DWelbz19
Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2012
- Messages
- 34,140
20 touches. 6 passes.How many touches has he had all game?
g = window.googletag || {}; googletag.cmd = googletag.cmd || []; window.googletag = googletag; googletag.cmd.push(function() { var interstitialSlot = googletag.defineOutOfPageSlot('/17085479/redcafe_gam_interstitial', googletag.enums.OutOfPageFormat.INTERSTITIAL); if (interstitialSlot) { interstitialSlot.addService(googletag.pubads()); } });
20 touches. 6 passes.How many touches has he had all game?
He's scored 30 goals so far and is a key player in a team going for their second treble in as many seasons. Pretty sure he makes their team better. What relevance does Hojlund have? He hasn't made our team any betterHaaland to me shows the folly of focusing so much on Hojlunds goal total rather his all round game. Haaland is a generational goalscorer that often doesn't make the team better, can't be one dimensional even if that dimension is the the elite of the elite.
Yeah but ignore what you're seeing and focus on the ideal of what football should be about.He's scored 30 goals so far and is a key player in a team going for their second treble in as many seasons. Pretty sure he makes their team better. What relevance does Hojlund have? He hasn't made our team any better
Ah, more than it seemed!20 touches. 6 passes.
Hojlunds future success for me is going to be heavily reliant on his all round game improving to were he can be more than just a rather one dimensional runner into space behind. If his all round game stays at the point it is now but he becomes a more reliable goalscorer I don't think it will be enough long term. Even for a freak like Haaland his goal record is not enough to stop critique of his overall value.He's scored 30 goals so far and is a key player in a team going for their second treble in as many seasons. Pretty sure he makes their team better. What relevance does Hojlund have? He hasn't made our team any better
Would you want him playing for Utd?Did City really need to sign him?
If Pep disrespects him Ibrahimovic style, I'd certainly be interested.Would you want him playing for Utd?
Well there’s no 2009 Messi in City squad, he’ll be fine.If Pep disrespects him Ibrahimovic style, I'd certainly be interested.
Haaland would suit any team that wants to win trophies. I know it is a strange notion for some, but you win things by scoring goals. Not by running around, not by strategy, not by pressing ... all these are just tools that can be useful, but only if you score goals. Goals is the objective, not the other stuff. That's why goalscorers are the most expensive players, and that's why it is hard to find a consistent goalscorer.Haaland would suit a team that plays counter attacking football otherwise he is too predictable. He lacks the ability to hold up play to bring others into the game or to create for others.
Trying to ridicule it doesn't make it any less true. He genuinely disappears and is useless in a few games. This doesn't exclude the fact he's a fantastic goalscorer.Yeah but ignore what you're seeing and focus on the ideal of what football should be about.
Not goals, tekkers ™
I think you're wrong and are really trying to spin a mediocre performance into something it wasn't. Rudiger handled him easily for the most part.He kept Rudiger busy, and because of that Madrid were pretty deep in their own half ( we all know how effective Haaland can be in space or on the counter). But because City were so ridiculously determined to control the game they weren't taking any risks in creating any options for Haaland centrally. So they primarily focused on thier width, which worked well with Silva, Grealish and especially Foden.
I think Haaland's role tonight will largely go underappreciated to some extent.
I mean, What can he really do if his team is primarily focused on a different creative outlet. He was there to occupy thier backfour and he did.
I think the fact that Haaland is such a contrast for City's style is why it works. Because he's a completely different option. It doesn't mean they have to completely change thier whole philosophy around him, nor does Haaland need to change his game completely for them.
City can afford to have Haaland in the side because they've got other means of scoring.
It's like us when we played Hernandez.
We knew he wasn't going to be overly involved in possession. SAF knew exactly what he expected from him and how he could make his United side still coherent without a focal point who'd involve himself in play. Same here.
I think Pep would be content with Haalands game tonight.
There's this hipster football thing of discounting goals and goalscorersHaaland would suit any team that wants to win trophies. I know it is a strange notion for some, but you win things by scoring goals. Not by running around, not by strategy, not by pressing ... all these are just tools that can be useful, but only if you score goals. Goals is the objective, not the other stuff. That's why goalscorers are the most expensive players, and that's why it is hard to find a consistent goalscorer.
Who doesn't? I mean from the players out there this season. People say the same for Kane and Mbappe, that sometimes they disappear and they are useless in a few games.Trying to ridicule it doesn't make it any less true. He genuinely disappears and is useless in a few games. This doesn't exclude the fact he's a fantastic goalscorer.
None of the top players with the same regularity and in the same manner as Haaland does.Who doesn't?
But can he defend like Wout Weghorst?There's this hipster football thing of discounting goals and goalscorers
You have a striker that is extremely prolific and your first thought is, "can he drop deep and facilitate for Foden and KDB and Grealish and B Silva"... brothers in Christ they are supposed to be the facilitators
That's debatable. I don't think so.None of the top players with the same regularity and in the same manner as Haaland does.
Nobody does it as regularly as Haaland to the extent he is now a global meme for ghosting.. He is not even an average player when he doesn't score with 5-6/10 ratings and 10 touches per game..Who doesn't? I mean from the players out there this season. People say the same for Kane and Mbappe, that sometimes they disappear and they are useless in a few games.
