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 .
Righteous Steps said:
Kane is a better player, full stop, Haaland is the definition if flat track bully, nearly every top 6 defence he has faced this season has made hum look average, hes not a good dribbler, not a good passer, his touch is decent but nothing out the ordinary.

He is simply a great poacher, an all time level poacher, but he can't compared to the likes of Benzema and Kane in their prime when all said and done.
Click to expand...

He's scored 3 goals against us in 2 games ffs. He's only played the other big teams once and missed the Arsenal game but he's scored against Spurs and Liverpool already. He also scored against City when he was at Dortmund.

Meanwhile Kane has a very average record against top teams.
 
Kane is a more rounded footballer and better player all round but Haaland is obviously the better striker
 
It depends on what you want from your striker. If Kane was playing for city, we wouldn't be talking about city having to adjust their playing style to accommodate him, because he is well rounded enough to play that role.

As a pure goalscorer, haaland is exceptional. As a sort of modern center forward who can come short and participate in the build up, kane is exceptional.
 
There really isn't much between them at the moment, Haaland would score more goals, Kane would make up for that with his general play. I prefer Kane because he can make an impact without scoring and he scores at a world class rate non the less.
 
Haaland is a freakish goalscorer but otherwise very limited and when you examine it, his teams tend to do the same or worse with him in it. Norway still can't qualify for anything. City are the shittest they've been in years and Dortmund weren't up to much either.

Kane is a terrifically well rounded striker who can do everything you want from a player. Spurs would have been lost without him.
 
I think Kane is a cracking all round player who really should be playing for a top team. He might have another 4 good years left too - we should be getting him in the summer.

Haaland is a force. City under Pep probably aren't the right team for him ultimately, but it'll set him up to be the best player in the world a couple of years from now, when he moves to Madrid.

Big fan of both, but Haaland is the better striker.
 
At the moment Kane. He offers more than Haaland. Haaland (at the moment) doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan B.

Kane, on the other hand, is a much more versatile striker and he scores every kind of goal.

I’m sure Haaland will work on his all round game, he’s only young.
 
balaks said:
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.
Click to expand...



Fantastic to see all the knee jerk nonsense in this thread. If you put Kane in the City team he wouldn't get anywhere near the numbers Haaland gets, because Haaland pretty much gets those numbers whatever team he's in, it's not actually that much to do with City. He's practically 1 in 1 for Norway FFS. You can tell from this thread who actually watched Haaland play prior to City and who is just making up their minds on the evidence of watching him for the first time this season.
 
I don't get how anyone could watch them and conclude Haaland is better than Kane. Kane is on a different level. Haaland is a great goal scorer in a team with many great players. But Kane is an all round great footballer. It's like thinking Lineker is better than Bergkamp or Lampard is better than Zidane. If Kane was at City he'd score just as many goals, or close to it, but City would be on top of the league. We've seen them on the pitch together twice in recent weeks and Kane has shown he's levels above Haaland. His touch, passing and hold up play is miles better.
 
Kane by an absolute distance. Gives you a few less goals but gives you a million more things that Haaland can't.
 
Andrade said:
Fantastic to see all the knee jerk nonsense in this thread. If you put Kane in the City team he wouldn't get anywhere near the numbers Haaland gets, because Haaland pretty much gets those numbers whatever team he's in, it's not actually that much to do with City. He's practically 1 in 1 for Norway FFS. You can tell from this thread who actually watched Haaland play prior to City and who is just making up their minds on the evidence of watching him for the first time this season.
Click to expand...
If you look at the responses in this thread you will see I'm not alone in my assessment.
 
balaks said:
If you look at the responses in this thread you will see I'm not alone in my assessment.
Click to expand...

I don't think you're wrong, kane would be a better fit for this city side, he can contribute more in the build up, and they don't seem to be great at playing to haalands strengths but I don't think that makes him a better striker, he'd have just fit in this system better (also he wouldn't continually score goals against city :lol: )
 
Haaland will score a goal a game anywhere. This is proven time and time again. Norway, Dortmund, City..it matters not. He will sniff out goals at that rate which I don't think Kane can.

