancho looks so poor here, while Haaland has hit the ground running should be a massive slap in the face of anyone who watches Manchester United.
 
AbusementPark said:
He seems to be the missing piece for City, they could run away with everything this season, if he stays as injury free as possible. The chances they create are unreal and this guy is always in the right place to finish them off.
Click to expand...
Possibly, he could also be a net negative in big (particularly champions league) games as he’s something of a passenger in open play.

Ok I’m reaching because we need to hold on to something.
 
Brwned said:
I don’t think it’s the scary goal rate but it’s the consistency of the goals. Most people wouldn’t have been saying it was a problem if he was scoring over a goal a game. It got brought up with Ronaldo because he was scoring closer to a goal every two games. Like Mario Gomez when he was worth putting up with for Bayern, vs. when he wasn’t. I don’t know why you’re suggesting that’s a small distinction.

People will definitely ask those questions of Haaland in the big games. People were asking those questions of Haaland after his first few games. It’s just the volume of goals drowned out those criticisms. That would have happened with Ronaldo too. He never got close to that level of productivity. It’s got nothing to do with his age or some agenda against him.
Click to expand...
I dunno, he was hunting Salah down towards the end of last season there. 25 goals or whatever he ended up with is still a lot of goals. Relatively speaking he did score an enormous amount of goals for us because we were a 7th placed team and literally nobody else could. Not one other player would be backed to score from a few years out. Our goal scorers away from Ronaldo were relegation level at best, I really believe that.
My conclusion is last years debates from Carragher etc were nonsense. I just don’t see City’s structure breaking down with a pure goal scorer leading the line. I have no doubt Ronaldo being what he is hurt us but not in the ways that pundits (and fans) had us believe.
 
justsomebloke said:
Yeah well, you keep missing the point which is that he didn't start playing football in August this year. And what we're seeing so far in the PL just folds neatly into everything he's already been doing for several seasons. So, when you have a player who's been putting them away at a rate of roughly one per game at every level he's played, was the CL top scorer at age 20 and comes in scoring 9 goals in 5 PL games, what exactly would you consider a more reasonable reaction?
Click to expand...
Top striker fits in well at top team

Not this

 
horsechoker said:
His goals yesterday were nothing special. Merely a goal poacher excelling in a team that creates dozens of chances.

More Gerd Müller than R9
Click to expand...
Calling Gerd Müller a poacher shows that you didn't watch him play but only go by his stats.
 
Acrobat7 said:
Calling Gerd Müller a poacher shows that you didn't watch him play but only go by his stats.
Click to expand...

Everybody’s been told that Müller was nothing but a goalscorer, and would have you believe he had the touch of a man without consent. I was very surprised when I saw a comp of him displaying flicks and tricks that I thought were well beyond his ability.
 
OverratedOpinion said:
I don't think looking at 1 player is a good way to judge an entire league. There are so many factors, he is now playing in the best team in the league when he wasn't at Germany for example. Just looking at one player you could conversely say it has been proven by Sancho, Keita ect. All have different circumstances though including Haaland.
Click to expand...
No, on here every player from the Bundesliga is shit and must prove themselves in the amazingly physical and fast PL first.
This obviouosly has alot to do with United not having much success with their signings from the Bundesliga. But that is on United.
 
Eriku said:
Everybody’s been told that Müller was nothing but a goalscorer, and would have you believe he had the touch of a man without consent. I was very surprised when I saw a comp of him displaying flicks and tricks that I thought were well beyond his ability.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
AbusementPark said:
He seems to be the missing piece for City, they could run away with everything this season, if he stays as injury free as possible. The chances they create are unreal and this guy is always in the right place to finish them off.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I have been saying when the deal was announced, City was too often let down by bad finishing, not being clinical and being clinical is exactly what they bought with Haaland.
 
cyberman said:
You see, I’m not really talking about Haaland v Ronaldo, it’s more Haaland v last seasons narrative. Is he pressing high from the front? Is he a trigger for the press? Is he linking play and playing in his teammates to the final third? Is he involved enough outside of the box?
He may do other things well but I was repeatedly told these were the basic fundamentals of modern football, that scoring goals just wasn’t enough anymore. Anything else and a top side can’t operate at a top level.
I’m looking at Haaland and I don’t see his teammates or his side suffering. I don’t even think it’s 9 in 5 that makes up the difference since he just stat padded v Forest. Say he got 0 last night, would people be saying he was a problem with 6 in 5? I suppose the better way of asking that is pre Forest match he had 6 in 4 which isn’t obscene. He still wasn’t seen as a problem so it’s not a scary goal rate that’s the difference here.
Click to expand...

