City without Haaland
No there isn't. There's no proof of that.
what kind of logic is this? As if it was Haaland that took City to CL title and treble by ghosting in every single semi & finals scoring 0 g&a.
probably the worst post in this thread.
at this point, I'm not even sure if you are watching City games or following Haaland stats on transfermarkt.Bot, I know that you can't comprehend anything that's not programmed into you, so I know it's not your fault that you didn't understand what I wrote. I'll try again in simple English
Whats that to do with Haaland?
It's no different than saying had Guardiola or Klopp come to United instead of Mourinho, United would perform better. or that City would perform better with Kane. A lot of folks seem to agree that Haaland is not a good fit for City.
So just conjecture. Not based on anything concrete. Speaking of complete strikers making teams better, how is Kane doing for Bayern so far?
I mean, it doesn't make sense when City are a season removed from winning a treble, and Haaland scored how many goals again... That "a lot of folks" look and say, "oh they can be doing better". Doing better at what exactly? And yeah, um, bring proof?
Eh yeah, and I hate to break it to you, there’s no proof that it isn’t true either.
That's not how it works, you can't suggest an outlandish hypothesis and then ask for proof to the contrary
He is doing great at Bayern, scored 29 g&a in 21 games, a record. How was Haaland doing before coming to City in Bundesliga? any treble winning season, or double? any Golden Shoe? any CL final or SF? most goals in Bundesliga? any Bundesliga title?
Bringing a better forward than Haaland that would fit their system. You're conflating team success with individual success again. City does not need Haaland to dominate, but Haaland needs a team like City to win things, trophies, titles, awards. He can be anonymous in the finals as the worst player on the pitch, still not a problem, there's plenty of players in that City that can complete his task on his behalf and win the title.
He did nothing in the semi and the final of the UCL yet City won.
Yet they couldn't win it without him. Strange one really. The bottom line anyone trying to say Haaland has been anything other than a net positive at City dispite his glaring issues is an idiot and it shows in trophies. The poster I started the discussion said City scored less goal than without him, but over the course of the season they actually scored more, just less in the PL.
You love him if he plays for your team though.
Yes definitely.
In case you didn't notice, Kane is on track to not win a Bundesliga title in his first season at Bayern. No "big game goals" (you know, big games only happen in semi finals and finals)
See, you made me go and look up Haaland on wiki, a nearly unforgivable offense. And it says he won Bundesliga Player of the Season while at Dortmund, and was highest scoring forward in the CL once at Dortmund. Why lie?
1. No I'm not
Fit their system better in what sense? Score more goals? Provide more assists? Look better? What forwards out there should City consider swapping for Haaland? And what would they provide precisely, that City along with Haaland currently lack?
I don't know. You were absolutely capable of winning the UCL before Haaland's arrival as well. It's small margins in the latter stages of international tournaments and usually luck plays a huge role so attributing the CL trophy to the addition of Haaland smells like a control illusion to me - especially when the player in question barely participated at the stages in which you tended to go out.
Makes Pep even more of a fraud that he won a treble playing with 10 men in games where Haaland didn't score.
Man City went from small margins and coming the wrong side of them, to large margins in their favour last season though, they destroyed Real Madrid and Bayern Munich.
Fraud is a bit hard. I think he's the second best coach in history, only behind Xabi Alonso obviously
The margins weren't any different, only the results were. They were the better team pretty much everytime they faced Madrid or Bayern in the last years, even when they were thrown out of the tournament by them. In the final, they had 7 to 14 shots against them which translated to 0.99 to 1.68 xG. And Inter was amongst the weakest finalists of the last 15 years. Haaland is a great striker but so far I don't think he has turned them into a better team. And like it or not, that's also been the case at Dortmund.
Those Bayern and Madrid teams seemed to be playing with 9 or less players tbf.
He absolutely does the bolded. Foden recently scored a goal where he had so much space in the box because guess who the defenders went after?