But Kane is much, much superior as a playmaker, bringing others into the game.

It just depends what you want in your striker. Kane would probably have worked great at City because of his ability to drop off like Pep requires. I think Haaland would work well for us as we have a lot of players looking for the direct pass.
 
Last edited:
Kane is easily the better footballer. Haaland is a pure poacher who is exceptional at goal scoring but rubbish at everything else. Kane has had quiet big games too but Haaland just disappears as his overall play just shit. Shaw and Romero swatted him away like a fly.
 
It's Haaland. I don't have a short memory and remember what he looked like before the break. City look pretty terrible at the moment and all of their players look out of it.

Kane is a fantastic striker but the physical gifts of Haaland in addition to his timing of runs and positioning makes this pretty clear to me.

You could say Kane is a better 'footballer' but Haaland is the better striker.
 
Anyone who claims all Haaland has is goals has no credibility whatsoever. Pure parody. Same with the idea that he only gets the numbers he gets becaus he's playing for City.

Yeah, he hasn't got all that much in the way of technique or creativity, but all he really needs is someone who can spot his runs and make a decent pass and he will score goals.
 
As of now and how their utilized kane simply offers more and i have a hard time seeing how Haaland could add to the parts of his game that lag behind kane's as I don't think he has it in his locker, he just strikes me as sort of limited when it comes to overall football intelligence while kane for example could legitimately play a central role if moved there and I think that's a very good sign of the gulf of quality that exists between the two.

The difference in their goal scoring numbers isn't that major either to be honest seeing how much stat padding haaland has had (what was it? 3 hatricks so far) and that's without even mentioning the teams these two play in.
 
redmeister said:
I don't get how anyone could watch them and conclude Haaland is better than Kane. Kane is on a different level. Haaland is a great goal scorer in a team with many great players. But Kane is an all round great footballer. It's like thinking Lineker is better than Bergkamp or Lampard is better than Zidane. If Kane was at City he'd score just as many goals, or close to it, but City would be on top of the league. We've seen them on the pitch together twice in recent weeks and Kane has shown he's levels above Haaland. His touch, passing and hold up play is miles better.
Click to expand...
I bet you haven't watched a lot of Haaland and/or have trouble understanding how extraordinary Haaland's numbers really are.
On one side you have a m player who is on his way to smash the all time EPL record in his debut season and other side you have a player who’s delivered good numbers on regular bases for many years.
To put this into perspektiver: The only player with comparable numbers at Haaland's age in the history of football is Pelè from the Sao Paulo district league (Paulista) when he played for the best team in the world in a league with 5 good teams and 19 championship or lower quality teams in the 50s and early 60s.
In top 5 leagues in Europe we've never seen anyone close to Haaland's numbers in the history of football.

Players of Kane's tier comes along every now and then and he isn’t close to the level of extreme talent or possessing the extremequalities Haaland has. Not now and certainly not when he was Haalands age.

Haaland’s moving the standards and breaks records every other week without taking out his max potential and it looks too easy. Now people suddenly believe this should be expected by any decent striker at a club like City. Yet nobody’s done it before. These kneejerk threads will appers every time he has a 2 hour goaldrought, which tells it all really.
 
This wouldn't even be a discussion if you guys didn't think you might be getting Kane in the summer.

Ironically I think Haaland would win you the league and fit United like a glove this season and Kane would have fit much better at City despite scoring less goals.

But its absolutely clear Haaland is the better striker even if Kane has better tekkers because Haaland is way more of an athelte to the point he's almost freakish thanks to genetics, kinda like Usain Bolt (who has something like 80% fast twitch muscle fibers).
 
They’d play well together, with Kane dropping deeper and playing Haaland in. Maybe we can get both when City get thrown out of the PL?
 