The whole basic point you're making - which seems to be that if it's OK for Haaland not to do everything at the highest level than you also can't criticise Ronaldo for what he doesn't do well - is missing the wood for trees. It's just superficial and overly simplistic. They're very different players, on very different teams. The criticism of Ronaldo's limitations took place in a context of a team who went into a nosedive after he arrived, both in results and attacking performance. There's a pretty unassailable case he didn't make United a better team, and a pretty strong case the limitations he brings are ones this United team can't really afford. Or couldn't last season, at any rate. There's also the personality factor, the impact on team cohesion and morale which does not appear to have been uniformly positive, to say the least.
 
Haaland is a collection of basic things in football done with perfection. He's 100% what a striker should be doing in a match

If this is gran Turismo license he's that ghost car that players have to emulate
 
It’s like a Flann O’Brien story. While Keano was in the process of leg-breaking his dad, he accidentally kicked him in the nuts, creating quantum entanglement with one of his spermatozoa. If you look closely at Erling’s head (I know), you’ll see mad eyes staring out from below that (slightly dented) robot brow. Thanks for nothing, Roy.
 
Brwned said:
Shouldn’t he have been scoring at a much higher rate in the Bundesliga for it to be so much worse than the PL?
Click to expand...

No. It doesn't work that way. Sometimes players struggle when they move up a level, but sometimes it makes them better. And as for Haaland, he scored more in the Austrian league than he did in Norway, his rate of scoring in the Bundesliga wasn't that different from what he did in the Austrian League, and his rate of scoring in the PL was roughly similar to the one he had in the BL.
 
Tincanalley said:
It’s like a Flann O’Brien story. While Keano was in the process of leg-breaking his dad, he accidentally kicked him in the nuts, creating quantum entanglement with one of his spermatozoa. If you look closely at Erling’s head (I know), you’ll see mad eyes staring out from below that (slightly dented) robot brow. Thanks for nothing, Roy.
Click to expand...

:D De Selby for United Manager - now!
 
Zen said:
Messi and Ronaldo didn’t become excellent scorers, the only point here, position is irrelevant until their age 22 seasons. On a per 90 minute basis, basically at or near 1 per 90. Don’t over complicate things…. because no one is direct comparing the players as wholes, mainly them as SCORERS. This isn’t a modern stat thing either…. were talking the goal, a stat as old as football.
Click to expand...
Let put it so you understand.
1. Messi was already a great goalscorer before age 22, Cristiano Ronaldo became one after age 22.

2. Yes position on the pitch matters ALOT when it comes to goals. Any player playing closer to goal is bound to get more opportunities to score compared to one who isn't. A case in point, when Ronaldo started playing as a forward his numbers went up spontaneously compared yo when he played as a winger.

3. I agree that the goal stat has existed as long as football but in today's age it has resulted in overhyping players who otherwise have an average allround game. A case in point in today's game is the comparison between Haaland and R9 which is nonsense. Or that from the past players Gerd Muller isnt compared to Cruijff or Pele despite a phenomenal goalscoring rate for club and country due to his relative limitations in his all round game
Anderson_7_ said:
This thread is nauseating to read. So many of our fans gleefully counting goals of a player who openly hates our club.

