So who is actually the best striker in the PL? (Let's be honest; it's a Kane vs Haaland discussion)

Who is actually the best striker in the PL?


  • Total voters
    233
  • Poll closed .

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Staff
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
25,671
Location
Inside right
If you frequent Haaland's thread, sceptics are all over it doing the kid down, generally trying to figure out if he's slowly being found out after a flying start.

Kane is Kane: a known entity whose been doing it for years now. He's also playing in a mostly negative team where he's expected to do a lot more than score goals. He's shown himself to be ever-present and is slowly catching Haaland up, on this current trajectory, at least.

Outside of those two, there's only Toney, on 13 goals, to really consider from the remainder, but as the title, it's only realistically between the aforementioned.


No.Name & ClubGoalsAssistsMatches PlayedMins Per Goal
1Erling Haaland
Manchester City
2532066
2Harry Kane
Tottenham Hotspur
17122116
3Ivan Toney
Brentford
13319131
4Aleksandar Mitrović
Fulham
11118141
5Marcus Rashford
Manchester United
10321171
5Rodrigo Moreno
Leeds United
10118131
7Miguel Almirón
Newcastle United
9121195



Haaland's gpg is currently unprecedented, but it doesn't necessarily make him the best - the eye test surely plays a role in assessment and Kane's indisputably one of the most complete strikers on the planet, -- if not the most -- if Benzema's finally winding down, it can be fairly argued.

Now that the Dixie Dean trajectory has calmed to more than good levels for Haaland and we've got to observe him over at least the halfway point in the season and seen more vulnerability, there's a more balanced platform for discussion, so with all that said, who do you believe is the premier striker in the PL? Not next year/season; not who you'd rather in your team, simply who is the best striker outright?
 
Last edited:
As an individual, IMO it is Kane. Has so much more as a CF than anyone else on that list. Haaland will score incredible numbers but his all round game isn't as good as Kane's. Rest are a level or 2 below compared to those 2.
 
If you put Kane into that City side I reckon he would be very close to the numbers that Haaland has, but he would also be offering a lot more to their side than Haaland is.
 
Difficult question because people have different perceptions of what strikers should do and be there for. You have people like Keane that are adamant that they're in the team to score goals and in that sense you'd say Haaland but you have others who would argue against that and look at how they fit into a team as much as their goals and you'd choose Kane. Kane is by far the more complete player but he is 29 compared to Haaland at 22. That being said, I can't ever see Haaland doing what Kane does as a player in terms of dropping deep and being involved in build up, that's just not his game and he doesn't have those attributes. Once he loses his pace and power in his 30s he will be nothing more than a poacher (which he's exceptional at of course, but again, specialist). Haaland is more top tier specialist and Kane is top tier complete. I think you have to set your team up more to get the best out of Haaland whereas you can drop Kane into most sides and he'd do well.
 
Last edited:
If you put Kane into that City side I reckon he would be very close to the numbers that Haaland has, but he would also be offering a lot more to their side than Haaland is.

Yea, this is what I think to be honest. Kane would have made them better as a team and got a tonne of goals. Haaland has got the goals but they are a worse team.
 
If I have to pick one for the team (ignoring age and all that) it would be Kane. He offers more than just goals, his link up play, passing is very good.
 
It's hard to go past Kane tbf, he has been doing it at the top level for years in a Spurs team that has gone through ups and downs. Haaland is the new kid on the block and whilst I think he is a better out and out scorer he is also in a team surrounded by super stars. Kane has clowns like Dier, Sanchez, Royal in his team, but still manages to post good numbers year after year.

I think eventually it will be Haaland as he matures his game, but atm, Kane edges it, just has a bit more about his game atm.

They are both absolutely fantastic strikers that any team would be happy to have.
 
Probably the player who has more goals and assists. Kane just has the excuse of being the best in an average team where as Haaland has come into a top team that's in transition.
 
This season it's Haaland, but peak Kane might be better overall.

Haaland will have the better career out of the two. Both individually and in terms of trophies.
 
If you put Kane into that City side I reckon he would be very close to the numbers that Haaland has, but he would also be offering a lot more to their side than Haaland is.
And if you put Haaland into that Spurs team there's no way he would have scored that many.
 
And if you put Haaland into that Spurs team there's no way he would have scored that many.

They'd play different and I'd say there is no way Haaland would have missed that many chances, like the ones we saw them bottle on the first leg before gifting City the comeback...