MoskvaRed said:
They’d play well together, with Kane dropping deeper and playing Haaland in. Maybe we can get both when City get thrown out of the PL?
Click to expand...

In a counter attacking team playing 2 up top they'd be scary.
 
Not even close. Kane every day and twice on Sunday against Stoke.
 
padr81 said:
This wouldn't even be a discussion if you guys didn't think you might be getting Kane in the summer.

Ironically I think Haaland would win you the league and fit United like a glove this season and Kane would have fit much better at City despite scoring less goals.

But its absolutely clear Haaland is the better striker even if Kane has better tekkers because Haaland is way more of an athelte to the point he's almost freakish thanks to genetics, kinda like Usain Bolt (who has something like 80% fast twitch muscle fibers).
Click to expand...

Is it clear though? I mean Kane is likely the better finisher, definitely the better header of the ball and, because of the difference in athleticism, he is better positionally too. All of that while being the better footballer in general. Tell me, what exactly does Haaland as a footballer have that makes him a clearly better striker? If all it is is athleticism then I can't agree with your point.

Haaland is the better goalscorer of course, but 'striker' is much more than that and Kane is miles ahead in every other category while not being that far behind in scoring in a much worse team.
 
kidbob said:
Is it clear though? I mean Kane is likely the better finisher, definitely the better header of the ball and, because of the difference in athleticism, he is better positionally too. All of that while being the better footballer in general. Tell me, what exactly does Haaland as a footballer have that makes him a clearly better striker? If all it is is athleticism then I can't agree with your point.

Haaland is the better goalscorer of course, but 'striker' is much more than that and Kane is miles ahead in every other category while not being that far behind in scoring in a much worse team.
Click to expand...

He's not the better finisher though, Haaland outperforms his xg in a way Kane never does. Haaland has statistically better finishing, clearly better athleticism and equally good positioning.
Kane has better creative attributes but as an out and out striker, all the metrics point to Haaland.

This season.
Haaland has +6 on his xg, Kane +2.4
Haaland has an xg of over 1 per game, Kane has 0.66.
Haaland has an xa of 0.21 per game to Kanes 0.2 (I found this weird)

Now alot of this can be argued to Haaland playing in a better team but everywhere he's went his stats have been roughly the same.

Going back to last season Kanes stats are relatively the same except xg.
Kane underperformed his xg by 3.6.
Haaland overperformed his xg by 5.

The season before
Haaland over performed his xg by 3.4
Kane over performed his xg by 0.6.

Over 3 seasons Haaland has scored 14.4 goals more than the chances he's had should offer.
Over 3 seasons Kane has scored 0.6 goals less than he should have accounting for chances.

Kane has consistently averaged 0.66 xg per game.
Haaland has consistently averaged almost 0.9 xg per game. (1, 0.8 and 0.9).

Watching Kane play football is easier on the eye but Haaland is way more efficient.
 
Last edited:
justboy68 said:
Haaland is a freakish goalscorer but otherwise very limited and when you examine it, his teams tend to do the same or worse with him in it. Norway still can't qualify for anything. City are the shittest they've been in years and Dortmund weren't up to much either.

Kane is a terrifically well rounded striker who can do everything you want from a player. Spurs would have been lost without him.
Click to expand...
Such a stupid point, he’s had half a qualification to try to reach one.
 
Red the Bear said:
As of now and how their utilized kane simply offers more and i have a hard time seeing how Haaland could add to the parts of his game that lag behind kane's as I don't think he has it in his locker, he just strikes me as sort of limited when it comes to overall football intelligence while kane for example could legitimately play a central role if moved there and I think that's a very good sign of the gulf of quality that exists between the two.

The difference in their goal scoring numbers isn't that major either to be honest seeing how much stat padding haaland has had (what was it? 3 hatricks so far) and that's without even mentioning the teams these two play in.
Click to expand...
I have a hard time seeing how Kane can match Haaland's physical gifts either, even with the most miraculous gym routine known to man. So as much as he has certain qualities Haaland cannot replicate, there are gifts that Haaland has in terms of efficiency of goalscoring and his physical attributes. It's not a one way street where Kane has everything except the numbers on Haaland - they fundamentally have different attributes and it's not a fair characterisation when it's painted otherwise.