All this hype and hysteria around Haaland is what happens when you let stats rule your way of thinking. Haaland is an average, one-dimensional player and most of his goals are either simple tap-ins or 1-1 with the keeper. I think everyone who has actually watched him play should come to this same conclusion. He's not a game changer or anything special. He's not even the best youngster in that City team (Alvarez is) and yet you have people comparing him to prime Ronaldo and Messi. He shouldn't even be compared to Mbappe, let alone legends. Please get serious!
Click to expand...
You can say the same about comparisons between Cristiano and Messi. Levels between the 2 players when it comes to all round play. Although Cristiano >> Haaland interms of everything outside scoring.
justsomebloke said:
Yes, but you're missing the obvious point, which is that there is no "every young player who" aspect here. No one has ever done what Haaland has done in the CL at a similar age. Not Cristiano Ronaldo or Messi either. The level of dominance he achieved as a teenager and in his early 20s is simply unique.
Click to expand...
The problem is you are going on goals alone. Messi by 19 was a far far superior allround footballer, not even debatable as was Brazilian Ronaldo. Cristiano Ronaldo was also a much better allround footballer by age 21.
 
I remember the days when 1 goal every 2 games was seen as world class. Then came Ronaldo and Messi with 1 goal ever game, which was classed as out of this world. Now comes Haaland, where 2 goals per game seems normal! Fecking crazy!
 
Brwned said:
Do you think it suggests that your impression of how easy the Bundesliga is was a little off-base? People talked about the PL as if it was in a different category altogether, and yet Haaland doesn’t notice the difference at all…
Click to expand...

Criticism of the BL is fair enough. Attackers have a tendency to be system players who do well there and fail to replicate it when moving elsewhere. The difference with Haaland is that people were burying their heads in the sand regarding his overall record. He has throughout delivered for every team, no matter the competition, opposition or level of his teammates. Applying the “Bundesliga tax” to him was always sheer lunacy.
 
Sky1981 said:
Haaland is a collection of basic things in football done with perfection. He's 100% what a striker should be doing in a match

If this is gran Turismo license he's that ghost car that players have to emulate
Click to expand...
Summed up perfectly !
 
justsomebloke said:
The whole basic point you're making - which seems to be that if it's OK for Haaland not to do everything at the highest level than you also can't criticise Ronaldo for what he doesn't do well - is missing the wood for trees. It's just superficial and overly simplistic. They're very different players, on very different teams. The criticism of Ronaldo's limitations took place in a context of a team who went into a nosedive after he arrived, both in results and attacking performance. There's a pretty unassailable case he didn't make United a better team, and a pretty strong case the limitations he brings are ones this United team can't really afford. Or couldn't last season, at any rate. There's also the personality factor, the impact on team cohesion and morale which does not appear to have been uniformly positive, to say the least.
Click to expand...
No, that’s not really what I’m saying. I’m saying Ronaldos flaws were dissected in such broad terms as to what is needed to succeed in modern football. Apparently that was all nonsense from what we’re seeing now. You either need what was demanded from last season to succeed or you don’t. Being able to get around those demands lowers the value of the argument that seemed so absolute a few months ago.
Carragher etc weren’t saying Ronaldo doesn’t score enough goals to make up the difference. They were 100 percent saying no matter how many goals he scores the detrimental affect such a player brings to a top side isn’t worth it. Remember they were saying this as Ronaldo dragged us through the CL group stages on his own. He opened the scoring in a must win game away to Villarreal yet everybody said he was rightly dropped for the game a few days later at Stamford Bridge.
Football evolves so quickly and in such a rapid fashion that any ideas or lectures on modern football is basically worthless.
My prediction (ironic I know) is the idea of teams needed attacking FBs to succeed falling away for teams who play us with Sancho and Antony out wide with Dalot and Malacia behind them. Not in terms of effectiveness but in how teams will abandon that way of playing when facing us (please God if they’re a success!)
Football tactics go with trends and if wide men who get in behind become the norm again then you’ll see a lot more conservative FBs picking their spots. If we see a lot more goal scoring number 9s appear from the abyss then the workhorses who drop deep and link up play will be on the out again.
There really is no one way of playing modern football.
 
horsechoker said:
Top striker fits in well at top team

Not this

Click to expand...