If there was a player who is great every single game, every year, and scores as much as Haaland, he would cost over 200 million.
In terms of the top players and what they bring overall to the game even when they're not scoring, I really don't think it is.That's debatable. I don't think so.
Like who? Give us a couple of names.In terms of the top players and what they bring overall to the game even when they're not scoring, I really don't think it is.
Rasmus is already the better all round player. He works damn hard for the team and has developing finishing and movement. He is pretty terrible in the air and obviously he needs to and will improve on the ball with experience. He has to do a lot more for his team in the buildup than Haaland.Hojlunds future success for me is going to be heavily reliant on his all round game improving to were he can be more than just a rather one dimensional runner into space behind. If his all round game stays at the point it is now but he becomes a more reliable goalscorer I don't think it will be enough long term. Even for a freak like Haaland his goal record is not enough to stop critique of his overall value.
It's an overly simplistic notion imo. Liverpool and Arsenal both have more goals scored than Man City so far this season. Arsenal without even having a proper striker. We (Spurs) will probably have our best goalscoring season since 2016-17 the year after losing Kane, and he did far more than just score goals.Haaland would suit any team that wants to win trophies. I know it is a strange notion for some, but you win things by scoring goals. Not by running around, not by strategy, not by pressing ... all these are just tools that can be useful, but only if you score goals. Goals is the objective, not the other stuff. That's why goalscorers are the most expensive players, and that's why it is hard to find a consistent goalscorer.
So you're just about stats, right?The people who compare Hojlund with Haaland live in a different universe.
Last season, Haaland had 52 goals in 53 games. This season, he already has 30 goals in 37 games, and this is supposed to be a bad year for him! He is only 23.
Hojlund is 21. In the next 10 years, if his best year is similar to Haaland's worst year, then for me Hojlund had a very good career. (But I am not really sure that he will ever come close to Haaland's worst year.)
Mbappe and Kane both offer far far more when they're not scoring.Like who? Give us a couple of names.
Its not debatable. Some are just completely unable to look past stats unfortunately.Mbappe and Kane both offer far far more when they're not scoring.
Don't even think it's debatable.
Are you saying he's very technical?I think that without going to extremes, like usually happens, Erling must really improve his holding and pivot game.
It's really really important, specially in with these kind of big fellas palying as strikers that are very technical.
Playing as pivot with his head, or killing and holding a long pass, etc..gives time, brings his team line forward and a lot of things that are very useful, that can also help him to score.
He really needs to improve that and use better his body and head in such situations.
List of top 10 most expensive players in football history:Haaland would suit any team that wants to win trophies. I know it is a strange notion for some, but you win things by scoring goals. Not by running around, not by strategy, not by pressing ... all these are just tools that can be useful, but only if you score goals. Goals is the objective, not the other stuff. That's why goalscorers are the most expensive players, and that's why it is hard to find a consistent goalscorer.
I don't think anyone 'discounts goals and goalscorers', more that people understand those things in their proper context, as part (an important part) of the whole connected picture of a team or a game rather than something completely apart and way above everyone and everything else. I really think that if Hugo Sanchez and Maradona were around today, you'd have people arguing that Sanchez was better because he scored more goals. Such is the discourse today.There's this hipster football thing of discounting goals and goalscorers
You have a striker that is extremely prolific and your first thought is, "can he drop deep and facilitate for Foden and KDB and Grealish and B Silva"... brothers in Christ they are supposed to be the facilitators
Wouldn’t be first either, we had that experience with Lukaku.The aim of football is to win trophies, most teams don't manage that, teams that have a player that scores 30+ goals a season tend to win things, that's all that really matters, United sure as hell wouldn't be 6th if he played for us
Nope, I've meant "that "aren't" very technical"Are you saying he's very technical?
The thing with Haaland is good teams can stop him. He is not someone impossible to handle. He doesn't even take multiple defenders away with him allowing others to score.The criticisms can be overboard though, Haaland isn’t GOAT material but his scoring prowess is still pretty ridiculous and even if he’s to retire tomorrow his record would stand up favourably to plenty of past greats.
Personally I think that conversation is complete BS in whatever context and whichever players, the game has changed drastically over the years, football today is nothing like it was 10 years ago, which is nothing like the game 10 years before that and so onWouldn’t be first either, we had that experience with Lukaku.
The criticisms can be overboard though, Haaland isn’t GOAT material but his scoring prowess is still pretty ridiculous and even if he’s to retire tomorrow his record would stand up favourably to plenty of past greats.
As much as the game might change, followers of the sport can by and large still recognize the special talents that set themselves apart from their peers, Haaland isn’t that, there’s no universe in which you can consistently watch his games and say he’s been the best player on the pitch. That’s fine, that’s no shame, he’s very good at a particular thing and that thing happens to be one of the most important skill in the game, but there’s more to football than just that and it understandably irks some people and draw out criticisms(sometimes unfair) when he’s talked of as the best footballer in the game, or somewhere around that.Personally I think that conversation is complete BS in whatever context and whichever players, the game has changed drastically over the years, football today is nothing like it was 10 years ago, which is nothing like the game 10 years before that and so on