Also the thing about stat padding is nonsense. A goal is a goal, how can a hat trick go against a striker? That's a new one for me. Punishing a striker in appraisal because he destroys a team. Makes no sense at all, I thought that's what your 9 is there for. There's also a certain irony given Kane has been criticised throughout his career for some of his performances against bigger sides and in decisive moments where he could have fired Spurs or England to glory. All strikers stat pad in some way because you're supposed to put shite teams to the sword, why wouldn't you score plenty against them and many strikers knock in pens etc (including Harry)
 
Haaland better striker, Kane better player. I think Kane can improve any team while haaland will score goals but not necessarily improve his team.
 
From what I’ve seen of Haaland so far, he does not look like the sort of player who will help get City through a Champions League semi-final against Real Madrid. He will turn a 4-0 against Southampton into an 8-0. Whether Kane could also make that difference is also open to question - he has never really dragged England over the line in those crunch games.
 
Handré1990 said:
Such a stupid point, he’s had half a qualification to try to reach one.
Click to expand...

I don't follow them to be fair, just know that they haven't qualified for anything. In any case it is a pattern that every team he's at tends to somewhat surprisingly fare similarly or worse than without him.
 
justboy68 said:
I don't follow them to be fair, just know that they haven't qualified for anything. In any case it is a pattern that every team he's at tends to somewhat surprisingly fare similarly or worse than without him.
Click to expand...
Name these teams.
 
Halftrack said:
Name these teams.
Click to expand...
And I just gave a very valid reason as to why he shouldn’t be judged on that, we’ve qualified for major cups like 4 times in total, last time in 2000, but sure, let’s put it on our top scorer who played a little less than half the games.
Edit; I hate the ugly cnut as much as the next person, but keep the discourse fair at least.
 
Last edited:
kidbob said:
Is it clear though? I mean Kane is likely the better finisher, definitely the better header of the ball and, because of the difference in athleticism, he is better positionally too. All of that while being the better footballer in general. Tell me, what exactly does Haaland as a footballer have that makes him a clearly better striker? If all it is is athleticism then I can't agree with your point.

Haaland is the better goalscorer of course, but 'striker' is much more than that and Kane is miles ahead in every other category while not being that far behind in scoring in a much worse team.
Click to expand...
The issue is that Kane is WAY behind in scoring. Haaland has scored 2/3 of the career goals that Kane has and he's 8 years younger. And Kane's 'all round' ability is overrated as well, probably because he's English. In addition, he's probably the least clutch player in history. The jury is still out on whether Haaland is clutch (or merely a flat track bully) but there is no question with Kane.
 
Kane. Much more complete player. Not saying Halaand won't get there but Kane would make this City team look ten times better than they do with Halaand.
 
If you consistenly outperform your xG, do stats nerds eventually amend the "x" for this person?
 
Abraxas said:
Haaland will score a goal a game anywhere. This is proven time and time again. Norway, Dortmund, City..it matters not. He will sniff out goals at that rate which I don't think Kane can.

But Kane is much, much superior as a playmaker, bringing others into the game.

It just depends what you want in your striker. Kane would probably have worked great at City because of his ability to drop off like Pep requires. I think Haaland would work well for us as we have a lot of players looking for the direct pass.
Click to expand...

This is the correct response, way too much Kane love in the thread compared to the underrating of Haaland. Haaland for any of his faults is a generational goalscorer that seldom comes about in football. He's quite mediocre technically and on the ball compared to Kane, but outclasses Kane physically and provides much more of a direct threat. Kane can't "score every type of goal" as even at his best he was a bit slower and as such as he's gotten older he's developed his playmaking to make up for dropping deeper.

It really depends on what you want from a striker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.