Other than the title, which is clearly over the top (as is suggestions he's making the PL look bad), what exactly do you have a problem with there? Seems to me Bernard Black's kid brother is generally making valid observations.
 
cyberman said:
No, that’s not really what I’m saying. I’m saying Ronaldos flaws were dissected in such broad terms as to what is needed to succeed in modern football. Apparently that was all nonsense from what we’re seeing now. You either need what was demanded from last season to succeed or you don’t. Being able to get around those demands lowers the value of the argument that seemed so absolute a few months ago.
Carragher etc weren’t saying Ronaldo doesn’t score enough goals to make up the difference. They were 100 percent saying no matter how many goals he scores the detrimental affect such a player brings to a top side isn’t worth it. Remember they were saying this as Ronaldo dragged us through the CL group stages on his own. He opened the scoring in a must win game away to Villarreal yet everybody said he was rightly dropped for the game a few days later at Stamford Bridge.
Football evolves so quickly and in such a rapid fashion that any ideas or lectures on modern football is basically worthless.
My prediction (ironic I know) is the idea of teams needed attacking FBs to succeed falling away for teams who play us with Sancho and Antony out wide with Dalot and Malacia behind them. Not in terms of effectiveness but in how teams will abandon that way of playing when facing us (please God if they’re a success!)
Football tactics go with trends and if wide men who get in behind become the norm again then you’ll see a lot more conservative FBs picking their spots. If we see a lot more goal scoring number 9s appear from the abyss then the workhorses who drop deep and link up play will be on the out again.
There really is no one way of playing modern football.
Click to expand...

Okay, you can say the pundits are exaggerating and generalising too much, and I've no problem with that claim, if that's all you mean. But you're still assuming way too much comparability here, in my opinion. It's not just about the number of goals.
 
cyberman said:
You see, I’m not really talking about Haaland v Ronaldo, it’s more Haaland v last seasons narrative. Is he pressing high from the front? Is he a trigger for the press? Is he linking play and playing in his teammates to the final third? Is he involved enough outside of the box?
He may do other things well but I was repeatedly told these were the basic fundamentals of modern football, that scoring goals just wasn’t enough anymore. Anything else and a top side can’t operate at a top level.
I’m looking at Haaland and I don’t see his teammates or his side suffering. I don’t even think it’s 9 in 5 that makes up the difference since he just stat padded v Forest. Say he got 0 last night, would people be saying he was a problem with 6 in 5? I suppose the better way of asking that is pre Forest match he had 6 in 4 which isn’t obscene. He still wasn’t seen as a problem so it’s not a scary goal rate that’s the difference here.
Click to expand...

You were told this because all the crazy goalscoring feats were happening outside the EPL.
Now that they're happening in the EPL, people made the U-turn and suddenly pure goalscoring is the best thing ever.
 
justsomebloke said:
Okay, you can say the pundits are exaggerating and generalising too much, and I've no problem with that claim, if that's all you mean. But you're still assuming way too much comparability here, in my opinion. It's not just about the number of goals.
Click to expand...
But Haaland doesn’t do any of the apparent vital aspects of modern football that was so important last season.
He just doesn’t. There’s a video a few posts up literally saying he doesn’t leave the width of the goal posts alongside Rodri quotes of him not contributing much outside of goals (which he says is understandable)
The man barely touches the ball. Apparently he averages half the touches of what Aguero did under Pep and only City’s goalkeepers under Guardiola average less. I’m just quoting stats now but every golden boot winner has averaged twice as many touches as that and they aren’t playing in a Pep team. Only two players have touched the ball less than Haaland (pre Forest game is where I’m reading this from) in the league this season.
There aren’t any pressing stats available from what I see but I can’t see them being any way impressive. It’s not as if he’s doing anything with the ball when he gets it, he has so few touches yet most shots from outside the box! So it’s not exactly link up play here.
What exactly is he doing that fits modern football criteria?
 
mshnsh said:
Let MEEEE put it so you understand.
1. Messi was already a great goalscorer before age 22, Cristiano Ronaldo became one after age 22. Etc, etc.
Click to expand...
Fixed for you. When being condescending towards others as a know-it-all newbie, don’t forget to include the main man. ‘Me, me, me’ … Enjoy the season!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.