It was also Januzaj vs Gnabry, and Chicha vs someone that I can't remember
Rashford vs Iheanacho
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) look forward to a new life under Ruben Amorim. What system will we be playing? What players will impress? and how will it all go? We also say goodbye to Ruud Van Nistelrooy and review United's 3-0 win at home against Leicester City.
Rashford vs Martial is a far more interesting topic.
You're right. It's just not the right time to compare the two players. They are both similar in terms of where they are at currently.
Yea that was a pretty random statement from me, height does help though. But there is just not enough sample to choose from.wtfSince when being bigger means better in the air ?
I wouldn't swap Rashford for Iheanacho for all the apple sauce in Glückenschabbel.
I just worry he might never have had his chance had Martial not been injured that time.
I just worry he might never have had his chance had Martial not been injured that time.
It's not even close for me, from what I've seen. I've never even been impressed with Kelechi. He was actually ruining most of City's attacks in the few games I've watched him. I can remember only one bad game of Rashford.
I think you're getting confused. United threatened to boycott under 18s matches against city because of their alleged 'aggressive' behaviour towards their youngsters. This was nothing to do with rashford! Also I've never heard of Liverpool and Everton doing the same mind. Rashford happened years before this! I know city's academy coaches very well and it all happened before the current setup under Mark Allen but from what I've been told city rejected Rashford on his technical ability. Size is a media created thing in my understanding.
Yeah sure it was.
Iheanacho I think is a better striker of the ball but for me Rashford has a significantly higher ceiling. Rashfords natural ability running with the ball especially sets him apart.
That is utter rubbish. Rashford has been technically outstanding since a very young age and was a number 10 until a couple of years ago. Both Arsenal and Chelsea were tracking him since he was 12 and city were in his ear every week until he signed professionally at United.
Jeez. I'm not saying he's technically poor I am saying city didn't think he was technically strong - a mistake - and they tried to sign him when he was 16 before he signed a professional contract! He trialed with city when he was 13/14 or even younger!
I don't know who your ex city academy coaching pals are, but they are talking a lot of shite. Rashford was one of the most technically gifted youngsters in the country since a very young age, known nationally by club and national coaches.
I don't really think there's much of a difference either way at the moment, I think both should go on to be really impressive players.
I prefer watching Rashford though, really exciting player to watch.
I prefer watching Rashford though, really exciting player to watch.
So a kid who has been with us since aged 10 was trialing with you at age 14, especially considering that he was a talent all this while.
I think you should change acquaintances/friends and by that I mean make up new imaginary friends.
I think you got the timing wrong.I believe that happened when Rashford was 7 or something, not 13-14.
You were right about the boycotting it has nothing to do with Rashford.It happened because City was trying to poached every decent United youngster for a good few years, especially at the age U9s-U12s or even the pre-academy lads who were training at our facilities.You were successful in some cases although tbf we did get 1 lad from you who are extremely promising and recently there is another lad moving to us for some unknown reason.
Last edited:
Hey, at least you admitted it
and like you said if there aren't enough samples to choose from, better to wait for them to play more.Reminds me of the American commentator who noted that the English NT must be so happy to see Aaron Ramsey getting back into form...
Who would you pick?
Except Rashford was known for his technical ability since his time in the under 12s and only hit a growth spurt in the last two years.
Here what Rashford's first coach at Fletcher Moss Rangers, David Horrocks, said:
http://www.express.co.uk/sport/foot...y-Premier-League-transfer-news-gossip-rumours
I stand corrected re his age.
It"s difficult, Iheanacho is so good in the box, it's unreal. His decision making in the box is sublime and he just has that amazing instinct, strength and finishing. Rashford is more complete imo with better dribbling, more pace and his link up play. I cant pick a winner yet, both absolutely amazing talents. But I think if you put Iheanacho in an attacking team, he'll just garantue goals. And a lot of them.
You mean you know someone, who knows another person, that knows that person, who saw 1 of the City coaches accross the street.
Why do all you Berties seem to think you are good friends with the clubs management. Mansour would stone most of you to death it it would make him a few quid. Get a grip FFS.
I'd pick Rashford.
You mean you know someone, who knows another person, that knows that person, who saw 1 of the City coaches accross the street.
Why do all you Berties seem to think you are good friends with the clubs management. Mansour would stone most of you to death it it would make him a few quid. Get a grip FFS.
Rashford is great, but Martial is a wizard with the ball. Martial will win the Ballon D'Or IMO.
Not sure myself. Martial is more gifted technically but he's behind Rashford in understanding the game. Rashford imo will reach his peak level far sooner while Martial is going to take a bit longer to fully understand how to be completely effective as an attacker. His awareness at times is just really poor. As athletes they're of the same level while Rashford is a far more natural finisher.
Need to see Rashford play consistently like Martial has done last season but from what I've seen Rashford looks the better player at least for now. Both are exciting though
Last edited:
Hey, at least you admitted it
Yes it's always tough to compare two young players. My gut says that Rashford will go on to be a bigger player out of the two. There is that desire and attitude combined with skill that you don't often see.
Physically if you compare Rashford who scored against midtjylland and the one who scored against hull, it's quite evident that he's put on some good amount of muscle. I just hope he stays injury free.
Well, for those saying that Iheanacho doesn't score in big games ...
He was pretty decent today.
He was pretty decent today.
He led the line pretty well. A bit inconsistent/ erratic in his decision making but that'll improve.
When he came off City lacked a focal point and looked far less dangerous.
When he came off City lacked a focal point and looked far less dangerous.
He was mostly annoymous but credit to him for the two yard tap in, he should have been offside if it were not for Blind's poor positioning.
City looked like scoring on every counter.
To be honest he miscontrolled a bit again today and made a couple of silly errors Rashford doesn't make. but as always with Kelechi right place at the right time, its that knack goal machines have. Shearer, RVN, Fowler. Great strikers score tap ins because they have this knack of being where they need to be. For the love of me I can't understand why Pellers said he was a no.10 and not a no.9.
Rashford was brilliant for you guys when he came on. I'm starting to really believe the hype. I hope the english media don't build him up and tear him down like the do to so many though.
Iheanhacho got an assist and goal today? That is not bad. It will be interesting to see how these two develop. Rashford Seem to have a lot of potential but Iheanancho seems just like a player who knows how to score goals.
I think they're both super talents. I don't really like the constant need to compare youngsters but, if you're going to do it, you should at least wait until they're both getting a consistent run in their respective teams.
Rashford is significantly better than Iheanacho imo. There's just a bit more magic about him.
Really? I mean I can understand saying he's better, but significantly? I doubt you'd get a neutral saying those words.
There's very little between them really, two top talents although arguably Rashford looks like he has a bit more to his overall game because of his dribbling ability.
Significantly more exciting maybe in the way he plays the game but Iheanacho already has a phenomenal scoring rate in goal per minute and is lethal in the box. They are very, very different styled players. Who will be more effective long term? Who knows.