Haaland is by far the better goalscorer of the two... Kane is by far the better/smarter, creative football player overall.
 
They'd play different and I'd say there is no way Haaland would have missed that many chances, like the ones we saw them bottle on the first leg before gifting City the comeback...


Haaland is by far the better goalscorer of the two... Kane is by far the better/smarter, creative football player overall.

I'm not sure there is much in it in terms of pure goalscoring when you consider the standard of the teams they play for. I think Kane could get close to Haaland's numbers in that City team. Would Haaland score as many if he played for Spurs? I'm not sure. Kane has 17 goals in 22 league games so far in a side that most people have been saying is crap all season.
 
Last edited:
Kane is a better all round player, done it for longer and in a significantly weaker team. Put Kane in that City team and watch him rack up stupid numbers as well.
 
Haaland.

You could argue that Haaland contributes less to the overall game but Kane has lost much of his pace and is getting increasingly laboured in his build up play. The difference is no longer as stark, whilst Haaland is much better in the box.

It's also always concerned me when we are linked to him how average Kane has been against the top teams in England. I dont think he has the mentality for it. Early days for Haaland but 3 goals in 2 games against us isn't a bad start.
 
Don't particularly care for either but it's Haaland without a doubt for me. Kane was doing loan spells in lower leagues when Haaland was already banging them in in the CL. This year almost 30 year old Kane might be nearly as impressive as the 22 norwegian making his debut season in the PL but it took him 8 years of PL to get there (alright he had other impressive seasons but nothing like we were witnessing before the WC break from the yeti).
 
Haaland.

You could argue that Haaland contributes less to the overall game but Kane has lost much of his pace and is getting increasingly laboured in his build up play. The difference is no longer as stark, whilst Haaland is much better in the box.

It's also always concerned me when we are linked to him how average Kane has been against the top teams in England. Early days for Haaland but 3 goals in 2 games against us isn't a bad start.
I have no clue how you could actually believe any of this if you have been watching both players. Most of what you have said here is just plain wrong.
 
Don't particularly care for either but it's Haaland without a doubt for me. Kane was doing loan spells in lower leagues when Haaland was already banging them in in the CL. This year almost 30 year old Kane might be nearly as impressive as the 22 norwegian making his debut season in the PL but it took him 8 years of PL to get there.
Eh? Kane has been banging them in every season since he broke into the Spurs side. 8 years of PL to get there? Are you having a laugh?
 
I have no clue how you could actually believe any of this if you have been watching both players. Most of what you have said here is just plain wrong.

There's a reason Kane still plays at Spurs after all this time and nobody other than City, once, has ever seriously been in for him.
 
I'm not sure there is much in it in terms of pure goalscoring when you consider the standard of the teams they play for. I think Kane could get close to Haalans's numbers in that City team. Would Haaland score as many if he played for Spurs? I'm not sure.

I think he would... Haaland scored at an insane rate for Salzburg and Dortmund in the UCL... I don't think Kane has it harder against Nottingham Forest than what Haaland's mission was when he scored in the UCL for Salzburg against Liverpool, Napoli, or when he kept scoring for Dortmund against PSG, Lazio and Sevilla... And against Bayern in the Bundesliga.
 
Oh so now we're rating Kane again? It seems we keep going from thinking he's a great striker when he scores a few goals to saying he's no where near Benzema, Haaland, Lewandowski when he goes into a few games without a goal.

For the record, I've always rated him alongside the other top strikers in the world because of his all round ability.

That being said, it's ridiculous to say Kane would match Haaland's goalscoring numbers. Haaland has been scoring at an insane rate for every team he's played for, regardless of whichever league or tournament it is. Using arguments like he's playing for a great team doesn't fit when you look at how much he scored for Dortmund and RB Salzburg in domestic leagues and especially UCL.

Kane isn't the type of striker now to score the volume Haaland does, and Haaland would score more goals than Kane if he played for Spurs. As an overall player, for a big team that might like to keep possession, I would rather have Kane though because he doesn't restrict the team tactically. For a smaller team, Haaland would be better because of how dangerous he can be playing on the counter.
 
Eh? Kane has been banging them in every season since he broke into the Spurs side. 8 years of PL to get there? Are you having a laugh?
Well i'm saying it took him 8 years to even be in the conversation of being a great striker. Yes he's delivered for spurs, but won nothing I can remember with them. He's never taken any game I watched that was a semi or a final or a game for a championship by the neck and bossed it (neither for England). He's their captain and experienced striker and doesn't have all that much to show for it besides being Tottenhams top goalscorer. If I was a Tottenham fan I'd be backing him no doubt, but i'm not.
 