True, they might as well have started 9 men instead of playing Upamecano
You won't hear me saying that City is essentially playing with 10 men because of course a striker, especially when he's Haaland, has tactical implications and drags players out of position by his mere presence, with or without the ball. And as said, I believe his abilities on the ball are much better than he's been given credit for (and that he is showing). But one way or another, he has a very low density of good plays in comparison to other great strikers. I also disagree that scoring goals is necessarily more important. It doesn't matter who scores the goal, what matters is that it is scored. If your contribution to it was more important than the last touch before the ball passed the line, you contributed more to it than the scorer.
It wouldn't even be mentioned if it wasn't city, any team on the world would take him but as many have said he offers very little outside the box. He's arguably the best finisher in the world and makes excellent runs but Pep's system is more of a touch and move which aren't Haaland's strengths.
The ones that immediately came to mind for me was his overhead kick last year (don't remember the opposition), and the one he scored for Dortmund vs. PSG a few years ago.
a great performance by anyone watching the game, yeah, right
Maybe, you should apply for the sports director position at below famous news outlets, they can learn thing or two from you.Haaland had a nightmare night in front of goal this weekend and he's had other bad games too for sure, but your sick need to downplay him as a footballer is totally unjustified. You can blaim him for not finishing his chances on Saturday and probably costing City 2 points in that match, but that's about as far as you can stretch it. He's been the decisive winning factor so many times for them already. He was a handfull for the Chelsea defense and then some on Saturday, and it was good for them his aim was not adjusted properly.a great performance by anyone watching the game, yeah, right
"L’Equipe rate Erling Haaland worst Man City player"
www.talksport.com/football/1428246/lequipe-erling-haaland-man-city-real-madrid/
Erling Haaland (5/10):
"Was lively but had an off-night in front of goal. Courtois denied him on three occasions and he ends the tie without scoring once. But given what he has done this season, we can forgive him."
Bernardo Silva (10/10):
"A virtuoso display. Produced an emphatic finish for his first goal and a clinical header for his second. But this was about far more than goals. He ran rings around Madrid, weaving magic at every turn."
www.goal.com/en-us/lists/man-city-player-ratings-real-madrid-bernardo-silva-erling-haaland/bltaffd3967cdc8df7a
1. Did you not see I was speaking about Courtois, not Haaland (who had a decent game)? Bot, I suggest Chatgpt 4a great performance by anyone watching the game, yeah, right
It's it's programming (don't think bots have genders unless they're programmed to say differently)
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Of course but Haaland was a big part of that step over the line, even if he didn't have the best games in the semi's and final, he scored 12 goals on the way there, 4 more than the competitions 2nd top scorer. We absolutely annihalated a Real team who knocked us out the season before desptie no assits or goals he was a huge handful against them and ran them ragged. He had a poor game in the final but so did most the team being honest.
In case you didn't notice Dortmund had their best Bundesliga season in the last 3 years after shipping Haaland, You're doing it again and again confounding team performance and individual performance as it fits your narrative.
You always mention treble like City was an average side until Haaland graced City with his arrival. And since you are into trebles and titles so much, I asked you to tell me if Haaland had a treble, or a double, or even a single Bundesliga, or Golden Shoe, or top goalscorer award, any CL semi final or final..
This has been answered multiple times by multiple posters in this thread. He lacks almost everything R9, Benzema, Van Basten, Kane and many others have other than number of goals.
Aren't you the guy that compared Messi and Haaland posting below nonsense, comparing a GOAT level playmaker + dribbler + goalscorer Messi with a penalty box poacher and declaring him as better, talking as if Messi is a penalty box poacher as well. Reducing strikers to "number of goals" only as if they don't do anything else with that great football knowledge.
It seems more like the world's problem rather than mine that football fans adore Messi, Maradona, Cruyff, Pele, Ronaldinho, Zidane, Beckenbauer, R9, Xavi, Modric, Platini type of players rather than one-dimensional limited poachers like Haaland. You're definitely in the minority with that unique taste
What does this even mean? Sterling comes close and/or exceeds his xG almost every season.... a sign of a notoriously (good or bad) finisher? I get the idea you are implying he's bad... but delivering in ways only good finishers do.