Well i'm saying it took him 8 years to even be in the conversation of being a great striker. Yes he's delivered for spurs, but won nothing I can remember with them. He's never taken any game I watched that was a semi or a final or a game for a championship by the neck and bossed it (neither for England). He's their captain and experienced striker and doesn't have all that much to show for it besides being Tottenhams top goalscorer. If I was a Tottenham fan I'd be backing him no doubt, but i'm not.

:wenger:
 
What?

What has he won? Individually or in a team? Having Tottenham and England fans fawn over you doesn't yet make greatness. He's a good striker no doubt. There's more to greatness than scoring double digits every season.
 
They'd play different and I'd say there is no way Haaland would have missed that many chances, like the ones we saw them bottle on the first leg before gifting City the comeback...


Haaland is by far the better goalscorer of the two... Kane is by far the better/smarter, creative football player overall.
I'm not sure there is much in it in terms of pure goalscoring when you consider the standard of the teams they play for. I think Kane could get close to Haaland's numbers in that City team. Would Haaland score as many if he played for Spurs? I'm not sure. Kane has 17 goals in 22 league games so far in a side that most people have been saying is crap all season.
KdB alone would increase Kane's goal tally by a considerable amount. I'd say their combination would be harder to defend than KdB + Haaland as well.
After seeing how Haaland played against United, I expect his output to become slower as more and more teams figure out how to play against him. Kane is harder to defend and he's been in PL for a long time yet remains a threat whenever he plays.
 
This idea 'would Haaland have scored as many in some team not as dominant' is kinda ridiculous considering that he was scoring at the same rate in the last 3-4 years in not as dominant teams. He is better than Kane has ever been.
 
This idea 'would Haaland have scored as many in some team not as dominant' is kinda ridiculous considering that he was scoring at the same rate in the last 3-4 years in not as dominant teams. He is better than Kane has ever been.
Don't forget the league he played in.
 
KdB alone would increase Kane's goal tally by a considerable amount. I'd say their combination would be harder to defend than KdB + Haaland as well.
After seeing how Haaland played against United, I expect his output to become slower as more and more teams figure out how to play against him. Kane is harder to defend and he's been in PL for a long time yet remains a threat whenever he plays.

And I think you're stuck with 2018-2021 KDB... The current KDB barely deserves to start for City. But City dominating their games the way they do and obtaining many penalties would of course increase Kane's numbers, I just think he would still come short of the crazy numbers put by Haaland...
 
This idea 'would Haaland have scored as many in some team not as dominant' is kinda ridiculous considering that he was scoring at the same rate in the last 3-4 years in not as dominant teams. He is better than Kane has ever been.

Opinions here can only be explained by the fact one rejected us and the other may yet sign in the summer.

More goals, more assists, more shots on target, team has more goals. Yet one or two more progressive passes per game and apparently Kane is better to some.
 
Haland won't have a chance in this poll with the Engerland bias in this thread, he's much better than Kane. Poll should be scapped.
 
In terms of playing as an out-and-out striker:

1. Haaland
2. Kane
3. Wilson

Attacking 'Forwards':

1. Salah
2. Saka
3. Rashford
 
Haland won't have a chance in this poll with the Engerland bias in this thread, he's much better than Kane. Poll should be scapped.

This is not dailymail comment section, this forum is with people from different parts of the world, why would there be England bias ?

Did you see the celebrations on caf when England gets knocked out from Euro or World cup?
 
Haaland's been better this season, but there's a lot of people underrating Kane in this thread.

He's wasted his career at Spurs.
 
This is not really a fair comparison. We are comparing someone young and new to the league with a body of work over a long career. There is only one winner and that is Kane. We will have to wait and see Haaland develop over the years. One thing is, if it kept going the way it is I believe Haaland will not be a City for long (or Pep) and will be Benzema's replacement. Meantime he will take the highest goals record.
 
This is not dailymail comment section, this forum is with people from different parts of the world, why would there be England bias ?

Did you see the celebrations on caf when England gets knocked out from Euro or World cup?
All you have to do is read the ridiculous posts in this thread for the kane brigade should tell you this, hopefully our foreign counterparts knocks this shit poll out of the park.
 
Last edited: